Comparing GTD to other systems...

[Mark Finlay]

James, your first post has the answer - adapt the system so that it works the way your brain works. If that means replicating electronically an aspect of your FC methodology, I say go right ahead, and put "change the batteries" (or "buy/find batteries"...) on your calendar, then go ahead and get it done. If you don't do it that day, move it on as you would with FC - it'll take 2 secs to do that elcetronically & the psychic RAM won't be nearly as badly affected as sitting in traffic for an hour without music. In my experience you'll either very soon do the action or happily "relegate" it to the next action context lists

So its not 100% "pure" GTD - big deal. It sounds to me that it is important enough to you to merit being on the calendar, and clearly you're not going to put everything on the calendar.

But whatever you do, don't tell the GTD police, or they will cite you for a violation of the GTD Code, Chapter X article Y

Hope this helps

 

[mhm802]

I'm new to the board, but have lurked for a long time, (love the new look!) and I've used GTD for a couple of years now, with some modifications. I'm paper-based (I need the tactile and visual sense of paper and ink)

GTD is a great system, but I agree that we each have to customize it for our own needs/situation. For a while, I got stuck in thinking that I had to do everything the GTD way and I was getting frustrated because some things just were not working for me. But as soon as I realized I already had some good and effective systems in place, I gave myself permission to take GTD and make it work for me.

What I Love:

--the GTD process of processing all that paper
--the Weekly Review (two hours a week saves 2 DAYS work, I'm convinced)
--keeping my calendar pristine and hard-edged
--maintaining a master projects list that holds everything (actually two; I keep separate lists for home and work)
--identifying a next action for everything so that nothing sits unprocessed or un-thought-about
--making/keeping lists on lots of things, just for fun

What I've modified/customized:

--I too need to schedule big chunks of time to work on projects in depth. My mind/work style often is more effective when I'm focused on one project, even if I'm utilizing several different tools/modalities (e-mail, thinking, drafting, number-crunching, telephone). This works well for me and I find I can make a lot of progress in these focused sessions. If I deconstruct a project's actions too much, I often find my progress on the project becoming too disjointed. Similarly, if I only pick one next thing, the project doesn't move forward as quickly as it does when I work in concentrated chunks.

--Context-based next action lists are overkill for me. Most of my projects have multiple next actions that could be done in any order, and often in different ways. (example: I might need to contact client X, but I could do that via phone or email and often don't need to determine the method ahead of time.) And when I think of one next action, I usually think of an additional half-dozen. This produces instant and continually updated project plans, and I want to write all these actions down once, together on a project plan list, rather than on separate context-based lists.

I basically use the time-frame of the coming week as my context, and keep two lists: one home-related tasks, one for work. I will add to them during the week as things come up, if I know I need to do it that week. Otherwise I'll add it to my weekly review pile, or immediately to my projects list (2-minute rule). The lists are side-by-side and visible together. I often make home-related calls from work, or draft a proposal or contract when at home, and do errands for both when I'm out and about. So it works OK for me -- I just have two Next Action Lists to work from each week. And the open loops get caught in my Weekly Review.

Flexibility is what makes GTD so unique and so powerful.

 

[GeoffAllen]

I'm new to all this, but would it help if you took 50 or 60 items off your @home list and parked them somewhere you'd see them at your next weekly review?

It seems a bit drastic, but it sounds as if right now you can't trust your @home list to get done.

I think this is an important point. The original question was "where's the urgency?"

The answer, I believe, is that the "next action" lists must be jealously guarded and contain only "urgent" items, or at least items that will be done very soon. I know I have a tendency to put a lot of someday/maybes on the lists. I have to keep reminding myself that only simple, immediately doable items should be on the next action lists. Everything else is either a project or a someday/maybe.

So, in this case, "Get new MP3 batteries from drawer" should be an action on @home, with the expectation that it will be done today, or at least ASAP. "Do something about the paint in the bathroom" shouldn't be there. It's someday/maybe (or maybe a project if I'm committed to doing something now).

Geoff, who struggles with this a lot!

 

[pd_workman]

I don't prioritize my next action list by importance, but I do by urgency. If I cannot do it right now, it is not a next action and won't be on my current list. Either there is something else that needs to be done first that will be on my list, or it cannot be done until a certain date, and it will be forward-dated.

