GTD's value and ROI

[nunodonato]

was just thinking about this today. makes sense?

 

[Oogiem]

No, not to me. ALL workers have a high ROI when GTD is implemented. I would have it a straight line up near the top. Have you ever read Cheaper by the Dozen? Minimizing therbligs in any job is important and GTD helps you do that no matter what your job function is.

 

[nunodonato]

No, not to me. ALL workers have a high ROI when GTD is implemented. I would have it a straight line up near the top. Have you ever read Cheaper by the Dozen? Minimizing therbligs in any job is important and GTD helps you do that no matter what your job function is.

No I haven't read it, will check it out, thanks for the suggestion!

From my experience with others, for people who do 90% mechanical work, GTD doesn't sound as a valuable tool or something they could use daily. By mechanical I dont just mean physical work, I mean work which has no(or almost no) thinking to be done. All tasks are defined for you and you just have to blindly push the buttons. In these scenarios the gain of having to learn and implement a methodology like GTD may not be worth it (considering this work only, not personal life). There is always SOME benefit, that's why the line is not at 0

 

[TesTeq]

No, not to me. ALL workers have a high ROI when GTD is implemented. I would have it a straight line up near the top.

Do you suggest that GTD makes a cashier at a supermarket more productive? I wonder how?

 

[Oogiem]

Do you suggest that GTD makes a cashier at a supermarket more productive? I wonder how?

Absolutely. Just because you are in a menial job doesn't mean you can't have an impact. For example, one project might be to make sure you smile and greet by name everyone who comes through your line. That will improve the customer experience and result in more sales. At least here most cashiers are also paid bonuses based on the number of customers and amount of money spent with them so that could help your bottom line too. Your work station might not be set up so that it is efficient, some rearranging might help there. YOu may be using this as a way to pay for additional schooling or training in other jobs. You might be a manager who wants to see what it's like at the bottom so are working incognito as a cashier so have lots of notes to take where you can't be observed (happens more often than you might imagine). You can keep an eye on the quality of the produce and point out when things are getting low or of poor quality as all the local cash register machines are tied to store inventory.

And then again there is the entire personal side of GTD.

One of the biggest fallacies is the focus on GTD for "work" when, like a martial art, it's more focused on the whole person. I don't care who you are or what you are doing GTD can help you achieve your goals.

 

[Oogiem]

From my experience with others, for people who do 90% mechanical work, GTD doesn't sound as a valuable tool or something they could use daily. By mechanical I dont just mean physical work, I mean work which has no(or almost no) thinking to be done. All tasks are defined for you and you just have to blindly push the buttons.

YOu cannot separate work and personal. GTD is a methodology to help you achieve your dreams,. If you've ever read any of Barbara Sher's stuff one of the things she talks about is people who choose to work in what would be considered menial jobs to make the money they need to pursue their other interests.

Have you ever dug an irrigation ditch by hand? I bet you think that is a job with no thinking required. OTOH it is a very skilled job to get an irrigation ditch to work properly with minimal further effort so what you see as menial, shoveling dirt in a line, is actually a rather complex engineering problem that you have to have thought out before you start or the water goes the wrong way and your plants die. We tend to have a bias that hand work is not skilled work and nothing could be further from the truth.

For proof go try to buy a modern shovel. At most you will find maybe 2 or 3 different types. Now go to a well stocked antique store that specializes in old farm equipment or go read some agricultural textbooks from 1850 and earlier. There are maybe 15 different types of shovels described, each for a very specific use. If you are trying to perform the same functions without a large modern tractor, perhaps because your land is too small to use that sort of machinery, or you wish to provide more jobs for people, you had better learn about the various tools that were developed to make those jobs easier and more effective and that means you better understand the proper use of the 7-8 different shovels that a typical diversified farm should own. Hoes are another tool that is far more than most people think. Even the skill of exactly how you hold and use those hand tools is something that is often neglected.

So there is nothing unskilled about manual labor when it's done right.

 

[Folke]

I, too, would doubt that a cashier has much value of GTD or any other structured approach. I also doubt that the distinction between "operational worker" and "knowledge worker" is particularly apt. Even among knowledge workers I suspect there are quite a few who benefit much less than others from using a structured general approach. For example, how about someone who works for an insurance company with processing claims? I suppose they just process an "intray" (or the electronic equivalent thereof), and if they need to make a phone call or do some research they probably have checkboxes etc in their computer system for that.

I think the value of a structured approach, such as GTD or any of the other structured methodologies, is generally higher for people with very varied work and no other systems to support them. For example, I imagine an "operational worker" like an electrician, having multiple clients to serve in multiple locations with anything from new major installation projects to minor problem fixing can benefit tremendously from having a structured approach that reduces the risk of forgetting.

