Newbie question: how to best prioritize actions list?

[GTD123BRO]

Hi all, just getting into GTD, a little confused about project-action list prioritization...

So, let's say I have (as David says) 50-100 projects I'm working on at any given time. And let's say that I've assigned a first action to each one of those projects. I also have maybe 50 one off actions (change lightbulb in bedroom etc.).

So now if I look at my actions list I have 150 things to do. Great.

BUT, not everything really has equal weight...

So, let's say I have a university assignment due in 3 weeks. On Sunday night I determined that my next action on that project is to contact my lecturer to clarify something I'm confused about. So Monday morning I contact my lecturer and get the answer to my question and tick that action off as completed.

Now I have 149 actions left on my list...great...except that I now have zero actions left on my "university assignment" project...

So...at what point do I review this for next actions? Because it makes little sense that I would be spending the rest of the week doing lots of other things when this is overall the most important.

Or, what if I spoke to my lecturer at 9am...there's still the whole day left, plenty of time left to do more actions on that project..at what time do I decide what those next actions are?

Am I meant to be reviewing my next actions on my project list daily? (as part of the 30-90min daily inbox clean)

I'm a little confused, please help! Thanks!

 

[RobG]

Hi

My (very basic) understanding is for pure GTD you don't use deadlines or apply a priority, you break your next actions down by context and by doing so you will burn through those next actions and complete work as necessary.

In your example the system I use would still have 150 next actions after your chat with your lecturer as the next one on the university assignment will pop into the system. That is good and correct but when you have a lot of projects which seems to be the norm I find it difficult to see which projects I've progressed.

To solve this for me I view my next actions list and tag the actions, I then view and work through that tagged list so see that list burning down, as such I'm progressing all projects. As my review, I'll check the next actions and update once I have gone through the tagged list and progressed them all as I can.

No priority or deadlines is an area I battle with. If I'm in front of my computer I have pretty much access to do any of my work related stuff, but it can be broken down, I have work I need to outside of our core working hours so I have contexts for that. Some work is much easier at a desk with multiple screens whilst other work is OK on just the laptop so when on a train and no connectivity etc. Energy levels are another I use, so when tired I'll look to tick of some simpler tasks.

I'm probably breaking the gtd rules but I also nest projects, as an example I currently have 26 servers I need to carry out some upgrades on, they are all equal in terms of urgency and deadline but I can't do them all so instead of 26 projects and actions I have them in one project with one next action.

Regards
Rob

 

[Gardener]

Now I have 149 actions left on my list...great...except that I now have zero actions left on my "university assignment" project...

So...at what point do I review this for next actions? Because it makes little sense that I would be spending the rest of the week doing lots of other things when this is overall the most important.

You could continue to work on that project, using your project support plan or just ad hoc, and then, when you're done, add a Next Action so that the project doesn't fall off your radar.

You could make a habit of always adding a new Next Action for a project when you work the last one for that project. In OmniFocus, I used to add several Next Actions and then add a final one of "Create more Next Actions for this project." Now I make my lists much smaller, so I'm likely to notice an action-bereft project, and I've dropped that habit.

You could have a whole stream of Next Actions for the project, so that when you check one off the next one floats to the top--of course, only if you have software designed to do that. (Or a written system designed to do that.) Again, I prefer minimal lists, so I don't do this.

 

[cfoley]

I strive never to have projects with no next actions. When I complete any actions I have recorded for a project then either the project is done or I add another, even if that other action is 'brainstorm'. If I notice a project that has slipped through the cracks, I can add a next action at any time. I don't have to wait for review.

 

[BadHairDay]

As long as they are independently actionable, you can have more than one active next action concerning a project and you would certainly add the following next action concerning a project onto your list as soon as possible. The weekly review is more of a safety net in case that goes wrong somehow. You do not really assign priorities like ABC but you do assign duedates or deadlines if something has a due date. You can kind of look at the next action as a bookmark in your project, if that helps...

