Next Action with deadlines

GTD-Sweden

Registered
Longstreet said:
There is ample research that clearly has shown that what has been scheduled has a much better chance of being done

Here comes the evidence:)

"According to one study, the simple act of scheduling a specific time and place to exercise increased success rates from 32 percent to 91 percent in terms of actual follow-through on a commitment to exercise."”*

(*Note in ”The 5 Choices - the Path to extraordinary productivity” source Heidi Grant Halvorson Ph.D., recorded FranklinCovey interview, page 166 ibooks).
 

Folke

Registered
Longstreet said:
... be open to renegotiate with yourself if things change. If you do that, as David himself stated, then you are "doing GTD".

I can agree that this - if you are open to renegotiate, as you say, and if you keep it in a separate calendar or color such that you do not confuse it with the hard landscape - is perfectly in line even with GTD 2001.

Basically all you have done is use a separate media or "list" for some of your next actions. The calendar you had before is still the "calendar" in the original GTD sense (hard landscape) and this new calendar is actually just one of your next action lists in a colorful version with actions shown in tentative time slots.

For me the additional color and tentative times would not mean much as I would constantly renegotiate them - either not have the patience to wait until that day or maybe not in the mood for it when the day comes etc, so I am better off with a list that I do not have to adjust.

Longstreet said:
There is ample research that clearly has shown that what has been scheduled has a much better chance of being done.

I'd like to see how that has been measured before I put any value in it. I have seen so many erroneous conclusions drawn from questionnaires and experiments that I think the safest bet is to disregard such statements until I know how it has been established. (And even then it would be just a statistic, not necessarily true for me.) This strikes me as likely "consultant buzz", you know, stuff that sounds good, is liked and easily swallowed by the audience and then copied and "improved" by the next consultant. Have you heard the other one about only 7% of your total message actually coming from the statements you make, the rest being body language etc? Similar fallacy in this case, quite likely.
 

Longstreet

Professor of microbiology and infectious diseases
Yeah, I did not think there was a problem at all. And Folke, I am a professor and research scientist, so I know how to analyze and assess whether sound research was conducted. I do believe it has been and the evidence is strong.
 

Longstreet

Professor of microbiology and infectious diseases
I do wish to say how much I admire you two -- Folke and Jenkins. Your dedication to standard GTD best practices is unparalleled. As Red Green always use to say: "I'm pulling for you -- we're all in this together". :)
 

TesTeq

Registered
Longstreet said:
@Tes Teq: I maintain ALL of my next actions on my context lists. Just because I may feel the need to schedule a 2-hr major next action (and it is truly a next action and not a project) does not mean that I have "left it in the dark hole of the past" because something urgent and important has come up. I simply remove it from my calendar or reschedule it. It really is simple.

My answer was explaining why David Allen is against overloading calendar with actions.

I know that you see an opponent in every person that says "put less in your calendar". But you ARE putting less in your calendar. You don't overload it. You use it wisely. You don't reschedule huge backlog of actions from day to day. Tens of actions.

I ask you to understand that there are many people who need the advice "put less in your calendar". You are successful and happy scheduler because your calendar is not overloaded. But for many people "the dark hole of the past" in their calendars causes a huge stress.
 

TesTeq

Registered
Longstreet said:
I really would like to hear from you what you think David meant by this. I see that he has a document that is due soon and he realizes he had better set aside time so that it WILL get done. Hence, blocking off time on the calendar.

What is a calendar in GTD? Is it an engine or a wheel?

A calendar is a wheel where you put some items from your Project inventory (the real engine). You do not block time to work on each Project. You block time when you want to give a Project the main priority. You don't reschedule this block. If you need more time you block yet another chunk. But you still return to the Project list and the Weekly Review process to check if it's necessary.

This approach is very different in comparison to the calendar with daily todos method which require constant rescheduling. Yes, yes, yes, I know that you are not overloading your calendar and you are not rescheduling so don't attack me, please.
 

GTD-Sweden

Registered
TesTeq said:
This approach is very different in comparison to the calendar with daily todos method which require constant rescheduling.

