Folder Structure for Projects?

[ivanjay205]

Hi everyone, I am looking for some help and advice on a clearer hierarchy for my project/next action lists. I use OmniFocus and today everything is broken out by Areas of Focus. I am a President/Owner of a 40 person company and on the personal side wife, 3 kids, dogs, cars, house, etc. So LOTS of areas of responsibility. In listening to a recent GTD Nordic podcast they recommended separating the organization structure of your project and next action list from your areas of focus for clarity. I can relate to this as I can honestly say because of the complexity of my hierarchy it is difficult to see if I am working on the right things.

I am thinking about moving my areas of focus into a mindmap as the GTD Nordic podcast (ep 59) suggested and stripping down my Omnifocus setup to just a project list and next actions. Eliminating most of the areas of focus from there.

Before doing all this work just wondering what most of your experiences and structures are? I think the hierarchy in Omnifocus is clear for me to find stuff, that is not an Issue. But it is hard to gauge the overall work distribution to make sure I am paying attention to what needs to paid attention to.

Thanks in advance!

 

[mksilk2]

My personal approach is to keep the projects/tasks or NA in a separate system to my AoF. I find it too much work keeping every project assigned to a AoF religiously. I have tried doing this in the past. I think FacileThings is probably the best app I have tried that does this in the simplest manner (its mapping of AoF to Projects to NA is very good). But I am now a Nirvana user for Task, NA and Project management (having moved from Microsoft ToDo). My AoF are in TheBrain which is very similar to a mindmap style (but more powerful). I find this way of managing better suited to me (which is the beauty of GTD). My reference system is in TheBrain too and I use OneNote for Project Support material. Attached is a pic of my current set up

 

[cfoley]

Consider the ways you want to use the data and ensure your system supports those uses for you.

When I have experimented with different list organisations, what I have been searching for is the best dashboard for me to: organise, choose actions, and review. I don't think there is such a best dashboard so making it easy to see what you want when you want it is key.

My Areas of focus are written on 3 x 5 index cards and are in a reference folder called GTD Horizons. Quick and easy to look at them whenever I want.

For my lists, I use a 3 x 5 index cards. Normally, I group the cards by context. Here is how I use them, and how I have achieved the similar effects in the past using software.

Clarifying: I write the project on one side and the next action on the other side.

Organising: I write the context next to the action and put the card in the appropriate context stack. In software, I have always found it difficult to separate clarifying and organising. The best was in Toodledo where I could type in the action and then type in the context tag.

Choosing an action: I take the stack of cards for the current context and take out those that I have time and energy to do. Now I have a shortlist to make priority decisions. After I do an action, I go through that shortlist again and remove actions I no-longer have time and energy to do. Previously, I have used the star feature in software to do this filtering, and once the initial stars are set up for "right now", use the star view to see only my shortlist.

Reviewing: Normally I review projects without rearranging them (i.e. in context order)

Reviewing by Area of Focus: Occasionally during the weekly review, I like to view my projects by area of focus. I sort my stack of cards manually by AoF. In the past, I have used tags in software for this. There is an obvious tradeoff here. Do you spend time tagging projects with AoF while organising, or repeat the sorting every time you want to see your projects in this way. For me, it is more valuable to streamline the organising.

Reviewing using an Eisenhower Matrix: Occasionally, I want to use an Eisenhower matrix. Again, I arrange the cards I have into the quadrants. In the past, I have used tags in software for this. The trick with the software approach was remembering to undo those tags afterwards.

These are the most common ways I use my lists. However, I am quite confident that I can arrange these cards in lots of different ways on my desk, to solve whatever problem I have in the moment. I would suggest that whatever structure you choose in software, you have the flexibility to slice and dice your lists in whatever ways suit your needs without having to do a big restructure.

