-So, I'm sorry it took such a long time to write this one (because this is a document that relates to procrastination...it's ironic folks (ohdearlord.jpg, I'm explaining my jokes D:))
-So, you're on the INTERNET, reading about productivity from a guy who's clearly not using his time productively....
-So, whew, I've wasted a lot of time on this...

O.k., done.

FOR LEGAL PURPOSES: EVERYTHING WRITTEN HERE IS NOT ENDORSED BY ANYONE AND IS TOTAL CRAP.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Procrastination and Willpower
-Theoretical Criticism
--MAN UP
--Needs/Context/etc. Model
--CBT
--IFS
--Alice Miller
--Tony Robbins
-Alternative Approach
Productivity
-Todo systems
-Idea capture
-Logging
-Chaining
-Sleep
Focus
-The passive approach
-"Opening the Book"
-Note taking
-Bundling
-Standing Desks
Studying
-Jump into the lake
-The role of memorizing
-How to read (no, I'm not joking)
References

Procrastination and Willpower
I will take Henry Hazlitt's brave lead by saying, "There is no such thing as Willpower." However, I will mean it in a different sense than he did. My thesis is that Willpower is that you have an innately puny amount of willpower. So that, if you think you are doing something out of willpower, it is my thesis that you are doing it subconsciously out of clever self-manipulative tricks. To back up this claim, there is some research I'd like to bring up:
-Check out the Google talk in the references section (if you actually doublecheck any of my sources, doublecheck that one!). Specifically, the speaker talks about the incredible limitations our pre-frontal cortex have. And that, when the subconscious limbic triggers, we literally have seconds to respond.
-Check out http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/10/27/procrastination/. Specifically, they give a nice summary of the classic marshmallow experiment which I will allude to later, but now I just want to focus on the fact brought up in the article that willpower qua willpower is not the issue.
-If the opposite of the claim is accepted (i.e., by way of contradiction), then this runs into logical contradictions. (argument runs along the lines: If we had complete free will we would be able to control our own free will.)
-If the opposite of the claim is accepted, then his runs against a LOT of common experience out there. The vast number of AA chapters, rehab clinics, and cyclical diet phenomena seems to suggest that if this were apt to a "brute willpower" motivation, that if people have enough motivation to start these social groups and try these various things, that that kind of strategy would have worked. tl;dr, "brute willpower" is the DEFAULT strategy that pretty much everyone starts with doing, thus, this seems to indicate that something else is going on here.
the DEFAULT strategy that pretty much everyone starts with doing, thus, this seems to indicate that something else is going on here.
-Third of all, it's kind of insulting. Some guy is and has been on and off trying to get off of alcohol for 20 years. And someone comes along and says, "Man up, just use your willpower dude." Perhaps people have different modes of willpower and we should respect that. Or perhaps there is a different thing going on here altogether that we should appreciate.
That's my evidence that willpower is not the way to beat procrastination.

Theoretical Criticism
There is a number of psychological alternatives that promise to beat procrastination. I want to make clear that, even though I have written considerably less on it in this document than the psychological theories, I really do want to make the claim that willpower is not how you beat procrastination; BUT, I am NOT making the claim that one of the psychological theories might be valid, I just want to express my theoretical difficulties with them. After this, I will discuss what I think is the proper way to face procrastination.

MAN UP
This is the default advice I hear in these matters. Exemplified by this website (warning: language). I will admit that this is a good first approach, but I have a number of issues with this advice:
-It is the default thing done.
Chances are, if you give the "MAN UP" advice to someone who is struggling with procrastination/etc., that they have already attempted this. In fact, I guarentee to you that this is the default option that people resort to in dealing with problems of willpower. To say to someone "DUDE, JUST DO IT" is pretty insulting, as there's a large chance that this person has already TRIED TO DO THE OBVIOUS. Therefore, since it is the default option, this philosophy is about as useful as saying "try moving your legs" to a professional runner.
-It is overly simplistic.
Again, given the previous bullet that this is the default option, we may say this in another way: this is the control/starting point, not the end-all/be-all solution.
-It is inefficient.
-Check out the introductory paragraphs I wrote. Our innate level of willpower is puuuuuny. I want to exhibit this point via analogy:
Imagine you are a working yet weak farmhand during the 1800's. It occurs to you that you could make a lot more profit if you were stronger. When you ask people for advice they reply, "Well, time to put up or shut up; get to the gym skrawny boy" or other heavily machismo slogans. You could follow their advice, which would essentially be the MAN UP philosophy. Or, you could try building a tractor. The latter is what I hope to exemplify in the "Alternative Approaches" section (go ahead and skip there already).

