Developing areas of focus lists

tominperu

Registered
I'm finding a more systematic use of Areas of Focus has helped me recently.

In a weekly review I am writing down the areas of my life that need my attention or that are bugging me in any way and for whatever reason. I will then open a note for each one in Outlook. Then I write ideas on what I can do to get on top of the issue. From these projects and actions are generated. If I don't have time to go over all the areas of focus then going through them will become actions in themselves.

I've also recently started doing this in my daily commute.

Of course I have been doing this sort of things for months/years, as it is staple to GTD - many of you will just call this mindmapping/brainstorming about issues that are foremost in the mind. But a more systematic and conscious process using the term "Areas of Focus" seems to have helped me.

I find that I need different lists of Areas of Focus for different altitudes. For instance the Areas of Focus mentioned above may be only runway, while I find a more long term list of Areas of Focus is useful for looking through in the weekly review and for a periodic assessment of more long term goals etc.

It seems I find I benefit for Areas of Focus at different levels that correspond to the more processed levels of actions, projects, goals etc. Does this make any sense to anyone? Has anyone developed a similar sort of approach?
 

madalu

Registered
tominperu;56405 said:
It seems I find I benefit for Areas of Focus at different levels that correspond to the more processed levels of actions, projects, goals etc. Does this make any sense to anyone? Has anyone developed a similar sort of approach?

Yes, that makes a lot of sense. I think of the 20,000 feet level as "Areas of Responsibility." But I like the phrase "Areas of Focus" -- it makes me feel like I have more agency in deciding what my responsibilities are.

I love how one can do the same things in GTD with very different technology. I use index cards to map out the higher levels of GTD. So, here in a nutshell, is my review process:

1) My projects are all on index cards. One project per index card. I keep these organized by context, depending on the current action. (I use symbols to make it easy to sort the cards.) I like this approach because on days when I need additional focus, I can pull out the cards for the 3-4 projects that have to get done that day and focus on them, all the while knowing that I can go back to the big stack of cards and work by context at any time. (I also have a someday/maybe stack, which makes it easy to promote and demote projects.)

2) I have a separate stack of cards that outline goals and "areas of responsbility/focus." So during my review, I arrange these on a table and put my project cards beneath them. For instance, I have a set of upper-level "Finances" cards that list my goals and responsibilities pertaining to Finances. During my weekly review, I put all my projects related to finances under the "Finances" card and see if my current projects are moving me towards my goals.
 

sdann

Registered
This is a goal of mine. A month ago I outlined my Horizons of Focus. What I noticed at that time was that I was already well on my way to accomplishing many projects toward many of the goals. But, defining the HOFs gave everything new meaning. Aside from altering the HOF as they change or as I define them better, I now want to "draw paths" to my projects and to any new items in my someday/maybe.

I too would like to see how it worked for others.
 

rivergal

Registered
20,000-ft. vs. 30,000 ft.

In revisiting the descriptions of the 20,000-ft. and 30,000-ft. horizons, I'm feeling like they're flipped around.

My Areas of Focus/Responsibility (20K) remain fairly stable from year to year, both personally and professionally, whereas I revise my Mid-term Objectives and Goals (30k) over the course of 1-2 years.

For me, then, shouldn't they be flipped? Doesn't the level reflect how often we review them and revise them?

Examples:
Areas of Responsibility (personal): Relationships, Home, Spirit, Finances, etc.
Areas of Resp. (professional): Ecological management, Science & Planning, Preserve Management, Fund Raising, Alliance Building

Objectives (professional): Write at least one grant proposal; Complete dam removal on Salmon Brook; Contact at least 5 forest landowners; Define & create steering committee

Objectives (personal): Select new day care; Convert office to bedroom, etc.
 

mebstein

Registered
Another thought

rivergal: that's a really good point. My 20k list is also very static and rarely changes. My counter would be that while it's true I don't revise it much, I do need to review it more frequently. As I review that list and consider each of my roles, I am frequently reminded of projects and tasks hidden inside those roles. So, for me anyway, I find that my 20k list is a checklist that I need to consult more frequenly than my 30k goals even though the list itself seldom changes.
 

Håvard Pedersen

Registered
I have come to the conclusion that Areas of Focus does not belong in the hierarchy along with the rest, and should be thought of as a separate set of categories. Visions, goals and projects will fit nicely in a hierarchy – AoF won't. Some times a project will belong to Goal 1 and AoF 3 and other projects within the same AoF might belong to different goals. Or projects within the same goal might belong to different AoFs even. So you will never be able to link them perfectly.
 

treelike

Registered
I have come to the conclusion that Areas of Focus does not belong in the hierarchy along with the rest, and should be thought of as a separate set of categories. Visions, goals and projects will fit nicely in a hierarchy – AoF won't. Some times a project will belong to Goal 1 and AoF 3 and other projects within the same AoF might belong to different goals. Or projects within the same goal might belong to different AoFs even. So you will never be able to link them perfectly.
When I asked about this on the forum the explanation I liked best was that the Horizons of Focus are organised in order of frequency of review rather than necessarily a hierarchy . So you (normally) review the AOF list more often than your Goals list.