Now, if we are talking about the "ROI" for switching specifically to GTD from some other structured approach, I again think it varies from person to person and from what kind of structured approach they are switching. Probably the main group of rivaling methodologies are those that are based on time planning - making daily todo lists long in advance, or even scheduling specific time slots. That probably works well for some (that is probably why it is so popular), whereas others could benefit a lot from switching to the more dynamic context-energy-timing-priority approach of GTD as this saves the time of scheduling and re-scheduling and re-re-re-re-scheduling. The people who benefit most from GTD I imagine will be those who have a high degree of unforeseeable things happen to them during a typical day, whereas those who tend to have few such disturbances can follow a set schedule more easily.

If we look at the "ROI" for switching to GTD from another "non-time-planning" approach, such as DIT or MYN, the potential gain is not of the same magnitude, and although the switch could perhaps prove to be either marginally better or marginally worse, it would not necessarily make much difference in practice. The main difference I see between DIT and GTD is the fact that DIT advocates trying your best to really stick to the plan you make in the morning for the rest of the day - and not let disturbances affect you unless there is really no other way (hence the name DIT - Do It Tomorrow, don't even think about it until tomorrow unless you really have to). In other words, the little "white index card" as a little bit "holier" in DIT, but I doubt that this makes much difference to people. Often I personally find that the tentative list I make in the morning survives the day pretty well, and if I need to adapt to something I just change it, so for me both philosophies produe the same results.

For someone who switches from MYN the main difference is probably that they have a shorter "next" list and more in "someday" ("Opportunity now" vs "Over the Horizon"). MYN says that anything that you cannot reasobale expect to start within the next 10 days should go on the "Over the Horizon" list ("someday"). This is very similar to how many GTDers do it and to what David Allen also sometimes advocates, even though in the GTD context you seldom hear of a specific time limit, such as ten days. I don't think the difference will make much difference to anyone. Personally I avoid both of these approaches as a do not like to use my Someday as an AB prioritization tool - with or without a time limit; I like to have my Someday/Maybe be pure Maybes. (Instead, I simply flag the "decided" actions differently, with markers in three different colors, within the Next list itself.)

 

[TesTeq]

Absolutely. Just because you are in a menial job doesn't mean you can't have an impact. For example, one project might be to make sure you smile and greet by name everyone who comes through your line. That will improve the customer experience and result in more sales. At least here most cashiers are also paid bonuses based on the number of customers and amount of money spent with them so that could help your bottom line too. Your work station might not be set up so that it is efficient, some rearranging might help there.

Maybe such flexibility and creativity is possible in the US Wallmart type stores but I observed no room for variations in Polish Tesco, Carrefour, Lidl or Biedronka stores. All cashiers wear the same "business smile" and use the same phrases to greet you and to say goodbye. The same applies to the Amazon "human robots" in 3 brand new fulfillment centers in Poland. The only difference is that neither smile, nor spoken phrases are required...

 

[bcmyers2112]

GTD is for those parts of your life that are not on "cruise control" and therefore doesn't have much applicability to highly structured, repetitive tasks like cashiering or working on an assembly line (I should know; I once worked as a supermarket cashier). Nevertheless no one's life is 100% on "cruise control," and I think anyone can therefore benefit from GTD.

 

[CJSullivan]

The menial jobs you speak of are just jobs with incredibly short completion cycles. So, in that sense, no - someone is not going to put "open till, put in money" as a next action, or "complete transaction with shopper" as a project. But there's something about this thread that makes me a little uncomfortable... As Oogie has already pointed out, GTD is a holistic approach to managing all the open loops in one's life. To assume that a cashier or other "non-thinking" (????!!!!) worker (a) doesn't have to think, or (b) doesn't have anything else going on in their life that needs managing... errr... I dunno... Doesn't feel like a good leap to make to me...

 

[bcmyers2112]

The menial jobs you speak of are just jobs with incredibly short completion cycles. So, in that sense, no - someone is not going to put "open till, put in money" as a next action, or "complete transaction with shopper" as a project. But there's something about this thread that makes me a little uncomfortable... As Oogie has already pointed out, GTD is a holistic approach to managing all the open loops in one's life. To assume that a cashier or other "non-thinking" (????!!!!) worker (a) doesn't have to think, or (b) doesn't have anything else going on in their life that needs managing... errr... I dunno... Doesn't feel like a good leap to make to me...

Well said.

 

[Folke]

As Oogie has already pointed out, GTD is a holistic approach to managing all the open loops in one's life. To assume that a cashier or other "non-thinking" (????!!!!) worker (a) doesn't have to think, or (b) doesn't have anything else going on in their life that needs managing... errr... I dunno... Doesn't feel like a good leap to make to me...