Needs/Context/etc. Model
Or Maslow Heirarchy or Context Model or etc..
This comes in various flavors, but I claim they're pretty much the same.
In general, these start by flipping our perspective. Instead of asking, "Why am I not doing what I want to be doing?", we ask, "Why am I doing this other thing instead of what I want to be doing?" All of these various models come down to basically the same answer, "Your Subconscious/Your Brother Jed/Your Pet Dog is trying to satisfy some core need." The solution typically involves trying to "find constructive ways to satisfy core needs".
There are a number of common experiences one could throw to try to test this, but they don't exactly debunk the model. I.e., "Why are there fat people then? Hasn't their food need been satisfied?" comes the answer, "They're satisfying a social need."
...in fact, almost every objection from common experience you can think of usually has the response, "You do X because of some vague social need. Because we're social animals" or something similar. However, in answering objections in such a way, it causes me to question whether the model is at all falsifiable.
To give another serious objection to this, I don't quite see how it explains the phenomenon of catharsis (see http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/08/11/catharsis/). I.e., there have been experiments that, for example, venting does not satiate one's anger. Rather, it increases it. So, if venting is done to satisfy basic needs that brought about anger, it is contradictory that this action does not satiate anger whatsoever.
Another point, just to drive this home (and in case you validly question the validity of the catharsis experiment), is that the needs model does not explain enhanced reinforcement schedules. Or, put in terms of an example, a gambler (if left to his device) will typically over time tend to gamble more and more both in terms of higher amounts and frequency. This is, in general, with all other things remaining constant. This leads us to believe that if the needs model is true, it provides not only an inefficient model to satiating needs, but instead in some cases actively reduces efficiency in such satiation.

CBT
The idea is that we don't do what we want ourselves to do because:
Step 1-The subconscious mind knows what is going on (commentary: I agree that the subconscious mind has a lot more brain matter and processing power (which is where I think this claim probably comes from; see the Google video) than the pre-frontal cortex; but this doesn't immediately imply that it knows what is going on. I am thinking of, for example, the amount of processing power it takes computers to do things simple to us (move an arm) versus doing calculus. A similar thing might be occurring in our brains)
Step 2-Emotions, since they are not an act of the conscious mind, are an act of the subconscious mind, and are therefore our way to figure out what is going on with the subconscious mind.
Step 3-?
Step 4-Emotions signal irrational beliefs.
Step 6-Profit.
(to be fair, I think the jump to step 4 is something like: the subsconscious recognizes contradictions in our actions that the pre-frontal cortex doesn't recognize (because of step 1), so in an effort to correct this, the subconscious mind uses this emotional baggage (step 2))
O.k., I kinda said along the way what I think is wrong with this, but here is a thought experiment/rhetorical question (aka, loaded question)...
If the subconscious mind flips out because of contradictions in our actions...well, experience would suggest that the subconscious mind should be flipping out a lot more, almost all the time. I'm not only talking about the stuff where obvious emotional baggage does occur like your cat dying (which, btw, what's the 'irrational belief' that occurred in your cat dying? Thinking she was going to be around all the time? This seems to be another apparent contradiction with some observable phenomena here), but also stuff like, your subconscious _encouraging_ you to have wild parties and do heroin (fortunately, our rational minds know that these are bad choices). There are a number of everyday contradictions when you sit and think about it...

On another note I would like to point out some wisdom found in an amazon review of all places. Go ahead and check it out, it and the discussion prompted by it is a nice critique of most self-help methods in general.

IFS
One of the variants of a various flavor of the needs model. To butcher the explanation of it, it basically takes as a thesis that we all have split personality disorder. In this way, the reason we have emotional baggage is to satiate the need of an another internal personality. As such, if we become masters of managing our Internal Family System (thus the name), we can get ourselves to do what we want to do.
First of all, the same falsification question as brought up in the needs model is applied here.
Secondly, if it is true that we need to do the things we do to satisfy certain 'internal family needs', then does this mean that the reason there are some people who are alcoholics and some who are not simply because of different internal family structures? If not, the causes appear to be disordinate with the consequences; if so, then the theory is completely hermeneutical and subjective yet is trying to be applied in an objective manner to individuals.

