Do you set all next actions when project planning or just THE next action

ivanjay205

Registered
I run into one problem when I clarify consistently. I hit something that I know should be a project and I pause (completely out of laziness) about wanting to go through the process of creating a project and thinking it all the way through. When I slow down and really clarify and break it down I find it way more effective but mentally using David Allen's analogies this "repels" me and I feel some friction on committing it to the project list vs just a single next action as I "know" what else goes with it.

I just finished rereading the book and noticed that David Allen consistently talks about planning the "single" next action as part of a project. That seems counterintuitive to me as if I can plan them all out on a Monday for example by the time I get to Friday I might accomplish a bunch. However, if I only place one I will not get to more until I get to my weekly review and realize there are no next actions to move the project forward and during that process I will plan more.

What do most do? Any advice? Plan a single next action or plan the project out as far as you can?
 

mcogilvie

Registered
GTD favors making the act of creating a project and getting started as easy as possible. So a project entry and a next action for it gets you started. If possible future steps occur to you at that point, you can stash them in project support, in whatever you store it. A lot of my projects only need a next action or two, and planning too far ahead can waste my time planning down the wrong path.

If you think of the next action as a bookmark, the next thing you need to do to move the project forward, then the best practice is to place a new bookmark when you stop, that is, immediately write the next action, or at least remind yourself to figure out the next action. In between the two bookmarks, you may have covered a lot of ground or just a bit, but you are moving. You should not wait for the weekly review to add next actions. If you are not sure what to do about something, throw in in the inbox, but ABC: Always Be Collecting. And always be reviewing too.

It may be that you have projects and procedures that repeat with minimal changes, or perhaps repeat but evolve in time. That’s where checklists come in. For example, I just returned from a trip to DC combined with hiking in Shenandoah National Park. I used both my travel checklist and my hiking checklist to pack for what were essentially two different trips. (Shenandoah is wonderful, by the way.)

Hope this helps.
 

Gardener

Registered
However, if I only place one I will not get to more until I get to my weekly review and realize there are no next actions to move the project forward and during that process I will plan more.
I add THE next action. But I don't wait for the weekly review--I'll tend to add another action when I check the latest one off, or just keep working on the project and add a "bookmark" action when I'm done, and then the weekly review serves to catch any projects where I missed that step.

As an example, I may be out in the garden in a "bed prep" work mode, and when I've forked and amended a few beds and am collapsing in my garden chair, I'll go through those projects in my phone and add the fact that this one needs greensand, that one is waiting for me to transplant the anemones, that one needs to be soaked, I need to find the dill seed for that one, and so on. I use the garden as my examples, but I would handle work projects similarly.

This is affected by the fact that I have VERY short project lists and keep everything else in Someday/Maybe. I'm likely to realize, while glancing at ten projects, that "Oh, I need to add an action to that one." If I had a hundred projects, probably not.
 

ivanjay205

Registered
GTD favors making the act of creating a project and getting started as easy as possible. So a project entry and a next action for it gets you started. If possible future steps occur to you at that point, you can stash them in project support, in whatever you store it. A lot of my projects only need a next action or two, and planning too far ahead can waste my time planning down the wrong path.

If you think of the next action as a bookmark, the next thing you need to do to move the project forward, then the best practice is to place a new bookmark when you stop, that is, immediately write the next action, or at least remind yourself to figure out the next action. In between the two bookmarks, you may have covered a lot of ground or just a bit, but you are moving. You should not wait for the weekly review to add next actions. If you are not sure what to do about something, throw in in the inbox, but ABC: Always Be Collecting. And always be reviewing too.

It may be that you have projects and procedures that repeat with minimal changes, or perhaps repeat but evolve in time. That’s where checklists come in. For example, I just returned from a trip to DC combined with hiking in Shenandoah National Park. I used both my travel checklist and my hiking checklist to pack for what were essentially two different trips. (Shenandoah is wonderful, by the way.)

Hope this helps.
That makes sense. Just as an example below is a personal project for something at my house (to avoid sharing any confidential work wise). I need to replace one of the covers to one of my kids fish tanks. So I captured "Replace Noah's Fish Tank cover"

When I clarified I have:

- Measure Caleb's Fish Tank Hood
- Research Compatible hoods with appropriate lighting for plants and size
- Order replacement fish tank hood
- Install replacement fish tank hood

Typically when I clarify I think about, in this case "replace Noah's fish tank cover" and I plan out the entire sequence of events. On something this simple it takes only a few minutes and it is fairly easy to do. However, some of my work related items might have quite a bit more on them and writing them out takes a lot of thought. I will sometimes put the last next action on the list (if it is sequential) as Write out Next Actions or something like that as a reminder it is not yet complete.
 

