Interesting experiment - Number of active projects

[Tom_Hagen]

I sent an AI to this forum to ask what users were saying about the number of active projects. And things got interesting because:

What GTD users say about the number of projects
"Standard" according to GTD (theory + forum)
Often-cited number: 10–100 active projects
Some users provide specific numbers:
~16–20 projects → considered "few"
~50–60 projects → quite typical
up to 200+ projects for power users
Conclusion: classic GTD does NOT limit the number of projects—rather, it encourages a complete list of everything.

But... an important tension arises
Two camps are clearly visible on the forum:
The "lots of projects" camp
"I can't imagine having only 16 projects"
"I have 200+ and that's normal in my job"
The "too many = chaos" camp
Problems with browsing lists
Overload during the weekly review
The feeling of "reading lists instead of taking action"

A key problem that recurs on the forum
In short:
GTD is good at collating everything, but it doesn't limit parallel work
Result:
You have 50-100 projects
But you're actually working on... a few
The rest is "mental noise"
Brutally objective
The GTD forum shows that people naturally overload the system
Summary
Typical GTD user: dozens of active projects
Common problem: overload and distraction

What do you think? Which "camp" are you in? Are you distracted?

 

[bobusa]

I'm in the max. of 20 projects camp that are active. At least I try to keep it around 20 to be able to stay clear.

There are 3 types of projects in my view:

1. Active project that (must) have my attention and need to be completed as soon as possible.
2. Inactive projects that have my attention but cannot be acted upon. (Later option in Nirvana HQ)
3. Someday projects that do not have my attention and I do not want to act upon at this moment.

I do have e about 25 active projects, 19 inactive and 24 someday. Keeping in mind that I'm retired

Saying no to a (given) commitment is the best thing someone can do to stay clear. Most GTD'ers forget that one can say NO (to your boss!!) at the clarifying step. Using your horizons and areas of focus will give you that answer.

 

[cfoley]

I prefer a smaller list.

It's easy to write a long list of projects. It's much more challenging to curate those ideas and focus them on the kind of change you want to see in the world. I think it is worth the effort though.

 

[bobusa]

I prefer a smaller list.

It's easy to write a long list of projects. It's much more challenging to curate those ideas and focus them on the kind of change you want to see in the world. I think it is worth the effort though.

I like that perspective. What are you really trying to accomplish with that project in a bigger sense? There will be some projects that need that treatment and it could shorten the list indeed.
However, there are projects that are very simple like replace door handle that will only take a few actions. And when you're retired, like I am, there are many projects around the house that have become active. Although what you probably mean then, is to make a bigger (one) project like "Improve hardware house" which is actually a good idea.

 

[gtd solo-studente]

I sent an AI to this forum to ask what users were saying about the number of active projects. And things got interesting because:

What GTD users say about the number of projects
"Standard" according to GTD (theory + forum)
Often-cited number: 10–100 active projects
Some users provide specific numbers:
~16–20 projects → considered "few"
~50–60 projects → quite typical
up to 200+ projects for power users
Conclusion: classic GTD does NOT limit the number of projects—rather, it encourages a complete list of everything.

But... an important tension arises
Two camps are clearly visible on the forum:
The "lots of projects" camp
"I can't imagine having only 16 projects"
"I have 200+ and that's normal in my job"
The "too many = chaos" camp
Problems with browsing lists
Overload during the weekly review
The feeling of "reading lists instead of taking action"

A key problem that recurs on the forum
In short:
GTD is good at collating everything, but it doesn't limit parallel work
Result:
You have 50-100 projects
But you're actually working on... a few
The rest is "mental noise"
Brutally objective
The GTD forum shows that people naturally overload the system
Summary
Typical GTD user: dozens of active projects
Common problem: overload and distraction

What do you think? Which "camp" are you in? Are you distracted?

@Tom_Hagen

Thank you for your good post

"GTD is good at collating everything, but it doesn't limit parallel work
Result:
You have 50-100 projects
But you're actually working on... a few
The rest is "mental noise" . . . makes perfect GTD sense when any Project(s) needs a Next Action(s)
Brutally objective
The GTD forum shows that people naturally overload the system"

Again, thank you very much for your good GTD post

 

[cfoley]

I like that perspective. What are you really trying to accomplish with that project in a bigger sense? There will be some projects that need that treatment and it could shorten the list indeed.
However, there are projects that are very simple like replace door handle that will only take a few actions. And when you're retired, like I am, there are many projects around the house that have become active. Although what you probably mean then, is to make a bigger (one) project like "Improve hardware house" which is actually a good idea.

