Is there a good, universal way to identify next actions for complex tasks?

[Folke]

@Oogiem and @Gardener

I perfectly respect all that. We seem to be focusing now primarily on the type of "incremental" tasks ("grinding", "chip-away-at" tasks) where each step is not really much different from the previous step or the next step, and where we fully understand the task.

You want the high of checking something off? Fine. Deep down I actually share that wish, but I found that it was too much trouble for my taste to keep managing it (fiddling with repeating tasks and other solutions). So I settled for just starring and "un-starring" the same task over and over. I do not check it off until it is finished.

You want to be motivated or triggered? Absolutely. Me, too. I totally agree that it is important that the task is worded in such a way that I can understand it without hesitation or reluctance.

You think that "for X minutes" helps you clarify your intentions and reduce your reluctance? Fine. For me it does not have any such effect; it just makes it sound arbitrary, "bureaucratic" and repulsive to me, but we are all different. I do as much as want each time; it varies a lot, and I am fine with that; and that's probably why a set duration sounds repulsive to me.

You want to track your progress? Perfectly understandable. I also like to know were I am standing. I think in my case I know intuitively roughly how much has been done and how much remains. Counting the number of checked-off previous instances of the task would not really improve the accuracy of my estimate.

So I guess it comes down to personal taste more than anything else, as usual.

But the above applies to "grinding" tasks only. If we are talking about more typical "complex tasks" (as it was phrased in the thread) I think it becomes quite different. First of all, we are then usually talking about different tasks (not the "same" task being repeated) and these typically need to be identified and listed separately. Second, it can happen both initially and during the course of the project that we do not really know how to proceed (we may have no more next actions defined). And maybe it is too difficult to figure this out during the regular processing or review. On those occasions, defining a small brainstorming task can be a very useful trick. For me, these brainstorming tasks typically require a suitable frame of mind, and I have defined a special context for that (@Reflection). I still refrain from guessing a duration for it, as I really cannot know how long it will take, and it usually doesn't matter if it takes 15 minutes or an hour, or if I need to take a break and continue another day. It needs to be done. Period.

 

[andrew732]

Setting aside the issue of inserting time or other types of limits into next actions, I guess my problem may be that I have so many projects in the "planning" or "brainstorming" phases for which I demand specificity in phrasing a next action, whereas it's clarity that's actually more important. I suppose it is fairly clear what I will be doing with "review project X notes and then brainstorm" or "read book Y for 20 minutes" even though they are very non-specific and could in fact be repeated many times over the course of the respective project.

 

[cwoodgold]

Oogie, I acknowledge that "wind bobbins for X minutes" works for you. It could also work for me, but what tends to feel more satisfying for me, if possible, is a quantification of what gets done rather than the amount of time: wind one bobbin, or wind a certain length of yarn onto the bobbin, or wind until the bobbin reaches a certain weight. Glancing at the clock is easier than weighing something. I actually use a "for X minutes" sometimes because it can be hard to define some other good, measurable step; but I find it can reduce motivation. It's not just that I'll look at that action on a list and not want to do it. It's also that while doing something "for X minutes" and glancing at the clock, I tend to have the feeling more like "I wish the time would go by faster so I could stop doing this", which sets up negative thought patterns and feelings associated with the task, and may leave me feeling less motivated the next time I do it.

I'll sometimes do "work on project A for X minutes" to get me started on a project. The increase of motivation that I get from having already started and therefore feeling like continuing is larger than the lessening of motivation from having used the "for X minutes" method. Once I'm started, I'll try to switch to some other system.

If I could instead select an appropriate action in the project, I'd prefer that; but it can be hard to predict the length of time something will take. I don't mind something that I'm pretty confident will take between 10 and 45 minutes; but if it might end up only taking 1 minute, there's a feeling of anticlimax, and if it ends up taking 3 days because of unforeseen complications, that isn't very satisfying either.

I also have something that I do "for 60 to 90 minutes or finish in less". That works: if it only takes 10 minutes, I feel great. If it takes more than 60 minutes, I can stop when I feel like it as long as I stop before the 90 minutes. I don't let myself go over 90 minutes because then it would take too much time away from other tasks. Having a maximum time as well as a minimum time can increase motivation by framing it as something I'd like to do if I were allowed the time.