Most of my todos are undated. The ones with increased urgency/priority are dated and are at the top of the list. If something must be done today (because of urgency or importance) it would be dated today and sorted to the top of the list.

 

[pshammer]

What I like and don't like

I liked what Jane had to say about her use of GTD--make it your own. Use what you like and discard what doesn't seem to work for you, but try it first.

I have discarded several of David's categories. They don't work for me. I find that the @Action, @computer and @waiting for categories are just excuses to bury things where I will forget about them and then get bit later when I don't deal with them.

The biggest help that I have found with GTD is developing in myself the committment to taking action. I am currently fighting the problem of lots of items on the next action list that are aging. Many of them genuinely have to be done, but they just sit there getting bypassed and this drives me crazy. I need to get better about putting them in someday/mayber and then discipline myself to do the weekly review and then assign them to next action.

I was a Covey-ite before and still am to some extent. I like the concept of actions based on principles and deeply held values. The problem for me was I got stuck contemplating my values and feeling real good about it, but never got things done. In reality, the real mission of the moment is to make the phone call, write the letter or do some concrete thing and not some highminded piece of literature no matter how unified I feel with it.

Hope this helps.

 

[frieki]

Remind me of what I need to be reminded of at the right time

James, I agree with Mark that about adapting the system so that it works the way your brain works.

Here is a different option that might accomplish what you need without having to put such a task (change batteries) on your calendar.
I am not sure what technology solution you are using (paper? electronic?) but if you have any categories available you might consider adding a new 'context' called "Before Leaving" and assign 'Change the MP3 batteries' and similar tasks to it. Then get into the habit of checking this new context before leaving home. You could also use/check this context for before leaving work or any other place that you want to habitually check for "Before Leaving' tasks.

For me, Home is too general a context and I find breaking it down further into "When" zones helps. After all this is what we are already doing with @Computer for example. The best time for me to see/do these tasks is WHEN I am at my computer rather than having them clutter up my @Home (or @Work) list. The best time to see/do your example “Change the MP3 batteries” task may be “Before Leaving”.

Or you could call the context something like “Transitioning” so you could include tasks that you want to do immediately ‘after arriving at’ somewhere as well; for instance as soon as you get home, but before you relax into your decompression mode. So then you would just get in the habit of checking the “Transitioning” context before leaving and after arriving at home, work, and/or your car. (This might require a reminder alarm at first until it becomes a habit.)

In the above post, pshammer mentioned that he/she doesn’t use some of David’s recommended contexts. I think adding/subtracting as many contexts as you need to make the GTD system work for you is not only ‘permissible’ but is probably at the heart of GTD, which David Allen re-emphasizes in his post at http://www.davidco.com/forum_topic.php?id=14.

HTH,
Frieda

 

[rossw]

If we need to find a way to filter our lists, it would seem to make sense to start with the criteria for choosing actions:
context - we already have separate lists for each context we consider relevant, whether this is location, tool or (for some of us) project
time available -
energy -
priority

Most of us naturally start with the LEAST important of these: perhaps we could think about a simple (H/M/L) flag for the amount of time the task should take, or the amount of energy we'll need?

 

[pd_workman]

I find that I know whether I have enough time for something just by looking at my list, and I know whether I have high or low energy (and whether it is a high or low energy task) by my gut reaction to approaching the task right now.

 

[Anonymous]

Comments

A few comments:

#1. If you can change the batteries right away, then just do it.

#2. If you feel you must do it during the day, put it on the calendar.

#3. 75 items on your @home list is way too much, you should put away 50-60 of them on your Someday/Maybe list.

 

[Anonymous]

Number of items on any given action list

Boy do I share the frustration of what to do with lots of items on any given action list. If I can shift into GTD-cop mode for a second, given a few minutes I could show you the exact sentences where DA states that a project is adequately planned when **every** next action that can be taken without a predecessor action being taken is in an action list. (If these are committed to projects, then in strict GTD terms, these are all active next-actions, not someday/maybes. Next actions are to be done as soon as possible, but they are to be done. Someday/maybes are just that...things you're not sure you're committed to doing yet.) These lists can be **long**.

