My reflections on GTD practice over the years

Longstreet

Professor of microbiology and infectious diseases
I posted this in GTD Connect and wanted to share it here too:

I have been practicing GTD for a long time now. I have been a GTD Connect member also for many years. I wanted to share some of my thoughts on the practice of GTD and within the world of productivity in general. I find that the greatest strengths of GTD reside in the initial four steps: Capture, Clarify, Organize, and Review. It is critical to capture everything that comes your way or you think of into a trusted system. The system -- and we all use different ones -- should be simple enough that you could work with it even when you are ill. The weekly review is so important -- standing back and reviewing and reflecting about what is on your plate and coming up -- this makes such a difference in stress levels and being able to get into the creative, flow state.

You will notice that I have not included the final stage of "Engage". Surely this is important. One could say it is THE most important because if you do not engage....well....then what preceded was pointless. This is the area where I find the most debate and disagreement. HOW one engages with their work is hugely different across people. Some follow David's models to the letter and decide in the moment what to do next. And even here we have huge differences in the contexts we use. Some fall into the category of Carson Tate's Planners -- those who like to plan out their week and create blocks of time on their calendar for specific projects. Some create different themes during the week -- Monday is Admin Day, Tuesday is Writing and Creating Day, etc. Some like to schedule all of their next actions on their calendar because they like to see their work in that way versus multiple lists. The key here is that we are all different and we approach our GTD practice differently. What may work for me may not work at all for you. I listened to the episode of David Allen interviewing Adam Grant, the distinguished Professor of Business at Wharton. He is an amazing colleague and one who I have interacted with. I know he is a believer in scheduling deep work sessions championed by Cal Newport. In fact, I know he schedules virtually every minute of his day. He is incredibly productive, successful, and has a wonderful family life. He follows the first four GTD steps avidly, but has a different approach in the engaging step than classical GTD.

My overall point is that we all approach our GTD practices differently and can learn from each other. But we are not Androids and each of us will have a personal twist on everything within GTD.

I am looking forward to many more years of work as a professor and scientist - and embracing my GTD practice that keeps me on top of my game -- at work -- and at life!
 

TesTeq

Registered
I listened to the episode of David Allen interviewing Adam Grant, the distinguished Professor of Business at Wharton. He is an amazing colleague and one who I have interacted with. I know he is a believer in scheduling deep work sessions championed by Cal Newport. In fact, I know he schedules virtually every minute of his day. He is incredibly productive, successful, and has a wonderful family life. He follows the first four GTD steps avidly, but has a different approach in the engaging step than classical GTD.

Thank you for the great summary - "The State of GTD in the Longstreet World"!

Some people say "If It Doesn't Get Scheduled, It Will Never Get Done".

It's true for deep work and it's true for the ugliest stuff like cleaning a toilet bowl.

For me the flow state is very dangerous because I immediately forget about the world, @context lists and other Next Actions. So there's no time for my intuition to decide what's the most appropriate action to do next.
 
Last edited:

Longstreet

Professor of microbiology and infectious diseases
Thanks! I have encountered many people who do the "Engage" part of GTD in very different ways. It is intriguing!
 

TesTeq

Registered
Thanks! I have encountered many people who do the "Engage" part of GTD in very different ways. It is intriguing!
I've found another intriguing concept: thomaslecoz.com/productivity-system based on assianefficiency.com/agile-results based on Microsoft's J.D.Meier book "Getting Results the Agile Way: A Personal Results System for Work and Life" (gettingresults.com and sourcesofinsight.com and blogs.msdn.microsoft/jmeier). The author says that his method is a perfect 30000 feet horizon (with or without GTD).
 

Tom.9

Registered
I've found another intriguing concept: thomaslecoz.com/productivity-system based on assianefficiency.com/agile-results based on Microsoft's J.D.Meier book "Getting Results the Agile Way: A Personal Results System for Work and Life" (gettingresults.com and sourcesofinsight.com and blogs.msdn.microsoft/jmeier). The author says that his method is a perfect 30000 feet horizon (with or without GTD).

I gave only a brief look on the webpages. It seems that there are many "items" to be checked in order to follow the program. @TesTeq: "intriguing", but is it working? I.e. is it worth to implement ? I follow GTD for nine years now and still have to re-think my system once in a while.
 

TesTeq

Registered
I gave only a brief look on the webpages. It seems that there are many "items" to be checked in order to follow the program. @TesTeq: "intriguing", but is it working? I.e. is it worth to implement ? I follow GTD for nine years now and still have to re-think my system once in a while.
1. Don't buy this book. The most ridiculous piece of writing. Probably the author uses some kind of Microsoft Word macro to permutate a set of statements. How many times can you read about forest and trees. ;-)
2. The concept of THREE is good. Three yearly, monthly, weekly and daily outcomes. No info how they should be interconnected but the idea to narrow the field of activity is OK.
3. The agility concept is OK too: take into account your results and adjust the direction.
IMHO that's all.
 
Top