 

[ivanjay205]

My personal approach is to keep the projects/tasks or NA in a separate system to my AoF. I find it too much work keeping every project assigned to a AoF religiously. I have tried doing this in the past. I think FacileThings is probably the best app I have tried that does this in the simplest manner (its mapping of AoF to Projects to NA is very good). But I am now a Nirvana user for Task, NA and Project management (having moved from Microsoft ToDo). My AoF are in TheBrain which is very similar to a mindmap style (but more powerful). I find this way of managing better suited to me (which is the beauty of GTD). My reference system is in TheBrain too and I use OneNote for Project Support material. Attached is a pic of my current set up

Interesting.... I think this is most inline with what I am envisioning. I used FacileThings way back when upon starting with GTD and while I loved it it felt very archaic technology wise and very limiting. Good for beginners but once I really was ready to tweak and develop my own system it presented a lot of friction.

Is theBrain free? It seems very similar to what I use but free. I do love free and would switch possibly if it was as I cannot truly justify the subscription cost I pay but I get nervous with free = disappearing lol

 

[ivanjay205]

Hello I am also Chairman and CEO of my own Company and had the same problem. I think we dont work at the same level when we work on a project (H1) or a next action (H0). I have a different mind on level H2 (A of F) and on H3, H4, H5

This is why i have my AOF outside my omnifocus (or things 3 I recently migrated to)
Putting project on area was to difficult to maintain and also to act on. I use mindmap or my bullet journal for this. The principle is to get a bird eye on my meta engagements. Were the projects belongs doesn't matter for me. They belong to it naturaly.

About project and next action, On Things (but it could be on omnifocucus or Nirvana...) I have a single list of actionable project or subproject (Area = active projects) . They are grouped by this week and this month. All non actionable project goes to a someday may be area. For me software like facile things are great but wanting segment to much things leads to confusion...

I use my software as a reminder and plan tool for focusing on action and take altitude for the rest.

PS I kept some specific area because there are a lot of relative projects and subprojects for example : Finance, Buildings, clients.... I only have 9 of them.

Thanks for the response. Sounds like you are in a similar position to me. As an owner regardless of size at the end of the day you have some level of accountability to all aspects even with people under you. The system I have developed has become too cumbersome. Currently I am thinking the right solution is

• Business
  • Active Projects
  • Maintenance Projects (for recurring projects that will never change, like preparing my annual corporate returns)
  • On Hold Projects
• Personal
  • Active Projects
  • Maintenance Projects
  • On Hold Projects

The piece I have to sort out in OmniFocus is where the loose single action tasks go but perhaps that is just a list under Business and Personal.

Just curious, why did you leave Omnifocus for Things?

I also think because of my current setup I spend way too much time in the weeds and do not get up to the altitude enough which is not good from a business leadership standpoint.

 

[Quicksilver10]

Hi everyone, I am looking for some help and advice on a clearer hierarchy for my project/next action lists. I use OmniFocus and today everything is broken out by Areas of Focus. I am a President/Owner of a 40 person company and on the personal side wife, 3 kids, dogs, cars, house, etc. So LOTS of areas of responsibility. In listening to a recent GTD Nordic podcast they recommended separating the organization structure of your project and next action list from your areas of focus for clarity. I can relate to this as I can honestly say because of the complexity of my hierarchy it is difficult to see if I am working on the right things.

I am thinking about moving my areas of focus into a mindmap as the GTD Nordic podcast (ep 59) suggested and stripping down my Omnifocus setup to just a project list and next actions. Eliminating most of the areas of focus from there.

Before doing all this work just wondering what most of your experiences and structures are? I think the hierarchy in Omnifocus is clear for me to find stuff, that is not an Issue. But it is hard to gauge the overall work distribution to make sure I am paying attention to what needs to paid attention to.

Thanks in advance!

Hi. I have tried listing projects (no Areas) and listing Areas of Focus and nesting projects within them. Currently using the latter. I kind of go numb to long lists and using Areas provides a kind of 'chunking' that gives me better focus. I am retired from paid employment, so my Areas are purely personal (house, home, family, self-development...blah). A factor for me is I moved from Omnifocus to Things 3 recently and Things makes it very easy - and tempting - to create Areas and the look and feel of these is different from Omnifocus folders..

My Areas are quite granular. They are sufficient to be meaningful to me.

I think regarding looking at the balance between different areas, a mind map or a checklist (the DavidCo Incompletion Trigger List checklist is a fave of mine!) are a better way of doing this than trawling through your List manager app. So, to summarise, I map out my Areas of Focus on a mind map, then list those Areas in Things. I use the Incompletion Trigger List in my Weekly Review.

