Newbie: merging action item lists/locations for work

[Bohemia]

I'm getting started on GTD, and I've got work action items in 3 main places:
1. Email folder (move stuff that's actionable to *Action Items folder in Outlook). This is a bit clunky because I have to read the email to see/remember what the action is.
2. Stack of papers on my desk. I have processed these and put a sticky note with the "next action" written on it
3. Electronic list: I started using Wunderlist to capture ideas to an inbox when I have them, then I sort them into other folders

How do I best manage actions in 3 places? They don't jive with contexts.

Speaking of contexts, I've gone back and forth a bit on what are the most appropriate contexts. The traditional computer/online/phone categories that DA describes don't make a lot of sense, because I typically can do all 3 at any given time. I've thought of "during work hours vs. after hours" as I often do accounting entry or analytical projects when others have gone home and I'm not interrupted by people or phone. Also there's "stuff people are waiting for vs. things that aren't so urgent". Can anyone offer some suggestions about how best to tackle this?

I should mention that my home stuff and errands stuff I've got decently managed. It's the work nut that I haven't yet cracked.

 

[K-S]

Dear Bohemia,

Looking in 3 different places for your next actions is too much of a hassle. GTD recommends to reduce the number pf places looking for input and tasks. Therefore, the points you mentioned above all go on one list in my GTD system. Emails that I need for the work or for the reply are stored as "Action support" material in an email folder, same applies applies for papers, obviously not stored in an email folder ;-)

In terms of contexts GTD recommends a standard set which is great to start with. Feel free to adjust them to whatever works best for you. Maybe this article is worth a read on how to adjust the @computer context.

Cheers
Knut

 

[TesTeq]

How do I best manage actions in 3 places? They don't jive with contexts.

There's no best. One Next Action list per context. "Doing" context. Not "capturing" context.

I'm getting started on GTD, and I've got work action items in 3 main places:
1. Email folder (move stuff that's actionable to *Action Items folder in Outlook). This is a bit clunky because I have to read the email to see/remember what the action is.
2. Stack of papers on my desk. I have processed these and put a sticky note with the "next action" written on it
3. Electronic list: I started using Wunderlist to capture ideas to an inbox when I have them, then I sort them into other folders

1. Read email and process it into a Wunderlist Next Action or Project.
2. Read or glance at each paper and process it into a Wunderlist Next Action or Project.
3. Read each Wunderlist inbox item and process it into a Wunderlist Next Action or Project.

 

[Oogiem]

How do I best manage actions in 3 places? They don't jive with contexts.

You don't manage actions in more than a single place. If your action/list processor is Wunderlist then it should have everything in it. The e-mail gets excerpted or summarized as an action item in Wunderlist, the papers go into action support and the sticky notes go into Wunderlist with a reference to where the paper lives and the stuff already in Wunderlist gets processed and stays there.

Speaking of contexts, I've gone back and forth a bit on what are the most appropriate contexts. The traditional computer/online/phone categories that DA describes don't make a lot of sense, because I typically can do all 3 at any given time. I've thought of "during work hours vs. after hours" as I often do accounting entry or analytical projects when others have gone home and I'm not interrupted by people or phone. Also there's "stuff people are waiting for vs. things that aren't so urgent". Can anyone offer some suggestions about how best to tackle this?

I should mention that my home stuff and errands stuff I've got decently managed. It's the work nut that I haven't yet cracked.

Just because you can do most things most places doesn't make it efficient or reasonable. Contexts are a key feature of GTD and until you really grok how to use them it will not be as seamless as it could be. I personally separate my computer contexts by application, I find that the mental effort and time it takes to switch applications is a lot more than I thought it was. I am more efficient if I do all my Scrivener stuff at once, all my Banktivity stuff at once and so on. Yes on a few occasions my project support material may be in a different application but generally I can work in a single app most effectively. I also separate my outdoor contexts by whether I need help or not and by location. So I have actions that require more that one person to do, like evaluate ram lambs in the context outside with help vs ones I can do by myself, Make new mineral for ewes. Other people prefer to have some contexts for mental effort, deep thought vs quick, or by time needed but for me I found that I am pretty good at determining my mental state and my time without that crutch and I do better seeing all the choices in a given context at once.

