Finalizing GTD tips

[Yodude120]

Hello !

I've been using GTD for a bit less than a year now, and I can realyl say it's had a profound impact on my behaviour, interaction with others, outlook on things etc.

I have recently taken up a project to finalize (more or less) my GTD implementation. I'm using Wunderlist mostly, and I think I've developped and maintained my system to the point of it really being what I need.

I still have some general (not software-specific) issues and ideas I would like to get input on however, esp. from a community of GTD users who know what they're talking about.

1) I have naturally applied the 2min rule for now quite often, not just in processing, but in some form (depending on the context) also on the fly. So when I think of something, if it's very clearly and palpably

 

[Folke]

1 and 2: I want to avoid getting "lost in work" when I deal with my inbox. And I have a system that allows me to write quick, sloppy, short-lived notes for action immediately afterwards.

3 and 4: I use the proper project approach mainly for "real" projects and the "task with subtasks" approach for the micro-GTD type projects.

5: I write down those that come to mind. At least one, sometimes many. I never keep additional actions outside (I use an app that lets me distinguish between current next actions and upcoming next actions)

6: I prefer using an app that has a built-in tickler (usually called start date or scheduled date). I use it extensively, especially for repeating routines etc. Some apps allow you to choose between repeating at fixed intervals and repeating a fixed interval after completion.

7: I do not regard the inbox as a must. I often put things straight where they belong.

9: I think many things are optional in some sense. I prefer using apps that have the built-in distinction between Next and Someday/Maybe. I use the Someday/Maybe designation for all kinds of stuff that I have not yet decided whether I will do or not, even within projects, e.g. Plan B type actions.

 

[TesTeq]

3) Do you stick to the 2+ todos definition for projects in general ? I found that sometimes it's very easy to just put a small task, with 2-3 subtasks, as a standalone task in wunderlist and keep the whole on one context list. I mean, if "Print xyz document" is on your lists, and "Hand it to HR department" is a subtask, should those really go on a project list ? It's kind of an overkill

Check Cascading Next Actions: http://www.marktaw.com/blog/CascadingNextActions.html

You can also write a sequence of Next Actions as:
Next Action One > Next Action Two > Next Action Three

 

[SiobhanBR]

1) If thinking about an item and integrating it into your system will clearly take more than 2 minutes, should a task be scheduled to do that actual processing or should one process it anyway ?

I often put NAs like "Process notes from conference" on my lists. If it will take longer than 2 minutes and you don't want to do it right now, deferring it makes perfect sense. You could also put it in your tickler for a specific day if you know you will have time to do it then. If you know or expect something in there should be done before your next weekly review, you might want to tickle it. Otherwise, you at least know you'll catch it by the weekly review.

2) Related to 1, is it better to always reflect on the inbox items and actually write out all the physical next actions to be able to make a 2min rule judgement call ?

It's a judgement call. Use your intuition. If you find that you're often taking 30 minutes doing what you thought was a 2 minute item, then try not using the 2 minute rule at all and just process everything without doing. Sometimes I implement a time-bound context like

 

[PeterW]

And that reminds me - I am going to add "Teach my son to play canasta" to my projects list.

Go one further and teach him to play Bolivia. Great game.

 

[megedwards]

Congratulations on your GTD Implementation!! Great questions so I am going to try and give you some high level comments.....

One of the reasons for the 2 minute rule is that it can take that long to put the next action in your system and then later retrieve that next action and do it so you might as well just take the 2 minutes and do it right then and there. The 2 minute rule really starts when you have decided what the next action is. I have had clients take 3 or 4 minutes to figure out what needs to be done with the email but once they do and they realize that it will take 2 minutes they go ahead and just do it. When I am processing emails or paper the only "doing" I am doing during that time is the 2 minute rule. The rest of the time I am just processing and organizing. It took me a while to separate defining vs. doing but after a while I saw the benefit of doing it that way.

Another point is when I am processing and organizing I sometimes will ask myself at the end "Did I do what I needed to do to get that item off of my mind." If the answer is yes then I go on to the next item.

More to come...

Cheers!

Meg

 

[megedwards]

7. - Yes, if you know where the action goes then please please please just put in on your list. I see this all the timMe that folks think that everything needs to start in the "inbox" but that isn't the case.

Meg

 

[Yodude120]

Check Cascading Next Actions: http://www.marktaw.com/blog/CascadingNextActions.html

You can also write a sequence of Next Actions as:
Next Action One > Next Action Two > Next Action Three

actually I'm doing a form of this already. My project list and area of focus list, and goals (horizons 1-2-3) have items with tags attached to them. One area of focus is for example #health. Under that I might have a project for "making use of new #insuranceservices #health". I immediately know the project has all its items tagged with #insuranceservices, and that the project itself is part of #health. I go up and down these levels very easily this way, kinda like going up and down the stairs For tasks too, they either have a project tag, like #getanewbike (project "Trying go #getanewbike" on project list), or an area of focus tag (like #cleaning), because they don't have a finishable, but maintainable outcome. And then if I want to know what to do after completing something, I just open the tag, it will get a view across all my lists (everything) tagged with it, and I pick up upcoming stuff dependent on what I finished from the tickler (I "tickle" stuff that need to be done after completing prerequisites)

 

[Roger]

Excellent thread -- I always like the see more discussion around the tactical levels of GTD like this.