Alice Miller
If you want some background to what I might characterize as this approach, check out the following video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1WC6hNTONg&feature=related.
I.e., the ever famous cliche associated with psychologists (at least in a Simpson's episode), "It's Your Parents Fault".
I liken this to the following analogy...
Say one day, you wake up and you have some emotional problem you don't like no movement in your legs. Freaked out, you call the cops. A detective comes and tells you that he is going to help. You ask whether you'll be able to get rid of that emotional block be able to walk again, the detective says yes. The detective asks you lots of questions about your past. Eventually, he gets you to see that it was your parents the mafia that did it. The detective claims you're cured and leaves.
To spell it out, I find it highly unlikely that just knowing the cause without some other further action (which may not use the cause at all, like hopefully below solutions (to spell it out completely, in the above example, robolegs are an invention independent of the mafia; despite what Italians may have you believe)) is the cure.

Tony Robbins
This guy has absolutely mastered the craft of saying words that sound nice with no content and suggesting exercises that keep your brain busy but in the end do nothing IMHO.

Alternative Approach: Behavioralism
The key, as already told in The Thief of Time, http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/10/27/procrastination/, the marshmallow experiment, etc. (check the references), is metacognition. I.e., we need to recognize that our willpower is limited (i.e., we only have so much innate willpower::we can only jump so high), and find work arounds (i.e., use external device to enhance willpower::let's build some rockets!). We are humans, we use tools and modify our environment. So, why can't we use tools and modify our environment to eliminate distractions and thus in the process eliminate procrastination? This is an approach very similar to a lot of behavioralists. Check out Science and Behavior (it is being released for free now! here; also, one might want to check out the article written by Dr. Epstein, "Skinner as Self-Manager"), and particularly the section on "'Self-Control' Techniques".

The simplified process of how I apply behavioralism is as follows:
-Identify time-wasters.
-Identify what enables them/reinforces them. (logging helps with these two steps)
-Utilize the appropriate self-control techniques to eliminate these bad habits directly with aversive reinforcements or by removing their reinforcers.

What are the self-control techniques? Here is my own tl;dr list of them (these are what I find as the essentially ingredients listed from Skinner's research only organized so I could make an acronym out of it (BROADS). All the fancy self-help books now-a-days seem to have acronyms):
-Bundling
Bundle the desired task with something one likes to do. The common example of this is running while listening to music, or grading while listening to podcasts (some advice w.r.t. the podcasts, choose something low key and that doesn't take a lot of mindpower to pay attention to).
-Remove the situation
Remove the item that enables the situation altogether. Get rid of the internet in your apartment. Store your power chords in difficult to access areas. Avoid temptations. To quote Hazlitt, alcoholics should never be so dumb as to even go near bars. I.e., try to find what is wrong about the following picture:

If you are trying to avoid wasting time on Facebook, etc., why do you have it so close by? If you were an alcoholic, why would you live right next to a bar? -Operant Conditioning
I know psychologists are going to get finicky about the difference between classical and operant conditioning when I say this, but this really is essentially just playing the old Pavlov dog trick. Use some form of bundling to make a desired activity not so desired anymore (one has to be careful about how to set this up. For example, if you bundle with something you don't like to discourage a certain behavior, you find you might end up making the operant conditioning go the other way, and you like the behavior you were using to apply operant conditioning with). -Acting Counter-cyclically
This is a strange idea, but really its application is essentially a form of operant conditioning as well. If you have a behavior you want to change, try doing it when you otherwise wouldn't. Over time this associates the negative desire you have for the task at the given moment with the behavior.
-Distraction
Do something else entirely. Throw your mind off the subject. In the marshmallow experiment, many of the children observed did this by singing songs, playing with something else, etc.. -Satiating Supplement needs
Do something else that satiates the desire for the behavior more efficiently or positively than the normal behavior would have otherwise.

I should admit that there is a mixed bag of research about behavioralism. It apparently has gone "out of fashion" in a lot of psychology departments, which I admit I don't quite understand. After all, the old data and research that supported behavioralism in the past or the successes it did have hasn't gone anywhere. That, and after looking at a lot of Skinner's experimental methods, I am much more impressed by his research than a lot of the non-repeatable "research" going on now (see Rat Park, etc.).

Dealing With Fatigue
Section Forthcoming :U

Productivity
So, now that we have set ourselves in an appropriate psychological mindset; and we've established a work patten for ourselves, then how can we be efficacious about it? Well, there's a number of systems in this regards that I've been playing around with...