Contexts should be fluid, you will create, use and delete contexts as your work changes. There have been times when I made a context of 10 minute jobs just to pull them all together and plow through them. That is one of the few times I've used a time based context. I've also made contexts for a location, Back Cedars Pasture, and when I was done with all the projects there deleted the context as it was no longer used. I have 32 core contexts that basically never change. Right now I have added a context for a contractor doing some work for us as then when we get together I can go over all his agenda items at once.

For me once a context gets to over 40 items in it I look at how to split it up. I can easily and quickly read a list of 40 or so possibilities in a few seconds when deciding what to do next but if I have to scroll more than 1 page I get frustrated so my contexts are designed so that I can see most of them on a single screen and a few need a scroll to another page.

 

[TesTeq]

You don't manage actions in more than a single place.

There is one exception. One can separate work and personal actions due to work security reasons and maintain two separate GTD systems. So my version of this statement is:

"You manage actions in a single place in a GTD system but you can have more than one system if necessary."

 

[Oogiem]

There is one exception. One can separate work and personal actions due to work security reasons and maintain two separate GTD systems.

Good point, especially for secured workplaces. Your clarification is more accurate but in my mind I don't consider 2 systems as 2 places to look, because you are in either one or the other so still a single place for actions. Semantics mostly and because that is how I've always handled classified data.

 

[tismey]

How do I best manage actions in 3 places? They don't jive with contexts.

There's nothing wrong per se with having reminders for different things in different formats and places, if that's the most helpful way for you to be reminded of them, but if they genuinely don't correspond with contexts you may be making things too complicated and confusing. It might help to think of contexts more broadly as 'mindset' or 'mode', rather than just location or available tools.

For example, I put emails that just require a simple reply in a 'For Reply' folder in Outlook, and don't track a separate next action reminder in my task manager, because if I'm in a 'banging out emails' context, that's the most useful and friction-free way for me to be reminded. However, emails that need a different response (say a proposal preparing, or a conversation with a team member), will get filed as Action or Project support, and my reminder will be tracked as a Project, Next Action or Agenda item in my Task Manager. Similarly, some people like to use paper items (bills to pay or Read/Review are the classic examples) as their own action reminders rather than tracking a separate next action in a list. But you have to be committed to review all these buckets regularly, and they need to have hard edges so you understand the action implied by that bucket without having to re-clarify every time.

If there's an overlap between the _kind_ of actions that are in your email, paper stack and Wunderlist, then you'd be best-placed organising as Oogiem describes above and treating your paper stack and emails as Action Support, tracked in Wunderlist

Speaking of contexts, I've gone back and forth a bit on what are the most appropriate contexts.

As above, it's really about thinking about how do you want to be reminded of the actions. What contexts will make sense for you, in the moment, so you can just crack on with Doing the Right Thing? For example, I have a 'Private' context for calls or conversations that can't be had in our open plan office, so I can make the most of the rare occasions I can secure a meeting room.

 

[bcmyers2112]

There's nothing wrong per se with having reminders for different things in different formats and places, if that's the most helpful way for you to be reminded of them, but if they genuinely don't correspond with contexts you may be making things too complicated and confusing.

I agree. There's nothing wrong with using an emails in a folder or papers in a desk tray as action reminders as long as it works for you. But "out of sight, out of mind" trips up some people, like me. If you're like me in that respect, it's best to put everything in your action lists and organize any emails or papers that generate actions as support material.

 

[Cpu_Modern]

I am in the middle of the spectrum. I can have some "inbox IS tasklist" lists, the laundry basket for instance, but in other cases I NEED the extra list.

