GTD and Focus and WIP

[Gardener]

OK, so, the general opinion in parts of the world, especially the programming world, especially the Kanban subset of the programming world, is that too much Work in Progress (WIP) is Bad. Having too many things "open" at the same time is distracting, increases errors, slows things down more than just the multiplier for the task (that is, doing five 50-hour tasks in parallel will take a LOT more than 250 hours), and all that.

Let's accept that as reality for at least as long as it takes me to type this post.

GTD is supposed to get things off your mind. Part of the reason for reducing WIP is that too many open loops tie up your mind. There are lots and lots of other reasons, but that's one of them.

So is GTD not just a way of tracking your work, but also a sort of mental therapy to allow you to reduce the negative effects of increasing your WIP? I realize that the answer may be, "Yeah, we said that," but I suppose I'm asking in a fairly specific brain-chemistry sense.

I think I remember reading somewhere--and I can't remember where; I seem to remember that it had to do with a "something effect" where the 'something' started with a z--that very very busy people sometimes do fairly irrelevant and low priority tasks simply because they crave some brain-food effect, probably dopamine, of getting something "done". GTD organizes the work so that you perceive bites of your main project as "done" in a checked-off sort of way. So maybe the Next Action structure feeds dopamine, and feeds it by working on your main projects rather than those tempting side actions?

(By the way, much of this ignores the high-WIP phenomenon that is @Oogiem. Is it possible that Oogiem is a supertasker, one of the two to three percent of the population that actually CAN multitask effectively? I haven't seen any discussion of whether supertaskers can also handle an overdose of WIP, but it feels logical.)

What's my point? I guess my point is that I'm suddenly interested in GTD and its effect on brain chemistry. Has this been discussed? Searching the book for "dopamine" finds nothing. Searching it for "reward" finds a few indicators.

Anyway. Thoughts.

 

[Oogiem]

(By the way, much of this ignores the high-WIP phenomenon that is @Oogiem. Is it possible that Oogiem is a supertasker, one of the two to three percent of the population that actually CAN multitask effectively? I haven't seen any discussion of whether supertaskers can also handle an overdose of WIP, but it feels logical.)

I don't multitask at all well. I do however tend to task switch fairly rapidly within the same context. The more granular the action the more likely it is that I can blast through a bunch of tasks within a single context thus moving lots of WIPs forward. To me that is very different from trying to do multiple things at once.

I don't context switch at all well either. Which is why even with a fairly simple life I use so many different contexts.

Even so, I can get totally lost in a single context or on a single next action for several/many hours, forgetting to look up, or do anything else and then when I come back to the present am stiff and knotted up and sometimes a bit dehydrated. ;-) This happens most often on things like reading, weaving, programming and other computer tasks. Side note: Weaving is very like programming where the weaver is the computer, the shuttle throws and treadling is the program and the pattern is the algorithm. Knitting is also like programming to some extent. Taking a few very simple instructions and creating complex things from how they are combined. Probably partially why so many high tech folks also do some sort of fiber art like weaving, knitting or crochet. I don't know how to crochet but people I know who do all three are almost always skilled programmers or computer engineers.

I agree that the ignoring of high value tasks in favor of completing some low value ones happens. That is one reason I like very long lists. I can get the "win" of a few simple things within the context I am in and then move on to the more important things. Another reason for lots of actions is to force some movement and change of brain power as I complete them to keep my interest up and force me to not focus so intensely on a single thing to the exclusion of all else.

When I've had lists that are short with only a few things on them and all are high energy or high value I frequently was finding that I would freeze like a deer in headlights unable to choose one to go with and do. With lots of choice I am more able to just get something done and then get the next one and so on. Eventually the high value and difficult tasks actually do get done.

There also seems to be a mind set or style of interacting with tasks that fits in well with the GTD model in favor of others. Since how we think is a product of a biological system that is based on chemical interactions it makes perfect sense to me that GTD interacts with an individual's brain chemistry differently than other systems and probably fits some people's way of thinking aka brain chemistry better than others.

It could be as simple as how many receptors for various brain chemicals an individual has, or how their nervous system is wired with how many connections between neurons or even their epigenetic biome. It would be an interesting area to study if you could figure out how to design a decent experiment.