Do You Have Questions For David Allen?

[Dave Edwards]

I will be recording another interview with David Allen soon. Do you have any GTD questions for him?

If you have questions for David, email me at daveedwards@outlook.com or send via my website: www.DaveEdwardsMedia.com and click on “Contacts”. i will be happy to include your question on a future episode.

Dave

 

[schmeggahead]

How do you measure the success of your system?

I remember the "have a gleam in your eye and being excited about what you are doing" and I paraphrase in quotes being the irony maker.

Sometimes I feel like when I'm doing nothing on my list, that is a success of my system.
Other times, I feel like I am in the groove with what NAs are in my system.

Can both be right?
Clayton

Sometimes learning to undo can make all the difference.

 

[Longstreet]

What does David think about planning your week? Several productivity authors state that one should plan out your week. I don’t do this, but am wondering how David feels about this.

 

[Longstreet]

Just one clarification. I do a thorough weekly review, but that is not planning out your week. I may realize that I need to block some time to finish that important manuscript that is due at the end of the week. But that is it.

 

[Jeremy Jones]

What methods, if any, does David use to force himself to reclassify non-moving actions ahead of the Weekly Review?

Specifically, actions which are set up poorly, although they look like solid actions, because prerequisite actions haven't been completed?

For instance: you have an action to "Call X re: Y," but you're not completing it. Upon thinking about it, you realize it's because you haven't prepared what you'll say should you get the person on the phone, so you need an earlier action, "Prepare plan for calling X re: Y" or something like that.

 

[René Lie]

What methods, if any, does David use to force himself to reclassify non-moving actions ahead of the Weekly Review?

Specifically, actions which are set up poorly, although they look like solid actions, because prerequisite actions haven't been completed?

For instance: you have an action to "Call X re: Y," but you're not completing it. Upon thinking about it, you realize it's because you haven't prepared what you'll say should you get the person on the phone, so you need an earlier action, "Prepare plan for calling X re: Y" or something like that.

This reminds me of some unfinished business I have with mr @John Forrister ...

 

[Dave Edwards]

How do you measure the success of your system?

I remember the "have a gleam in your eye and being excited about what you are doing" and I paraphrase in quotes being the irony maker.

Sometimes I feel like when I'm doing nothing on my list, that is a success of my system.
Other times, I feel like I am in the groove with what NAs are in my system.

Can both be right?
Clayton

Sometimes learning to undo can make all the difference.

Great question.
dave

 

[Dave Edwards]

How do you measure the success of your system?

I remember the "have a gleam in your eye and being excited about what you are doing" and I paraphrase in quotes being the irony maker.

Sometimes I feel like when I'm doing nothing on my list, that is a success of my system.
Other times, I feel like I am in the groove with what NAs are in my system.

Can both be right?
Clayton

Sometimes learning to undo can make all the difference.

Great question
dave

 

[Dave Edwards]

What methods, if any, does David use to force himself to reclassify non-moving actions ahead of the Weekly Review?

Specifically, actions which are set up poorly, although they look like solid actions, because prerequisite actions haven't been completed?

For instance: you have an action to "Call X re: Y," but you're not completing it. Upon thinking about it, you realize it's because you haven't prepared what you'll say should you get the person on the phone, so you need an earlier action, "Prepare plan for calling X re: Y" or something like that.

Will be interested to hear David’s thoughts
dave

 

[Longstreet]

I was thinking a lot about the following yesterday. I think one's need to carefully allocate time via time blocking changes over the span of their career. Of course, I can only speak of the Academic world, but perhaps this also makes sense in other settings as well. I mentor several cohorts of junior faculty nationally as I am an NIH grant-writing coach. In my interactions with these junior faculty, we also discuss how to acclimate as a new professor and be successful in the Academy. We talk a lot about productivity and "time management". Of course, I talk a lot about GTD and what I consider are universal principles for success and a clear mind - the 5 steps we all know and embrace. But what I have learned is that the engage step is different for them somewhat because they are at an early stage of their career. They MUST publish manuscripts, they MUST get NIH funding, they MUST become excellent teachers. So they need to allocate their time carefully. A number have young children and must take into account family responsibilities in this complex equation of allocating time. As a very senior professor (34 years now), I don't have to regulate my time allocation nearly as rigidly as they do. I can rely on deciding in the moment, occasionally blocking time for major projects, but mostly have a reasonably clear calendar apart from the usual too many meetings that come my way. So, my needs in terms of managing my calendar are different than theirs. This fits into the weekly planning I mentioned earlier. They are strong advocates of this and scheduling major tasks and projects on their calendars so that they can clearly see their time allocation. This old professor, although I have major responsibilities and commitments and wear a huge number of hats, does not have the same need to so carefully allocate their time.

So, what do you think? I find this fascinating. Of course we all know that one size shoe does not fit all, but I think people's relative shoe sizes also change over time. Not to sound like Spock...but fascinating.

