OmniFocus: When the Next Action is a meeting

jenkins

Registered
My wife and I have recently been experimenting with OmniFocus. Until now, I have used a very simple plain-text file system (just lists and a calendar, really).

My question is: What if you have a project, and the Next Action is a meeting that's already scheduled on your calendar? In my old system, I would simply put the meeting on my calendar. But now in OF, the project looks like it doesn't have a Next Action, which is misleading. One solution would be to add the action "Go to meeting" or "Waiting to have meeting," but that feels odd and redundant to me.

I have my own thoughts, but I wonder if other people have encountered this issue. It's not exclusive to OmniFocus, I just use that as an example.

Similar issue: What if the Next Action is waiting for an email response? Right now, I keep track of Waiting For emails directly in my mail app. I suppose I could add a Next Action to OF "Waiting for email response," but again, that feels odd and redundant.
 

DenaDahilig

Registered
I have a paper-based system and a context (i.e. a list) called "Waiting" that I review along with all of the others. "Waiting for Meeting" would go on that list. And you know after that meeting happens there will be a whole slew of new actions headed your way!

I don't actually visually associate Next Actions with Projects as you do by necessity in OF so I don't constantly feel the pull of "what's the next action on this project?" every time I look at it in the system. Next actions either get into the system during the next review or when I complete the current next action.

Ha! I have NO idea if that was helpful! :rolleyes:

Dena
 

davidcoforum

Administrator
Staff member
Hi Forum Fans,

You may have noticed that this thread by jenkins appeared on January 23 and is showing as new today. The reason is that we made a mistake in deleting a spam post that was added to the thread, and deleted the whole thread. We apologize to jenkins, and to Folke and jdavidcarr who posted replies. In the text below, we've added the replies to the original post. If any of you want to repost under your own names, please feel free.

***************

from Folke:

If the first/next action is not a Next action but a Waiting For action or a Calendar action, and if I cannot do any of the subsequent Next actions until after the first action is done, then I simply leave it at that. I will "activate" the following action when it becomes relevant (unless I use an app that does that automatically.)

Calendar actions are a bit of a difficulty with most apps. Ideally, I would like to have them both listed within the project AND on the calendar, but as this is not possible (or not done palatably) in most apps I keep them only on the calendar, and have them sent over 15 hours in advance to my list manager.

***************

from jdavidcarr:

Meeting just to meet would be a waste of everyone's time; there must be some purpose to meeting, right? That's your next action, not the meeting itself

For example, if the meeting is to review requirements, the next action may be "review requirements" or "get group feedback on requirements document". Then the context is assigned as applicable (e.g., office, agenda/staff).

In OF, if I'm waiting for someone to respond to an inquiry, I don't create a new next action for it. I set the context of the next action about which I've inquired to Waiting. So if I need an address for a meeting, I might have an action "Determine location for off-site meeting". When I email someone for this address, the action is not complete until I get a response, so I leave the action open and change the context from "office" to "waiting". When I get a response, I complete the action. In my daily review, I look at Waiting actions and follow up as needed.

Hope this helps.

***************

from jdavidcarr:

Also, if you're deferring tasks until an appropriate start time, you will see them (against) your actual calendar in OF. I usually prefer this over creating blocks on my calendar for individual tasks unless they are "deep thought" tasks or time consuming. I just know I'm not particularly effective at safeguarding my calendar when things like operational fires pop up. I can manage a task list much better than specific time boxes on a calendar.

***************

from jenkins:

jdavidcarr said:
Meeting just to meet would be a waste of everyone's time; there must be some purpose to meeting, right? That's your next action, not the meeting itself

For example, if the meeting is to review requirements, the next action may be "review requirements" or "get group feedback on requirements document". Then the context is assigned as applicable (e.g., office, agenda/staff).

In OF, if I'm waiting for someone to respond to an inquiry, I don't create a new next action for it. I set the context of the next action about which I've inquired to Waiting. So if I need an address for a meeting, I might have an action "Determine location for off-site meeting". When I email someone for this address, the action is not complete until I get a response, so I leave the action open and change the context from "office" to "waiting". When I get a response, I complete the action. In my daily review, I look at Waiting actions and follow up as needed.

Hope this helps.

