The Truth About GTD Software Tools

I completely disagree with Allen here. His statement even seems internally contradictory to me. As far as I understand what he said, the GTD system cannot be implemented in any application because it is "holistic." Firstly, this would mean that it is even more impossible to implement it "on paper," because "paper" solutions are inherently static. This would mean that Allen has created a brilliant yet unimplementable system. Nonsense.
Unless by "holistic" he doesn't mean "comprehensive," but "infinite," but then we're back to square one.

Secondly, claiming there's no market for a given product without trying to sell it is pure guesswork. Period.

Thirdly, I got the impression that Allen hopes that GTD will define the next steps so that you'll know exactly what needs to be done. Unfortunately, this isn't the case, especially in highly creative fields like programming. Someone will soon tell me that you can define a task as "Implement class XYZ / function ABC." To a certain extent, yes. But writing a program is really an iterative process with many steps forward and backward, constant corrections, etc., etc. It's often better to write down the next action in more general terms and simply think creatively as you go.

Fourthly, I don't understand his objection to lists. After all, that's a part of GTD. And here, software is much more user-friendly than "paper." If I have dozens or hundreds of next actions, and it's 7:00 PM on a Wednesday, and I'm low on energy and have an hour to spare, I can filter out potential actions faster in my Evernote than on paper.

In summary, I think it would be better to say: we don't intend to certify any program because it's too risky, or we simply don't want to, than to claim we're not doing it because it's impossible.
 
I haven't been able to watch the video yet, but to me the lists are just where I store the results of my thinking. While they are important, they are only part of the system. The GTD habits are at least as important, and are not easy to implement in software.
 
Tom_Hagen said:
I completely disagree with Allen here. His statement even seems internally contradictory to me. As far as I understand what he said, the GTD system cannot be implemented in any application because it is "holistic." Firstly, this would mean that it is even more impossible to implement it "on paper," because "paper" solutions are inherently static. This would mean that Allen has created a brilliant yet unimplementable system. Nonsense.
Unless by "holistic" he doesn't mean "comprehensive," but "infinite," but then we're back to square one.
Click to expand...
@Tom_Hagen If you assume that GTD = list manager then you're right. But it's a wrong assumption. GTD is a holistic approach to focus our attention where we want it to be focused. List managers (analog and digital) are just tools that free our minds from remembering the details of the outcomes of our thinking process. A list manager for a GTD system is like a shovel for building a house.

Tom_Hagen said:
Secondly, claiming there's no market for a given product without trying to sell it is pure guesswork. Period.
Click to expand...
In this video @DavidAllen says that he tried to develop the GTD app twice but failed. Why? Because such app would have to integrate with (ro replace) many different business applications that we use to store information relevant to our Goals, Areas of Focus, Projects, and Actions.
 
if you discuss with people the very near question they will probably ask is : what tool do you use ? And after which is the best ? I agree with David there is no answer. For me Gtd is not complicated. It is collection of behaviour and process. AI is and softwares can help but i hope they will never decide for us. A collection of lists on sheets of paper can be better than the best complex tool or an ERP. i stopped searching tool when i understood that i had to drive my own life conscientiously. The bullet journal helped me and still helps me for that purpose. Wanting to manage everything from a software is an illusion. It is like driving on an highway and dropping the flying hoping that the car will naturally go in the right direction..,
 
I'll respond collectively:
@TesTeq I never claimed that GTD is all about lists. You attribute that claim to me and then argue with it. The "holistic" argument is too general. It would be best to point out which functionality/aspect of GTD cannot be translated programmatically.
It just so happens that I've been administering and working with ERP software practically from the beginning of my career. These are "behemoths". Yet they can encompass the entire complexity of company operations: projects, warehouse management, accounting, logistics, production, picking, and much more. And they can be versatile enough to be implemented in companies with diverse business profiles.

With all due respect to GTD, this system isn't as complex as ERP systems.

The fact that Allen or his team failed to create a suitable application doesn't necessarily mean that such a thing is impossible. It's quite possible that they lacked the necessary skills. Designing a productivity system is one thing, but translating it into an IT system is quite another. I'd love to know the details of where they "failed."

I use Evernote, and although it's not a dedicated GTD system, I managed to implement all the levels, such as vision, AOF, projects, etc., in it. I don't see anything difficult about it. This is also true in the context of a new application.

@cfoley Like TesTeq, I'm not saying GTD is just lists.

@FocusGuy I agree with you. But as far as I understand Allen's statement, he's not saying it's impossible to write a perfect program for everyone (because that's truly impossible), but rather that writing an application that meets GTD requirements seems impossible to him. And I disagree with that.

Unfortunately, Allen's statement is too general. A long time ago, I came across a post of his where he was drawing up a design for a suitable application. There was a dashboard, if I remember correctly, and many other elements. As a programmer, I see no problem with implementing a dashboard and implementing everything GTD addresses.

So, I'd love to know what element can't be implemented. Of course, the system won't completely do the thinking for us. But that's like expecting a spreadsheet to figure out what data we want to work with.
 
I'll add one more thing: why doesn't Allen's point seem consistent to me? Let's assume he's right that it's impossible to write a good program that meets all the requirements of GTD. What conclusion does that make? Well, we have two solutions:
1. Either you can implement a system with all the requirements in a different way, and then we're left with only one: analog, i.e., paper.
2. Or you can't implement GTD at all to meet all the requirements, and then it means Allen designed a utopia.

I think we can reject point 2.

So the question arises: what paper solutions can't be transferred to the digital world?

PS. There's also a third solution: that GTD is so complex that it requires a mix of paper and digital tools. But this contradicts the message from the book, in which Allen doesn't mention—or at least I don't remember—that a computer is absolutely necessary for GTD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top