Yes it´s different but I think this subject is broader than just descussing Longstreets advanced practice of scheduling. I think both you and Folkes minimalist approach seems harder for a newbe to implement than combining scheduling in the calendar. Even if you don´t use the calendar in such an advanced way as Longstreet you can still get leverage from the practice. And remember Megs take of the situation (based on wast evidence from GTD-clients) - that even if you do have to reschedule in the beginning it´s ok - you will get it right in the end.
 

mommoe436

Registered
I determine at my WR what projects need to move forward during the coming week, in order to meet hard deadlines and find the best time on my calendar and schedule it. I do my best to meet this commitment but If things change, I simply drag this to another time/date - this gets is off my mind and I know I have time to complete the required work during the week.

I have not seen any comments that state or imply anyone is scheduling their entire day or all of their projects/tasks. These last few posts are productive discussions - moving the discussion to what is helpful. And the first that I have seen "put less on your calendar" which seemed to have been lost in the earlier argumentative posts.

I absolutely agree that GTD is against using your calendar as a To Do list (which winds up being a wish list), and teaches not to overload your calendar with these types of items. From what I am reading, those of us that block/schedule our time (not just other people's time) are not overloading our calendars, but understand and accept that this is our preference and does not work for everyone.

There are clearly 'opponent' and the responses (I believe) are intended for the better of all, not to get lost in one point of view (which is often presented as fact).

As I've said before Folke - if your purpose in continuing your argument is to have David make changes to what you feel is the key to GTD, then this is not the appropriate forum. This forum is to help others who are using GTD.

Maureen
 

Folke

Registered
GTD-Sweden said:
I think this subject is broader ... ... minimalist approach seems harder

I totally agree that the whole subject is broader. I also believe that we all tend to reject methods that we perceive as overly simplistic, crude, clunky etc in relationship to our desires (for clarity, confidence etc).

I think this whole discussion is broader in the sense that the underlying problem that many of us perceive is that we risk being drowned in long lists of actions and/or drowning in too many shorter lists. We fear losing our overview and fear that we will forget some of the things that we cannot afford to delay for too long (whether an action has a hard deadline or not it can still be time-critical - every day or hour counts.)

Some of the methods that have been discussed on this forum for dealing with this overwhelm is:

Prioritization - reclassifying some actions as Someday/Maybe even though they are in fact "next" (i.e. perfectly possible to do now and I have no other reason than sheer overload not to consider them). Or removing entire projects from your active project list; essentially the same kind of thing. This is a trick recommended by David Allen, but he does not use the word "priority" for it. Basically, I do not like this method myself. I do not like A-B(-C) prioritization like this, i.e. entirely hiding away perfectly possible and "approved" things - there is a chance that I will be in exactly the right context to get it out of the way without unnecessary delay if I leave it in view on my next actions list (active project list).

Scheduling - putting particularly important things on the calendar even if they are not hard. This goes against the fundamental approach described in GTD 2001, but has apparently been recommended by David and some of his coaches since then. I personally do not like this method either. As I can change these dates at my own whim anytime I want they have very limited real significance (pure clutter, IMO). I of course realize, though, that if used sparingly, like Longstreet does it, its negative effects will be quite negligible, and it may help address the overwhelm problem to have the critical tasks conveniently identified on this separate "list" (which happens to be designed as a calendar).

Flagging - marking actions with various colors, icons or other visual cues that help you spot the critical things and help you avoid overly frequent reviewing of others. This is the method I personally prefer. It has the advantage that I do not have to introduce or adjust any vacuous dates. Unfortunately this method has not been mentioned by David, but I cannot see that it in any way would conflict with the core principles. (In fact, I think it tallies extremely well with the core principles.)

I agree with TesTeq that blocking time for (large) projects - or entire areas, for that matter - is quite different from blocking out time for individual tasks (or smallish projects). In fact, time blocking is something most of us do without even documenting it when we are aware that, say, 9-5 is predominantly office time or Sundays are predominantly family time. Please note that these time blocks are "hard landscape". Office hours have been agreed with others. family time has been communicated to, and is expected by, others. They represent "hard" commitments, external to yourself. And you could go on - if you work in an overly meeting-oriented company, to, say, block out time in the morning for doing individual work tasks and communicate that clearly to others (e.g. in your shared calendar system) to prevent them from booking you. This is also "hard landscape", since it is in fact something you have communicated with others, and you have perhaps given them the right to book you at other times, something you cannot easily change without incurring additional renegotiation work with your colleagues. You cannot easily move such commitments to another day at your own whim. That is what makes them "hard".
 