I have recently taken up a project to finalize (more or less) my GTD implementation.

I would suggest this is a mistake, but it'll either become clear to you in time that it's a mistake, or it won't, and you'll figure it out on your own.

1) Does the 2min rule also apply to processing?

Mmm, sort of. Basically in these sorts of cases I generally end up with a 'Figure out what this is' next action, but I can see how some people would just power through it.

I would guess it's related to when people engage in their processing. I usually treat it as a low-energy/feeling-dumb context, so if there's anything challenging in there, I want to defer it until some point when I'm feeling smarter. But there are probably people out there who do most of their processing when they're feeling smart, so it might make sense for them to tackle it in the moment.

2) Because sometimes I find myself naturally coming up with things and starting doing them

I think that's sort of the natural state of most people, and something GTD is explicitly-designed to steer us away from. It's not necessarily a bad way of doing things, but I'd personally keep a jaundiced eye on it.

3) Do you stick to the 2+ todos definition for projects in general ?... It's kind of an overkill

This is all about what the Projects list is really for -- what it does, what problem it solves. The problem it solves is: yay you've completed the last live Next Action for a project, and now the project doesn't really exist anywhere inside the GTD system any more. The List of Projects is a place for that project to continue living.

If your particular system and your particular project are such that there's always at least one Next Action for the project in the system, until the project is complete, then yeah, it doesn't need to also live on a different list. (Okay, it might also live on in Waiting For, which is a pretty common pattern, but you get the idea here.)

4) Related to 3: do you apply the 2+ todo definition to sub-projects ?

I'm not sure what you mean by sub-projects here, but maybe I've said enough already.

5) When organizing a project, how many next-actions do you flesh out for it ? I mena do you just flesh out the next action or a whole project plan ? it's to know how much "low-level" in terms of actions one should go ? Some people go down to as low as "hand paper to HR department", while others think they will anyway do that intuitively. I'd love to have your opinion on how to judge, for each project, how much low-level you need to go in fleshing out the next-actions for it

The resolution and scope of a single Next Action is very personalized, maybe moreso than any other part of GTD. The thing I personally tend to keep an eye on is dwell time -- how long has this NA been sitting around in the system? If it feels like 'too long', then the solution is almost always to decompose it further. But it's going to be pretty different for everyone.

6) I've found that using a digital form of the tickler can help main quite a lot of things in order. For household chores, I have a system where I schedule cleaning stuff on predetermined frequencies, I wonder if anyone is doing something similar ? If yes, any advice ? This touches on a bigger probelm: that of punctual tasks. Some tasks are inherently punctual, in the sense that they are done for a small moment but CANNOT or SHOULD NOT be done again before some time, but still need to be done regularly enough. Think of taking out the trash. The thing is, you can trust you will when these tasks need to be done, but amid all the other stuff, do you actually want to remember-to-remember them ? What are your thoughts ?

I haven't really run into this with a non-digital Bring Forward file, so possibly the tool is making things harder on you than they need to be.

7) What's your advice on bypassing the inbox for some stuff ? Take "Buy chocolate mousse" for example. You need to be out and about for that, if you remember it, isn't it better to directly put that on the "errands" list instead of putting it on the inbox

Yeah, that's probably fine. I mean, the first inbox that we all have is inside our heads, right. GTD doesn't really recommend processing that as an inbox directly, but I wouldn't call it inherently-problematic.

9 ) Do you ever keep "optional" tasks on the context lists ?

Hmmm. Every NA is optional, really, so I wouldn't worry too much about this sort of thing, I don't think.

Cheers,
Roger

 

[Folke]

Roger, you brought up a couple of very interesting points that are not often discussed, but which probably should be:

This is all about what the Projects list is really for -- what it does, what problem it solves. The problem it solves is: yay you've completed the last live Next Action for a project, and now the project doesn't really exist anywhere inside the GTD system any more. The List of Projects is a place for that project to continue living.

If your particular system and your particular project are such that there's always at least one Next Action for the project in the system, until the project is complete, then yeah, it doesn't need to also live on a different list. (Okay, it might also live on in Waiting For, which is a pretty common pattern, but you get the idea here.)

I agree, and I might add that this whole question arises mainly when you use paper or simplistic list apps. For many of today's todo apps this is a non-issue, since they also have a project feature (or sometimes a multi-level folder feature) which allows you to organize your actions into projects AND ALSO mark them with whatever context is required. This means you can view your actions by context whenever this is appropriate (when selecting additional actions to do), and by project, area etc when you organize and review your actions.

The thing I personally tend to keep an eye on is dwell time -- how long has this NA been sitting around in the system? If it feels like 'too long', then the solution is almost always to decompose it further.

I agree. I often write down, next to the action, the date on which I entered it (some apps even do this automatically). As you say, "dwell time" ("since" date) can be an indicator that something is wrong, and the task may need to be reworded or broken down into smaller steps. Or maybe it does not really deserve to be on an "active" list anymore and could be trashed or moved to Someday/Maybe. I also find the "dwell time" very useful for deciding whether additional actions may be required, such as following up on why something I am Waiting For has not yet arrived.