Todo systems
I have tried so many todo systems:
-Lists with vim on Desktop.
-Lists with vim + conky.
-todo.sh and NOTHING ELSE.
-todo.sh + conky.
-todo.sh + lists + conky.
-Calcurse, no need for lists now.
-Calcurse + conky.
-Calcurse + conky + remind.
That is also basically how I've evolved so far. Look, my needs are, and I feel anyone's todo system's need are as follows:
-I want to keep track of general projects with prioritization.
-I want to keep track of appointments.
-I want them to appear on my desktop conviniently.
Calcurse, remind, and conky respectively accomplish the above three bullets. (you can find conky and remind in any common linux repository, and you can find calcurse over here http://culot.org/calcurse/)
Now here are the objections/other things I've tried putting into todo-listing; and why I suggest doing this is probably a waste of time:
-Super subdividing tasks.
The idea is as follows...if I see "Do MA[5 6]..HW", will I not feel overwhelmed? How will I complete this task? I'll feel better, and get more work done, and feel like I'm on a roll if I super sub-divide it and check off each tiny piece.
Look, if you did part one, you're basically in a white room staring at a computer screen, with the door locked, and two hours until the missiles launch and nuclear armeggedon hits. What are you, some kind of actor? You got your motivation, don't give yourself an excuse to twiddle-dum with todo lists all day (true story).
-Super time-tracking.
What if you set up your appointment list so that you plan specifically what projects you'll be working on throughout the day? I think "You Are Not So Smart" said it best when they said, "Giving a person dealing with procrastination a planner is like telling a depressed person to cheer up." It doesn't really have any meaningful effect. In fact, my experience in trying this tends show some of the hallmarks of the unintended consequences economists speak of in social planning.
E.g., I ended up overestimating all the times in subjects that I was already good enough at, and underestimating the subjects I was not so good at. Unintended consequences galore.
Basically, prioritization does everything that this could possibly hope to accomplish.
-Resolution tracking.
Honestly, another time-waster. Or, I guess it might be more because I hate broadcasting my resolutions embarrassinglyon my desktop.

Idea capture
Idea capture...this has been another thing that I've played with quite frequently.
(1) I want the ease of using my computer to organize and sort and search notes.
(2) I want the immediate ease and simplicity of notecard and paper.
(3) I want the thing not to be crushed in my pockets.
(4) I don't want my immediate notes to be cluttered.
Solution:
To satiate 2, I have a notecard and pencil. (see http://www.43folders.com/2004/09/03/introducing-the-hipster-pda)
To satiate 3, it's in a leather pouch.
To satiate 4, I only keep one notecard on my, when it's full, I transcribe it to computer and get a new notecard.
To satiate 1, in the end my notecard notes get transcribe to computer.
I'm not going to detail the history of this development here. But I will note that having an idea capture system is very ideal. You have plenty of good thoughts that, assuming you don't have such a system, don't get caught. Now they will get caught. Furthermore, it allows note-taking for reading etc. anywhere. I'm in love with it so far.

Logging
Logging! One just keeps tabs on what they're doing throughout the day. You don't have to feel guilty if you don't keep it updated 24/7, in fact I would not suggest so, but rather every bit that you do document allows you to keep track of how to use your time. Which I think is the first step is realizing how to use it more effectively.
Then...what are the specifics of logging? How often and what about?
So, I want an accurate portrayal of what I did in the day, but I want to make it so that I'm able to give accurate updates that actually give me a picture of how I'm using my day. I.e.:
(1) I want regular time intervals for logs (for log comparison reasons)
(2) I want the logs to be accurate.
(3) I want the logs to be readable.
(4) I want to not spend a lot of time on this.
(5) I want to know, from time to time, how I spend the time in my day.
Solution:
To satiate 1-3, I do what I call daily checklist logging. I.e., in general I know what time wasters I end up doing. So, at the end of the day I have a checklist that asks whether or not I've done that or not. It's simple Y/N, so I can look through a calendar (specifically, I use a .reminder file, check your package repo for "remind") to see whether or not I'm doing well or not. The checklist is 5 questions, it takes 10 seconds, 4 is satiated. These checklists help me verify at a glance whether my systems are working, whether something needs changing, etc. To satiate 5 I'll do a 'weak verbose log' on the same pad that I do idea capture with, where I'll just note the time and one or two words of how I spent that time (I have notice that if I am too verbose, it is harder to analyze quickly how I havespent my days). The benefit of this is that looking back at this help me identify negative factors in my environment that I need to modify.