Example: In my last job I was assigned to 19 different project teams (each dealing in mulitmillion dollar acquisitions, and each having many "projects" in GTD terms) and serving on the senior leadership team--in a completely different area of expertise--for the same several hundred person global organization (again, more than a few projects in GTD terms). I wasn't using GTD at the time, and I don't think my job was uniquely complex in the annals of human history, but any next-action lists derived from these projects would have been neither small nor "someday/maybe". These weren't "I'd sure like to learn to surf someday..." (Even though I probably FELT that way a bunch of times...grin.)

If there's a risk to GTD, it's how to ensure currency with all these next actions without risking one getting lost in a huge list. (Urgency can easily overwhelm importance, in Covey terms.) Relatedly, someone on another board spoke of needing six (6) hours to do the weekly review. That's insane (not the person, the situation that required it). That's essentially most of one productive day of work spent just "getting organized" every week. At some point the psychic angst of overlooking an item would have to be weighed against the angst of losing most of one day a week to just keeping track of what's going on.

So, to make a long story short (too late): I don't have all the answers, but it would appear the system (and probably any system) has some limits. My suggestion is to make the system serve you, and not the other way around, noting the trade-offs you make in doing so...

 

[Anonymous]

Oh, what to do!

Well, this is what I do. Things that must be done today, go on my calendar, or on my ToDo list for today. Things I want to do, but do not have to do today, go on my context list.

It seems to me that if your computer is not a place where you get anything "done" that you don't use it as a context area.

It also seems to me that a weekly review is to analyze what has been done for the week, and what must be done for the next week. Anything that cannot reasonably happen in that time frame is not on my context lists. Either it is a future step in a project, or it is captured on Someday/Maybe. For awhile, I divided Someday and Maybe into separate categories. Even David says his Palm categories are a "work in progress", so find what works for you. 75 things on one list would not work for me, period.

If I needed to be reminded of batteries, I would put that reminder in a place that I "trust" would help me to remember it. And then, I guess I would work a bit harder at review my context lists when in that context.

I was into Covey too, but the truth is, his book is much more about relating to others than getting tasks done. There is no contradiction or even opposition between the two. Covey helps you reflect on your values, GtD helps you implement them. What I have found is that without a system like GtD to lean on, Covey is almost useless. Lots of good ideas, but little implementation is what happened to me.

What I can say is that after years of Covey et al, more of what I value (Covey helped me sort that out) has gotten actually acomplished in my life in the last 6 months, than in the previous two years.

Thank you so much, David Allen and Team

Gordon - in Canada

 

[JohnParlabane]

This is a fantastic discussion!

As far as getting that huge "Next action" list done

I think the biggest thing everybody needs to remember that one of the biggest things about GTD that everybody forgets about, is that is is a system that "naturally and dynamically evolves for each individual user". It is a framework for us to build on. As we go along, we notice things that are not working well in the system, and we develop safeguards and mirco-systems to counter the issues.

Here is an example:

I use Palm vanilla to-do list to organize everything. I too was finding that my urgent phone calls (@ phone) were getting lost in the shuffle. I needed to find a way to "Trick" myself to make sure all the big important calls always get done.

Here is what I did

#1: I prioritize all my lists using the "1 2 3 4 5" in Palm. Some stuff is just more important than other stuff - period

#2: If a call does not need to be done until a certain date, but does not HAVE to be done on a certain date, I date it forward on the to-do list.

#3: Here is what my @ phone list might look like on my palm

1 Call Mom to wish happy birthday
1 Make dentist appoint
2 Call to close Anderson on lease deal
2 Fax Mortgage paperwork to refi company
2 make appointment at garage for tune-up
3 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
3 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
3 @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
4 pull info from the web about Gooey.com
4 order bug-zapper from amazon.com
etc...............

My big trick (that works for me) is the "@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@" nonsense in the middle

Obviously the priority 1 and 2 items make perfect sense, but what the heck is the "@@@@@@@@@@@@@@"

that, in my mind, is the "Canyon". Anything that is a priority 1 or 2 has been brought "across the canyon" and needs to be done in the near term. Once it has been brought across, it can't ever go back to the other side. There is never anything in my system that is a "3' priority. Priority "4' and "5" is just general @ Phone next actions.