Gardener

Registered
However, some of my work related items might have quite a bit more on them and writing them out takes a lot of thought. I will sometimes put the last next action on the list (if it is sequential) as Write out Next Actions or something like that as a reminder it is not yet complete.
This, and your mention of "laziness" in your early post, suggests that you think that you're supposed to write out all the actions.

My perception is that not only does GTD not demand that you write out all of a project's actions, it to some extent discourages it.

I'm not sure which perception you have here?
 

ivanjay205

Registered
This, and your mention of "laziness" in your early post, suggests that you think that you're supposed to write out all the actions.

My perception is that not only does GTD not demand that you write out all of a project's actions, it to some extent discourages it.

I'm not sure which perception you have here?
I think my fear is that David talks a lot about capturing all the thoughts to empty your mind. Otherwise your mind will drift to them again as it is not fully captured and start nagging at you. I am not sure if I only partially clarify will I get that nagging for it not. Guess I need to pick something simple and try
 

Gardener

Registered
I think my fear is that David talks a lot about capturing all the thoughts to empty your mind. Otherwise your mind will drift to them again as it is not fully captured and start nagging at you. I am not sure if I only partially clarify will I get that nagging for it not. Guess I need to pick something simple and try
One compromise could be to create a project plan as project support material. but not clog up your project/action lists with extra actions.
 

ivanjay205

Registered
One compromise could be to create a project plan as project support material. but not clog up your project/action lists with extra actions.
The actions dont really bother me as I can filter through those. Once I put it in project support material I am doing the planning anyway. I think what I am gathering from this is I need to start going either way with planning it all out or just the next action based on the situation but need to when I work on something also go int othe project list so that when I check it off complete I also get in the habit of identifying the next or next few actions to be done.

Right now I work from my tagged list so If I check off the one action I wont realize there is not another. So going to the project view would help that.
 

Aliman

Aliman
@ivanjay205,

Your first paragraph on your original message seems to say that you tend to want to classify what are actually Projects (because they have more than one Next Actions) as Next Actions instead of projects. That definitely causes our future selves problems.

Your second paragraph seems to ask a different question, which is mostly discussed in the thread, and that is about planning either one Next Action for a Project as opposed to planning several Next Actions. The discussion, and your own observations, seem to answer that question. But I'll chime in here. For me, Next Actions attached to Projects are not things that I write down that must be done, such that I check them off as I do them. Rather, I almost never write down multiple Next Actions for Projects because the purpose is not to do the Next Actions. The purpose is to complete the Project. Next Actions on Projects are simply lures. They are lures for action, which make it easy for me to jump back into working on a Project. I only need one such Next Action. Once I leverage that Next Action, and use it to jump back into working on a Project, the Next Actions pile up in my head and I do them one after another--that's the meat and potatoes of working and progressing on the Project--I don't write them down or pre-define them out as future steps. If something occurs to me which is a brilliant idea and I can't do anything about it in the moment, sure, then I note that down in the Project Support Material, and return to working. Before I leave that Project and transition into something else, I write down the Next Action next to the Project name so it's a lure for me to easily jump back into next time.

Aloha,
Aliman
 

ivanjay205

Registered
@ivanjay205,

Your first paragraph on your original message seems to say that you tend to want to classify what are actually Projects (because they have more than one Next Actions) as Next Actions instead of projects. That definitely causes our future selves problems.

Your second paragraph seems to ask a different question, which is mostly discussed in the thread, and that is about planning either one Next Action for a Project as opposed to planning several Next Actions. The discussion, and your own observations, seem to answer that question. But I'll chime in here. For me, Next Actions attached to Projects are not things that I write down that must be done, such that I check them off as I do them. Rather, I almost never write down multiple Next Actions for Projects because the purpose is not to do the Next Actions. The purpose is to complete the Project. Next Actions on Projects are simply lures. They are lures for action, which make it easy for me to jump back into working on a Project. I only need one such Next Action. Once I leverage that Next Action, and use it to jump back into working on a Project, the Next Actions pile up in my head and I do them one after another--that's the meat and potatoes of working and progressing on the Project--I don't write them down or pre-define them out as future steps. If something occurs to me which is a brilliant idea and I can't do anything about it in the moment, sure, then I note that down in the Project Support Material, and return to working. Before I leave that Project and transition into something else, I write down the Next Action next to the Project name so it's a lure for me to easily jump back into next time.

Aloha,
Aliman
That sounds like a dangerous game to play in my situation. I totally get where you are coming from and sometimes it is easier to do that but it seems to be counterintuitive to GTD where the entire game is to empty your head.