Hope that is of some help.

 

[bcmyers2112]

I don't actually think I have anything meaningful to contribute to this thread, but I just wanted to say I found it really fascinating to read how @cfoley uses paper (well, index cards) to great advantage. @cfoley -- cool system. It's probably a bit more sophisticated than I would use in terms of how you review things at different horizons -- I'm more of an intuitive thinker and I just like to review my horizons at regular intervals to see if my gut tells me anything needs more attention. Which is not to say I think your approach is wrong -- because I don't. My only reason for commenting is that I think it's really interesting how you found a way to do something really powerful with low-tech tools.

 

[cfoley]

Thanks for the nice comment @bcmyers2112 !

My system was born from frustration.

• I have this big desk but my computerised system was confined to a 15" laptop screen or a 5.5" phone screen.
• I didn't love having to look at a screen to choose actions from a non-computery context.
• I always enjoyed paper systems but they were difficult to view in different ways.

As a child, I loved collecting stickers and cards. I would use the entire floor to arrange them into bundles, sometimes in numerical order, sometimes to collect the rare ones together, sometimes by artwork style. Sometimes I would just lay them all out individually so I could get a view from a 4 foot altitude! Little did I know I was practising the manual dexterity and algorithms for an effective index card GTD system!

The biggest source of friction in my system is... friction itself. The cards do not slide across each other as easily as I would like. I am looking into using blank glossy playing cards but they seem more expensive, less readily available and possibly less environmentally friendly. The sweet spot might be some 3 x 5 glossy cards that are cheap but also a compatible size with the rest of my cards.

 

[ivanjay205]

Hi. I have tried listing projects (no Areas) and listing Areas of Focus and nesting projects within them. Currently using the latter. I kind of go numb to long lists and using Areas provides a kind of 'chunking' that gives me better focus. I am retired from paid employment, so my Areas are purely personal (house, home, family, self-development...blah). A factor for me is I moved from Omnifocus to Things 3 recently and Things makes it very easy - and tempting - to create Areas and the look and feel of these is different from Omnifocus folders..

My Areas are quite granular. They are sufficient to be meaningful to me.

I think regarding looking at the balance between different areas, a mind map or a checklist (the DavidCo Incompletion Trigger List checklist is a fave of mine!) are a better way of doing this than trawling through your List manager app. So, to summarise, I map out my Areas of Focus on a mind map, then list those Areas in Things. I use the Incompletion Trigger List in my Weekly Review.

Hope that is of some help.

I think my problem was the pure size of my areas of focus. It made it impossible to gauge just how much is on there. I just got rid of that and put them all under active projects and my reaction was no surprise I feel overwhelmed I think I had 20 active running projects just for work, not personal which is separate

 

[ivanjay205]

Hello
My advice would be to make it as simple as possible. About Omnifocus, You can put on hold a project and use the view to see or not on old project.

About why I leaved OF for things is just a question of pleasure. OF is too strict for me. Everything must be in a case. Things is more time and user oriented. Also by my function you know that entrepreneer has different job and different horizons. We need concentration and action. We need beeing in the real life and taking space. The tool we use must be as flexible as possible but also well thought and organised to collect and organise our amount of information. It also need to be time oriented. Time in the uncoverable asset. Time is everything. Each minute must be decided and optimised wether it is for fun or work. Life is too short.

I use GTD since over 15 years and I admit it has changed my life It gave me a real sense of time and aweness of my engagements. Of course I evoluated and changed myself little by little. But GTD needs a good tool something which doesnt make frictions thinkings vs acting...

Anyway, getting more experienced about GTD, made me realise that I like simple systems. A good sandbox of stuff is better for me that a collection strictly organised by folders and subfolders. Too much organisation kill efficiency and organisation.

I also realised that tools like stictly data base dont really suites to me. I need flexibility. I need action. I need beeing in the flow. Using omnifocus slow me. It force me acting like a robot. There is also a great advantage to things. Context are great but they are secondary for me. Time and availability is more important to me. When I work with GTD I first do my core stuff for the day eg what I planned or decided to do yesterday after a review of my core engagements.

