sdann;61871 said:
This is interesting. You put roles/responsibilities into a separate grouping (in your case categories) like contexts are. It is almost as if these two lists are the framing.
I've started and junked about six different replies to your post. Probably because it raises a bunch of questions that I've struggled with regarding GTD higher altitudes. I'm going to give it this one last shot and maybe I'll get it right... (I don't know if this will be of any interest to anyone, but it certainly helped me a great deal... ymmv...)
Altitudes are confusing because they are used (in GTD) as a shorthand for multiple concepts, not all of which (imho) are well captured by the altitude metaphor. The concepts are as follows:
Action: We tend to talk about next actions that occur at the runway, but there are planned actions, someday/maybes and project action steps that may occur at a later time. Actions are the physical actions taken to manifest the outcomes. (Cause & Effect).
Outcome: At every altitude (even the runway) there is an outcome (effect) for every action (cause). We call these outcomes projects, objectives, goals, etc. but they are all outcomes, at the higher altitudes they simply have multiple prerequisite outcomes that must be achieved first.
The breakthrough for me happened when I brought in some Theory of Constraints thinking and applied it. Take a look at Dr. Goldratt's paper on Strategy & Tactic Trees
(
http://www.vancouver.wsu.edu/fac/holt/em534/Goldratt/Strategic-Tactic.html)
I realize this is another level of terminology, but at the simplest GTD thinking, strategy = outcome and tactic = action. Each level of the tree represents an altitude. At the top is your Ultimate Outcome, what is your life mission or purpose (In TOC terms, what is the Goal?). The next level is for your long term goals (40,000 ft), 1 year goals (30,000 ft), quarterly objectives (20,000 ft), projects (10,000 ft) and finally the runway objectives (next actions completed).
Developing an S&T Tree is a pretty daunting task, and I'm not saying you should create one for your whole life, I have found the concepts useful when working on projects where I was taking action but not getting the results I expected. I've found it helpful in identifying outcomes that were necessary conditions for higher level outcomes, as well as un-necessary activities that were taking up focus.
Focus Areas/Areas of Management/Categories of Improvement are simply another way of slicing the object. if you look at altitudes, in Dr. Goldratt's paper they are horizontal divisions. The other division is Vertical; you might have faith, family, finances, & fitness as focus areas for example and these might (or might not) be sub-divided at lower levels into finer areas. Fitness might be divided into medical, exercise, & nutrition for example.
Perspective: In addition to the different level of Outcome that David puts into altitude, the perspective (time horizon) at each level is different, e.g. ASAP/this week, ~3 months, 1 year, 3 years, life etc.
Control: David talks about control at the runway, which is where it is easily applied but it is not the only type of control that we have. At the project level, Control happens through project (and higher objective) planning and through the regular reviews. So while it isn't as simple as control only being at the runway, we can make adjustements at higher altitudes.
Finally one of the things that is subtle in GTD is the importance of knowing your higher purpose. OPA/RPM requires a purpose for each and every block (GTD project equivilent), and while this is nice, it is not strictly necessary. If you know your highest purpose then from the S&T tree your higher purpose should drive the runway level next action.
sdann;61871 said:
....
Tony Robbins' method was great for the top, but I found the runway or the practical applications really lacking. This is why I'm such a GTD fan. I also see how the two can be meshed, but only at the higher levels.
Meshing the two at the runway is equally simple. It just comes down to realizing which of your RPM/OPA blocks you will schedule on your calendar. Once you do that, schedule time for your must projects you then use your discretionary time to work your next action lists. GTD's rule of what goes on your calendar are only those things that must be done on a particular day. It's simply a matter of what your standards are.
For any TOC folk out there, GTD is simply drum(discretionary time)-buffer(next action lists)-rope(weekly review). For your musts you can also apply critical chain to your project based work (calendared project time). I've been working on a white paper that ties all this together... if anyone is interested ping me privately and I'll forward a draft....
hope this helps...