I'm intrigued by the idea of different Areas of Focus at different Horizons but I'm just trying to get my head round what that actually means!
 

Håvard Pedersen

Registered
This probably boils down to a specific rigid mindset of mine that really wants everything to form a nice hierarchy. :p Which is why it took me so long time to recognize that this doesn't fit my world.

The GTD podcast episode 20 "Defining your areas of focus" says (loosely transcripted):
Don't think it needs to be matchy-matchy [...] That you have to have a purpose which relates to your areas of focus which relates to your projects [...] Because it probably wont't.

Also this quote from a blog article called "GTD Horizons of Focus - A framework for success":
Most of us will have some areas of focus and areas of responsibility that are not directly tied to any of the above levels. These same items may have related projects or outcomes. “Birthday party for wife” may be a project under the “be a good spouse” responsibility.

So for OmniFocus (which is my GTD manager of choice) my current setup is one tag hierarchy for goals and one for areas of focus. And I try to make sure that all projects have atleast one of those, two if possible. But if a project doesn't fit into neither, it probably means a) I should not do it or b) I lack something in my horizons.
 

Cpu_Modern

Registered
This probably boils down to a specific rigid mindset of mine that really wants everything to form a nice hierarchy.
Maybe that is part of it. But here's another aspect of this. When you "want to form a hierarchy" you maybe have something like this in mind, or have seen it somewhere:
VISION-MISSION.jpg

You see nicely the higher-level stuff, the vision and the mission statement, at the top, at the narrow end. From there you go through the lower level all the way down to the runway, where you will find myriads of actions. This resembles the data in a GTD system: a few top-level items and loads and loads of action items.

But I think this is an illusion or better yet, just one half of the story.

Let's go back to the bronze age of time management system and even further back to the silver age of time management. (Joke stolen form Merlin Mann.)

Bevor their merger to form Franklin-Covey, these two companies had their own respective materials. Here we find this pyramid diagram for the first time. In the teachings of Hyrum W. Smith, the founder of the Franklin Quest company. His Pyramid looks like this:
Discover-Plan-Act-Pyramid.jpg
You can see it is the other way around! The action items are at the top, at the narrow end. The purpose and goals stuff, the higher levels, are at the broad end.

I think what he factors in is the aspect of time. You do one action at a time, right? If you are awesome at time management, what you do in each moment is the best possible action, all things considered.

So, in each moment of time only one action plays a role (haha), but the more of your goals and visions and dreams and values etc etc get consideration - the better!

Yes, the raw amount of data might contain a lot of lines for action items and a few lines for lofty goals, but the "size" of these things is exactly the other way around!
 
  • Like
Reactions: AFG

treelike

Registered
You can see it is the other way around! The action items are at the top, at the narrow end. The purpose and goals stuff, the higher levels, are at the broad end.
Yes! This is how I have come to see things. My actions are "experiments" which yield information that allow me to "discover" what my purpose is. Then when my purpose is known, the other half of the story comes into play- purpose leads to vision, goals and then more actions. And then these actions may result in modified purpose depending on the information (or lack of) generated.

But where do AOF's fit in to this concept???
 

mcogilvie

Registered
Perhaps a better metaphor is a wheel, or even wheels within wheels, signifying the cycles of gtd. Or maybe boxes with arrows, like a state diagram for a simple computer. David Allen used two axes in “Making It All Work” to conceptualize and explain much of gtd. The problem with metaphors is that they only go so far in describing reality.

I used to rely more on my areas of focus as a conceptual organizing tool, but they’re so well assimilated now I think about them less. Looking at upcoming changes in my life, I have been giving more thought to those longer horizon items. I think this is all pretty natural, and I don’t give it much thought, that is, I’m not thinking about the structures so much as using them.
 

mcogilvie

Registered
Are you moving to Amsterdam too? ;) Like @DavidAllen and @kelstarrising ?

Oh, Tes, you had me rolling on the floor laughing. What a great idea!

No, my wife and I have three small granddaughters (2,2 & 4) and a fourth on the way. My wife would like to visit the Galapagos (she’s a biologist) and we both have Alaska and Africa on our bucket lists. In the past, we’ve piggy-backed pleasure travel on top of professional travel, so balancing travel to see family and pleasure travel is new. The kind of trips we’re starting to think about have a 3-5 year horizon for us.
 

Whitehairs90

Registered
Just noting. Here's how I understand the hierarchy:

First comes purpose: what are you trying to do, ultimately. That without you doing anything, it wouldn't happen.

But wait- don't our "opinions and beliefs" precede our purpose chronologically?

Yes.

But because the point of these horizons is to clarify you work, all your opinions only become relevant once you have a declared purpose.

Some people have opinions about what their purpose SHOULD be but don't believe in their gut that this is actually their purpose. GTD is built on the premise that you are willing to commit to what your purpose is.