Chaining
For a quick summary see http://lifehacker.com/281626/jerry-seinfelds-productivity-secret. It fits in very neatly with checklist logging. It helps in the sense that it gives one a better goal to try to accomplish. For example, "BEING AWESOME ALL DAY, EVERY DAY" may be a hard goal to accomplish; however, trying to beat the previous chain of "DAYS IN WHICH I WAS AWESOME" gives one a much more reasonable goal to accomplish.

Sleep
I HAVE DONE SO MANY PERSONAL EXPERIMENTS WITH SLEEP.
Here's what I've tried and why it sucks.
-Oversleep.
When I wake up and feel rested, KEEP PLOWING. Completely overkill it.
What happens? I can just keep sleeping. I can easily keep going for 12+ hours a day. It's like eating, THERE'S NEVER ENOUGH.
-Undersleep.
aghagahgahg, I've tried so many different methods of undersleep. Going for just 7 hours a day, 7 hours a day + tea, 4 hours a day + insane amount of tea, alternating 4/8 with buckets of tea, 6 hours a day with metric tons of tea.
Even with caffeine I have never been able to escape the following conclusion:
Every hour of sleep lost I have to roughly make up with 2 more hours of work due to sleep retardation and mental fog.
In every case, with all sorts of stimulants imagineable, I have not been able to overcome the "Sleep Retardation Rule" (tm).
This rule comes in various forms:
-Decreased willpower (even moreso!).
-Increased daydreaming/spacing off.
-Just general retardation.
In all instances I've found that it's just not worth it on the bassis of time gained for work/work lost due to becoming dumber.
-Double-sleep.
I tried sleeping for 6 hours and then napping at noon in my office. Conclusion? The nap doesn't really cover it. I feel a little bit refreshed, but like in undersleep, sleep retardation occurs.'
-Natural sleep.
This is something I tried recently. I figured, why not just let my body tell me to go to sleep when I'm absolutely exhausted, and I'll wake up when I'm not?
Conclusion: WHAT IN THE WORLD IS GOING ON? It's 10 a.m. and I haven't slept yet? Or wait, I guess I slept at 1 for 3 hours? And then maybe? Oh screw it I don't know, let's just go to class and see if I can handle it, oops guess I can't, I can barely hold my head up, WHATISTHISIDON'TEVEN. It is so ridiculous. Sometimes I sleep for 2 hours in a day, others for 12, and the sleep intervals are so crazy random. I mean, I do, on the average end up needing less sleep and not having to deal with sleep retardation (6 hrs average); but the world's 24 hr schedule is not made for this.
OVERALL CONCLUSION:
-Reverse sleep. Go to bed immediately after your work schedule. This way you can be sure that you have enough time to get whatever sleep you need that day, because if you sleep at 10 and need to wake up at 6, you're placing an upper limit that you can't mess around with if you need more sleep.

But most importantly: GET AS MUCH SLEEP AS YOU NEED. NO STIMULANTS. NO ABSTRACT SCHEDULING. THAT SIMPLE.

Focus
Completely separate from the idea of even being able to start a task, is being able to concentrate diligently on it, and to strain oneself away from constant daydreaming.

The passive approach
Again, just like before, I am taking an environmental approach. Let's make some tools, apply metacognition, and be intelligent about this so that we set up our future selves in a successful setting. As such, I already outlined the appropriate strategy, but here I am just giving some explicit passive things we can do.

"Opening the Book"
Often, I'll have the trouble of having nothing else to do, but knowing I have to read something. My mind will try to avoid it and do anything but. The solution? Don't read the book yet, but simply open it to the correct page and lay it out. That's all. I place no pressure on myself to read it, but simply lay it curiously out.
I will eventually start reading it. As if my subconscious is saying, "Oh hey, what's this doing h--ohnoatrap."
Sometimes we need only eliminate the first barrier.

Note taking
When I take notes in class, contrary to popular opinion it's not to re-read afterwords, but rather it's an attention focusing device. Thus, I suggest taking notes whenever applicable. Reading, studying, etc.. If you have to create a pile of notes, it will keep you focused. For class notes, it's probably reasonable to take appreciably good notes to read afterwords (if you're going through the trouble and you might re-read them, might as well, right?). However, for anything else, don't strain yourself, you don't want to have to force yourself through another mental barrier. However, over time it will get easier to pass such a barrier.