Things shows me what is upcoming, what is available, what could be possible (someday) Things helps me to think and choose better than omnifocus does.

Also, I have tested Omnifocus 4 and I hate it. I find it efficient but it gives me nopleasure at all. However Omnifocus is a great tool and very secure. It just doesnt suits to me. I spend too much time organizing, making perspective, cleaning them afterall than acting.

Things gives the possibility to plan projects or task. It is perfect for my bullet journal. Things is also just simple and efficient. It is like Nirvana. A great tool but it gives to me a shot of pleasure each time I use it. So simple and so well build. I dont feel working. I fell gaming. The game of life.

Very interesting, thanks! I had tried Things (and do have an active membership) but gravitated to Omnifocus as I love the built in review and found that its flexibility gives me a lot of ways to engage with it. Only issue is it encourages constant fiddling with the system which is in effect a good form of procrastination unless you are really making a big impact with the change.

 

[FocusGuy]

Very interesting, thanks! I had tried Things (and do have an active membership) but gravitated to Omnifocus as I love the built in review and found that its flexibility gives me a lot of ways to engage with it. Only issue is it encourages constant fiddling with the system which is in effect a good form of procrastination unless you are really making a big impact with the change.

I agree. There is an automation with things to help to review. But i notice that taking each project one by one was better and faster. For me the real difference beetween OF and things is the way things force you to act on. If you dont do it just ask you why. May be it is still unclear may be it is because it is not worth to do it now. Things encourage and active procrastination and controle about each aspect of your life. For me it is most in the flow as Omnifocus as good as it is is more an administrator tool. Difficult to live with that when you'r are a business maker.

 

[bcmyers2112]

Anyway, getting more experienced about GTD, made me realise that I like simple systems. A good sandbox of stuff is better for me that a collection strictly organised by folders and subfolders. Too much organisation kill efficiency and organisation.

This has been my experience as well. If I recall correctly, I think David Allen's advice about contexts and inboxes is something along the lines of having as many as you need, but as few as you can get by with. I think a similar idea can be applied to structure: apply as much as you need, but as little as you can get by with.

My particular issue has always been applying too much structure. Way, WAY too much. By trying to control too much (everything, really) I inevitably lost my grip on the few things I actually could control.

I've been reluctant to post such thoughts in this thread because I don't use Omnifocus. I don't want to offer an opinion about something I don't understand. But... you kind of opened the door for me to share this thought. Or at least that's what I'm telling myself.

When it comes to AOFs, regardless of the tool I use I just don't think of AOFs or any of the horizons above it to be a rigid hierarchy. I just feel that adds a burden with no commensurate payoff.

I feel AOFs and above are things to review at appropriate intervals to help me decide whether I'm addressing the right areas of my life or not. Sometimes certain of my AOFs don't need a project or action because they're on cruise control. Sometimes I have a project or action that doesn't map to my AOFs or a higher level. In my world, these things are OK.

Like I said, I wouldn't know how that would or would not work in Omnifocus. It's not a tool I can even try -- I use a PC rather than a Mac. So, y'know, out of respect for @ivanjay205 I didn't want to sound off about something I have no experience with. I guess I would say, however, that if @ivanjay205 feels the complexity of their system makes it difficult to determine if they're working on the right things, some simplification is definitely in order. Decoupling AOFs and above from projects and actions might help.

Things is also just simple and efficient. It is like Nirvana.

It's funny you mention Nirvana. I used to use it. I abandoned it in favor of Todoist. Then I kinda let my whole GTD system go to hell. Todoist is now filled with irrelevant nonsense, and Nirvana was empty because I abandoned it. So I returned to Nirvana because it is a blank slate that allows me to rebuild my system from the ground up.

I used to have a love/hate relationship with Nirvana. I was frustrated by the things it doesn't do. Recently, however, I realized that I've found a way to be annoyed with every single tool I've tried. Have you ever heard the saying, "The common denominator in all your bad relationships is you"? I feel that way about my relationship with list managers. LOL!