The big benefit of tricking myself this way is

#1: I can see at a glance the really important stuff

#2: I don't groan when I look at my huge Next Action list every day. We all hate looking at the list, don't lie, it's huge.

#3: I have a good shot at getting all my stuff that is "across the canyon" done in a day and that is very rewarding and motivating. There is no change that I could ever get my entire @ calls Next Actions done in one day or even close. It goes on forever and just will get worse

Now,

I am not saying anybody should use my technique, I am not going to write a book called "Across the Canyon", go on the lecture circuit, or write software. This is my trick, helps the GTD framework work well for me

get your own "tricks" that motivate, reward, and move you forward

Hope this helps

 

[pd_workman]

http://www.davidco.com/tips_tools.php?id=32

According to the workflow diagram, once you have decided what the next action is, you can:

a) do it (2 min)
b) delegate it
c) defer it
i) for me to do specific to a day or time (calendar)
ii) for me to do as soon as I can (next action list)

So there are two ways to defer. You can put it on your next action list if it is something that you are committed to doing as soon as possible. Or you can put it forward to a specific day or time. If I am not committed to doing an action "as soon as possible" (whether you take that to mean today, this week, or this month) it should not show up on your next action list yet. It should be put forward to a specific day or time.

Someday/maybe, on the other hand, is non-actionable items.

Pam

 

[Jason Womack]

"ooops! Did I say yes again?" (AKA: my lists are t

After a seminar a while back, someone had an interesting way of summing up our workshop. She said, "This really makes me aware of what I've said 'YES' to!"

Each one of us is ultimately responsbile for creating or allowing all of those "actions" to land on our lists. Too many projects is actually a good thing! I mean, I would have concern if my project list was empty!

Essentially, our work encourages (gently???) you to actually see what you've allowed into that 10 acres of your psychic space. Whether we write these things down or not, their ours AS SOON AS WE SAY YES.

So, I see further proof of becoming efficient. Any problem I have comes down to one of two possible roots:

1) I don't know what I want; or
2) I know what I want, and don't know how to get it.

(I took that from someone I know, Steve Snyder...thanks Steve!)

So, if those are my two, basic, problems...I really have two solutions!

1) Make it up
2) Make it happen

(Thanks David!)

IF your lists are too long, look at them from another level. Really, take the altitude analogy and do a monthly review!

From the 40,000 foot perspective (3-5 years from now) what ARE the projects you'd keep? Are there any you'd toss onto the someday/maybe list, or ditch altogether?

I remember when I first got Workflow Coaching in 1997. At the end of the two days, I had made an inventory of over 150 projects. That next month, I made some hard decisions. Two years later, I switched jobs (same career, different teaching arena). Today, I've been working on levels I only could consider just 18 months ago!

Best wishes,

Jason
jason@davidco.com

 

[eek]

2 Ideas for You... VERY Helpful

jkgrossi,

I think I have two ideas for you that may prove to be very helpful.

#1 - You *seem* to be suggesting that the GTD method does not allow the use of "priorities"... this is incorrect. The GTD method just stresses that a "Priority" must be considered after context, time available, and amount of resources... once these 1st three issues are met then Priorities come into play. I use priorities on all my GTD lists with great success. The priority numbers on my Palm ToDo list are just one more way to section my data. If I only have a few minutes to do something, and energy is low... I go straight to my priority "5" items and knock a few off.

#2 - For every Project on my "Project List", I also keep a "Project Memo". This memo is something I look over at each Weekly Review. This is a place I can put actions and ideas that I *plan* on doing but don't plan on doing in the next few weeks. This keeps my "action lists" from getting huge but it keeps these items so I see them at my weekly review so they don't slip through the cracks.

I have been doing this with my GTD system for a while know and it has been very successful. Good Luck!

Eric

 

[Anonymous]

Re: Oh, what to do!

It seems to me that if your computer is not a place where you get anything "done" that you don't use it as a context area.

Gordon - in Canada[/quote]

A fellow Canuck - eh!

