Is using automation harmful?

[cfoley]

Something that is beginning to worry me is that my computerised list manager has too much automation, and that having things automated keeps me less engaged with my lists. At the moment I'm using the fields "Repeat" and "Start Date" to automate things and I don't know if that's wise.

Some examples of things that repeat are:

Take out the bins. (weekly)
Check the oil, chain, forks, etc on the motorbike (weekly)
Mow the lawn. (weekly)
keep in touch with various friends (ranging from fortnightly to annually)

But, really I won't be mowing the lawn or riding the bike over the winter, yet there has been more than one year that I have clicked "Done" on these tasks for weeks in a row, only for them to pop up again uselessly each week. You can imagine that in the Spring I have caught myself just clicking "done" without thinking.

It is genuinely useful to be reminded to take out the bins every week but I wonder if the convenience is worth the problem described above. If I treated my computerised list like paper, I could re-add the tickler every week or just make 52 at the start of the year and another one to remind me to make up the ticklers for the following year.

In a similar fashion, I wonder if using "Start Date" to implement ticklers is wise. The paper tickler David Allen describes requires you to look ahead every now and then. Each month (at least), you have to open the monthly folder and put some items into the daily folders. Even if you don't process the items formally, you're still looking at them and I'm sure it's not uncommon for GTDers to choose to process them there and then (or at least throw them in the inbox).

By contrast, automating the tickler via start date means I don't ever see the items until the date I chose for them. In the past I've had no tickler list per say but a saved search identifies all the tasks that started "today". You can imagine that if I missed a day of checking it, I would miss all the tickled tasks from that day. That particular problem is fixed but the system still isn't bullet proof.

I could still have tickler file on the computer but model it on the paper folder version. It sounds less convenient to have 43 lists but if it keeps me more engaged with my system then it might be the better solution.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who has wrestled with these ideas. I would very much welcome thoughts and comments. In particular what did you try and how did it work for you?

 

[Oogiem]

I don't think the automation per se is bad but the implementation might need fine tuning.

For example, Instead of a task mow lawn that repeats weekly. Why not create a project for Summer Lawn Work, with each task related to that on a recurring basis, or even a single list that is set to repeat but have the start date be when you typically have to start those tasks? Then on the last weekly review of the season, whenever that is, you put that project back in Someday/Maybe until it's time to do it again? Or put it in the tickler section. Maybe use the start date for that?

Save the bike tasks and put them in a tickler to re-visit about 2-3 weeks before when you plan to start riding the bike. That's what someday/maybe is for IMO. Put off into the future stuff you can't handle or don't need to see now.

I have many projects like that but let me give you some examples:

We use water heaters in the sheep water tanks in winter to keep them from freezing. I have 2 separate projects Take water heaters out for summer and Get water heaters installed for winter. The projects have appropriate start dates so I don't see the put the heaters in tasks until it's fall. I don't see the remove heaters tasks until Spring.

For a project that is a lot closer to yours, with repeating tasks, I have one called Deworm the sheep. It starts up in early spring with a start date of 1 March and then once it's going all the tasks in it (deworm ewes, deworm rams, deworm ewe lambs, deworm ram lambs) all have various repeat times based on when I need to check them. At weekly review I decide whether it is still within the time we need to do this. In winter, after we've had a hard freeze and the sheep are in on hay there is one last deworming and then the entire project gets a reset start date for next year. So I don't get the weekly tasks to check off during the winter when we don't do this but I do in summer when it's important.

 

[Folke]

I agree with Oogie. It is not automation as such that is wrong, but perhaps the way you have done it.

- having summer activities auto-repeating throughout the winter!? (These should be disabled in the winter. You could put in another tickler to reactivate it next spring)
- having maintenance activities auto-repeat on pre-determined dates!? (These are best repeated at predetermined intervals after completion. It is quite common that these types of activities only get done after some considerable delay, which means you quickly get out of phase.)

I agree with you that it is good to sometimes review the Tickler file. But what is stopping you? In all the apps I have used and can still remember this has been perfectly possible. I totally agree that I would not want things to be "hidden" and then just spring on me one day. I like to be able to review all my stuff in an orderly fashion.

I have noticed that timers of all kinds seem to tempt a lot of people to overuse them, and seems to make them neglect implementing order kinds of order. In that sense I would agree with your initial question if I am allowed to rephrase it a bit: "Is automation through soft date programming harmful?". And I'd say the answer is Yes. The use of dates is best reserved for the "hard landscape" - i.e. true calendar actions and true "not-possible-to-consider-before" stuff (i.e. "Ticklers").

 

[TesTeq]

Something that is beginning to worry me is that my computerised list manager has too much automation (...)

But, really I won't be mowing the lawn or riding the bike over the winter, yet there has been more than one year that I have clicked "Done" on these tasks for weeks in a row, only for them to pop up again uselessly each week. You can imagine that in the Spring I have caught myself just clicking "done" without thinking.

Maybe it's not "too much automation" but "not enough automation"? Imagine a list manager that knows that it's winter and clicks "Done" by itself! Or even better - checks the weather forecast and decides for you what you should be doing during next week...

 

[cfoley]

Thanks everyone for the thoughtful and helpful replies.

Why not create a project for Summer Lawn Work, with each task related to that on a recurring basis, or even a single list that is set to repeat but have the start date be when you typically have to start those tasks?

I didn't think of making a project for the lawn. The project name you suggested clearly defines the scope too. I like this a lot and I might be able to apply the same principle to other areas. Thanks also for the examples. They help clarify and explain.

- having summer activities auto-repeating throughout the winter!? (These should be disabled in the winter. You could put in another tickler to reactivate it next spring)

This is great advice and it is what I have attempted to do. However the reality is that I have not achieved it. I was wondering if automation was a barrier to thinking properly about the items on my lists. Maybe just noticing the problem is enough to force me to engage properly.

