Live webinar: Are Long Lists a Problem for You?

[davidcoforum]

A frequent lament when people get most or all of their commitments externalized to lists is how long the lists can become. Are your lists long? If so, is that a problem? We will discuss how lists can grow, how long they should be, and how to make sure there is no problem.

February 8, 2024, 8:00–9:00AM Pacific

You can find the registration link in the webinars panel on the right side of GTD Connect pages.

 

[Longstreet]

This was an interesting discussion! We spent a lot of time discussing a focus or today's list. In Nirvana, I have the Focus list. I use it to set intentions for the day - that is all. I disagree with Ana and a bit with John. Ana comes across more GTD lockstep as she quoted passages from David Allen's GTD book. While I agree with most of this, I think one must be flexible in their approach and pursue what works for them. John suggested we try to work first from our NA lists. But the point of the webinar was: are long lists a problem for you? I am not convinced we addressed this completely. Nevertheless, a good webinar and discussion!

 

[Longstreet]

But to add - I think the world of John and Ana and really do embrace GTD. I just have a few nuances...you know...being a professor.

 

[FocusGuy]

the point of the webinar was: are long lists a problem for you?

Yes they are and it is still a real one for me. In omnifocus I use flags as you use your focus list. It is a simple reminder of all I must do today. Then I go to my next action list which is sorted by context. The problems is that I have much stuff. I can have 20 things to do on my computer all relative to different projects and 10 or 15 on my office context. Now I try to put inside my project not all next action but only the most important next action and all the rest is a check list of the project steps. It makes list lighter. If I think to another next action (eg the project has now 2 next action) I only tag the first one the other is without any context. So all that shorter the list. I was getting totally nut with all that tasks and realized it was un useful for everything has changed since I did it.

 

[Lucas W.]

I use it to set intentions for the day - that is all.

I do quite similar but if the focus list is too long then it can easily become just another place to manage – and then in my opinion it is inefficient.

 

[Ariadne Marques]

I do quite similar but if the focus list is too long then it can easily become just another place to manage – and then in my opinion it is inefficient.

Yes, I like to use the Focus list as an intention for the day, to know where to start. But this list must be between 3 to 5 items MAX. More than that and I will get decision paralysis or get repelled by it!

 

[Ariadne Marques]

I was reflecting on this topic a little more. In my work I usually have multiple next actions in a project, and it's very hard for me to say: this is the ONE immediate next action, and I will park the rest in project support for example. Sometimes I will get out of a budget review meeting with dozens of next actions to do, that I will have to tackle for the next day or two. In those days I will have more than 10 next actions for a project, and so I have to use a Focus or My Day list to be able to not get overwhelmed.

 

[Longstreet]

This was an interesting discussion! We spent a lot of time discussing a focus or today's list. In Nirvana, I have the Focus list. I use it to set intentions for the day - that is all. I disagree with Ana and a bit with John. Ana comes across more GTD lockstep as she quoted passages from David Allen's GTD book. While I agree with most of this, I think one must be flexible in their approach and pursue what works for them. John suggested we try to work first from our NA lists. But the point of the webinar was: are long lists a problem for you? I am not convinced we addressed this completely. Nevertheless, a good webinar and discussion!

Just to comment on what I posted....after considerable thought...there is nothing wrong with "GTD lockstep". In fact, as I corresponded with John, I am going back and reading David Allen's GTD book again. I think I need a refresher.

 

[mksilk2]

I look forward to hearing the recording!

 

[FocusGuy]

I was reflecting on this topic a little more. In my work I usually have multiple next actions in a project, and it's very hard for me to say: this is the ONE immediate next action, and I will park the rest in project support for example. Sometimes I will get out of a budget review meeting with dozens of next actions to do, that I will have to tackle for the next day or two. In those days I will have more than 10 next actions for a project, and so I have to use a Focus or My Day list to be able to not get overwhelmed.

I was also reflecting about this. In my work there are also specific cases where I have " relatives tasks " I treat them as check list inside the main task. For example I will write Check budget's task and send it to the accountant " then inside Omnifocus note I write all the check list. The task will remain into my system until everything is done.

