TesTeq said:
Isn't it great that despite the fundamental differences between your approach to implementation, GTD works for you both?
Everybody must find her or his own way to GTD!
I don't know how fundamental the differences might be. I often find myself nodding in agreement, doing many of the same things she recommends.
However, I have a question about everyone's own way to GTD. How significantly can one depart from David Allen's recommendations in the book and still say one is "GTD"? Especially if David Allen trademarks "GTD"?
For example. Brent started this thread about how he does his weekly review. As I understand things, he departs from 2 rather strong recommendations in the book. First, he separates work projects from home projects. DA tells us not to separate these. Second, he does not review home projects every week, so in that sense it's not a "weekly" review. DA recommends setting aside a chunk of time every week. Now Brent's strategies seem perfectly reasonable and work for him, but is he still "GTD"?
Another example. A number of people report that they often make a "Today" list. DA specifically discourages daily prioritized lists in his book. In fact, daily lists are strongly associated with other productivity systems like Franklin-Covey. So if one does this, is she still "GTD"?
I personally feel I am successful in getting things done if 1) I feel good about accomplishing goals that are important to me, and 2) I'm not forgetting any commitments. My criteria are similar to those stated on the
What Is GTD? page of this website, which says "
The only 'right' way to do GTD is getting meaningful things done with truly the least amount of invested attention and energy."
I agree with this statement, but I'm not sure it answers the question "What is GTD?" because other productivity approaches have the
same goals. If someone is achieving these same goals using the Franklin-Covey system exactly as directed, is he GTD? He may well be accomplishing meaningful goals, and with less attention and energy than he would need to implement GTD recommendations. With "GTD" to be trademarked and David Allen's recommendations being protected as intellectual property and sold, I see confusion between the "core principles of productivity" and "the best practices of
how to work (and live)." In one sentence, we are told that there is "tremendous freedom in the 'how'" -- yet 2 sentences later, we are told that there are "best practices of how to work (and live)." It is those best practices which most distinguish DA's GTD; yet "best practices" are tightly linked to specific situations and are best abandoned in other situations. They may work in many cases, but not others.
In my opinion (which I do not hold strongly), when I am no longer doing a weekly review because I find another advantageous way to keep up-to-date with my commitments, I am no longer doing "GTD." I have not "found my own way to GTD(TM)"; I have abandoned a GTD "best practice" in favor of my own way to get things done. In my opinion, I am getting things done, but I'm not GTD in the trademark sense of how GTD is best known.
But my track record isn't very good when comes to staying in an optimized state! Eventually I always fall off the wagon. So I think having that weekly stake in the ground is necessary for me. Perhaps I'll be so consistantly up to date over the next year that the WR becomes entirely pointless. I have a sneaking suspicion, however, that I'm better off keeping it.
). I prefer paper both because I believe it is more effective for me, and because I find putting pen to paper a pleasure. And both of those factors are important to me! I don't typically re-write my lists every week -- just when I feel I need to. While the re-writing may in itself be "inefficient," it is also a beautiful tool for focusing the attention (and intention), and thereby contains (for me) value beyond that of the task itself.