Anyone else not using a project list anymore?

[tominperu]

I listened to a series of 8 podcasts of merlin mann talking with david allen about GTD and there's two quotes i'd like to share:

nr1: "...goes on the project list, which is one of the most essential parts of GTD."
So it seems DA thinks it's essential. Though if you say it's costing you more time than saving you time, I agree it's best to leave it out.

nr2: "Sure, you can use parts of the GTD system, but the GTD system is really intended to be used in it's entirety and leaving any piece out can greatly reduce its worth"
Seems DA really thinks you need to use GTD as a whole, not just pick parts from it. I think some of you may be confusing the concepts and the tools. DA has often said GTD is tool-agnostic. you can choice what tool you want to use. However, I haven't heard him say that picking and dropping concepts is a good idea. short example: according to GTD, you MUST have a tickler system. Whether that's 43 physical folders or calendar alerts doesn't really matter.

@Jimmo: I've just started using thinkingrock aswell! previously, I used mGTD, but the tiddlywiki system is slow and once you start inputting any decent amount of projects and tasks in it, it just becomes waaaay too slow. I'm liking thinkingrock so far, though sometimes it requires quite a few clicks to get something done (most annoying I find the fact that when i see a thought that i just want to discard, it still takes 3 mouse clicks to get it done)

I remember both those quotes, hence my worrying at times that I have dropped the project list. But I have to say I'm not sure I agree with him, if that is one develops the habit of thinking of the next action whenever you check off a previous completed action.

Luckily there aren't any GTD police to stop me thinking that or even writing it on the forum, and all credit to this forum for that. I remember DA also saying that he wasn't bothered if people didn't use GTD in his organisation as long as things didn't fall through the cracks. I have the same attitude to myself.

 

[kewms]

I personally find it tiresome to have to consider and click the right project, or subproject if the project list is very granular, each time I input an next action. I find it slows me down when it is often very important to process my inbox quickly.

Maybe you've got the wrong tool?

I abandoned hard project-NA links for exactly this reason. I didn't think the link gave me enough added value to make up for the extra maintenance overhead. But I still use a project list.

Katherine

 

[lolajl]

I can't see not using project lists. I tend to go off every which way, and if I had a long list of NA items and no way to group these I think I'd be lost at sea. Some NA items will not occur until I'm ready to do that particular group; for instance, I want to make a shawl out of some roving that Ruth S. gave me before she passed away, but I'm not ready to spin that roving up yet, however, I know there are certain steps I need to do for that project. Some of these steps are the same for other knitting/spinning projects. This is where having project lists really comes in handy.

 

[Oogiem]

Some NA items will not occur until I'm ready to do that particular group;

Hi Lola,

I agree, I have some steps that are the same for all sorts of projects but also really need a project list to keep me focused. I also need the project list to keep me in tune with why I am doing something.

I'm curious though, do you think that because some of your and my projects are so long term (spinning then making something from the yarn) that we approach projects differently?

I have long term projects that have taken years to complete, with individual next actions taking years.

 

[tominperu]

I said I'd post to say how I was getting on with a project list...

I'm still keeping it and looking at it about twice a week. I'm finding it useful and will continue trying to use one again.

For me the key is to keep the projects sufficiency large/broad to be useful as a reference in one or two weeks time. I think if they are two granular they don't work as reference as they change too quickly and basically by the time a new weekly review comes round the list should have changed so radically that it serves little purpose. One then gets stuck in feeding the GTD system rather than actually getting things done. Just my opinion.

Incidently Oogiem, I think having next actions that last years is a mistake. The idea of a next action is that one can do it in one block of time. That can be a week of time if you have little else going on in a particular eweek but if you have a lot else going on then such a large next action is for me a recipe for procrastination.

 

[Oogiem]

I think having next actions that last years is a mistake. The idea of a next action is that one can do it in one block of time.

My view of a next action is the next physical thing you can do that will move the project forward.

My long timeframe next actions are things like "Spin moy gown replica yarn."

That one action may take years to finish (which means I have enough to start weaving the fabric) so I can check it off but for the project "Make Moy gown replica" spinning is the actual next physical action I can take. I can't go further until I have the yarn.

When I have projects where I am procrastinating I will change the next action to something like "spin 1 bobbin full of shooting sock yarn singles in cream Shetland from Moget's Brother" but that's only if I find I am resisting the project. Often it's because I didn't define the action well enough. In the above example the action spin yarn for shooting socks stayed on my NA list for about a month with no progress. I caught the problem in a weekly review and realized that I hadn't decided what roving to spin or whether I needed a single or a plied yarn. Once that project planning was done I could more carefully define the next action so it will get done.

In the case of the Moy gown, I know what I plan to use, I have the combed tops for it and I know all the details about what I am trying to duplicate so all that's left is spin it.

When I look at my NA lists and decide what to work on based on time, energy, priority etc. I can decide on the fly if I am up to the exacting technical work to do that type of yarn or do I need to pick a more mindless activity (Spin more bulky yarn for rugs)

But if I'm not procrastinating on it, as in, I feel the project as a whole is making good progress, then why not have a next action that stays on the list for a long time?

My projects take years to complete, that's part of normal activity when you are working on things based on the seasons or for skilled handwork.

Think of quilting, next actions for a quilt might include define size, select pattern, select fabric, cut pieces, sew blocks, lay out blocks, add edge, decide on backing, decide on filler, pin quilt, quilt it, decide binding color and style, make binding, bind it. The entire process for most folks is going to take a year or 2. If you handsew and hand quilt everything the fastest person I know does 1 quilt in 18 months. That's pretty common for the sort of crafts I do.