GTD wastes mental energy?

sdann

Registered
humblepie;72087 said:
hi katherine, perhaps so, but its not something i can break down into a few next action if you get what i mean. its not something u can plan to process brainstorming this portion then this then that. its like, you dun even know much conrete initially.

perhaps along the way you get to itemize it.

Processing in GTD is making a decision about something in your inbox or a decision about a project. You are basically applying the process of the workflow to decide whether it is actionable and then to do it, defer it, delegate it or trash it. I think you may be using processing in a different context.
 

humblepie

Registered
sdann;72107 said:
Processing in GTD is making a decision about something in your inbox or a decision about a project. You are basically applying the process of the workflow to decide whether it is actionable and then to do it, defer it, delegate it or trash it. I think you may be using processing in a different context.

i think my processing is a different context from what is used within GTD. in that case strictly according to GTD i shouldn't put it as a task, since its not actionable. But you really need to think about such stuff, but this thinking IS NOT the GTD form of processing nor is it actionable.

sometimes there are problems in life that can't be just describe by a GTD workflow.

best regards.
 

kewms

Registered
humblepie;72109 said:
i think my processing is a different context from what is used within GTD. in that case strictly according to GTD i shouldn't put it as a task, since its not actionable. But you really need to think about such stuff, but this thinking IS NOT the GTD form of processing nor is it actionable.

Thinking IS the Next Action.

I don't mean to be obnoxious, but you are not special. GTD's target audience is executives. A good executive's job includes enormous amounts of thinking. GTD can handle it, honest.

Katherine
 

humblepie

Registered
kewms;72110 said:
Thinking IS the Next Action.

I don't mean to be obnoxious, but you are not special. GTD's target audience is executives. A good executive's job includes enormous amounts of thinking. GTD can handle it, honest.

Katherine

nah im just raising some noob questions here. cause i get the idea thinking isn't suppose to be a next action since its not actionable. thats how i feel.
 

Linada

Registered
Just about everything is a next action. What makes you so sure that thinking isn't an action?
I often defer planning projects and thinking problems through. They are fairly big next actions, sure, but sometimes actions can't be broken down any more.
 

humblepie

Registered
Linada;72112 said:
Just about everything is a next action. What makes you so sure that thinking isn't an action?
I often defer planning projects and thinking problems through. They are fairly big next actions, sure, but sometimes actions can't be broken down any more.

thats what i used to think. but alot of people will procastinate on thinking stuff since if u dun have a good idea how u are going to start, you tend to defer it. it becomes like what happens if we don't define a task in an actionable way.
 

Oogiem

Registered
humblepie;72115 said:
thats what i used to think. but alot of people will procastinate on thinking stuff since if u dun have a good idea how u are going to start, you tend to defer it. it becomes like what happens if we don't define a task in an actionable way.

That's where you are missing some of the power of GTD. You need to not only think about what the next action really is as part of processing but then you actually have to DO the actions.

Best way to avoid procrastination is to get a really clear specific next action item.

For example the thinking part of my job can end up with actions like these:

Brainstorm possible crops for lower pear orchard field for fall forage for sheep. (We did that one, tried 2, discovered we have soils that can't stand plowing and are now back into improved permanent pasture.)

Brainstorm ways to create multiple small bits of shade evenly spread over the winter ram pens. (This one has resulted in a project to build some solar PV "trees" for shade and to offset our electric use. The brainstorming included planting real trees, building various forms of both permanent and temporary shelters, and then as an aside why not a solar array that does double duty. )

Similarly when I have an action or a project that is not moving forward, which I discover at my weekly review time, I spend an extra bit of time re-doing the workflow model with that item or project. I usually uncover that the thinking has not been done. Once I get clear on what I want, the outcome, and really break it down I can get to more actionable items. Procrastination for me is almost always the result of incomplete processing of an item.

