2-minute rule best practice question

[CamJPete]

I have a question about the 2-minute rule that I am having a hard time figuring out. Should I apply it during the processing step only, or should it be applied equally to things BEFORE capturing? There are many small tasks around the house that would take less than 2 minutes, but I don't really do them because I haven't captured them. Now, I totally realize that I don't need to be a ninny and I can just go ahead and do them without worrying about some stupid rule-- it's 100% okay to do "unplanned work" as called in the three-fold nature of work. But I often find that I procrastinate on things that would take less than two-minutes, and it would be nice to know that it's part of the GTD system. I hope this makes sense without sounds too anal. I'm kind of having a hard time verbalizing my question. Maybe another way to say it is this: Should the two-minute rule be applied equally to "defining work" AND "unplanned work" in the three-fold nature of work?

Cameron

 

[mcogilvie]

I have a question about the 2-minute rule that I am having a hard time figuring out. Should I apply it during the processing step only, or should it be applied equally to things BEFORE capturing? There are many small tasks around the house that would take less than 2 minutes, but I don't really do them because I haven't captured them. Now, I totally realize that I don't need to be a ninny and I can just go ahead and do them without worrying about some stupid rule-- it's 100% okay to do "unplanned work" as called in the three-fold nature of work. But I often find that I procrastinate on things that would take less than two-minutes, and it would be nice to know that it's part of the GTD system. I hope this makes sense without sounds too anal. I'm kind of having a hard time verbalizing my question. Maybe another way to say it is this: Should the two-minute rule be applied equally to pre-defined work AND unplanned work?

Cameron

Sure, any time if right for the two-minute rule- if you've got two minutes. You may be in the middle of capturing it and say "this is silly, I can just do it." Or you may have it on a list already, and realize you should have done it already. But it may just show up and you just do it. Suppose you had a little stovetop fire. Would you put the fire on a list before putting it out? (Anal GTD'er answer: I would put the fire out, then put it on a list and immediately check it off.) On the other hand, you might capture a two-minute item that you can't do in your current context, or you don't have the brainpower to do right now. It's ok to capture it for another time- it's getting things done, not beating yourself up.

 

[TesTeq]

The original two-minute rule is an element of the GTD workflow diagram ("Do it"). During an inbox processing step you ask two main questions:
- Is it actionable?
- What's the Next Action?

If the next action can be done in two minutes or less, do it when you first pick the item up.

Even if the item is not a high-priority one, do it now if you're ever going to do it at all. The rationale for the two-minute rule is that it's more or less the point where it starts taking longer to store and track an item than to deal with it the first time it's in your hands - in other words, it's the efficiency cutoff.

 

[kelstarrising]

I have a question about the 2-minute rule that I am having a hard time figuring out. Should I apply it during the processing step only, or should it be applied equally to things BEFORE capturing? There are many small tasks around the house that would take less than 2 minutes, but I don't really do them because I haven't captured them. Now, I totally realize that I don't need to be a ninny and I can just go ahead and do them without worrying about some stupid rule-- it's 100% okay to do "unplanned work" as called in the three-fold nature of work. But I often find that I procrastinate on things that would take less than two-minutes, and it would be nice to know that it's part of the GTD system. I hope this makes sense without sounds too anal. I'm kind of having a hard time verbalizing my question. Maybe another way to say it is this: Should the two-minute rule be applied equally to "defining work" AND "unplanned work" in the three-fold nature of work?

Cameron

Great question. It can be applied any time. And actually, to even have it in your awareness to consider doing it, you've already "captured" it.

 

[TesTeq]

Great question. It can be applied any time. And actually, to even have it in your awareness to consider doing it, you've already "captured" it.

Wait! How can you find any 2-minute Next Action on your GTD lists? They are meant to be done on the spot, not appended to any list.

 

[kelstarrising]

I was thinking more like when it first comes into your world and you do it right then and there, or when you capture it and then do it at a later time when you are processing it. That's really a matter of how closely together Capture & Clarify happen.

What you're referring to is bringing it as far as Organize. I would say on that, go for the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law. I am sure there are times in my life when I have captured something on a list, even though it would have taken less than two minutes.

 

[CamJPete]

Thank you for your insights. I've been thinking a little more about it today. I think that when I come across something that will take less than two minutes, I have in essence "captured it" by looking at it thinking that maybe I need to do something about it. Then I realize that, yes, there is an action I want to do with it, and yes, it will take less than 2 minutes. I suppose I am applying the workflow process in my mind without realizing it, but it happens in an instant.