Bundling
Bundle something you don't like/are having trouble focusing on with something you do like/have ease focusing on. The common item people bundle with is music. Now, it's said that one shouldn't play anything but classical music to enhance focus; however, if music is the sole thing standing between you doing something at all or not, then play whatever music you like. There are also other ways to bundle as well, like if you're having trouble reviewing notes or taking notes at all, bundle with the task of "creating a book" (this worked for me, I can understand if it doesn't work for others), as now the task has changed from "reviewing" to "creating" and the act is more positive due to the bundling.

Standing Desks
See http://lifehacker.com/5735528/why-and-how-i-switched-to-a-standing-desk. I have nothing for high praise on this one (I made mine by simply stacking a lot of books on a table at home). But why do I categorize this under passive focus devices? Well, if you're sitting down, you're much more likely to...fall asleep. Standing desks alleviate that problem. Furthermore, it's as if you're getting constant exercise, and thus you're getting constant blood flow. Which means, if you buy the ideas in the Google talk, one could make the argument that elevated blood flow to the pre-frontal cortex could increase abilities, not withstanding general concentration as well.
Really, the free exercise should be a good enough reason.

Studying
Now that we've analyzed theories of psychology of applying ourselves, how to be efficacious in applying ourselves, it is prudent to ask in what directions we should apply ourselves. Seeing as how this is a Purdue University web page, I figure my audience here is student, and thus the application is studying. Thus the question becomes more apt: how should one study? In this regard, I highly suggest Henry Hazlitt's Thinking As a Science.

Jump into the lake
If you know what to study. Practice. Don't read, don't memorize, but practice. If you can't practice anymore, default to reading or memorizing until you can. Apply, apply, apply.
To cement this, let me tell a story.
There was a man who wanted to learn how to swim. So he went and read every book on swimming. He memorized all of the forms. He spent years. Alternatively, one evening a man was thrown into a lake. Within a few minutes he learned how to swim.
Metaphorically speaking, I think one should "jump into the lake."

The role of memorizing
You should always remember through your practice. If you have to look at your notes while practicing, good. It will cement things as you go and kill you two birds with one stone. Otherwise, the only time I see memorization as applicable is in learning languages, and that is it.

How to read
Into the relevant and important information. I have noticed that in reading the amount of mathematics that I have, that I now read mathematical texts a lot faster than before, not because I mentally process the new ideas or read word-by-word that much faster, but because I have a much better idea of how information is organized, and how to look up the relevant information that I need.
Related to this is what I think is actually going on when a person 'speed-read's. That is, they don't actually speed-read, but know the structure of a given genre well enough so as to reconstruct the rest of the paragraph by only a few key words. They don't actually "read fast", they instead "skip unnecessary parts" well.
tl;dr, know the vocabulary and structure to use Pareto's Principle to your advantage and skim to what you actually need to read. Thus, you read faster by reading less. Read in 'concentric circles', and not front to back.
(if you took my advice, you'd only have read the 'tl;dr' section ;) )

References
Here is a good list of books/articles to see on these topics, ordered by my favorites to least (also, this seems to also be ordered from what was most used as a reference on this page and which have not):
Science and Human Behavior by B.F. Skinner
"Skinner as Self-Manager" by Epstein
Thinking As a Science by Henry Hazlitt
The Thief of Time edited by Chrisoula Andreou and Mark D. White
I Want to Be a Mathematician by Paul Halmos
The Way to Willpower by Henry Hazlitt
The Use of the Margin by EH Griggs
How to Live on 24 Hours a Day by Arnold Bennett
The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People by Stephen Covey (actually...I'm sorry, I think this book is useless, but it's obligatory to post it as a reference on such topics by now...)
And websites:
http://www.youtube.com/user/GoogleTechTalks#p/u/83/XeJSXfXep4M (WATCH THIS! HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!)
http://www.lifehacker.com
http://www.youarenotsosmart.com (In particular, http://youarenotsosmart.com/2010/10/27/procrastination/, but you might want to check some of the other things out, it is a great website)
http://www.math.purdue.edu/~zylinski/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=protips
Well-written CBT criticism
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1WC6hNTONg&feature=related (for a portrayal of the stereotypical psychological method/Alice Miller)