I’ve always been something of a chronic planner. On top of that, I’m a
researcher, so I’m programmed to investigate, well…just about everything. These traits have always played a role in how
I travel. Until now, most of my trips for business or vacation were well planned ahead of time, with exact start and
end dates, as well as detailed lists of desired activities and scheduled events. But for my upcoming extended travel
adventure to Europe and Asia, I’m tossing the planner aside. Instead of a detailed itinerary, there will be only
limited pre-planning and research. I don’t want to constrain myself to a set agenda, which is quite challenging for
someone notorious for making calculated moves. But it is also absolutely energizing, and an awesome breath of fresh air
to become comfortable with winging it.
The pros and cons of these two approaches to travel were on my mind as I read Rick Steves
latest article about trip planning. Steves
stresses the importance of pre-departure research, yet warns against becoming too attached to any pre-arranged plans. I
think this is an important lesson, but probably not as critical to follow for longer trips with days to spare. I
recognize that some pre-planning is, of course, practical and essential for any trip. But I don’t intend on getting
bogged down in it. The real challenge will be finding the right balance between preparation and adaptation — charting a
course, but being able to go with the flow (and even choose the flow) when the unexpected pops up. There are
pros and cons to both methods — and the steps each traveler takes before embarking will depend on the length of the
journey. What prep steps do you (or don’t you) take before a trip? Do you buy the guidebook and read it cover to cover?
Or maybe just borrow it from the library for a few days, take some notes and then leave it behind before heading out?
How much (or little) do you prepare?