Next action(s) and one thing at a time

Silvestro

Registered
Hello,
in the book the author speaks about identifying the 'one next action'. As I understand it, it suggests to do the next action, then to think again about the next one, and so on.
In my daily life I usually tend to break vague tasks to clear definite steps, in order of execution. For example, "Pay bill" is broken into 'Fetch bill', 'Pay bill', 'Archive it' etc.
This conflicts with the 'one next action' approach (correct me if I'm wrong). The disadvantage of reading a list of four or more actionable items is that I feel always late, and my attention is divided and instead of feeling my mind 'like water', it feels more like mud.
To counter this I tried to use apps where I see only one task at a time, and of course it helps a lot.
The question is: what is the GTD approach to doing only one thing at a time? And if present, where can I find references in the GTD books?

Thank you very much
 

Tom_Hagen

Registered
You can define more than one step in the project and put them all on the list: next action - provided that the implementation of these steps is not sequential. The principle is very similar to a recipe: sometimes you can fry an onion and boil water at the same time, and sometimes you have to wait until a certain stage is completed.

It also happens that the individual steps in the project are sequential but are known in advance. Then you can also write them all down and after completing a single step, move the next ones to the list: next action.
 

DKPhoto

Registered
Th
Hello,
in the book the author speaks about identifying the 'one next action'. As I understand it, it suggests to do the next action, then to think again about the next one, and so on.
In my daily life I usually tend to break vague tasks to clear definite steps, in order of execution. For example, "Pay bill" is broken into 'Fetch bill', 'Pay bill', 'Archive it' etc.
This conflicts with the 'one next action' approach (correct me if I'm wrong). The disadvantage of reading a list of four or more actionable items is that I feel always late, and my attention is divided and instead of feeling my mind 'like water', it feels more like mud.
To counter this I tried to use apps where I see only one task at a time, and of course it helps a lot.
The question is: what is the GTD approach to doing only one thing at a time? And if present, where can I find references in the GTD books?

Thank you very much
That to me seems over the top. The next action is Fetch the bill. Once you’ve fetched you are going to pay it, assuming that you are in the right context to do so. Once you’ve paid it then you archive it. Unless you get interrupted after fetching the bill you don’t need to write down the following actions as they will follow naturally.

To my mind the next action is there to get the project moving, either initially or after it has been paused for whatever reason. Bear in mind the 2 minute rule- it should take less than minutes to pay the bill, and then to archive it so the processing time to include the following next actions in your system wouldn’t be worth the effort.

DK
 

ianfh10

Registered
I suppose it depends on your definition of 'vague'. In your example, is the time/energy expended breaking the task into its composite steps worth the time and energy it takes to do the task itself? Yes, you can have a project of 'pay bill' and act on each next action linked to the project, but you have to ask whether you really need so many actions. if you know automatically you need to fetch and then archive the bill as part of the action 'pay bill', then why bog down your system and your mind with several items instead of one? This is a slightly pedantic aside, but wouldn't you also have the bill itself already captured in you inbox and organized and filed away as part of your processing?

I like to think of next actions as reminders I've set for my future self. The task 'bathe dog' is on my next action list because the dog stinks, but I may be so busy that I forget the dog stinks. The task is really saying 'do this thing your past self knew you needed to do but knew you would otherwise forget'. For me, breaking that task down into 'put dog in bath', 'soap up dog', 'rinse dog' and 'dry dog' adds nothing to me reminding my future self to do it. The act of bathing the dog, or really anything one already knows how to do, is enough of a next action.

However, if your project is 'fix bathroom pipes' and you know absolutely nothing about plumbing and own no tools, it's relevant to getting the task done that your next action be 'research DIY plumbing online' or 'research plumbers'.

Plus, where do you draw the line? If you have an item on your calendar to 'pick up sister from airport', would you break it down into, get in car, plan route, take X route, park at airport? But then why not say, check traffic, check weather, check oil, check gas, check tire pressure, print off maps in case GPS breaks, and so on and so on?