- having maintenance activities auto-repeat on pre-determined dates!? (These are best repeated at predetermined intervals after completion. It is quite common that these types of activities only get done after some considerable delay, which means you quickly get out of phase.)

This is how most of them are implemented. Maintenance checks and lawn cutting reappear a week after they are done. Taking bins out appears on the correct day of the week regardless. Sorry for not being clear.

I agree with you that it is good to sometimes review the Tickler file. But what is stopping you? In all the apps I have used and can still remember this has been perfectly possible. I totally agree that I would not want things to be "hidden" and then just spring on me one day. I like to be able to review all my stuff in an orderly fashion.

This might be my major failing. If I am using start dates to hide things then I must look at them during my weekly review. I'll start doing this!

I have noticed that timers of all kinds seem to tempt a lot of people to overuse them, and seems to make them neglect implementing order kinds of order. In that sense I would agree with your initial question if I am allowed to rephrase it a bit: "Is automation through soft date programming harmful?". And I'd say the answer is Yes. The use of dates is best reserved for the "hard landscape" - i.e. true calendar actions and true "not-possible-to-consider-before" stuff (i.e. "Ticklers").

That's interesting and I think it fits my observations. Taking the bins out would be hard landscape. My weekly tickler works well and is useful. Cutting the lawn is definitely soft date. If I miss the occasional week it's no big problem. Also, having it appear 7 days after the latest completion is arbitrary and potentially problematic. If I'm going on holiday, I might want to do the next one early so it's not all overgrown when I come back, for example.

Maybe it's not "too much automation" but "not enough automation"? Imagine a list manager that knows that it's winter and clicks "Done" by itself! Or even better - checks the weather forecast and decides for you what you should be doing during next week...

I have a colleague who thinks that computerised personal agents are the future. They'll remind you of all the little tasks like this, but over time they'll also get to know your personal habits and preferences. Eventually, your agent will know what your available time is and how to make best use of it in a way that it predicts will give the most satisfaction and enjoyment, etc. We both agree this would be a horrible invention.

 

[Oogiem]

This might be my major failing. If I am using start dates to hide things then I must look at them during my weekly review. I'll start doing this!

I'm using Omnifocus and things with start dates are in the Pending section. I have separated them out separately on my Weekly Review project so I check projects in order.First I check stalled, any that don't have a next action defined. Then I check Pending to make sure that what is coming up still makes sense. Then I check Active, to verify I am moving the current projects forward. Next up is the on-hold, which is my Someday/Maybe and lastly to catch any whose status I changed I check remaining. That's because I may see a project in Active and say oh not now and put it on hold. Then I may see a project in on- Hold and say oops I need to work on this now. I don't take the time at that point to finish the review of those projects as I am in one mode or the other and they will drop off my screen once I change them out of whatever group I am working on. I never click on the reviewed button in OF until I have actually finished the detailed review of that project. So reviewing remaining catches those whose major status has changed.

That is the biggest reason I have not upgraded to OF 2 on the Mac and why I hate trying to review on the iPad. That way of working got lost in the new stuff and I don't think it's back yet.

 

[ArcCaster]

My calendar model changed recently. It always contained hard dates (appointments). Now it also contains soft dates (ticklers). I use separate colors for appointments and ticklers. So far, I am pleased

 

[Folke]

Not to quibble, but I think it is important to distinguish between "hard ticklers" (real GTD ticklers; e.g. a tickler to prepare a monthly report and set this for the 1st of next month, which is the earliest possible date to sum up the past month) and those other types of "things" that could be called "soft ticklers", "deprioritized actions" etc (often quite non-GTD), that many people use for keeping their next lists short and sweet, but which would be perfectly available for being dealt with even now, and which I prefer to regard openly as "low priority next actions" (still on my next actions list).

Which exact tool we use for ticklers is not an issue, I believe. I don't think there is anything wrong with using the calendar tool even for "hard ticklers" (in a different color) if we have no better tool for it, but I personally avoid using "soft ticklers" in any form, using any tool, because I find it hides information in a way that I am not comfortable with. I want to see these perfectly possible actions when I look at my next actions (or any given context or other subset of my next actions).

 

[TesTeq]

I have a colleague who thinks that computerised personal agents are the future. They'll remind you of all the little tasks like this, but over time they'll also get to know your personal habits and preferences. Eventually, your agent will know what your available time is and how to make best use of it in a way that it predicts will give the most satisfaction and enjoyment, etc. We both agree this would be a horrible invention.

Isn't it Google's goal?

The problem is:

Is Google's intention to create software to get to know our personal habits and preferences or to create and shape them?...

 

[TesTeq]

I have a colleague who thinks that computerised personal agents are the future. They'll remind you of all the little tasks like this, but over time they'll also get to know your personal habits and preferences. Eventually, your agent will know what your available time is and how to make best use of it in a way that it predicts will give the most satisfaction and enjoyment, etc. We both agree this would be a horrible invention.

Isn't it Google's goal?

The problem is:

Is Google's intention to create software to get to know our personal habits and preferences or to create and shape them?...

 

[jsrds]

What is Prism Cell?

 

[Folke]

Now the forum is broken again. The last post visible in the overview is ArcCaster's last post above. And no blue icons have ever shown that there are additional posts after that.

 

[Folke]

Testing

 

[TesTeq]

Testing is good. But tasting is better! ;-)

 

[cfoley]

Thanks everyone for the replies. It sounds like the answer to my main question is a resounding "No". Automation itself is not harmful but maybe I was being a little lazy and careless in how I used it.