Yes exactly. I have just done a weekly review and something just like that happened. My partner and I are trying to declutter and organise the house, and we had a project for that. But we also recently got a new frying pan because the old one was banjacked, and we have another project for better shoe racks, and there is more than that besides.

I realised we are striving for a functional and organised house, so I made a project: "The house is functional and organised", and deleted all the smaller projects, adding them as a list of outcomes for this new umbrella project. I then went through my Someday/Maybe list and pasted anything related into the new project's notes. We'll have to sit down the two of us and talk it all over to see what our shared vision of wild success is here, and I think it will be more purposeful and focussed than if we treated it all as separate projects.

Looking forward to enjoying our new setup three months from now!

 

[gtd solo-studente]

@Tom_Hagen

On planet GTD . . . even if one has a 'million' Projects, a GTDer only needs to asks himself one 'final' clarifying Review question of one's Project list after each Project has an understood Outcome clarified necessary to be objectively Clear-&-Current for further Creativity ?

Draft:
Does each of the 'million' understood Projects need to simply have at least one Next Action appropriately Organized in its immediate Context lists ?

This might be deemed as an appropriate GTD way to focus one's attention to one's concerns for obligation(s) fulfillment ?

Perhaps to appropriately Engage in all 'million' understood Projects, literally at the same time, each Project must have a Next Action posted to one's appropriately focused Context list ?

For care or concern absence to occur, proximate Project(s) needs defining~deciding to keep it proximate for immediate Next Action(s) doing ?

One's immediate Projects list exist as a whole extrinsic platform to keep Projects objectified to make immediate Next Action(s) doing easier to creatively create and execute through immediate Contexts doing ?

Proximate Projects need to have immediate Next Action(s) doing in order for each Project to remain proximate through each proximate Project having appropriate immediate Next Action(s) doing in appropriate Contexts to prevent proximate Project defining~deciding from becoming an unproductive intrinsic distractions?

In other words, in order for all of one's proximate Projects defining~deciding to remain productively proximate, one's proximate Project defining~deciding needs to be without any Next Action doing deficiencies which can cause the Project defining~deciding find itself in an unnatural state of immediateness since all Projects' natural 'state' are for proximate defining~deciding, especially if one assents to the GTD concept that one is unable to do Projects and only able to do a Next Action relative to a Project(s) ?

As a GTD digression; perhaps might find it worthy to GTD see how one Next Action can potentially serve multiple Projects, Area's-of-Focuses, Purposes, etc. for awareness and effortless physical Productivity compounding ?

For proximate Projects defining~deciding to remain corralled in their proximate natural state, proximate Projects defining~deciding needs to 'embody' an immediate Next Action doing otherwise the proximate Project(s) defining~deciding itself can become confused with immediate Next Action doing when the possibility of doing is likely an unproductive figment of one's intrinsic imagination~memory, at least in the moment?


Summary:
For proximate Projects defining~deciding to be in their trusting natural proximate state, proximate Projects defining~deciding needs to do its job in providing a source for immediate Next Action(s) doing otherwise proximate Projects defining~deciding becomes unnaturally confused immediate Next Action(s) doing ?

The natural state of attention-free trustworthy proximate Projects defining~deciding is so when all proximate Projects defining~deciding are in their natural proximate state otherwise they can become intrinsically confusing, and possibly to some degree, intrinsically self-sabotaging in being unproductively immediate instead of proximate ?

GTD's Solution:
Make sure proximate Projects defining~deciding have appropriate immediate Next Action(s) doing to remain corralled in their natural proximate state and to best avoid intrinsic corporal and spiritual confusion(s) caused by extrinsic realities ?

In addition, as such, and in gratitude to your good post; the above might also seemingly be the reason why so many GTDer's 'insistently' prefer 'connect/tagging' all Projects to their Next Action(s) . . . perhaps in order to have real-time awareness when any Project might be Next Action deficient and the Project becomes a nagging unidentified sub-conscious Next Action until one's next 'Weekly' Review ?

As one sees their GTD fit best. . . .

 

[fooddude]

I have 70 Projects. I also have 40 someday/maybes. But the weekly review is key to the system and the grease in the wheels to move forward. I have 27 next actions in context.