As a tangent, can you automate paying bills so the entire process is on cruise control and out of your system and mind for good?
 

mcogilvie

Registered
Hello,
in the book the author speaks about identifying the 'one next action'. As I understand it, it suggests to do the next action, then to think again about the next one, and so on.
In my daily life I usually tend to break vague tasks to clear definite steps, in order of execution. For example, "Pay bill" is broken into 'Fetch bill', 'Pay bill', 'Archive it' etc.
This conflicts with the 'one next action' approach (correct me if I'm wrong). The disadvantage of reading a list of four or more actionable items is that I feel always late, and my attention is divided and instead of feeling my mind 'like water', it feels more like mud.
To counter this I tried to use apps where I see only one task at a time, and of course it helps a lot.
The question is: what is the GTD approach to doing only one thing at a time? And if present, where can I find references in the GTD books?

Thank you very much

You may benefit from the view of a next action as a bookmark, the place where you paused a set of actions. Maybe I need to look some information up on the web before a phone call. After I do that, I can either make the call, or put the call on a list. It’s my choice. Similarly, the granularity of your next actions has to be at a level you are comfortable with. People often have trouble with getting the granularity right, and also with not doing unnecessary advance planning. As you have found, too much planning can be paralyzing for many, especially when the plan hits a bump. Suppose I look up a company I want to call, but they are out of business? Or they need information I don’t have? In terms of understanding the ideas behind GTD, I have always liked “Ready for Anything.”
 

GTDengineer

Registered
GTD does not expect you to write down every action. Only record the project “pay bill” (note: better written as a desired outcome “bill paid”) and the one next action “fetch bill”.

You can perform the next steps from your intuition, unless you stop this project half way through. In this case you would record the new next action for this project and then move on to another activity.
 

Silvestro

Registered
GTD does not expect you to write down every action. Only record the project “pay bill” (note: better written as a desired outcome “bill paid”) and the one next action “fetch bill”.

You can perform the next steps from your intuition, unless you stop this project half way through. In this case you would record the new next action for this project and then move on to another activity.

Ok I'm starting to have a clearer vision about the method. Thank you very much.
 

Oogiem

Registered
The question is: what is the GTD approach to doing only one thing at a time? And if present, where can I find references in the GTD books?
I look at it very differently. I try to have my actions well defined by the location, or tool or person I need to compelte it and I focus on the one action at a time in that area until I need to move to another context. And next actions need to be single things. My tendency is to have projects hiding as next actions. I usually find one or 2 of them every weekly review. YMMV
 

Anowood

Registered
The next action is just the next action. However feel free to create any additional reference material that you require for your project. If you like to outline the project and create checklists then do so. You can create as much reference material as you want. GTD is kind of a list system that encourages taking and keeping reference notes as well.

Consider a highly complicated project, like building a rocket. You would potentially keep thousands upon thousands of pages of reference material you created, which would include tons of checklists and process manuals to check for safety and to not forget important steps. In the next action list you would write merely the next step like "install seat into rocket". Then you would do the task and anything that you naturally feel needs to be done while you're there, or maybe some new problem appeared while trying to install the seat so you have to revaluate. You go back to your lists and notes, check your existing references as needed, create new references as needed and then you write down the next step in your next action list. If you already know the next step in your project then just write it down immediately, without checking your references. Do what is required to make you feel safe enough to make the decision.
 

Silvestro

Registered
So, let's say that I define a project where there are 5 steps. What the method tells me is to convert the first step into actionable, do it, then convert the second step into actionable and so on. Is this right? What about have all the 5 steps actionable? They would not be next actions anymore. You can have one next action in each context. The method tells just to consider the next step, and not to shoulder the whole bunch.
The checklist approach of many todo apps might be misleading, because make an unclarified item checkable, you cannot put an item without checkbox.
Thoughts? Comments?
 

Silvestro

Registered
Ok @TesTeq so a next action is an action which is actionable in this context. I understand your example works for a shopping list, but for a sequential list we can call actionable only the first right?
So the question is if converting a foggy idea to a concrete action makes it a "next action"? How should we proceed in defining a sequential project.
In other words, in a sequential project, should I care only of the first action and make it concrete, and not care about the following (because I cannot do anything about them in any case)? Or just defining them better makes them "actionable" or "next actions" according to GTD glossary?
Is a "next action" different from an "actionable" action?
 