Now that you have a purpose - our next step is to create goals that will get you there.

But wait! What if these goals require me to do things against my values!?

Okay, fine, says David Allen, let's get all that "stuff" that defines what you will and won't do onto the page and THEN move onto goal setting.

Now that we figured out your values, we're setting some long term goals. Make sure your goal is stemming from your purpose. And that your purpose is something that is "actionable". If your goal doesn't connect to your purpose, then you can dismiss it, or reconsider your purpose. Because why would you DO anything that isn't about your purpose!?


Great! You have long term goals that are things that you must do :)

Let's break them up into projects so you can make them happen!

Wait! David! I have like 150 projects right now, let alone the ones that are upcoming ! How on earth do I review them all and be clear about them? Also, are there projects I've forgotten about?

David: you know what? You're right. You need a clearer picture of your projects. Let's group them into more general domains so that your brain can prioritize the projects on your next actions. It will also help you because it acts as a kind of trigger list for a lot of stuff lurking in your mind. Lets call it "areas of focus" that in order to complete your goals, you will need to be reminded of these areas constantly. E.g. health - personal economy- spouse etc.

Here's an example of a mistake many people make.

Please clarify that these domains are all neccesary for your goals though. Be clear of that relationship. E.g. if your purpose is to make a family, and your goal is to make a baby, then be clear that your spouse is only as useful to you as he/she contributes to that goal.
If you have a goal to "become happy" then you might put down "be a good spouse" as a goal and then "fun" as an area of focus BUT this system won't work, because becoming isn't work. So you'll end up with a real mess prioritizing.

But David- I want to be happy!
That sounds great- one way to do this in GTD is to turn that into work: what is the purpose of "being happy"?
Well, if I'm happy then I can contribute positivity to the world!
Okay great, so then the purpose would be: contribute positivity to the world.
The goal would be "learn how to make myself feel happiness"
The areas of focus would be
"Research - Practise - Reflection/assesment"
And then you would make projects.

Don't try to use your spouse to be happy. That's never gonna work in the long run.

Example is over

You might find that your goals are conflicting: e.g.
Save 1 million dollars
Start a business.

It's really important to be honest at the goal setting stage about which ones are key to your purpose.

I hope that helps!
 

treelike

Registered
But David- I want to be happy!
That sounds great- one way to do this in GTD is to turn that into work: what is the purpose of "being happy"?
Well, if I'm happy then I can contribute positivity to the world!
Why can't "being happy" be a life purpose?

What is the purpose of "contributing positivity to the world"?

You could question the purpose of any life purpose. At what point do you decide to stop asking why?
 

Whitehairs90

Registered
This is a great point, about being happy as a purpose- I don't know how to quote in this forum, I'm new- sorry!

I'd like to distinguish "life purpose" that we talk about on Thanksgiving and Holidays and funerals

To the "purpose" of the horizons of focus.

Having a belief that being happy is what it's all about is fine!

GTD is about "make things work"

Being by it's very nature is "passive"
Work by it's very nature is "active"

If your purpose is to be happy, then just be happy. No matter the circumstance, be happy!

If you're trying to "organize" and "prioritize" the important things so that you have a clear mind to accomplish your goals- then choosing an "active" purpose will be more useful-

I may have gone too far saying this is what David had in mind- so we'll just say "whitehairs" says this is what worked/didn't work for him. And you can agree/disagree

Projects- anything you have to do that's multi-stepped.

Purpose - an activity which you believe it is worth living JUST for that. E.g. "to serve and protect my family" (Maybe you have multiple purposes). These will be a little vague. please, don't make this a passive behavior.. include all passive behaviors in "principles" e.g. "being happy is good for me" can be a principle.


Goals- because your purpose is too general to aim for, pick ways in which you can manifest your purpose:
E.g. "get married"
E.g. "make my first million"
E.g. "spend my first million"

That when you think about them- you really feel that these goals indicate your fulfillment of declared purpose.

If you have all of your goals on paper, and you see how they contribute to your overall purpose. Then begins the work to complete the projects that get you to your goals. Namely projects.


All projects should be directly accomplishing one of the goals. And the goal should be a direct and resonating expression of your purpose.

Now.. what about
Vision?
Areas of focus?

Vision is crucial because it tests whether your goal is really a goal or if you're just "saying" it's a goal. Your vision is an actual vision of what you want your life to be like in the future- your goal either creates that vision or it doesn't.. that's why it's useful to do some en-visioning/image-ining before setting goals to make sure that the goal actually gets you there.

Areas of focus are really good because it helps our brain brainstorm projects by thinking about things from a "responsibility" perspective.


One more piece of wisdom from whitehairs. Take or leave it.

"Pursuit of Happiness"
Is like Like "day of happiness"
Not like "pursuit of a vehicle"

It Doesn't mean "pursuing happiness"
It means "a pursuit which has you feeling happy".
 
Last edited:
Top