You might even say that "unplanned work" has first passed the workflow processing stage if you choose to act on the incoming work. If your boss asks you to review a paragraph on the spot at your desk, and you choose to do it, you have processed the request and decided that 1) there is an action and that 2) you want to do it now. No need to put it on your actions list because you are doing it, but it has in a way made it through the processing stage.

Sometimes I feel there is a little bit of disjointedness in the steps and models that could be conveyed more cohesively in the book. The three-fold nature of work sometimes feels like it's own special model, but it's nothing more than applying the workflow diagram in different ways. Defining your work is just capturing, processing, and organizing results--with review to keep them current. Doing pre-defined work is nothing more than doing things from your lists or calendars. Doing unplanned work is nothing more than just processing on-the-fly and then skipping straight to the doing. I think when people read the five steps on the website, it can easily be misunderstood as a linear dependency. But sometimes processing can happen without capturing (boss asks you for review now), doing can follow an on-the-fly clarifying/processing moment. Maybe the "three-fold nature of work" could be eliminated as a model if the "do-it" part of the workflow simply included a caveat of "do it now if less than two-minutes, or you can also just skip the organizing step and do it-- even if it takes longer than two minutes". The five principles seem to be connected like a spider web, rather than a linear string, and it seems you can often skip from one to another.

 

[Gardener]

For what it's worth, I don't use the two-minute rule while processing. I find that it breaks my focus, and while the task itself may take me two minutes, getting back into the flow of processing takes longer. Research on multitasking suggests that returning to a flow state after that state is interrupted takes fifteen minutes or more.

 

[Oogiem]

Should the two-minute rule be applied equally to "defining work" AND "unplanned work" in the three-fold nature of work?

I tend to treat the 2 minute rule as a "guideline" not a rule, sort of like the Pirate code ;-)

I frequently have things that take me as much as 15 minutes to process properly but when processed will only take 5 minutes to complete. So I tend to process completely and then look at how much time I have left and if it's a short task just do it. Doesn't have to be 2 minutes, but short.

I also sometimes know that I have a bunch of tiny things that I can capture direct to my lists with minimal processing that individually will take less than 2 minutes to do, but that for efficiency reasons I may wish to batch process later. I'll write those to my context lists even though I could potentially do them as soon as I think of them. For me it's better not to interrupt what I am doing to go do the suddenly discovered 2 minute task and I can get from capture to processed in seconds so why not just quickly add it to my system and come back to that later for doing when I am in that context? Also there is a huge cost in switching contexts. If I am processing my inboxes and I find items that would require me to change context I find that it is often more efficient to just put them on my lists even if they are 2 minute type tasks.

Here is a rather extreme example: I have an inbox item of a quick note to skein off more blended yarn for my wool store. The next action is to get a cone of the yarn and take it to the shop where the skeiner is. Now the wool is in one building the skeiner is in another and I'm in thehouse processing my inbox. Sure the actual action of getting the cone of yarn and placing it in the correct location is tiny, less than 2 minutes to do, but do I really want to get up from my computer, go over to the wool store, grab a cone, drop it off in the shop and then come back to processing? No, I should just add that to the context Wool store and next time I am there I will see that I have several things to do, one is grab a cone of yarn and take it to the shop for skeining.

So I tend to add things to my lists if doing them would require that I change contexts significantly but do them when I process them if they are short 2 minute type tasks but I can do them in the same context I am in. For me that measn that I typically only do 2 minutes tasks at the time in the misc mac and computer Internet contexts and very rarely inside by myself if it's a desk thing.

 

[CamJPete]

Good thoughts on the 2-minute rule. Thank you for taking the time.

I read the GTD chapter on engaging, and it helped to clarify things. The chapter discusses the three-fold nature of work as a model for engaging (i.e. doing). I when I am engaging with predefining work, I am applying the workflow process. When I am engaging with unplanned work, I can just do whatever the heck I want however I want, and probably shouldn't be bound by a workflow process. Now if I want to use elements of it I can, but I don't have to. So applying this to my 2-minute rule question: If I see something that is less than two minutes, I could do it if I wanted-- not because I am trying to adhere to the 2-minute rule/guideline-- but because I just plain feel like it.

This is my first post on this forum, so I appreciate everyone responding. It has helped to think through this out loud with everybody. My simple question about the two-minute rule has helped me to understand the three-fold nature of work much better, which has led to a pretty crucial breakthrough for me in implementing GTD. I am already feeling much more relaxed today and find myself able to bounce back and force quite naturally between working from my lists and working from spontaneous desires to do things.