Is Computer only a "place"? DA doesn't restrict the use of Contexts to Locations. He says a Context is: "...either the tool or the location or the person required to complete it". Specifically, he states: "if the action requires a computer, it should go on an 'At Computer' list". I treat Computer as a Tool, not a Location. Agendas are "People Context". I believe the primary purpose of using "@" prefix is to identify Action Items and thus to sort them to the top of the alpha listing of Categories. (I am open to correction if I got this wrong.) So the word "At" shouldn't necessarily be taken by its literal English meaning.

People in this thread have talked a lot of sense about personalizing the GTD method, and my point is that since I stopped thinking "At", and started thinking "When" (When I am out in the car, When I am talking to Mr. A, someone said the equivalent of: When I am about to leave ...), I have gotten much more use out of using Categories. BTW "When" still translates into "@" on my Palm

Andrew

 

[chinarut]

high/low energy/ @peace category

I'm new to all this, but would it help if you took 50 or 60 items off your @home list and parked them somewhere you'd see them at your next weekly review?

It seems a bit drastic, but it sounds as if right now you can't trust your @home list to get done.

I'm toying with tagging actions with "high energy"/"low energy" needed markers. Has anyone tried this?

Regards

I use a @peace category...something I certainly relate to low-energy and actions that contribute to my well being.

 

[chinarut]

Re: Comparing GTD to other systems...

I would love to hear the thoughts of other GTD'ers that converted from another system -

What do you like about GTD?
What did you like about your old system that GTD doesn't address?

What I like about GTD is it's ability to commit to being in action, avoid analysis-paralysis, and adaptation to current communcation paradigms and technologies (ie. email, vmail, palm)! Being someone who's been very computer-centric, GTD has done wonders bringing my physical organization systems to a whole new level (long live the tickler!). For my electronic organizational systems, I find that I organize my actions in my palm/PIM in a whole new way and have a higher sense of trust in my system and in the end, in other people.

I am also a FC convert and what I feel very strongly about is their roles-based approach in their compass. I do believe that roles constantly shift in and out of our lives. The source of inspiration is based on our defined roles - who we're being, the people we interface, and the results we promise to them. Does anyone else share similar thoughts?

 

[Jason Womack]

Decision making...

What I like about GTD is it's ability to commit to being in action...

It was fascinating to read this again. On Friday, I was delivering a seminar to a group in San Francisco. Halfway through the seminar, someone said, "you know Jason, this system really makes you make decisions on everything."

She went on to say that the very concept of "having to decide" was big, and that she didn't know if she wanted to do that.

I've maintained that the real value for me in the GTD methodology is not the organization per se. Instead, it is the ability, within minutes, to take something new, imagine success, and make a decision about an action that - if and when taken - will get me closer to completion.

 

[mochant]

Re: Oh, what to do!

Is Computer only a "place"? DA doesn't restrict the use of Contexts to Locations. He says a Context is: "...either the tool or the location or the person required to complete it". Specifically, he states: "if the action requires a computer, it should go on an 'At Computer' list". I treat Computer as a Tool, not a Location. Agendas are "People Context". I believe the primary purpose of using "@" prefix is to identify Action Items and thus to sort them to the top of the alpha listing of Categories. (I am open to correction if I got this wrong.) So the word "At" shouldn't necessarily be taken by its literal English meaning.

People in this thread have talked a lot of sense about personalizing the GTD method, and my point is that since I stopped thinking "At", and started thinking "When" (When I am out in the car, When I am talking to Mr. A, someone said the equivalent of: When I am about to leave ...), I have gotten much more use out of using Categories. BTW "When" still translates into "@" on my Palm

Andrew

Andrew:

I agree with you 1000% and I love the "When" approach (the Zen of When?). "When" I'm "at" the computer isn't related to my physical context at all as I carry a laptop around. So @Office means the resources I need to do something on the computer are "at the office" and I'll do that task "when" I'm there. Same for @Home.

It can get a little blurry. I remember a fairly big discussion with DA at the seminar I took about "@HomeComputer" or "@WorkComputer" which felt pretty clumsy to most of the people in the room. So, like a lot of other aspects of the system it's personal and you need to adapt the concept to your own circumstances.

--Marc