andycragg said:
I have a four drawer filing cabinet which is full of hanging folders ... and full of papers. So, having read the book, I know I need to convert all these to alpha-sorted, labelled manilla folders.
Also, which bit is supposed to take two days? It will take me weeks to sort out every piece of paper in my cabinet
This is how I did it, not the only way, maybe not the best way, but the way I thought I could get the most benefit with the least time spent organizing and filing. It works with my amount of stuff, how I use my stuff, and my personal style. I wanted to be an "optimizer," not a "maximizer" when it comes to filing.
First, I did not convert hanging to manila. I thought it would be a waste of time to no advantage. I already had high-quality file cabinets designed to support hanging folders, plenty of great-quality hanging folders, and a bunch of stuff already filed in hanging folders. I have one legacy file box with manila folders, and I do not find them any easier to use than good (Pendaflex) hanging ones. (Any brand I've tried besides Pendaflex was frustrating, non-functional junk.)
I do use internal manila folders inside some of the hanging ones for sub-categorization, which works very well.
An advantage for manila for you might be freeing up a little space, but I would rather accomplish that by cleaning out some of the folders that need it most. Cleaning out the unnecessary helps you see the necessary. I purge or archive when I need more space.
Second, for me, it was the stuff OUTSIDE my filing cabinet that needed to be processed. It was much more current and likely to require action. I focused on processing that stuff. There was plenty to keep me busy for awhile.
So I did not put all my old filed papers into In. Use your judgment as to whether it's worth it to re-file a folder you have already filed. There are probably some files in there that are working pretty well; I would keep whatever is working already for retrieval. To free up space, I would look through the folders and pull some that are no longer relevant to retain, or some that I know are the worst mess, and sort through those. Unless you retrieve heavily, there are diminishing returns to increased organization of them.
For retrieval, I have also indexed my files in an Excel spreadsheet with multiple keywords. I did not create a comprehensive index of all pre-existing files upfront, but add to it when I retrieve from pre-existing files and whenever I create a new file. Small, painless steps on an as-needed basis.
But the more frequent the retrieval, the more organization pays off. So if you retrieve from all your files frequently, my somewhat laid-back style might not be best for you.
I don't know about the A-Z. Before I found GTD, I was already using A-Z so my new files fit in. Are you using a different system? Changing can make it harder to find things for a long time to come.
andycragg said:
How do I start? Isn't this a catch-22 - I can't start without a decent filing system (A-Z, labelled, manilla) but the filing system I have is in a mess and needs putting into "in", so I can't start with a filing system!
My process actually went like this. I started processing papers that were
not already filed -- the piles of "amorphous stuff" rather than the files. These gathered piles constituted my "Inbox" at the time. Some of these papers needed to be filed in already-existing files. Others needed new files. Some, thankfully, got trashed. When my file drawers got too full, I then turned my attention to them. First I yanked some old files I no longer needed to keep. Then I yanked the fattest files and sorted and purged them. Purging is the key. When I had enough space, I went back and finished processing the In piles.
But when I was done processing, I could
then see a better way to file some of the stuff. It was impossible to see beforehand, because I didn't know what all my stuff was. Now I had a choice: should I refile everything in a better way or leave it alone. I took the middle ground. I re-organized the files most obviously in need. For example, I had created 3 different folders for things that could easily be combined, so I combined them into one folder.
None of the files I left alone have mattered since then. So the outcome was successful.
andycragg said:
And ... can anyone advise on how to order single topic folders that have too much paper for one manilla folder - is it always chronologically? Do you have to rip off the label and print a new one (with dates?) when a folder gets full?
Whatever seems reasonable for the folder. Folders that were too full get purged, divided further by category, and/or a bigger folder (box-bottom or box-bottom pocket). Sometimes category division is appropriate (vehicles, for example), sometimes chonological division (financial statements). I did subdivide my bank account statements with internal folders chronologically. I went to the trouble with that one because I often need to retrieve from it.
I also archive stuff because I followed the "when in doubt, keep it" rule. So a folder with past bank statements from a now-closed account goes into the archive box and up to the attic. If I ever need the space in the attic, I'll take a quick look and probably throw it out.