Right now, I'm really enjoying the simplicity of Nirvana. I don't have to think about it when I use it. It's simple and easy. Can it do everything I imagine a list manager could do? No. But then, neither can anything else. Nirvana does what I need.

This is not intended to be an advertisement for Nirvana. Todoist is also a good tool. I've heard good things about Things (no pun intended), but I'm not a Mac user so it's not a solution for me. I know there are many happy Omnifocus users, and there's even a GTD setup guide available for it which says to me someone at the David Allen Company has determined that, yeah, this is a good tool.

Anyway, guess I thought it would be OK to chime in to say you and I think along similar lines when it comes to tools. I like what I consider to be "simple and efficient."

 

[archangel]

OmniFocus user here. Had projects, single, action, lists, and maintenance projects all within folders by area of focus. Even had folders for delegated projects within the areas of focus. Ended up looking nice and organized, but added too much friction. Also, opening and closing the folders hid my true commitments from myself. Although I may focus on a project or two within an area, I did not like siloing projects from each other in the outline view. What is working for me now is to distinguish some of the single action lists I will use an emoji for “house” or area of business like “finance” if I do need a quick visual to make sure that the area is being maintained. My actual list of areas of focus is in OmniOutliner and MindNode.

 

[ivanjay205]

OmniFocus user here. Had projects, single, action, lists, and maintenance projects all within folders by area of focus. Even had folders for delegated projects within the areas of focus. Ended up looking nice and organized, but added too much friction. Also, opening and closing the folders hid my true commitments from myself. Although I may focus on a project or two within an area, I did not like siloing projects from each other in the outline view. What is working for me now is to distinguish some of the single action lists I will use an emoji for “house” or area of business like “finance” if I do need a quick visual to make sure that the area is being maintained. My actual list of areas of focus is in OmniOutliner and MindNode.

This is exactly what happened to me; I only saw 2-3 projects in each area and felt great. Until I saw my lists. Now that they are in one place I said holy !@#$ too much!

 

[René Lie]

David Allen's recommendation is to have a complete projects list, and to me, it makes sense to have a list of all projects in one list. This is also true for all your next actions; those who do not have an overview over their commitments, are more likely to take on more than they can handle - or to be driven by the latest and loudest...

 

[Oogiem]

wondering what most of your experiences and structures are?

I've tried and used several different structures. For most of the time I had my system in a combination of Omnifocus and DEVONThink. Omnifocus projects were organized by Area of Focus and I used DEVONThink for project support and also my someday/maybe projects.

That worked ok but many of my projects cover multiple AOF's so I changed to a structure in Omnifocus with folders for current active projects, recurring projects that happened weekly, ones that happen monthly and then 4 folders for projects that happen or start in each quarter. My contexts expanded to be more granular. I still kept all someday/maybe and project support material in DEVONThink.

I experienced a significant failure in DEVONThink with lost data in spite of a backup string over a year long. I started searching for a replacement for DT and started playing with Obsidian in late 2020.

By early 2021 I had decided that Obsidian would work for me to replace DEVONThink for all project support and someday maybe material and started the process to convert. Instead of lots of folders like I had used n DT, in Obsidian I have a few folders and then use MOC or TOC type notes to organize my notes into logical groupings. I also can much more easily cross reference notes in multiple places. Projects and tasks still stayed in Omnifocus.

That has changed and since late last year I have moved all my task management and project management into Obsidian as well. I find it much more convenient to have it all in one place.

My Obsidian structure is that I have a folder for Active Projects. I am using templates and each project has a note. I use the tasks plugin to handle sorting actions by context and have a working GTD dashboard. I use the DataView plugin to create a dashboard of all my projects. I can

I do not use mind mapping much at all. I do not think that way. I have tried many times and I always come back to plain text. What limited graphical thigns I need to do I have been able to do in Obsidian Canvas. So far my only real use of it has been to map out a very complex sheep pedigree as a preliminary to testing a new way to calculate inbreeding coefficients using paths and nodes that takes advantage of the power of multiple GPUs in modern computers.