TesTeq

Registered
Ok @TesTeq so a next action is an action which is actionable in this context. I understand your example works for a shopping list, but for a sequential list we can call actionable only the first right?
So the question is if converting a foggy idea to a concrete action makes it a "next action"? How should we proceed in defining a sequential project.
In other words, in a sequential project, should I care only of the first action and make it concrete, and not care about the following (because I cannot do anything about them in any case)? Or just defining them better makes them "actionable" or "next actions" according to GTD glossary?
Is a "next action" different from an "actionable" action?
@Silvestro Each Next Action must be immediately actionable in its context and should be done if there is enough time, you've got enough energy and if it will give you the biggest payoff.
Here's an interesting short article about Projects and Next Actions: https://gettingthingsdone.com/2017/05/managing-projects-with-gtd/.
 

Gardener

Registered
I think it depends on the specifics and on your preferences.

In my vegetable garden, I can't "plant beans" until I've completed "prepare bean bed". There's a dependency.

But I can "prepare bean bed" or "prepare pumpkin bed" or "fertilize asparagus" or "prune roses" each as actionable actions independent of one another.

So how does all this divide into projects and next actions?

I could choose to identify each line of sequential actions. (prepare bean bed/plant beans/WAITING FOR bean germination/adjust bean watering to post-germination level/etc/etc/etc) and create a project for each line.

Or I could have a project "Make progress on spring garden" and give it a bunch of widely varied parallel actions.

Or I could have a project "Do gardenwide bed prep" and give it a bunch of very similar parallel actions.

Or I could have lists of "garden thoughts"--goals that are not as defined as a full project--and use them as inspiration for creating and completing projects a few at a time.

I tend to do the last thing.
 

GTDengineer

Registered
So the question is if converting a foggy idea to a concrete action makes it a "next action"? How should we proceed in defining a sequential project.
There are multiple ways to manage sequential projects, and GTD does not specifically define this. For a project at work, I use a Gantt chart. At home I make a check list. This is your project support material.

However, I think you are misunderstanding the next action list.

Think of the next action list as a bookmark in your project plan. It only indicates we’re you left off. Once you open the book, you can keep on reading (performing actions) until you decide to change to another topic.
 

Murray

Registered
This is a bit off the topic of the OP but...

Bear in mind the 2 minute rule- it should take less than minutes to pay the bill, and then to archive it so the processing time to include the following next actions in your system wouldn’t be worth the effort.

I may have misinterpreted your point here, but just to make sure the 2 minute rule is clear for anyone reading this...

My understanding is that the 2 minute rule applies specifically to time you're spending on the processing/clarifying phase of GTD workflow. Ie: taking inbox items and other miscellaneous inputs and decided whether they are actionable and if there is a project etc. If an item is actionable and the action would take less than 2 minutes then the general guidance from David and Co is to do it in the moment rather than spend time organising and tracking it in the system.
 

Gardener

Registered
The "fetch/pay/archive bill" example feels to me like an example of trying to establish a particular process/practice/habit, or an example of cutting an an anxiety-producing task into tiny tiny pieces in order to cope with getting it done. And as such, it doesn't feel like an entirely normal example of small actions, the 2 minute rule, and so on.

What about collecting? Why collect something when you can just do it in less than 2 minutes?
My answer to this would be about the perils of multitasking. If I'm in the middle of a review, or some other absorbing task (I would include sitting down and collecting thoughts as an absorbing task), and I wander off (even mentally) to do a 2-minute task, I will have killed my train of thought and it will take a lot more than 2 minutes to get rolling again. So it isn't really a 2-minute task, for me, in that situation.

However, if I'm between tasks when I think of the 2-minute thing, the 2-minute rule might apply for me. Edited to add: Or I may sometimes deliberately allot some time for brief tasks in a given context.
 
Top