next action vs priority?

[GTDUser]

GTD supports Next actions and priorities,
but next action has a priority as well.

I rarely ever use priorities and my software has no support for next actions. I was thinking about replacing next action with priority (A). Using both for a project seems like overkill.

Alternatively, I can create a project or context "next" to support it.

 

[cfoley]

Computer systems don't always map directly to GTD concepts. I find that it helps me to think about how I would implement GTD on paper first and then see how something similar could be done with software.

In a paper system, when clarifying an inbox item, we decide the next action. If this one action isn't enough to achieve the goal, we decide on a project too. Then we organise, writing the action on the correct context list and the project on the Projects list.

When we are "Doing" with our paper system, we use context, time available, energy and priority to choose an action in the moment. We aren't encouraged to write down priorities since priorities shift too frequently. Instead, we are encouraged to rely on the intuitive feel for priorities that we gain from regular reviews. Once we have completed the next action for a project, we decide on another next action and write it on the correct context list.

Moving on to a computer system, we need it to support our workflow and store everything that we wrote down, but we don't need it to replace the thinking we did. Based on this reasoning, we don't need the computer system to track priorities because in GTD terms they relate to decisions made in the moment. All we really need is a project list and context lists.

One of the simplest GTD computer systems would be a document where the first page is the projects list and subsequent pages are the context lists. When evaluating a computer system, I have two main questions that I ask myself:

1. Is it better than paper?
2. Is it better than a simple document?

For me, the answer to both is usually 'no' for most computer systems. I think it is no accident that lots of people use things like Evernote and Obsidian for both their reference system and their list manager.

I am not sure what software you are using but it sounds like it might not be doing the basics very well. Could you tell us what you are using? Maybe someone else here uses the same software and can help you navigate its features.

 

[FocusGuy]

One of the simplest GTD computer systems would be a document where the first page is the projects list and subsequent pages are the context lists. When evaluating a computer system, I have two main questions that I ask myself:

1. Is it better than paper?
2. Is it better than a simple document?

For me, the answer to both is usually 'no' for most computer systems. I think it is no accident that lots of people use things like Evernote and Obsidian for both their reference system and their list manager.

Difficult to answer about this. There are so many software. Here is my opinion.

However, Things, nirvana and omnifocus does the work pretty well with GTD.
One of the advantage about digital vs paper is the possibility to manage and sort a lot of data anywhere, anywhen.
There is nothing better than. There is always advantages and desadvantages.

About priorities they can be add using tags. In Nirvana there is a field for this.

For example in my own case I am a corporate realestate advisor. I have a lot of datas. So I need to minimize my number of software but I also need to manage many things. As you may know I use Omnifocus. I tried to go back to things but sub folder and perspective are missing. I needed to use it also as a CRM for following my contacts. My GTD system is operationnal. Each project is categorized and each actionnable one has a next action by context. I can put start date and use deadline. I can also use my calendar to put core information or plan stuff as GTD does.
This week I implemented my CRM. It is not a real CRM it is a follower of contacts but it works. I could do it on paper. But Omnifocus make it simplier and faster and I can get my info on my iphone everywhere and when I need it. How could I manage on paper 229 projects actionnable or not and 536 items ?

So I can focus on what matter to me. I can now lesson to my heart about what maters to me. I can also use OF inbox anywhen using siri when I think about something even if I will erase it later...

Digital is like organisation. It takes time to understand and make your own system. Paper is great at the beginning but when things are getting hot is make things complicated. I hope I answered to the question did I ?

 

[cfoley]

Totally agree. "Better" is a subjective term and will mean something slightly different for everyone. I also agree that there is subtlety involved when comparing tools. However, at the end of the day, a choice has to be made over which tools to use.

 

[ivanjay205]

GTD supports Next actions and priorities,
but next action has a priority as well.

I rarely ever use priorities and my software has no support for next actions. I was thinking about replacing next action with priority (A). Using both for a project seems like overkill.

Alternatively, I can create a project or context "next" to support it.

I would stay away from the trap of priorities. Priorities change FREQUENTLY which creates a lot of maintenance on your system. The idea behind GTD is to focus on your contexts, time, and energy as your limiting factors. Once you do that you can quickly make a decision from the subset of next actions available to you as to what your priority should be.

The priority is not across all of your next actions, only what you can accomplish.

For example, lets say I am home and looking at all my next actions. My highest priority might be doing something I can only do in my physical office. That doesnt help me as I am not there. Conversely maybe I am traveling on a plane with spotty wifi and the highest priority is something requiring high focus, internet on my computer. Hard to do that in that environment so I cannot do it. But I could knock off some low hanging fruit on my ipad that doesnt require much concentration.

 

[TesTeq]

GTD supports Next actions and priorities,
but next action has a priority as well.

@GTDUser I don't understand. In GTD priorities appear during the "doing" phase of the workflow when you decide what Next Action to choose taking into account context, time available, energy available and your current priorities.

 

[dtj]

I would stay away from the trap of priorities. Priorities change FREQUENTLY which creates a lot of maintenance on your system.

I infuse priority into tasks with a '@shortlist" tag the shows that I wanna give it a higher level priority than sort of the background priorities. Very quickly in the OmniFocus shortlist perspective, I can wipe them all out and start from scratch, based on my local conditions (time, energy, etc). Just nuking the '@shortlist' tag doesn't impact any of the other tags, which are tied to like energy and other context-y stuff.

 

[mrkwhlbrk]

I may be misunderstanding OP, but if he’s talking about adapting software to GTD using the Priority field to substitute for a GTD Status field, he’s not talking about tracking his priorities ….

I‘ve done this before, trying to use Nirvana’s statuses in a different program that had an unused Priority field. Focus was labeled “A”; Next Action was labeled “B”; Scheduled was labeled “C”; Later was labeled “D”; Someday was labeled “F”. It wasn’t difficult to mentally see “B” and think “Next Action”, and there isn’t any problem with adapting the software in this way because it doesn’t violate GTD principles.

I ditched the software because it didn’t connect Next Actions to projects well, and there are several apps that do this very well.