Now my structure consists of a set of top level folders in Obsidian. The very top folder has my MOC notes and my dashboard notes. I have an inbox folder where all new notes go initially. Then an active projects folder that is organized like Omnifocus was, current one off active projects, recurring projecs in folders for weekly, monthly and then a set of 4 folders for seasonal recurring projects. Ther eis a folder that contains pretty much everything not associated with a specific project. One for correspondence that may go away as I found I tend to keep notes like tahat in with their subject note as a link or in the project they realte to, one for my daily journals, one for on-hold projects (ones I started but have stopped but ntot finishedyet) one for archived completed projecs, one for notes on people and companies (my Farley File) one for places one that has notes related torefernces and books I've read incuding all my annotation on those scientific papers orand books, one for general picture attachments and then the templates folder. I also have a single folder that contains the documentaiton for my AnimalTrakker program that I use Obsidian Publish to keep updated.

One of my projects in Obsidian is AnimalTrakker development. It has a bunch of subfolders for each piece of the system, desktop app, mobile app, web app, database structure, queries and so on. That folder tree is version controlled using Git to a GitLab repository and shared among all the people working on the system.

Tags used for the tasks contexts, AOF's and project sttus are a limited curated set of tags. I use dashboard type notes to collect data so I can see and slice my projects and tasks and ideas in many ways.

I've found it much faster and simpler to manage with everythignin one tool even though I gave up some features in Omnifocus I thought were critical.

So whatever you choos plan on it evolving over time as your needs change.

 

[Logan]

Background
Used to use Things 3 on iPhone and iPad. Have to use Windows 10 for work. Then made the switch to OmniFocus. One of the issues I always have is screen size (iPad in landscape mode) to see larger structures.

My motivation for a better Areas of Focus (AoF) list
Some time ago I saw a AoF mindmap from Meg Edwards somewhere online. It was not just a flat list represented as a mindmap. Instead it had kind of trigger words below many of the AoF (not more than 2 or 3 levels). That‘s what I liked. It‘s not just e.g. ‚XYZ App‘, but ‚XYZ App‘ with sub-branches like ‚Operations‘, ‚Support‘, ‚Small Plant Rollout’, etc. .

I really like the freedom of OmniFocus to create nested folders. Therefore, I put my AoF folders into my GTD system in OmniFocus. A positive side effect at work is that I can filter by folder in OmniFocus Web and see my current planning for the e.g. ‚Small Plant Rollout‘.

AoF & my Weekly Review
My weekly review follows the steps as proposed in the official guides. They propose to look at the list of your AoF to trigger e.g. new projects/next actions or goals/vision. What I don’t like with OmniFocus though (Things 3 is simpler, because you cannot nest areas) were the limited OmniFocus custom perspectives and how the display data. Again, often I‘m on the go and want to see my full AoF ‚list‘ during my weekly review on the iPad‘s (small) screen.

My Approach
Because of this, I‘ve created an Apple Shortcut to read the folder structure (AoF) from OmniFocus and put them into a MindNode mindmap on the iPad. It is certainly not perfect and sometimes OmniFocus or MindNode crashes while generating. But it‘s good enough for my purposes.

Just to show you how it looks like I‘ve created some fake folder structure in OmniFocus:



Then I open the Apple Shortcuts app and run the shortcut. This is how the result looks like:


The Apple Shortcut reads the structure from OmniFocus, excludes folders given in an exclusion list (e.g. folder ‚Reference’), then generates the mindmap in the iCloud folder of the MindNode app.

BTW: Each AoF folder contains a single action project with the name of the AoF folder and ‚— ‘ in front of it. That extra step is no issue for me because the AoF don‘t change often. Instead these single action projects make sure that I can move next actions having no project to an AoF or its sub-topic like in Things 3. When doing the project review step in OmniFocus the AoF single action projects appear in the review, too. (Hope I was able to transfer the message)

 

[mksilk2]

Background
Used to use Things 3 on iPhone and iPad. Have to use Windows 10 for work. Then made the switch to OmniFocus. One of the issues I always have is screen size (iPad in landscape mode) to see larger structures.

My motivation for a better Areas of Focus (AoF) list
Some time ago I saw a AoF mindmap from Meg Edwards somewhere online. It was not just a flat list represented as a mindmap. Instead it had kind of trigger words below many of the AoF (not more than 2 or 3 levels). That‘s what I liked. It‘s not just e.g. ‚XYZ App‘, but ‚XYZ App‘ with sub-branches like ‚Operations‘, ‚Support‘, ‚Small Plant Rollout’, etc. .