Then you should be pleased to note that only you yourself made that strange connection. I never noticed anyone else here referring to "non-thinking" people or people that do not have open loops outside work.

But some people here have expressed criticism against:

• Oogie's approach that the value of GTD is the same for everyone. That's very theoretical. Although probably anyone at all can benefit from it to some extent, some will have a situation with more open loops in greater need of structured fixing. Those will benefit in a more direct and obvious way.
• the OP's view that the value of GTD depends primarily on whether the work is "operational" or "knowledge" based. As you yourself said, you think it is rather a matter of how long the completion cycles are. Or as I said earlier, I think it is a matter of how big the variation is and whether there are other support systems in place.

 

[nunodonato]

Hi friends!

Yes, please note that I was restricting my observation to work (as in, job). Of course there is always benefit in implementing GTD on our personal lives and nobody is every 100% in cruise control
I also agree that there is always some benefit, and - again - that's why the line does not start at 0.

It reminds me of an example David used to use "if all you do is crank widgets all day, then there is nothing much to think about" - consequentely, there will be not many open loops. I think we all agree on this

thanks for all your views

 

[bcmyers2112]

Then you should be pleased to note that only you yourself made that strange connection.

No, I drew that inference too.

 

[bcmyers2112]

It reminds me of an example David used to use "if all you do is crank widgets all day, then there is nothing much to think about" - consequentely, there will be not many open loops. I think we all agree on this

That's not the point. Even if someone has a highly structured job they can benefit greatly from GTD. Ultimately GTD is about getting things out of your head and into a trusted system so you can have a clear head and be present in the moment, and devote full attention to what you are doing. You can't come up with a quantifiable "ROI" for something like that based on someone's profession.

 

[Folke]

You can't come up with a quantifiable "ROI" for something like that based on someone's profession.

I think that sums it up quite nicely.

There can be all kinds of tendencies and possibilities for benefitting in different ways and to different degrees by adopting GTD, but I am sure it must be virtually impossible to define this benefit generally or to predict it for an individual person overall.

But it might be feasible to list a number of factors in any given part of an individual's life that are likely to contribute towards an increase in the value of using GTD for that part. A few such possible factors have been mentioned here. Among those, I feel that the OP's "knowledge based" (as opposed to "operational") is probably neither the clearest (a bit too sweeping) nor the most relevant influencing factor (probably not strongly correlated to the value of GTD). I think you need to look deeper and wider to find more specific factors, including personality factors, perceived needs and previous experience and habits.

The all-pervasive perceived benefit (of an almost religious nature) that some people report is probably also impossible to predict. On some people GTD apparently has that effect, on others not. It is hard to see what particular factors might determine this.

 

[Oogiem]

Then you should be pleased to note that only you yourself made that strange connection. I never noticed anyone else here referring to "non-thinking" people or people that do not have open loops outside work.

No I interpreted it that way too, as if physical or repetitive work means you are not a thinking person., Personally I found it insulting and had to rein in my initial thoughts and what I really wanted to say.

 

[Folke]

Well, maybe I would have reacted, too, if it had not been for the fact that I was so much more disappointed to hear about "knowledge workers" - again. It is certainly not the first time I hear this "trendy" term being used on various app and GTD forums as an attempt to describe a target group (for the app or the methodology), and I strongly feel it is a very poor definition of a target group. It leads nowhere, as far as I can see.

 

[bcmyers2112]

The problem with measuring an ROI for GTD based on whether or not one is a "knowledge worker" it assumes some things I don't think are true. The first is that GTD's value correlates with the number and complexity of projects and tasks a person needs to manage that aren't on "cruise control." I don't agree with that. I think GTD is about having a clear head, and a clear head is a clear head no matter how complex your life is (or isn't). Frankly if you're trying to manage more than two or three things in your head at once, you're on overload. How many people only have two or three commitments in their life? I would wager few, if any.

I also disagree with the idea that you can judge how much complexity a person is managing based on his or her job. You can't. I was once a supermarket cashier and also an assembly line worker; both jobs involved a lot of repetitive tasks and a lot of my work was on "cruise control." Today I am a technology salesperson and I think that qualifies as a "knowledge worker" by most people's definition of the term. But -- I don't have children. If I were still a cashier or assembly line worker but also had children to care for, I suspect my life would be at least as complex as it is now if not moreso.

I also think the idea somewhat assumes that GTD is primarily about your job. It's not. It's about managing all of your commitments, both personal and professional. Work is work whether you're being paid to do it or not.

 

[bcmyers2112]

The all-pervasive perceived benefit (of an almost religious nature) that some people report is probably also impossible to predict.

What you call "almost religious," I would call subjective. My assertion that I have a clearer head practicing GTD isn't based on faith, it's based on my experience. It's just that the result isn't easily defined or quantified. That doesn't make it "almost religious."