Longstreet

Professor of microbiology and infectious diseases
TesTeq: I am very sorry if I have come across as "attacking you". I never meant to portray that at all. It has been a lively debate and I was making my points and views as strongly as I can. Similarly to when I was on a debate team. But I absolutely did not mean to give the feeling I was attacking you. My sincere apologies if that is how my comments were taken.
 

Longstreet

Professor of microbiology and infectious diseases
TesTeq : And I agree with your assessment of blocking time on the calendar. I certainly do not use my calendar as a task manager and I know there are many out there that promote that. I do not.
 

TesTeq

Registered
GTD-Sweden said:
Yes it´s different but I think this subject is broader than just descussing Longstreets advanced practice of scheduling. I think both you and Folkes minimalist approach seems harder for a newbe to implement than combining scheduling in the calendar. Even if you don´t use the calendar in such an advanced way as Longstreet you can still get leverage from the practice. And remember Megs take of the situation (based on wast evidence from GTD-clients) - that even if you do have to reschedule in the beginning it´s ok - you will get it right in the end.

It's very interesting to learn that you've read somewhere that I am not blocking my time to do important things. Where have you read it?

Here I'm explaining why GTD seems to be an anti-calendar method. It is because people (ordinary people, not uber-GTDers like Longstreet, Folke and GTD-Sweden) tend to overload their calendars with todos. So the GTD recommendation is: "put less in your calendar". But you can block 24 hours and this approach is compatible with GTD too. Why? Because it can work for you and you can feel that all the scheduled items are time-sensitive.
 

TesTeq

Registered
GTD-Sweden said:
Yes it´s different but I think this subject is broader than just descussing Longstreets advanced practice of scheduling. I think both you and Folkes minimalist approach seems harder for a newbe to implement than combining scheduling in the calendar. Even if you don´t use the calendar in such an advanced way as Longstreet you can still get leverage from the practice. And remember Megs take of the situation (based on wast evidence from GTD-clients) - that even if you do have to reschedule in the beginning it´s ok - you will get it right in the end.

It's very interesting to learn that you've read somewhere that I am not blocking my time to do important things. Where have you read it?

Here I'm explaining why GTD seems to be an anti-calendar method. It is because people (ordinary people, not uber-GTDers like Longstreet, Folke and GTD-Sweden) tend to overload their calendars with todos. So the GTD recommendation is: "put less in your calendar". But you can block 24 hours and this approach is compatible with GTD too. Why? Because it can work for you and you can feel that all the scheduled items are time-sensitive.
 

GTD-Sweden

Registered
TesTeq said:
It's very interesting to learn that you've read somewhere that I am not blocking my time to do important things. Where have you read it?

Here I'm explaining why GTD seems to be an anti-calendar method.

You block out time for computer programming, so much I have gathered. And you don't like scheduling for mundane tasks. From that you conclude that GTD is "an anti-calendar method."

The first scheduling is "good gtd" and the other is "bad gtd? " Please help me understand what you mean.
 

GTD-Sweden

Registered
Folke said:
Flagging - marking actions with various colors, icons or other visual cues that help you spot the critical things and help you avoid overly frequent reviewing of others. This is the method I personally prefer. It has the advantage that I do not have to introduce or adjust any vacuous dates. Unfortunately this method has not been mentioned by David, but I cannot see that it in any way would conflict with the core principles. (In fact, I think it tallies extremely well with the core principles.)

.

Thanks for that descriptive post.

Just one question. ”A-B-C prioritizing” is a method to sort out the big rocks from the gravel. But is not flagging the same thing? Why do you flagg? To sort out what is more important than the other, the non flagged, stuff. Instead of ”A-B-C” priority you have ”important”, i e the flagged, and the ”not so important” that is the things you choose not to flagg.

So the conclusion - don´t you prioritize in the same way when you flagg as when you use the A-B-C prioritizing ”method.”?

- Have I understood this correctly?
 