 

[bcmyers2112]

@GTD123BRO, you should review and update your system continuously throughout the week as appropriate. And you should feel free to work on whatever makes the most sense to you, even if it's not an item on your lists.

In your first scenario, if you need to hear back from the lecturer before you can move forward with anything else related to your "university assignment" project then you would add an item to your Waiting For list so you could track it. If for some reason the lecturer forgets to get back to you, you'll see there's an open loop when you review your Waiting For list and you can decide on an appropriate follow-up action. You don't have to wait until your weekly review to check your Waiting For list. You can do it as often as would be helpful for you. If it's something particularly time sensitive you can even note in your calendar that it's something you need to follow up on by "X" date if you don't hear back.

Let's say you realize, however, that there are other things you can do to move on this project independently of getting something clarified by the lecturer. In that case, you should identify what those things are (if you haven't already) and work on them as soon as it makes sense. You needn't -- and shouldn't -- wait for your weekly review to do this.

In your second scenario, where you've spoken to the lecturer and gotten the clarification you needed, you should identify what to do next right then and there. If it makes sense to begin working on that next action or actions without checking your lists for other options, feel free to do so. Otherwise update your lists ASAP so you can work on those things as soon as it makes sense.

The weekly review is not the only time you review and update your lists. It's just a safety net, as another poster has aptly described it, to catch those things that will inevitably fall through the cracks during a busy week. You should be updating your lists regularly throughout the week to deal with new inputs whether they are things that come from the outside (like emails, calls, mail, etc.) or ideas you generate yourself. You should review those lists whenever you have discretionary time to help you decide what to do. And you should also feel free to disregard those options if something shows up in your world and you think it make sense to take care of it right then and there. As long as you know what you're not doing, you can feel good about not doing those things.

 

[Sarahsuccess]

What I would do is after I speak to the professor, I would mark the task “speak to professor” as done and immediately add the next action to my list. The next action would be something specific about the assignment (the context might be read, computer, or desk (paper tasks)).

David Allen does include priority in the gtd system. In his book, Getting Things Done, he talks about the four criteria model for choosing actions in the moment. These are: 1. context (are the resources available like a phone for calls or internet for online), 2. time available, 3. energy available and 4. priority. So priority is in his model.

 

[Suelin23]

If I don't already have other next actions, I would review the project plan and add another so there is always a next action for every project. If that would take too much time to do and I'd rather defer it, then I would add 'Review project plan' as the next action. Then you should always be choosing between the important and less important projects.

 

[bcmyers2112]

It's true that one of the misnomers about GTD is that you're "not supposed to prioritize." What David Allen actually coaches is that you should not code your actions by priority, and that priority is not the first criteria for choosing actions. After all, why focus on things you can't do when and where you are? Moreover, priorities can shift many times throughout the day. Better to focus on what you can do where you are in the time you have, and make priority decisions in the moment.

So, yes. In GTD you take priority into account.

But I don't think that was the OP's quandary (and I hope @GTD123BRO will correct me if I'm wrong). I think the OP was struggling with how to keep moving on critical projects when you can only update your lists once per week. Using a system like that, there's a good chance some of your highest-priority items could languish for several days.

Fortunately, GTD doesn't limit you to updating your system once per week. Quite the opposite: the methodology encourages you to update your system constantly throughout the week as new inputs in your life require it. If you're practicing GTD diligently, you'll be doing this many times per day.

 

[Geeko]

Hi @GTD123BRO,

As far as I see you are trapped with the idea that you can update your projects only during the Weekly Review. This is absolutely not the case.
Nothing keeps you from adding a new next action for your project right after you finished the last one. Otherwise you would get only one action done per week and project.

In your example: the stuff that came from your lecturer goes into your inbasket,gets processed and assigned a next action, if necessary. So you keep your project going forward.

Cheers,
Tristan