Dave, please bring this up to David too.

 

[Jim]

Dear David,

When you are looking at your list of next actions, after a weekly review, tell me what goes through your mind as you choose the thing that will be done next.

 

[Longstreet]

Dear David,

When you are looking at your list of next actions, after a weekly review, tell me what goes through your mind as you choose the thing that will be done next.

I usually stop and think and go up the horizons so that I am not mired in the weeds, but can see my big picture. I consider what is on my mind and why.

 

[TesTeq]

Dear @Dave Edwards,

Could you please ask @DavidAllen if he doesn't regret that he named the methodology "Getting Things Done" instead of "Zen and Art of Knowing What Not To Do"? Many people misunderstand GTD – they think it's a method of doing more work.

 

[GTDAcademic]

I would be curious to know how David feels about the “personal productivity industry” and how it changed over the years.

Today, there seems to be someone telling us “how to be productive” on every street corner. What does he think about these other methods/viewpoints? Are these interesting to him or does he just ignore them? How does he feel about people who try to discredit GTD as a launching pad to plug their own methodology?

 

[TesTeq]

How does he feel about people who try to discredit GTD as a launching pad to plug their own methodology?

@GTDAcademic Some of those who discredit GTD seem to read only the title of @DavidAllen's book…

 

[Longstreet]

@GTDAcademic Some of those who discredit GTD seem to read only the title of @DavidAllen's book…

That may be true for many, but definitely not all.

 

[GTDAcademic]

I also see both. Regardless, because many people struggle with implementing GTD, it’s very easy to say “GTD is not working/too complex.. here, try my approach” and get a following.

Euclid said “there is no royal road to geometry” (there is no shortcut to hard work), but in this day and age, these messages seem to get a lot of traction.

 

[Longstreet]

I also see both. Regardless, because many people struggle with implementing GTD, it’s very easy to say “GTD is not working/too complex.. here, try my approach” and get a following.

Euclid said “there is no royal road to geometry” (there is no shortcut to hard work), but in this day and age, these messages seem to get a lot of traction.

Nicely stated! I think one has to take into account personalities in some of this. I have some colleagues in Academia who are immensely successful, don't miss any email or meeting, have major admin responsibilities, and run huge research groups with several NIH grants. We have discussed GTD and they consider it "too much". The funny thing is...they are actually practicing much of the 5 steps in their way of doing things and don't even realize it. I had one colleague tell me that "occasionally" she needs to climb up her mountain to more clearly see the whole forest instead of just the individual trees. I asked her how often she does this and she responded about once a week.

 

[Longstreet]

I was thinking a lot about the following yesterday. I think one's need to carefully allocate time via time blocking changes over the span of their career. Of course, I can only speak of the Academic world, but perhaps this also makes sense in other settings as well. I mentor several cohorts of junior faculty nationally as I am an NIH grant-writing coach. In my interactions with these junior faculty, we also discuss how to acclimate as a new professor and be successful in the Academy. We talk a lot about productivity and "time management". Of course, I talk a lot about GTD and what I consider are universal principles for success and a clear mind - the 5 steps we all know and embrace. But what I have learned is that the engage step is different for them somewhat because they are at an early stage of their career. They MUST publish manuscripts, they MUST get NIH funding, they MUST become excellent teachers. So they need to allocate their time carefully. A number have young children and must take into account family responsibilities in this complex equation of allocating time. As a very senior professor (34 years now), I don't have to regulate my time allocation nearly as rigidly as they do. I can rely on deciding in the moment, occasionally blocking time for major projects, but mostly have a reasonably clear calendar apart from the usual too many meetings that come my way. So, my needs in terms of managing my calendar are different than theirs. This fits into the weekly planning I mentioned earlier. They are strong advocates of this and scheduling major tasks and projects on their calendars so that they can clearly see their time allocation. This old professor, although I have major responsibilities and commitments and wear a huge number of hats, does not have the same need to so carefully allocate their time.

So, what do you think? I find this fascinating. Of course we all know that one size shoe does not fit all, but I think people's relative shoe sizes also change over time. Not to sound like Spock...but fascinating.

Dave, please bring this up to David too.

Well, my post apparently came across like a fart in a submarine - not too popular. Oh well. Just trying to stimulate conversation.

 

[mcogilvie]

I also see both. Regardless, because many people struggle with implementing GTD, it’s very easy to say “GTD is not working/too complex.. here, try my approach” and get a following.

Euclid said “there is no royal road to geometry” (there is no shortcut to hard work), but in this day and age, these messages seem to get a lot of traction.

I came to GTD already familiar with Franklin Planner and Covey ideas (distinct before the companies merged) and I had read much of the classic material of this type. David Allen’s writing resonated with me because it acknowledged that these older approaches were flawed; in fact none worked for me. It seems to me that there are a fair number of “experts” out there trying to make money off desperate people by providing them with untested methodologies. A lot of the hype boils down to “this works for me so you should do it too.”