So to resume my Omnifocus system
- Top of the list : Very next action or Waiting for task if I am waiting something from someone and can't do anything.
- Then if absolutly necessary the following next action or check list action (see accountant)
- Then Steps of the project

I also write the goal of the project in the project note field.
I use the steps of the project for planning sometime. Example check budget task start Tuesday. It will appear into my forecast view. I also use a signifier ( often # ) To see that it is a project next action step.

All that little tricks helps me to narrow the list.
After what is most difficult is doing for me. I often procrastinate.

 

[Y_Lherieau]

In addressing the concern of long lists in the GTD methodology, it's crucial to consider the human predisposition towards accumulating 'in case of' items—a behavior rooted in our evolutionary history. Despite the vast changes in our living conditions since the era of early Homo sapiens, our brains have retained a tendency to prepare for uncertain futures by accumulating more than necessary. This behavior is evident not just in personal spaces but also in work environments, leading to the common issue of overwhelming lists in GTD practice.

To mitigate this, I advocate for a disciplined approach that integrates principles from Kanban and the 12 Week Year methodology with GTD. Kanban, with its emphasis on limiting work in progress to a defined number of tasks, offers a straightforward solution. By adopting a Kanban-like limitation—restricting ourselves to no more than one next action per project and a predetermined number of potential next actions—we can significantly reduce the bulk of our lists and maintain focus on what's immediately actionable.

Further enhancing this approach, the 12 Week Year methodology compels us to narrow our objectives to a maximum of three per 90-day cycle. This restriction forces us to prioritize rigorously and aligns with the GTD principle of breaking down projects into actionable steps. By setting a cap on the number of tactics (equivalent to GTD's next actions) to 14 in my 12WY tool, I've found that imposing such constraints not only makes the process more manageable but also cultivates a mindset where 'less is more.'

In conclusion, the key to managing long lists in GTD isn't just about externalizing commitments but also about applying strategic limitations on what we consider to be immediate and actionable. By integrating Kanban's work-in-progress limits and the focused objective setting of the 12 Week Year methodology, we can create a more sustainable and less overwhelming approach to productivity. This synthesis not only addresses the innate human tendency to overprepare but also enhances our ability to achieve meaningful progress in our personal and professional lives.

---

This answer provides a structured and thought-out perspective on combining different methodologies to tackle the issue of long lists in GTD, highlighting the importance of setting limits and prioritizing tasks to enhance productivity and reduce overwhelm.

 

[mcogilvie]

In conclusion, the key to managing long lists in GTD isn't just about externalizing commitments but also about applying strategic limitations on what we consider to be immediate and actionable. By integrating Kanban's work-in-progress limits and the focused objective setting of the 12 Week Year methodology, we can create a more sustainable and less overwhelming approach to productivity. This synthesis not only addresses the innate human tendency to overprepare but also enhances our ability to achieve meaningful progress in our personal and professional lives.

---

This answer provides a structured and thought-out perspective on combining different methodologies to tackle the issue of long lists in GTD, highlighting the importance of setting limits and prioritizing tasks to enhance productivity and reduce overwhelm.

I’m happy that works for you. I don’t disagree with you on long lists, but I have ended up favoring less structure and methodology. From personal experience, I know that I am often lazy and undisciplined, but want to achieve great results given my proclivities. I have, very slowly, simplified my GTD practice in ways that move my focus from day-to-day tactics toward higher levels of focus and the promise of a mind like water.

 

[davidcoforum]

The recording of this webinar is available.

Video

Audio

 

[John Forrister]

This webinar was a delight for me because there was spirited discussion. Ana Maria and I did not agree on everything, and neither did those in attendance. Yet it was all very polite, and never any need to bring in the mythical GTD police.

The last 10 minutes or so, when we talked about how to narrow your focus when it's time to choose what to do today, was especially interactive. In fact, that topic deserves its own webinar. It gets into app design and features, horizons of focus, tracking commitments, and the psychological subtleties of GTD.

To address a couple of points above . . .

No, we most definitely did not cover this topic completely. We scheduled an hour, but a full day would still leave us with angles to talk about.

No, we did not solve the problem of long lists. Except to say that long lists are not necessarily a problem. If they are, there are ways you can deal with that.

Please carry on with the comments here!

