gtdstudente
Registered
I find "Organize" as the most challenging step in GTD. All/Any deficiencies in/with ORGANIZE backlogs the whole GTD flow. Anyone else found this to be case for them as well?
re: Step-3: ORGANIZE
- Thread starter gtdstudente
- Start date
OF user
Registered
Doing/Engaging is also my Achilles Heel. I think the ORGANIZE step can be underestimated if you are doing it yourself but following. a study or implementation guide makes it rather simple. Now, if you are also referring to choosing a list tool, calendar, ref system, etc. as part of your organize step then I would agree with you that it is one of the more difficult phases.
gtdstudente
Registered
Thank you mcogilvie and OF user for your replies. First, I with David Allen in that making distinction between Personal and Professional is an insufficient distinction, i.e., a commitment is a commitment. By in large, good with my GTD system revolving around Areas-of-Focus, more of that to follow. Secondly, for me, the root of back-log is deliberation. Thus, everything must go where it needs to go as automatically as possible. Two "UMs" is two too many - "high energy consumption." Thirdly, processing, finding, reviewing, doing, etc. anything must also be "UM-Free" Thus, all "UMs" contribute to GTD backlog/breakdown. Therefore, in my mind, for "UM" avoidance, Archives, References, Projects must have their underlying Areas-of-Focus synchronized. Thus what often has me wrapped around the axle and thus putting me in deliberation-mode is what belongs where? As an example, a few Areas-of-Focus in alpha-sequence: CAR, FISCAL, HEALTH, HOME, PERSONS, etc. Thus, to make this angst as simple as possible, is any corresponding INSURANCE organized with the CAR, HEALTH, HOME, PERSONS, or are all INSURANCES organized with FISCAL. Thus that is just one example of "Cross-Organizing-Possibilities". Please, also bare in mind that since Paper Files are not "Tagable", unless there is note(s) that says "Not Here Dummy, You will find it. . . . Therefore, if any fellow GTDer has a principle to govern "Cross-Organizing-Possibilities" . . . believe-you-me i'm all ears. Thank you
gtdstudente
Registered
Thank you mcogilvie for your reply. First, I with David Allen in that making distinction between Personal and Professional is an insufficient distinction, i.e., a commitment is a commitment. By in large, good with my GTD system revolving around Areas-of-Focus, more of that to follow. Secondly, for me, the root of back-log is deliberation. Thus, everything must go where it needs to go as automatically as possible. Two "UMs" is two too many - "high energy consumption." Thirdly, processing, finding, reviewing, doing, etc. anything must also be "UM-Free" Thus, all "UMs" contribute to GTD backlog/breakdown. Therefore, in my mind, for "UM" avoidance, Archives, References, Projects must have their underlying Areas-of-Focus synchronized. Thus what often has me wrapped around the axle and thus putting me in deliberation-mode is what belongs where? As an example, a few Areas-of-Focus in alpha-sequence: CAR, FISCAL, HEALTH, HOME, PERSONS, etc. Thus, to make this angst as simple as possible, is any corresponding INSURANCE organized with the CAR, HEALTH, HOME, PERSONS, or are all INSURANCES organized with FISCAL. Thus that is just one example of "Cross-Organizing-Possibilities". Please, also bare in mind that since Paper Files are not "Tagable", unless there is note(s) that says "Not Here Dummy, You will find it. . . . Therefore, if any fellow GTDer has a principle to govern "Cross-Organizing-Possibilities" . . . believe-you-me i'm all ears. Thank you
gtdstudente
Registered
Thank you OF user for your reply. First, I with David Allen in that making distinction between Personal and Professional is an insufficient distinction, i.e., a commitment is a commitment. By in large, good with my GTD system revolving around Areas-of-Focus, more of that to follow. Secondly, for me, the root of back-log is deliberation. Thus, everything must go where it needs to go as automatically as possible. Two "UMs" is two too many - "high energy consumption." Thirdly, processing, finding, reviewing, doing, etc. anything must also be "UM-Free" Thus, all "UMs" contribute to GTD backlog/breakdown. Therefore, in my mind, for "UM" avoidance, Archives, References, Projects must have their underlying Areas-of-Focus synchronized. Thus what often has me wrapped around the axle and thus putting me in deliberation-mode is what belongs where? As an example, a few Areas-of-Focus in alpha-sequence: CAR, FISCAL, HEALTH, HOME, PERSONS, etc. Thus, to make this angst as simple as possible, is any corresponding INSURANCE organized with the CAR, HEALTH, HOME, PERSONS, or are all INSURANCES organized with FISCAL. Thus that is just one example of "Cross-Organizing-Possibilities". Please, also bare in mind that since Paper Files are not "Tagable", unless there is note(s) that says "Not Here Dummy, You will find it. . . . Therefore, if any fellow GTDer has a principle to govern "Cross-Organizing-Possibilities" . . . believe-you-me i'm all ears. Thank you
mcogilvie
Registered
It might help us to know what tools you are using to manage your lists, but I see what's bothering you. Areas of Focus do need to be just right for each person. I've tried just three: Work, Personal and Home. That was too few. You can definitely have too many. For example, insurance is an ongoing need, perhaps for car and home, but it's not usually an every week kind of thing. I think anything over 15-20 would overload my circuits. Right now I have 12: Research, Teaching, Administration, GTD, Personal, Renewal, Wife, Friends and Family, Health, Household, Digital Stuff and Money. A lot of this organization is based on experience. The Wife area contains a lot of stuff we want to do together but requires coordinating schedules. It therefore has a lot of agenda items. Household has all the car and home stuff, a lot of which involves physical actions. I broke out Digital Stuff because almost all of that is of a similar character different from household matters. For example, do I want to switch internet provider, or try a faster router? The projects have a certain relationship which makes it convenient to group them together.
Unless you have a hobby or professional interest in cars, I would put cars under household, for all the stuff. Routine stuff about insurance of any kind I would also put under household. If I were interested in switching insurance companies because I wanted to pay a lower rate, I might put that project under Money, or I might put it under Household. Either way is ok, as long as I do a weekly review. Persons does not seem like a good area of focus if you include people you interact with in a non-social setting. My Family and Friends area does not include people at work, except for a few I do see socially. It does take time to find out what will work best for you. As you do weekly reviews, you will start to see how your mind wants to organize things. Don't be afraid to try changes in your system.
OF user
Registered
When I used OmniFocus I organized projects under areas of focus. I also had a single action list for each area. The fact was all my actions fit into one area. If it didn’t I likely could delete it. Now I track areas of focus but as part of the FOCUS AND DIRECTION section I my paper system, not in my project or action lists. I don’t find tracking areas important as a part of ORGANIZING. They are helpful in in performing a mindsweep and during the ENGAGING step but I don’t worry about balancing time spent in my areas because they are not all equal anyway. I find that making intuitive choices is perfectly fine in handling that for me. During my weekly review, I evaluate those choices by examining progress made on my projects. Do you find you are spending a lot of time in these horizons during your weekly review? REVIEW is very much a runway and projects intensive area for me. I may look at Horizons quarterly.