Current example from my world:

I had an action to cull out 15 ewes before breeding season. I thought it was a next action, but the reality is I have to identify which 15 are to go first. And I couldn't do that until I had their physical evaluations done. So with help we did full evaluations on all 75 ewes. But the act of putting names on the slaughter list still wasn't happening. So I re-evaluated and I realized I had a bunch that were all equally good and could not choose between them for keep for breeding vs dinner. Realized that part of the procrastination was not knowing which were critical bloodlines and which were over-represented. So I evaluated the genetics of the ewes for kinship and inbreeding coefficients. That helped put a few on one or the other list but I still did not have my 15 selected. Then realized that the real issue is that I didn't know which sheep were more likely to produce lambs worth more money for me. So I had an action to figure out whether breeding stock, meat or wool is our most profitable product. That involved reviewing the financial data on income by product. Discovered that meat is a big part of our profit but that wool is the most important criteria used by buyers of new breeding stock and breeding stock sales are the the most profitable. So then I realized that what I needed to do was pick the best wooled sheep with the meatiest bodies to keep and butcher the others. I'm still not done, but I have more on my keep and go lists now and a smaller pool of sheep in the undecided category. Right now my action item on this project is check loin length of Rhan, Barb, Adeyrn, Aelwyd, Aelwyn, Carol, Moreen and Banon. I have a similar list of sheep to inspect wool on. It was a very long process. Thankfully with a regular weekly review I figured out the stuck project in time to collect the additional data I need to make a good decision. The thinking hadn't been done up front and that slowed me down. If I had spent more time processing I'd have started with the next action of checking loin length but I skipped on the thinking early on and the entire project is taking a lot longer than it should.
 

humblepie

Registered
Hii Oogiem,

thanks for the clear example. ultimately what i get from your experience is that you have to partition/schedule a time to perform that part of thinking brainstorming and translating it to actions. if you don't then things dun get move forward.

thanks for the illustration. my english is not very good but culling seems to mean killing (yikes!)
 

kewms

Registered
humblepie;72111 said:
nah im just raising some noob questions here. cause i get the idea thinking isn't suppose to be a next action since its not actionable. thats how i feel.

You might want to reread chapter 10 in the GTD book, which is about getting projects under control and specifically deals with "brainstorming" and "thinking" as next actions.

Katherine
 

Oogiem

Registered
humblepie;72138 said:
you have to partition/schedule a time to perform that part of thinking brainstorming and translating it to actions....culling seems to mean killing (yikes!)

Yes, I schedule the time and yes culling means killing. Sheep on the farm have many jobs, one of them is to feed either us or our customers. I have the task of deciding who goes to the freezer and who stays and I have to evaluate entire flock health/genetics/breed goals/personal goals/income streams/ time/energy available and how many sheep I can afford to keep each year when making the choices. I'd love nothing more than to only butcher the bad attitude sheep, those with bad behavior, (it's easy to eat a ram who has bashed you :) ) but I sometimes have to choose among really good sheep. Then it becomes harder. If I am doing my job right, over time, with years of selective breeding the job becomes even harder because there would be no bad sheep. It's the lot of all farmers that your job is to work to make your job harder from year to year. No other business has such an immediate the better you do your job the harder it becomes correlation.
 

humblepie

Registered
kewms;72140 said:
You might want to reread chapter 10 in the GTD book, which is about getting projects under control and specifically deals with "brainstorming" and "thinking" as next actions.

Katherine

thanks i will re-read that.
 

humblepie

Registered
Oogiem;72142 said:
Yes, I schedule the time and yes culling means killing. Sheep on the farm have many jobs, one of them is to feed either us or our customers. I have the task of deciding who goes to the freezer and who stays and I have to evaluate entire flock health/genetics/breed goals/personal goals/income streams/ time/energy available and how many sheep I can afford to keep each year when making the choices. I'd love nothing more than to only butcher the bad attitude sheep, those with bad behavior, (it's easy to eat a ram who has bashed you :) ) but I sometimes have to choose among really good sheep. Then it becomes harder. If I am doing my job right, over time, with years of selective breeding the job becomes even harder because there would be no bad sheep. It's the lot of all farmers that your job is to work to make your job harder from year to year. No other business has such an immediate the better you do your job the harder it becomes correlation.

Oh thanks for explaining. In my neck of the woods we eat mutton from goats to keep ourselves warm. but since our daily temperature never falls below 32 degrees celcius there is no need to do that. =)
 

TesTeq

Registered
My thinking is a real, physical activity.

humblepie;72111 said:
thinking isn't suppose to be a next action since its not actionable.

My thinking is a real, physical activity. So it can be the Next Action. YMMV.
 

Layla

Registered
I put 'brainstorm XY' or 'draft YZ'... on my project list, and see it sort of as 'next action' too.. I'm still a newbie to GTD though...

I was planning to maybe even put @journal as a context list? (Basically can't do it in front of the computer, need some time for reflection and reflective mode..)

Maybe thinking is not a NA only if you do it without a pen and paper? For me, 'brainstorm' and 'draft' mean paper and pencil in hand..