With the bobbins: Possibly I'd pull about 5 strands at random from the ball of yarn and tie red thread around them to mark them, then have the task "wind until I come to a red thread". Maybe that wouldn't work well: you can't easily look ahead and see when a red thread is about to come, and one might come when you're enjoying winding and in the middle of a thought. Or I might say "wind bobbins for 15 to 30 minutes" (or "18 to 23 minutes") and check it off as one unit. That would work better for me. I think, Oogie, you don't need that because you don't seem to have trouble with motivation and you probably don't like the random/variable/uncontrolled element.

 

[Folke]

"Get the File Out"

Are you all familiar with Mark Forster? He's the UK "equivalent" of David Allen. His main system is called DIT - Do It Tomorrow. He seems very interested in finding clever ways to overcome reluctance and he has devised numerous alternative ways and systems for selecting which next actions to choose from his "next actions list" (he uses a different term.)

One of his simple and insightful pieces of advice, whether you take it literally or figuratively, when it comes to interpreting or defining a next action whenever you are in doubt, is to just "get the file out". In other words, just dive right into it for a few minutes and see what happens - you can often see much better what the real next actions will be once you are in the water.

 

[Oogiem]

Another issue with time limits

Another issue with time limits is that it also forces me to stop at a specific time.

I can't tell you how many times I have started a simple task, knowing I will have many hours of that task to do and get so involved in working on it it that suddenly it's time to go feed the sheep and I realize I've done nothing else all day. I literally get so engrossed I lose all sense of time. Sometimes I even forget to eat or drink, and that often results in me being dehydrated and causes problems the next day.

So for me time limits like work on X for X minutes can be a way to force me to break up a task so I make slow progress on a bunch of things not just one item at a time.

 

[cfoley]

That's a shame. I love becoming so engrossed in a task that I lose track of time. In your position I would be setting an alarm for essential tasks like feeding the sheep. Side effects from forgetting to eat and drink sound less fun, though.

 

[cwoodgold]

"Get the File Out"

Are you all familiar with Mark Forster? .

I heard of him through this forum. I mention him on my web page "Tumbled Procrastination":
http://woodgold.pbworks.com/w/page/65767775/Tumbled Procrastination

I think the main focus of Mark Forster's techniques is keeping up motivation.

 

[Candid]

Can I step slightly outside the GTD framework, because I do have experience with reading on large projects, books or otherwise. I've even organized others to do just that, usually a year long reading project with more pages than you have to tackle.

I think in GTD such a project should be a daily repeating appointment. At first this may mean an actual calendar appointment, over time you won't need that appointment to be in your calendar to keep it. I always encourage my readers to select a time to read that makes sense for them. For some, that means the same time everyday, for others the time varies. Believe it or not there are actually theories on which time of day is the best time to read. Most say the morning, first thing. I confess, I am an after dinner reader.

Next, make the amount you read doable. Since you mention a 1000 page book, let me suggest either 5 pages or 10 pages per day. Your appointment is for however long it takes you to do that. If you want to read more you can, but generally, especially at first, you need to do whatever minimum you set. I always tell people that the way you eat an elephant is one bite at a time, consider reading a 1000 page book to be the same thing.

And you are looking to create this a habit so you really want to try to read almost everyday of the week. You'll find it will get easier to stay on track the longer you continue. I also find that it helps to warm up by reading something easier just before I begin, say for 5 minutes. I save internet articles in Pocket for this.

 

[jeffpheath]

I would add this: if it is time-based, it is best as an entry on your calendar. I frequently self-schedule things for myself (such as a weekly review, or reading, or workouts, or such) in order to keep an appointment with myself.

On a broader level, I would quote Julie Ireland from another post (I keep the quote pinned to my bulletin board): "If we aren't experiencing a sense of relief or clarity after answering "yes" or "no" about whether the item is actionable, then it could be an indicator that something deeper needs to be resolved." Do you really want to read the book, for example?

 

[TesTeq]

Do you really want to read the book, for example?

There are some actions that we don't like to do but must be done. The risk of not doing is to high. For example ;-) :
- regular dentist check;
- book reading;
- watching TV;
- sex.

 

[mcogilvie]

There are some actions that we don't like to do but must be done. The risk of not doing is to high. For example ;-) :
- regular dentist check;
- book reading;
- watching TV;
- sex.

Thanks to modern technology I can watch TV while having my teeth checked. No progress to report on reading a book while having sex, though. But remember, GTD teaches us that the ability to rapidly change focus is a key GTD skill.