That helped a lot, thank you. :)

I guess I always assumed (and perhaps this was a lazy assumption) that the meeting was the Next Action. But I think you are correct. The meeting is perhaps more like a context than an action. The mental process is more like this: "The project is to re-design our business cards. What's the Next Action? ...Well, we need to decide what our goal is with this re-design, because the overarching goal will determine the design decisions. But actually, I can't do that by myself...I should first schedule a meeting to brainstorm these goals." So you put "Schedule a brainstorming meeting re new business cards" on the appropriate NA list. That's really the "next available action" in this example. Later that day, you schedule the meeting and cross it off your list. You put the meeting on your calendar. The Next Action is now to decide on the goal of the re-design; and the context is the meeting itself.

***************

from jenkins:

jdavidcarr - Thought of another question. What if the Next Action really IS a calendar action, and not just a meeting? David Allen uses the example of "call Jim tomorrow @ noon" (assuming you have to call at that time, this would be a calendar action). If this were actually part of a larger project, then the NA would be on the calendar, and what would be in OF? In this example, do you think David Allen is suggesting that event goes on the calendar AND on your Calls list?

***************
 

jenkins

Registered
DenaDahilig said:
I have a paper-based system and a context (i.e. a list) called "Waiting" that I review along with all of the others. "Waiting for Meeting" would go on that list. And you know after that meeting happens there will be a whole slew of new actions headed your way!

I don't actually visually associate Next Actions with Projects as you do by necessity in OF so I don't constantly feel the pull of "what's the next action on this project?" every time I look at it in the system. Next actions either get into the system during the next review or when I complete the current next action.

Ha! I have NO idea if that was helpful! :rolleyes:

Dena

Thanks for responding - I think that was very helpful!

Similar to your paper-based system, when I used plain-text files I didn't visually associate Next Actions with projects either. During my Weekly Review, I would scan down my list of projects and think "What's the Next Action? Oh, it's on my calendar." The same applies to OF for the most part, since I'm not working out of the Projects view. However, projects without Next Actions also show up in the Context view under "No Context," which "pulls" on my attention as you say.

But I do think I have a solution from what jdavidcarr said -- the Next Action probably isn't the meeting itself. The Next Action is probably to make some sort of decision, which the meeting will hopefully illuminate. However, I still wonder what if the NA really is a calendar action (like "Call Joe @ noon on Friday"). Then there's no overarching goal behind the action like with meetings. If calling Joe is part of a larger project, OF is going to pull on me just a bit. Then again that's pretty rare and I'll probably just have to get used to it.
 

Oogiem

Registered
jenkins said:
My question is: What if you have a project, and the Next Action is a meeting that's already scheduled on your calendar? In my old system, I would simply put the meeting on my calendar. But now in OF, the project looks like it doesn't have a Next Action, which is misleading. One solution would be to add the action "Go to meeting" or "Waiting to have meeting," but that feels odd and redundant to me.
I like redundancy so I love having Waiting for actions in my OF system. I know I am not dropping something through the cracks and it makes it simple and easy to review at my weekly review. If the project is say "Brainstorming new Community Farming Ideas" and the next action is Waiting for meeting on 4 Feb I'm ok with that
 

TesTeq

Registered
Oogiem said:
I like redundancy so I love having Waiting for actions in my OF system. I know I am not dropping something through the cracks and it makes it simple and easy to review at my weekly review. If the project is say "Brainstorming new Community Farming Ideas" and the next action is Waiting for meeting on 4 Feb I'm ok with that

What about "garbage collection"? I mean you've got to remember to tidy up ALL redundant Actions, Waiting Fors and Calendar entries.
 

Oogiem

Registered
TesTeq said:
What about "garbage collection"? I mean you've got to remember to tidy up ALL redundant Actions, Waiting Fors and Calendar entries.

Not really, it's all taken care of by OF automatically. I update my calendar at the end of the day with what I really did so it functions as a diary so no garbage to collect there. I either attended the meeting or not. When I look at my OF lists I'll see the waiting for now I may be scatterbrained but I can usually remember whether I've attended or not and I check it off. Automatically the next action for that project will pop up into the appropriate list. So it's easy and painless to do and happens as I check my lists and work my day.
 

jenkins

Registered
Gardener said:
My take on this: I have no problem entering an apparently-redundant "waiting for" action in OmniFocus.