 

[brittas11]

I use ToDoIst which has an Outlook add-in and allows you to create an action from an email. I do this, file the emails in an action folder for reference but can then work on one list. I delete or file the email when the action is done. I'm pretty sure Wunderlist will do this too.

 

[Jordan]

Just because you can do most things most places doesn't make it efficient or reasonable. Contexts are a key feature of GTD and until you really grok how to use them it will not be as seamless as it could be. I personally separate my computer contexts by application

I would echo this. If you're office based you may find that 90% of your next actions list is @computer, but then you risk becoming numb to the list. Perhaps you can break it down by time available, energy available, etc

Something that helped me to get using contexts was having a verb associated to the action. Call is a verb, but computer isn't. Email, input, look into, look up might be good examples.

 

[Bohemia]

Thanks everyone for the input above. I've been working on getting a single action list set (in Wunderlist) and refining my contexts and here's where I currently stand. I'd appreciate input on how well these are likely to work.

Contexts:
Work with Others (things I have to sit down with someone and hash out) It feels different than agendas, which are more "sharing info" while these are "collaborating on something".

Computer work: I have subdivided these by system by using the convention "Excel: calculate profit sharing" or "DBA: review job costing for XXX job" Then I can sort alphabetically and it groups together the sub context of the computer system in which the work needs to be done.

At Desk/Paperwork: This is a contract I need to review or a draft brochure I need to proofread.

Phone calls

Emails/letters/proposals to draft. I suppose this could be an Outlook or Word subcontext in Computer work.

And a follow-up question on action item support: I've now got a pile of papers and a bunch of emails that serve this purpose. Do you just dig through the pile to find the supporting info when needed, or do you organize those by context when you're doing the processing?

Any and all feedback appreciated.

 

[mcogilvie]

Computer work: I have subdivided these by system by using the convention "Excel: calculate profit sharing" or "DBA: review job costing for XXX job" Then I can sort alphabetically and it groups together the sub context of the computer system in which the work needs to be done.

Do you use Wanderlist hashtags? They can be a quick and easy way to organize related actions, for example by project or area of focus.

 

[Gardener]

Any and all feedback appreciated.

I'm taking you at your word and just babbling on below.

What matters with your contexts is what works for you, so take the following as being what worked for me. Unlike Oogiem, I usually don't have contexts by tools--though I do increasingly see the appeal of that, and I may try it. But my work contexts have traditionally tended to be about the mental state inherent in the task.

The below is not actually a list of contexts that I'm using, because I'm redesigning my work system to deal with my abrupt and severe lack of tolerance for multitasking. I'm still tweaking a combined Kanban/GTD hybrid and considering whether to create "swimlanes" for contexts, or, well, not. So the below are sample contexts that I used to use when I tolerated enough actions to actually NEED contexts.

Documentation was a context that might involve my using Word, Excel, Sharepoint, my code editor, an application if I'm documenting an application rather than a library, and so on. It means that I'm thrashing around, checking this, checking that, deciding the best way to explain something, maybe making side notes that my code would be better self-documented if I made a particular change, juggling a number of thoughts in my head.

Coding was a more intensive juggling task--fewer tools, more thoughts to juggle.

Refactoring, on the other hand, was more meditative; I have a working code product that I'm making better and cleaner and more readable. I'm using precisely the same tools that I used when coding, but my mental state is different.

Writing is for writing tasks that involve much less thrashing around than Documentation.

I rarely used a Phone context. Phone tasks like sitting on hold forever and ever while I try to get to the internal support line were just dumped in the Workday Online context.

Re the papers question, my preferred solution when I have to work with paper is a folder for each project, rather than a folder for each context. Even if a project just has one or two pieces of paper associated with it, I prefer to have those isolated in a folder for the project.

I never sort emails by project; I add notes to actions that are enough to let me search for the email later. ("Fred Smith, 8/1/2016", for example, would usually be plenty.)