I often get interrupted. I might be midstream project and all of a sudden a colleagues pops into my office for something breaking my train of thought.... In that scenario this could be get me in trouble. I do like the relaxed feeling I get when I document the entire project.
 

mcogilvie

Registered
I think there are a variety of different kinds of projects, and it’s important to understand the differences. Here are some:

  • Simple projects: a desired outcome and a next action are usually sufficient. Example: getting a new roof for your house may be expensive but it’s fundamentally very linear.
  • Projects with internal deadlines or dependencies. Examples: teaching a course or building a house (if you’re the builder).
  • Projects you have little experience with, and you must explore options. It’s usually better to not settle all details because you will learn as the project progresses.
  • Projects with some complication but you have experience which makes completion straightforward.
Most GTD projects are of the first type and do not require too much ”planning.” Ditto for the fourth type. The second and third require some amount of project support. The second may or may not benefit from a list of sequential next actions, as opposed to, e.g., milestones. The third type often is hindered by too much planning, particularly if it is rigidly followed.

I think a lot of people want a “project plan” (as opposed to project support) for the psychological comfort it brings when starting a project. That leads to problems when plan and reality diverge. The cure is often to ask “what is true now?” and go from there.
 
Last edited:

ivanjay205

Registered
I think there are a variety of different kinds of projects, and it’s important to understand the differences. Here are some:

  • Simple projects: a desired outcome and a next action are usually sufficient. Example: getting a new roof for your house may be expensive but it’s fundamentally very linear.
  • Projects with internal deadlines or dependencies. Examples: teaching a course or building a house (if you’re the builder).
  • Projects you have little experience with, and you must explore options. It’s usually better to not settle all details because you will learn as the project progresses.
  • Projects with some complication but you have experience which makes completion straightforward.
Most GTD projects are of the first type and does not require too much ”planning.” Ditto for the fourth type. The second and third require some amount of project support. The second may or may not benefit from a list of sequential next actions, as opposed to, e.g., milestones. The third type often is hindered by too much planning, particularly if it is rigidly followed.

I think a lot of people want a “project plan” (as opposed to project support) for the psychological comfort it brings when starting a project. That leads to problems when plan and reality diverge. The cure is often to ask “what is true now?” and go from there.
This was a great response. Thank you. And I think this actually really summarizes it and does bring some clarity. Just this morning I was reviewing one particular project I fully planned out and move on to something else because the entire plan makes no sense now. So I need to go back and fix it all. Clearly over planned before it evolved.
 

gtdstudente

Registered
This was a great response. Thank you. And I think this actually really summarizes it and does bring some clarity. Just this morning I was reviewing one particular project I fully planned out and move on to something else because the entire plan makes no sense now. So I need to go back and fix it all. Clearly over planned before it evolved.
Yes, I agree that is a great synopsis of Project realities offered by mcogilvie. In addition, I find it productive from greater confidence in making a Mind-Map that is kept in Project Support File even if there is only One Next Action on the Project's Mind-Map
 

Logan

Registered
I usually just set the single next action or multiple if they can be done independently from each other.

Why?
The speed in my (office) environment is just too high. Often the outcome of one next action leads to a totally different succeeding path to achieve the outcome of the project.
 

ivanjay205

Registered
Thanks all, I think I have a better grasp on this now and need to get comfortable with just setting the next action or two unless it is very clear about the entire project. In that case the project itself will trigger more as I will inherently know where I am with it.
 

Gardener

Registered
Thanks all, I think I have a better grasp on this now and need to get comfortable with just setting the next action or two unless it is very clear about the entire project. In that case the project itself will trigger more as I will inherently know where I am with it.
Another element to consider: Often the best planning format for a project (what I think of as project support material) isn't a list of projects and actions. And often using the best planning format makes the list of projects and actions far less necessary.

For example, I have an ongoing plan to simplify and drought-proof my garden. I could make that a whole bunch of projects with a whole bunch of actions. But I get a much deeper understanding of the plan by drawing a series of diagrams of the garden--its state now, its desired end state, and then, in between those, a couple of diagrams for the next couple of seasons.

There's a lot of information about a garden that isn't conveyed well in lists of projects and actions, and is conveyed well with an overhead plan. Similarly, there's a lot of information about a programming project, or a dinner party, or an event, or probably most projects, that is conveyed best in forms other than lists of projects and actions.

I do have a few lists associated with my garden diagrams, but they're not action lists--they're lists of information and ideas. There's a list of candidates for a drought tolerant ground cover in one area, a list of candidates for added perennial vegetables, etc.

I COULD sit down with those diagrams and create a whole bunch of projects, but then every time I change the end goal, I'd have to change a whole bunch of projects.

If I'm concerned about possibly missing deadlines, I can address that in the diagrams--for example, areas will have "FP" or "SP" to indicate that they're an appropriate candidate for fall planting or spring planting. Two little letters are easy to add and easy to change my mind about, as opposed to--OK, let's make a project:

ESTABLISH JAPANESE ANEMONE BED
- Prep bed 12K for Japanese anemones
- Add irrigation to bed 12K
- Evaluate existing Japanese anemone candidates for transplant
- Order enough Japanese anemones to fill out the bed
- Soak Japanese anemone transplant candidates
- Transplant Japanese anemones
- WAITING FOR ordered anemones
- Plant ordered anemone seedlings.