I really like the freedom of OmniFocus to create nested folders. Therefore, I put my AoF folders into my GTD system in OmniFocus. A positive side effect at work is that I can filter by folder in OmniFocus Web and see my current planning for the e.g. ‚Small Plant Rollout‘.

AoF & my Weekly Review
My weekly review follows the steps as proposed in the official guides. They propose to look at the list of your AoF to trigger e.g. new projects/next actions or goals/vision. What I don’t like with OmniFocus though (Things 3 is simpler, because you cannot nest areas) were the limited OmniFocus custom perspectives and how the display data. Again, often I‘m on the go and want to see my full AoF ‚list‘ during my weekly review on the iPad‘s (small) screen.

My Approach
Because of this, I‘ve created an Apple Shortcut to read the folder structure (AoF) from OmniFocus and put them into a MindNode mindmap on the iPad. It is certainly not perfect and sometimes OmniFocus or MindNode crashes while generating. But it‘s good enough for my purposes.

Just to show you how it looks like I‘ve created some fake folder structure in OmniFocus:

View attachment 1472

Then I open the Apple Shortcuts app and run the shortcut. This is how the result looks like:
View attachment 1473

The Apple Shortcut reads the structure from OmniFocus, excludes folders given in an exclusion list (e.g. folder ‚Reference’), then generates the mindmap in the iCloud folder of the MindNode app.

BTW: Each AoF folder contains a single action project with the name of the AoF folder and ‚— ‘ in front of it. That extra step is no issue for me because the AoF don‘t change often. Instead these single action projects make sure that I can move next actions having not project to an AoF or its sub-topic like in Things 3. When doing the project review step in OmniFocus the AoF single action projects appear in the review, too. (Hope I was able to transfer the message)

Yes

Interesting.... I think this is most inline with what I am envisioning. I used FacileThings way back when upon starting with GTD and while I loved it it felt very archaic technology wise and very limiting. Good for beginners but once I really was ready to tweak and develop my own system it presented a lot of friction.

Is theBrain free? It seems very similar to what I use but free. I do love free and would switch possibly if it was as I cannot truly justify the subscription cost I pay but I get nervous with free = disappearing lol

Yes TheBrain offers a free version. I love the linking of thoughts and the user interface. My Brain is growing on a daily basis and use it for so much.

 

[gtdstudente]

Consider the ways you want to use the data and ensure your system supports those uses for you.

When I have experimented with different list organisations, what I have been searching for is the best dashboard for me to: organise, choose actions, and review. I don't think there is such a best dashboard so making it easy to see what you want when you want it is key.

My Areas of focus are written on 3 x 5 index cards and are in a reference folder called GTD Horizons. Quick and easy to look at them whenever I want.

For my lists, I use a 3 x 5 index cards. Normally, I group the cards by context. Here is how I use them, and how I have achieved the similar effects in the past using software.

Clarifying: I write the project on one side and the next action on the other side.

Organising: I write the context next to the action and put the card in the appropriate context stack. In software, I have always found it difficult to separate clarifying and organising. The best was in Toodledo where I could type in the action and then type in the context tag.

Choosing an action: I take the stack of cards for the current context and take out those that I have time and energy to do. Now I have a shortlist to make priority decisions. After I do an action, I go through that shortlist again and remove actions I no-longer have time and energy to do. Previously, I have used the star feature in software to do this filtering, and once the initial stars are set up for "right now", use the star view to see only my shortlist.

Reviewing: Normally I review projects without rearranging them (i.e. in context order)

Reviewing by Area of Focus: Occasionally during the weekly review, I like to view my projects by area of focus. I sort my stack of cards manually by AoF. In the past, I have used tags in software for this. There is an obvious tradeoff here. Do you spend time tagging projects with AoF while organising, or repeat the sorting every time you want to see your projects in this way. For me, it is more valuable to streamline the organising.