However, I am struck that this thread started with "Is there a good, universal way to identify next actions for complex tasks?" and the example given is reading a 1000 page book. Is this some kind of GTD parody? Really. Just read the book, for crying out loud. Or get the Cliff Notes. Come back when you want to plan a wedding or negotiate peace in the middle east. Something worthwhile. We like a challenge.

 

[TesTeq]

Thanks to modern technology I can watch TV while having my teeth checked.

Do you use your TV set's built-in camera & VDA for Smart TV (Virtual Dentist App for Smart TV)? ;-)

 

[mcogilvie]

Do you use your TV set's built-in camera & VDA for Smart TV (Virtual Dentist App for Smart TV)? ;-)

Actually, it's ODP (original dentist provided) equipment. TV looks down from above chair above the carnage.

 

[Tom_Hagen]

I think the author's question is very interesting. In some answers there is an opinion: why introduce books to GTD? Well, the difference is whether I want to direct my reading or not? If I like reading and I'm not really interested in a specific book - then ok - I can act spontaneously (although I'm not a supporter of this approach). However, if I select books (e.g. I am guided by rankings or I pay attention to recommended books), then such suggestions should be sent to GTD. Similarly, answers suggesting that reading a book is not a project is not the happiest in my opinion. Let's pay attention to the criteria for selecting the next action: we have, among others: time. If I have a book of nearly 1,000 pages, how should I mark this action? (10-12 hours)? Ok, isn't it better to divide it into, for example, chapters that will take 30 minutes to read? Then, if I have 30 minutes free, this task will "pop up" among my potential options. Not to mention the psychological aspects: 30-minute tasks are approached differently from 12-hour ones (yes, I know that books are a pleasure). An alternative is to mark the book with a time: any. But this will not always work, because often, especially in specialized books, it is better to read the entire topic at once than to treat it fragmentarily.

I believe that in the final parts of his book, Allen described an important issue: acting on autopilot, not to say mindlessly. Of course, it's about thoughtlessness, which means that I have defined the work that needs to be done in advance (work is every activity for me - no matter whether it's pleasant or unpleasant) and when I'm in the "doing" phase, I don't have to think about it all anymore. And this includes, among others - in my opinion - this is the strength of GTD. That is why granulation and very precise description of the next action are so important. Allen - rightly, in my opinion - emphasizes that it is important not to confuse these two phases: defining work and its "execution".

 

[gtdstudente]

I've been a GTD acolyte for a few years now and am very happy with it. There is one major nagging problem I have though, and it seems to be rarely if ever mentioned in GTD discussions.

In my opinion, the main source of GTD's power is the idea of having all your projects and life goals, no matter how complex, distilled at all times into one or more bite-sized next actions. However, I often find it difficult to identify bite-sized next actions for projects. In some cases, it takes more work to identify next actions than to actually perform the actions.

A good example is a book reading project i.e., I want to read book X, which has 1000 pages. It's obviously a major project, but what next action can I take to move forward toward the overall goal? I typically have next actions like "read book X for 15 minutes" but that is very unsatisfying and seems to defeat the main purpose of GTD, especially when most of my complex projects end up with next actions like "work on project Y for 20 minutes."

What do others think about this issue? Can anyone give examples of a better next action for something like the book reading project? Thanks for your help.

@andrew732,

This is a great GTD revisit

Baring any ad Hoc interruptions, a "GTD Next Action" is any Start-to-Finish action with how long being an irrelevant factor ?

 

[Jared Caron]

I've been a GTD acolyte for a few years now and am very happy with it. There is one major nagging problem I have though, and it seems to be rarely if ever mentioned in GTD discussions.

In my opinion, the main source of GTD's power is the idea of having all your projects and life goals, no matter how complex, distilled at all times into one or more bite-sized next actions. However, I often find it difficult to identify bite-sized next actions for projects. In some cases, it takes more work to identify next actions than to actually perform the actions.

A good example is a book reading project i.e., I want to read book X, which has 1000 pages. It's obviously a major project, but what next action can I take to move forward toward the overall goal? I typically have next actions like "read book X for 15 minutes" but that is very unsatisfying and seems to defeat the main purpose of GTD, especially when most of my complex projects end up with next actions like "work on project Y for 20 minutes."

What do others think about this issue? Can anyone give examples of a better next action for something like the book reading project? Thanks for your help.