Yes, all of those actions need to happen. But (1) they're obvious and (2) I may change my mind and prioritize some other thirsty plant over Japanese Anemones, or I may not get around to this until next year, and then I've wasted my time creating a detailed project that will either be deleted or will clog up my lists for eighteen months. (In my case, it'll be deleted.)

I'm much better off scribbling "Jap. anem WET FP" on a spot in my diagram. (The WET lets me see at a glance how many thirsty plants I have in what is supposed to be a drought tolerant garden.) If I know that the cultivar that I want is hard to get and I might have to mail order it, it can be "Jap. anem WET FP MO".

Then my projects and actions can address my planning format. I can have projects like, "Create FP list by priority" and "Create MO list by priority" and "evaluate WET plans."

Only when I actually get very VERY close to planting do I enter, anywhere, detailed actions like, "Soak Japanese anemone transplant candidates". (Even then, it will probably be, "Soak candidates on transplant list", as part of a project, "Carry out Transplant Saturday!" but that just reflects my preference for batch projects in the garden.)
 

ivanjay205

Registered
Another element to consider: Often the best planning format for a project (what I think of as project support material) isn't a list of projects and actions. And often using the best planning format makes the list of projects and actions far less necessary.

For example, I have an ongoing plan to simplify and drought-proof my garden. I could make that a whole bunch of projects with a whole bunch of actions. But I get a much deeper understanding of the plan by drawing a series of diagrams of the garden--its state now, its desired end state, and then, in between those, a couple of diagrams for the next couple of seasons.

There's a lot of information about a garden that isn't conveyed well in lists of projects and actions, and is conveyed well with an overhead plan. Similarly, there's a lot of information about a programming project, or a dinner party, or an event, or probably most projects, that is conveyed best in forms other than lists of projects and actions.

I do have a few lists associated with my garden diagrams, but they're not action lists--they're lists of information and ideas. There's a list of candidates for a drought tolerant ground cover in one area, a list of candidates for added perennial vegetables, etc.

I COULD sit down with those diagrams and create a whole bunch of projects, but then every time I change the end goal, I'd have to change a whole bunch of projects.

If I'm concerned about possibly missing deadlines, I can address that in the diagrams--for example, areas will have "FP" or "SP" to indicate that they're an appropriate candidate for fall planting or spring planting. Two little letters are easy to add and easy to change my mind about, as opposed to--OK, let's make a project:

ESTABLISH JAPANESE ANEMONE BED
- Prep bed 12K for Japanese anemones
- Add irrigation to bed 12K
- Evaluate existing Japanese anemone candidates for transplant
- Order enough Japanese anemones to fill out the bed
- Soak Japanese anemone transplant candidates
- Transplant Japanese anemones
- WAITING FOR ordered anemones
- Plant ordered anemone seedlings.

Yes, all of those actions need to happen. But (1) they're obvious and (2) I may change my mind and prioritize some other thirsty plant over Japanese Anemones, or I may not get around to this until next year, and then I've wasted my time creating a detailed project that will either be deleted or will clog up my lists for eighteen months. (In my case, it'll be deleted.)

I'm much better off scribbling "Jap. anem WET FP" on a spot in my diagram. (The WET lets me see at a glance how many thirsty plants I have in what is supposed to be a drought tolerant garden.) If I know that the cultivar that I want is hard to get and I might have to mail order it, it can be "Jap. anem WET FP MO".

Then my projects and actions can address my planning format. I can have projects like, "Create FP list by priority" and "Create MO list by priority" and "evaluate WET plans."

Only when I actually get very VERY close to planting do I enter, anywhere, detailed actions like, "Soak Japanese anemone transplant candidates". (Even then, it will probably be, "Soak candidates on transplant list", as part of a project, "Carry out Transplant Saturday!" but that just reflects my preference for batch projects in the garden.)
I cannot imagine with what I do creating graphical representations of it but that does make sense in your world for sure.

But I do think when you are in NY I should recruit some help for my backyard in desperate need of landscaping lol!
 
I'm late to joining this thread but I appreciate all the insights and this is a struggle that I have as well.

For example, if I am planning a dinner meeting at work at which I will give a presentation. If I decide to work on this, I have a number of choices. I could send invitations and get the number of attendees, I could work on the powerpoint, I could arrange the food, I could work on the handout. Most of these can be done in any order, and few are context dependent. How are people managing the situation of projects where there is a list actions but they are not linear, and there are too many moving parts to feel comfortable that you won't forget anything?
 
Top