 

[bcmyers2112]

By adopting a Kanban-like limitation—restricting ourselves to no more than one next action per project and a predetermined number of potential next actions—we can significantly reduce the bulk of our lists and maintain focus on what's immediately actionable.

If this works for you, I think that's great. But I'm not sure this is the right approach for everyone. I know it's not something I could adopt.

The easiest way I can think of to explain is by way of example. I used to be a board member for an arts non-profit in my area. Every year we'd host a chili cook-off fundraiser. We'd ask area restaurants to donate chili and sell tickets to the public to sample all of the chilis and vote on their favorite. On a couple of occasions, I volunteered to steer the event.

At various points there were several next actions (or more) that I could move on independently in different contexts: calls to make, emails to send, creating spreadsheets, errands to run, things like that. I don't think it would have been efficient to make a call, for example, and then have to fish through project support to find the next call to make, especially when no one call was a higher priority than another. Also, if there were computer actions I could take when not in "phone mode," not having those already in my lists would've been a missed opportunity if I were working at my PC.

I'm also not sure how I could limit the project to a "predetermined number of potential next actions." We had a binder for the even that included an outline of things you'd need to know if you were running the event. But every year there would be changes, and every year life would throw curve-balls at us. We had to accommodate them. There was no way to "predetermine" all of the next actions that would be needed to make the cook-off happen.

By setting a cap on the number of tactics (equivalent to GTD's next actions) to 14 in my 12WY tool, I've found that imposing such constraints not only makes the process more manageable but also cultivates a mindset where 'less is more.'

Again, if that works for you, that's wonderful. But I know I'd feel overly constrained by that. I've got goals, objectives, visions, etc. that don't fit neatly into a 90-day window, but if they're not reflected in my system somehow, my mind would take back the job of managing my stuff. While it would be nice if I could say, "14 is my limit, everything else has to wait," I don't think my reality would actually allow that.

I think the difficulty I have with applying what are essentially approaches that came out of the manufacturing world is that my life is not a manufacturing process. My life is chaotic, messy, sometimes unpredictable, and full of gray areas. I find I have to keep my GTD system flexible to accommodate this reality.

 

[cfoley]

This answer provides a structured and thought-out perspective on combining different methodologies to tackle the issue of long lists in GTD, highlighting the importance of setting limits and prioritizing tasks to enhance productivity and reduce overwhelm.

Your observation of collecting "just in case" to-dos is interesting to me. I am currently aware that my lists are too long for my taste at the moment, and that most of the commitments on them are to myself, not to other people. That seems consistent with too many being "just in case". Today, I have set aside some time to get honest with myself about what I have time to do, and either move projects to Someday/Maybe or to trash them.

I have thought about making more use of Someday/Maybe while clarifying and organising and make it more of a default setting for things that could be actionable but that aren't essential right now. It would mean that the main route to my Project list would be via Someday/Maybe. I suppose that your suggestion of allowing three objectives at a time would have a similar effect. Most of my aspirations would be recorded in a staging area (someday/maybe) and I would make strategic choices at regular intervals.

I think the 90 day cycle is consistent with a lot of GTD teaching. Normally, we talk about weekly reviews, but I also hear people talking about quarterly and annual reviews. Often people reference their higher horizons during those reviews and focus on making strategic decisions.

What I don't hear so often in GTD is hard limits for list lengths. I have a preference for one next action per project but I some of my projects have several.

I think the difficulty I have with applying what are essentially approaches that came out of the manufacturing world is that my life is not a manufacturing process. My life is chaotic, messy, sometimes unpredictable, and full of gray areas. I find I have to keep my GTD system flexible to accommodate this reality.

I think this captures it perfectly. GTD deals with the strategic but also with the mundane. If I have 50 people to call, then I have 50 people to call. Life admin might take up 20 slots on my next actions list at times. That is just the way of it. On the other end of the spectrum, something of major strategic importance to me is serendipity. Some of the best things that have happened in my life happened because I was open to new experiences and ready to say "yes" when opportunities came along. This almost always means breaking whatever disciplined strategic framework I should be following.

I am enjoying this discussion and don't really side with anyone here. I actually think there is plenty that I could learn from both ends of the spectrum.