I would encourage you to remember that your calendar is also a next action list.

So some of this could be solved by scheduling time on your calendar to work on the project.

I find a lot of complex work projects in their early stages for this bill also, where I can block time to work on the project and just work off “project support”.

Similar for leisure projects where the next active are harder to define, and the limiting factor is time. I have project support material for my hobbies, but it looks different- my guitar and lead sheets are the reminders to play music; my miniatures and paints are the reminders to paint models; i just need the time to do it. So the calendar is where those live.

I’ve found over the years that being less specific works week for me… so for instance blocking time for ”leisure” and then just picking the thing based on how i I feel works well for those items. At work I tend to block time for an area of focus and hone in on those projects.

 

[fooddude]

In my opinion, the main source of GTD's power is the idea of having all your projects and life goals, no matter how complex, distilled at all times into one or more bite-sized next actions. However, I often find it difficult to identify bite-sized next actions for projects. In some cases, it takes more work to identify next actions than to actually perform the actions.

It's not one or more it is one. The very next action. Within context. If you can't do that it is perhaps a someday maybe item?

 

[Mrs-Polifax]

This post is from 2014, so some time ago, yet still as timely as ever for me. Thanks so much to everyone who posted such useful and varied information, especially the examples. Ever since I read David Allen's recommendation to formulate Next Actions as a clear, specific, do-able physical action in the form (something like) "Do X to Y with Z," I've realized that this specificity and clarity is very important. I've gradually realized that the reason for this is to have already decided precisely what that Next Action is at the time I create it, so I do not get hung up trying to make those decisions while in process of doing my defined work. However, I'm still learning how to do this in a way that works for me in specific instances, so this is a gold mine of material. Thanks, again!

 

[DKPhoto]

The next action for any book reading project is “continue reading from page x”. No time limits, no commitments other than start reading.

You stop whenever.

You definitely don’t stop after 20 minutes right in the middle of a really interesting bit.

When you stop you note the page and the next action is “continue reading from page y”.

That’s it.

 

[Y_Lherieau]

I've been a GTD acolyte for a few years now and am very happy with it. There is one major nagging problem I have though, and it seems to be rarely if ever mentioned in GTD discussions.

In my opinion, the main source of GTD's power is the idea of having all your projects and life goals, no matter how complex, distilled at all times into one or more bite-sized next actions. However, I often find it difficult to identify bite-sized next actions for projects. In some cases, it takes more work to identify next actions than to actually perform the actions.

A good example is a book reading project i.e., I want to read book X, which has 1000 pages. It's obviously a major project, but what next action can I take to move forward toward the overall goal? I typically have next actions like "read book X for 15 minutes" but that is very unsatisfying and seems to defeat the main purpose of GTD, especially when most of my complex projects end up with next actions like "work on project Y for 20 minutes."

What do others think about this issue? Can anyone give examples of a better next action for something like the book reading project? Thanks for your help.

I appreciate your insights into the GTD methodology and your concern about the difficulty in identifying bite-sized next actions for complex projects. This is a challenge I've encountered as well. However, my background in electronics has allowed me to approach projects in a somewhat unique manner that I find helpful.

When faced with a complex project, I tend to visualize it as if it were an electronic board diagram. This means I look at the project in terms of logical units with inputs and outputs. If a project appears too complex, I break it down into these units, considering what each part does from input to output. This approach helps me identify a starting point by reverse engineering the process back to the first 'unit block,' which becomes my next actionable step.

For instance, in the context of a book reading project where the goal is to read a 1000-page book, I would break this down into chapters or sections, treating each as its own module or block. Instead of setting a next action like 'read book X for 15 minutes,' I define it more tangibly as 'read chapter 1 of book X.' This not only provides a clear and immediate next step but also a sense of accomplishment upon completing each section, making the overall goal less overwhelming.

Applying this logic-based breakdown to the GTD framework, especially for projects that seem abstract or daunting, could involve mapping out the project like a circuit. Identifying the inputs (what you need to start), the process (the steps in between), and the outputs (the final goal) can clarify the next steps. Even if it's something as simple as 'draft a list of required resources for project Y' or 'identify the first logical unit/block for project Z,' this method offers a structured path forward.

This technique has not only helped me navigate the complexities inherent in some projects but also enhanced my use of the GTD method by ensuring my next actions are both meaningful and manageable