TesTeq

Registered
GTD-Sweden said:
The first scheduling is "good gtd" and the other is "bad gtd? " Please help me understand what you mean.

There's an important difference between:
  • "Here I'm explaining why GTD seems to be an anti-calendar method." - TesTeq wrote.
  • "From that you conclude that GTD is "an anti-calendar method."" - GTD-Sweden wrote.

"Seems" means that it looks like "anti-calendar". It looks so because David Allen suggests to remove as many items as possible from the calendar.

So yes - I block time for focused work on selected Project (for example I've blocked 3-hour chunks of time between 9:00 and 12:00 on each workday in January, February and March to write my book "Teraz!" - soon to be published). This was my everyday meeting with "Teraz!" Project. But I don't schedule Next Actions that are not time specific.

A long time ago - before GTD - I tried to use the Above & Beyond Personal Information Manager. It has "The Dynamic Scheduling" - if a task is undone it is automatically scheduled using the nearest unblocked slot of time. You can imagine what happens after one week - you've got totally overscheduled days because tasks from the past magically pile up.

To summarize: Projects List is the engine of the GTD methodology which drives all the other lists including Calendar. Of course there's a small exception - standalone Next Actions that go directly to NA lists or are executed on the spot (2-minute rule).
 

Folke

Registered
GTD-Sweden said:
So the conclusion - don´t you prioritize in the same way when you flagg as when you use the A-B-C prioritizing ”method.”?

There are so many methodologies and interpretations of these methodologies. Even GTD alone has a huge span of interpretations, as can be seen on this and other forums. And that probably goes for every other action planning methodology (or even isolated tricks) as well.

So to avoid any confusion, the distinction that I want to make is this - whether you hide or do not hide the less critical actions. I personally want to have all my "possible" tasks (next actions and project) perfectly available, visible in plain sight, but be able to conveniently tell the difference between critical, normal, and "whenever convenient". I want to be able to make the decision in the moment what I will in fact do right now. That will depend on context, energy, time and priority. My tri-color flag just helps me find things quicker when I review my lists.

If we compare this with what David Allen says (2001) he also emphasizes the good practice of making the decision in the moment for what we choose to do right now. And he also recommends strongly against ABC prioritization for the same reason I do, if I recall correctly - because "hiding them" causes you to overlook perfectly viable tasks that you could have gotten out of the way much sooner had you only seen them. He also recommends you to put stuff into your Someday/Maybe bucket.

As for David's terminology I am a bit uncertain what he actually means. He uses the word "priority" for the choice of action you actually do in the moment. He also uses the word "priority" for the inherent "fourth decision factor" (along with context etc) that you will consider when choosing a task to do now. He also uses the word "priority" for the "bad" practice of "staging" tasks ("ABC prioritization" - do the As before the Bs etc). Funnily, I think pushing things into Someday is precisely an A vs B prioritizing that results in some thing being hidden, so I am not sure how he would reconcile that. Does anyone know?
 

TesTeq

Registered
Longstreet said:
I am very sorry if I have come across as "attacking you".

I am sorry that I used the word "attack". I fully understand your point of view about blocking time. I am sure that David Allen was blocking time when he was editing GTD'2015. My point is that we use GTD trusted system to be able safely block time to focus on our most important work. Safely? Yes, because we know that no other important issue was forgotten.
 

GTD-Sweden

Registered
TesTeq said:
There's an important difference between:
  • "Here I'm explaining why GTD seems to be an anti-calendar method." - TesTeq wrote.
  • "From that you conclude that GTD is "an anti-calendar method."" - GTD-Sweden wrote.

I obviously did some bad reading of your post, my bad.

Anyway. I think you are to rigid in the way you look at the leverage of scheduling. I think you both can schedule deep work (like T-T writing his book) and schedule mundane stuff like "get with my kid after kindergarten to our storage and get the spare vacuum cleaner since the one we use are broken" (an example from the real world:))

To use an automator like you did seems crazy - of cause you are getting overloaded if the machine does the work.

About what to schedule, as Merlin says in the Holy grail "you have to choose but you have to choose wisely".

Schedule both the big or small stuff in the beginning - thats my advice to the beginner (as earlier stated). You will soon learn that overloading is not the right strategy.
 
Top