So what do you think of jdavidcarr's response? Regarding meetings, I agree that a redundant "waiting for" action is not the end of the world -- but I think it would probably be better to delineate the goal of the meeting rather than just say you're "waiting for" a meeting to be over.
 

Gardener

Registered
jenkins said:
So what do you think of jdavidcarr's response? Regarding meetings, I agree that a redundant "waiting for" action is not the end of the world -- but I think it would probably be better to delineate the goal of the meeting rather than just say you're "waiting for" a meeting to be over.

My general philosophy is to come up with the very, very simplest next action that will (or may) push the project forward. If the next event for this project is the meeting, then I think that the simplest next action is attending the meeting. I probably have an agenda--informal or formal--for the meeting, but I doubt that I'll want to incorporate that agenda into the phrasing of the next action.

To suggest the sequence of events, I can imagine a series of very simple next actions being created and knocked off. Let's say that my boss tells me that he wants me to covert the WidgetBase to PlatinumFramework 68Q. I'm at a loss. I write myself a project with a goal state of "WidgetBase conversion plan is complete." I write a first action of:

- Spend fifteen minutes thinking about the WidgetBase conversion.

I think, and I decide that Jane might help clear the fog for me. So I check off that action and write a new action:

- Talk to Jane about the WidgetBase conversion.

I talk to Jane. She suggests that Joe and Fred know a lot, and that we should all meet. So I check off the "talk to Jane" action and create a Next Action:

- Set up meeting with Jane/Joe/Fred about WidgetBase conversion

I set up the meeting and check off the action. Yay! I eye the project to consider whether I have a next action. I probably want to think about what to talk about at that meeting, so:

- Spend fifteen minutes prepping notes for the WidgetBase meeting.

I spend the fifteen minutes. I check off the action. I consider the project and, nope, the next thing is the meeting. So I write an action:

- WAITING FOR: Jane/Joe/Fred meeting.

I have my notes to guide me on the goals for the meeting, and when I emerge from the meeting, I'll presumably have another Next Action.
 

bcmyers2112

Registered
jenkins said:
What if you have a project, and the Next Action is a meeting that's already scheduled on your calendar?

Ask yourself how much this bothers you, and is it worth the effort is it worth to fix it? If it is, try one of the suggested workarounds in this thread. If it's not, let it go.

When I've used digital list managers that could link tasks but not calendar items to projects, I found the "issue" only impacted a few projects. During the weekly review I always remembered when I saw an "orphaned" project that the next action was a meeting. The project was off my mind, and it didn't bother me.

No GTD system will be perfect, regardless of the tools you pick. And your system doesn't have to be. It just has to be good enough for you.
 

Oogiem

Registered
jenkins said:
I think it would probably be better to delineate the goal of the meeting rather than just say you're "waiting for" a meeting to be over.
For me the goal of the meeting is part of the support material for that action. Two write it all into the actual action note is too much work. It's not likely to fit and will take more time to process when I look at it.

I'd keep the goals for the next meeting in the folder electronic or paper, that has the rest of the project support material.
 

Oogiem

Registered
Gardener said:
My general philosophy is to come up with the very, very simplest next action that will (or may) push the project forward. If the next event for this project is the meeting, then I think that the simplest next action is attending the meeting. I probably have an agenda--informal or formal--for the meeting, but I doubt that I'll want to incorporate that agenda into the phrasing of the next action.

Exactly, why spend all tha time to add the details to the titel of the action when it properly belongs in the support materials, at least in my mind.
 

jenkins

Registered
Oogiem said:
Exactly, why spend all tha time to add the details to the titel of the action when it properly belongs in the support materials, at least in my mind.

Thanks everyone for the great responses!

In my mind, I wasn't thinking of it as re-phrasing the next action to incorporate the goal of the meeting. Rather, I was thinking that the most accurate next action once a meeting is already scheduled is not just to have the meeting but to unearth some information (indeed, if you found the information by some other means, you could probably cancel that meeting/phone call/what-have-you). But I do agree with you and Gardener that the path of least resistance is usually best, and it makes a lot of sense to keep things simple.
 

jdavidcarr

Registered
davidcoforum said:
from jenkins :

Thought of another question. What if the Next Action really IS a calendar action, and not just a meeting? David Allen uses the example of "call Jim tomorrow @ noon" (assuming you have to call at that time, this would be a calendar action). If this were actually part of a larger project, then the NA would be on the calendar, and what would be in OF? In this example, do you think David Allen is suggesting that event goes on the calendar AND on your Calls list?