Oogie, it would be a tough decision for me too... So I'll probably never keep sheep for a living, more as a 'hobby' or pets maybe.. Maybe it's even harder if you have them named etc? It's probably difficult to not have them named though.. (My uncle had a cow named as my ex-schoolfriend! :))

After listening to Prioritizing and Procrastination on GTD Connect the other day (highly recommended!), a few of my projects I procrastinated on turned out to be a bit like Oogie wrote too!! (If I want to do this, I need to do this first - oh, and what do I need to do for this? So, a lot of things clarified..)

I'm still learning though.. :)
 

dusanv

Registered
TesTeq;72153 said:
My thinking is a real, physical activity. So it can be the Next Action. YMMV.
I second that, and especially since GTD puts much emphasis on knowledge work. For me, thinking is definitely actionable if it has a purposeful outcome.

Layla;72156 said:
I put 'brainstorm XY' or 'draft YZ'... on my project list, and see it sort of as 'next action' too..
And that's what the book suggests (p. 213)

Layla;72156 said:
Maybe thinking is not a NA only if you do it without a pen and paper?
Maybe it's not a NA only if you do it without any medium at all. But I think the point of defining NA as "the next physical, visible activity" is that you need some external source (outside of your mind) to initiate your thinking (this might be Stuff you have collected, which in turn could come in part from your mental gathering), else you'd miss any true motivation for the action and your system wouldn't be trusted -- at least that's how I see it.

Dusan
 

sdann

Registered
Thinking by itself is already implied in most next actions. Take the next actions "identify resources needed for project A" or "write introduction to proposal B." Each requires thinking. The action does not need to have the word think or brainstorm as an action verb to qualify as thinking.
 

Layla

Registered
sdann;72170 said:
Thinking by itself is already implied in most next actions. Take the next actions "identify resources needed for project A" or "write introduction to proposal B." Each requires thinking. The action does not need to have the word think or brainstorm as an action verb to qualify as thinking.
Interesting!

If you are eg writing an article or blog post, or just starting something, for me 'brainstorm' is less threatening and easier to do.. 'Identify resources' means something more specific than 'brainstorm' to me - it's probably better, not always applicable in what I do.. Thank you for the good idea though!

The key is probably whatever sounds better to you or is more actionable to you personally!

Dusanv, thank you for the 'heads up'! (I read the book so quickly I'll probably soon have to read it again! :))
 

dusanv

Registered
sdann;72170 said:
Thinking by itself is already implied in most next actions. Take the next actions "identify resources needed for project A" or "write introduction to proposal B." Each requires thinking. The action does not need to have the word think or brainstorm as an action verb to qualify as thinking.
I agree with that, but my point is that while the next action does not need to have a word like think or brainstorm in its name, there are situations where having it might be desirable. Take, for example, those (rare) situations when creating a project plan is a project in and of itself. If I wanted or needed to be pedantic about the natural planning model, I might have next actions like "clarify project purpose", "envision project outcome" or "brainstorm project plan", which are all thinking per se. I agree that such NAs could be rephrased as to remove any mention of any form of thinking, but I assume one could name those in the way that makes most sense to them, including those names just stated above.

Dusan

EDIT: Just thought I'd mention that this thread has changed its topic of discussion so many times as to become silly and actually begin to waste one's mental energy as stated in the title. I guess I am unsubscribing now.
 

dusanv

Registered
Layla;72177 said:
Dusanv, thank you for the 'heads up'! (I read the book so quickly I'll probably soon have to read it again! :))
I admit that many concepts have become much clearer to me after a second read, but even re-reading the first part (chapters 1-3) has helped me a lot. I also used the diagram from pg. 139 as a quick reference.

Dusan
 

fwade

Registered
Getting frustrated at GTD

Earlier it was said:

7) If you feel stupid following the system - stop and analyze, why. Eliminate this feeling via changing the system to fit your needs. Otherwise this feeling will kill your trust in your system, and that means return to stress and anxiety.

I liked what you said here, but I wondered if you meant to say that if some element of GTD doesn't work, then use something that does.

I also realize that lots of people have "lost faith" in GTD because it didn't work for them.

I think this is unfortunate, as GTD wasn't designed for everyone, but it does emphasize some inescapable elements of all time management systems that must be incorporated by anyone who is serious about their productivity.

This is too bad because I don't get the feeling that it was written as a solution for all professionals.

(OR was it?)
 
Top