 

[Ariadne Marques]

I was also reflecting about this. In my work there are also specific cases where I have " relatives tasks " I treat them as check list inside the main task. For example I will write Check budget's task and send it to the accountant " then inside Omnifocus note I write all the check list. The task will remain into my system until everything is done.

Perfect!
That's an effective way of dealing with similar tasks that can be grouped together. Let's say I must call 10 subtrades regarding a specific budget I'm working on, I can create subtasks inside a task to list all the people I have to call (instead of having 10 different next actions on my Calls list). Same thing with budget reviews: they are all going to be done at my computer, so I can group them in a task "Complete changes on budget X as per meeting review" and list the revision items in subtasks.
It's something I will remember to do now, because that will make a significant difference on the number of individual actions I have on my lists.

 

[FocusGuy]

Perfect!
That's an effective way of dealing with similar tasks that can be grouped together.

@Ariadne Marques
Yes !
The purpose of this was to shorter long list and make Omnifocus more efficient. I was blocked by the numbers of call I had to do and the complexity of certain project (Corporate Real estate is complex for a building or a client you can have a lot of task and steps to do so fast I became totally overwhelmed and blocked). This way was inspired from THINGS 3 which has inside a task check list and Nirvana which has box in notes (if you make it with a dash). The result was good for me. Keeping the project organized, but not too much, focussing on action step and check list forced me acting and doing stuff. But sometime it is not enough. I need to write all tasks on a sheet of paper as a check list and do one by one....

 

[Longstreet]

This webinar was a delight for me because there was spirited discussion. Ana Maria and I did not agree on everything, and neither did those in attendance. Yet it was all very polite, and never any need to bring in the mythical GTD police.

The last 10 minutes or so, when we talked about how to narrow your focus when it's time to choose what to do today, was especially interactive. In fact, that topic deserves its own webinar. It gets into app design and features, horizons of focus, tracking commitments, and the psychological subtleties of GTD.

To address a couple of points above . . .

No, we most definitely did not cover this topic completely. We scheduled an hour, but a full day would still leave us with angles to talk about.

No, we did not solve the problem of long lists. Except to say that long lists are not necessarily a problem. If they are, there are ways you can deal with that.

Please carry on with the comments here!

It was a spirited discussion and quite helpful. Thanks so much for doing this, John. Keep them coming. And yes, GTD rocks!

 

[Gardener]

If this works for you, I think that's great. But I'm not sure this is the right approach for everyone. I know it's not something I could adopt.

(Quoting with Re: because quoting normally on this device is causing trouble.)

I prefer just one or two actions per project, so I organize my projects accordingly. I'm not saying you should organize yours that way, just describing ways that one-action can work with complex projects.

Addressing your example with this in mind:

Re: "Every year we'd host a chili cook-off fundraiser...
...calls to make, emails to send, creating spreadsheets, errands to run, things like that."

I would treat the fundraiser as multiple projects, possibly a dozen or more. Each of those projects would have just one or two actions.

Re: "I don't think it would have been efficient to make a call, for example, and then have to fish through project support to find the next call to make"

Instead of fishing, I would create a calls list as part of the project support material, and each time I realized I needed a call, I would add it to the list. That would allow me to have Next Actions that look like, "Make some calls," instead of "Call Fred" and "Call Joe."

Similarly, I might have a computer actions list.

I realize that this suggests, "Um...in that case, why not just have those as actions, set their contexts, and be done?"

Because I like to keep my actions lists short. Whenever something can be grouped as a list and gotten out of my everyday what-to-do-now lists, I'll do that.

Re: "I'm also not sure how I could limit the project to a "predetermined number of potential next actions.""

I don't think the idea is that you limit the project or predetermine the actions--in fact, Kanban is closely tied to Agile, which very specifically does NOT predetermine the actions.

I think the idea is instead that you limit the number of active actions in the lists that you look at several times a day. Kanban has the concept of a backlog, which I see as moderately analogous to GTD's Someday/Maybe, though I think of it as "Later/Not Today" rather than "Someday/Maybe."

Re: "but if they're not reflected in my system somehow, my mind would take back the job of managing my stuff."

In my view, if they're in project support material, they are reflected in the system, you just don't have to scan through them every day. I realize that your mind may demand that it see all those actions frequently. My mind freaks out and runs away if it sees all those actions frequently.