Ultimately, OF is my source of record for tasks, not my calendar. My calendar is just a scheduling tool.

With this in mind, the calendar is the right place to block out time to call Jim, and I might put a 15- or 30-minute block on my calendar for the call, but the task in OF is for whatever I'm calling him about. And the task that I'm tracking is the one in OF, not the meeting in Outlook. It would look like this: "Call Jim to discuss location for off-site meeting". Satisfying this task isn't really accomplished by just calling Jim, but by finding out from Jim where we are holding our off-site meeting.

The calendar item would simply say "Blocked for call to Jim" and I would complete the task in OF after talking to Jim, mostly likely at the end of the day when I do a quick end-of-day review.
 

TesTeq

Registered
Gardener said:
- Spend fifteen minutes thinking about the WidgetBase conversion.
- Spend fifteen minutes prepping notes for the WidgetBase meeting.

I NEVER mix time-blocking with Next Actions. What's the successful outcome of "Spend fifteen minutes prepping notes for the WidgetBase meeting"? Fifteen minutes spent. In my world this NA would be "Prepare notes for WidgetBase meeting". I want high quality, good enough notes. Not 15-minute notes.
 

Oogiem

Registered
jenkins said:
I was thinking that the most accurate next action once a meeting is already scheduled is not just to have the meeting but to unearth some information
Might depend on your meetings. Mine are almost always dealing with federal officials and giving community inputs for government things being planned for our valley. They are unlikely to provide me any any new information at all. They are, however, one of the few ways to get official public comments on record and are often both videotaped and /or have a court reporter taking the testimony. Showing up counts as part of the comment is the numbers of community activists who will actually come. Sometimes I have a prepared speech, most often I just wing it depending on what the mood of the meeting is as my prepared speeches never really seem correct no matter how hard I try to prepare. I can almost always guarantee that the next action after the meeting is to prepare a follow-up written list of objections, conditions or comments on the issue and file it within the correct timeframe for public comment.
 

Oogiem

Registered
TesTeq said:
I NEVER mix time-blocking with Next Actions. What's the successful outcome of "Spend fifteen minutes prepping notes for the WidgetBase meeting"? Fifteen minutes spent. In my world this NA would be "Prepare notes for WidgetBase meeting". I want high quality, good enough notes. Not 15-minute notes.

It again may depend on how you actually work that action. I frequently have projects that might have an action like spend 30 minutes thinking about how to handle FLIR inputs into LambTracker. Either I'm avoiding the project and this is a way to chunk it down, sort of like a just pick up loose items in the house for 15 minutes as a way to get off the mark on cleaning up, or I need time to play with possible solutions and need to block the time for that thinking. Another good reason to have actions like that is to limit you. If you know you only have 15 minutes to do the task you are often more focused on that and get better solutions faster. Planning a 5 minutes speech on a topic is totally different from planning a 1 hour speech. If you are prone to continual tweaking due to perfectionism then time limiting can be a very good idea. I do it on some types of projects. Sometimes good enough is good enough and we don't need perfect.
 

bcmyers2112

Registered
Oogiem said:
Either I'm avoiding the project and this is a way to chunk it down, sort of like a just pick up loose items in the house for 15 minutes as a way to get off the mark on cleaning up...

That's a good trick. Often when I am procrastinating on a task I'll give myself "permission" to work on it for a few minutes and then stop if it's too much. Of course it's never "too much" and once I've started it's easy to keep going. Sometimes the smart part of your brain needs to fool the other part into doing something.

Oogiem said:
Sometimes good enough is good enough and we don't need perfect.

Yes, and "good enough" is entirely subjective.
 

bcmyers2112

Registered
If redundant entries in one's system are what's needed to achieve a clear head, I can't see an issue with that. I would however caution people against creating a system more burdensome than beneficial. Adding a few "waiting for" items to represent pending meetings, for example, may seem easy. But every time you review that "waiting for" list you're using mental energy. Just be sure the redundant entries don't create lists you resist using, and that the benefit outweighs the effort.

If "orphaned" projects really are a burden then by all means, try a workaround. Just be sure you're not giving into perfectionism with your lists. "The perfect is the enemy of the good."
 
Top