Reviewing using an Eisenhower Matrix: Occasionally, I want to use an Eisenhower matrix. Again, I arrange the cards I have into the quadrants. In the past, I have used tags in software for this. The trick with the software approach was remembering to undo those tags afterwards.

These are the most common ways I use my lists. However, I am quite confident that I can arrange these cards in lots of different ways on my desk, to solve whatever problem I have in the moment. I would suggest that whatever structure you choose in software, you have the flexibility to slice and dice your lists in whatever ways suit your needs without having to do a big restructure.

cfoley,

Thank you for your post.

System on this end is very similar, however, using ubiquitously available 8 1/2" x 11" copy paper with a helpful clipboard is undoubtedly less nimble than 3" x 5" index cards which would be a preference. The upside to the 'clunkier' 8 1/2" x 11" copy paper functioning in landscape, like index cards, is the additional space capacity.

Again, using 'clunkier' 8 1/2" x 11" copy paper was due to needing more capacity required for an Easy Comprehensive Project Review:
'Project Eco-Map ~~ Contextually Journaled Next Action(s) Eco-List.'

For whatever its worth, the above is applied as followed:

For 'accessibility / identifiability' the 'Project Side' is labeled Top [either Left, Center, Right (all OK as well)], the Center/Center also has the Project Name with Outcome with the bonus being there is plenty of capacity/space for writing needed/'obstacle(s)' Sub-Projects and the like.

Like you, on the other-side [inversely] is primarily the 'Next Action(s) side' beginning Top-Left with plenty of space capacity for Dates, Time, Notes, etc. Any randomly captured Support information in doing 'Next Action(s)' is written beginning on the Bottom Left Corner.

The rest is 'identical' to what you posted.

Thank you very much, most appreciated. Thank you

 

[ivanjay205]

Background
Used to use Things 3 on iPhone and iPad. Have to use Windows 10 for work. Then made the switch to OmniFocus. One of the issues I always have is screen size (iPad in landscape mode) to see larger structures.

My motivation for a better Areas of Focus (AoF) list
Some time ago I saw a AoF mindmap from Meg Edwards somewhere online. It was not just a flat list represented as a mindmap. Instead it had kind of trigger words below many of the AoF (not more than 2 or 3 levels). That‘s what I liked. It‘s not just e.g. ‚XYZ App‘, but ‚XYZ App‘ with sub-branches like ‚Operations‘, ‚Support‘, ‚Small Plant Rollout’, etc. .

I really like the freedom of OmniFocus to create nested folders. Therefore, I put my AoF folders into my GTD system in OmniFocus. A positive side effect at work is that I can filter by folder in OmniFocus Web and see my current planning for the e.g. ‚Small Plant Rollout‘.

AoF & my Weekly Review
My weekly review follows the steps as proposed in the official guides. They propose to look at the list of your AoF to trigger e.g. new projects/next actions or goals/vision. What I don’t like with OmniFocus though (Things 3 is simpler, because you cannot nest areas) were the limited OmniFocus custom perspectives and how the display data. Again, often I‘m on the go and want to see my full AoF ‚list‘ during my weekly review on the iPad‘s (small) screen.

My Approach
Because of this, I‘ve created an Apple Shortcut to read the folder structure (AoF) from OmniFocus and put them into a MindNode mindmap on the iPad. It is certainly not perfect and sometimes OmniFocus or MindNode crashes while generating. But it‘s good enough for my purposes.

Just to show you how it looks like I‘ve created some fake folder structure in OmniFocus:

View attachment 1472

Then I open the Apple Shortcuts app and run the shortcut. This is how the result looks like:
View attachment 1473

The Apple Shortcut reads the structure from OmniFocus, excludes folders given in an exclusion list (e.g. folder ‚Reference’), then generates the mindmap in the iCloud folder of the MindNode app.

BTW: Each AoF folder contains a single action project with the name of the AoF folder and ‚— ‘ in front of it. That extra step is no issue for me because the AoF don‘t change often. Instead these single action projects make sure that I can move next actions having no project to an AoF or its sub-topic like in Things 3. When doing the project review step in OmniFocus the AoF single action projects appear in the review, too. (Hope I was able to transfer the message)

This is amazing. Does it create the projects as well?