Single next actions in the lists
- Thread starter RomanS
- Start date
No, it’s not similar for me. Most of my @computer tasks are associated with projects, but most of the ones @anywhere (in practice, mostly phone or tablet), are single actions. I think it all depends on your work, your preferred workflows, whether you assign recurring actions to a project, et cetera. And all of that can change with time.There’s certainly no “right” distrbution.
gtdstudente
Registered
@RomanS
Thank you for your very good GTD post
1. Little unclear:
"I usually have single next actions in the form of 2-minute tasks or tasks that I complete when they appear (three-fold nature of work)."
You seeming to be saying you have "2-minute tasks or tasks" akin to as a "2-minute checklist reminder' imbedded in your Next Action list(s) ?
Interesting, if so, while unnecessary, and as an aside, is this particular imbedded checklist corralled in its own "little box" on the Next Action list(s) ?
On this end, it seems OK to have longer list than might very well be unconventionally longer with "additions" embedded as long as one's embedment's are not undermining the lists' practical purpose's through distraction, numbness, and the like ?
2. "This means that I almost only have next actions in my lists that are linked to a project."
Unless the Next Action is a 'stand-alone' action for completion, then it would be -- at least implicitly -- 'linked' to a project
Very good
Ps. In reading @mcogilvie good reply, how the concept 'linked' is being used in this context is unclear, and as such, reply herein thinking of 'link' universally vs. possible "digital link"
3. Is it similar for you?
Yes
Additionally, generally speaking, the GTD methodology can tolerate personal adaptations, however, on this end prefer to test on one part of one's GTD systems for 'stand-up overtime worthiness' prior to implementing any personal adaptations throughout one's system with personal adaptations if that makes sense ?
Likewise, at least until verified, it might also be prudent to give one's personal adaptations some sort of subtle notion, i.e., * , italicize, etc. just to know/track what is not 'pure' GTD in one's system . . . while everything in life is subject to improvements, GTD has been very well thought out for "out of the box" implementation as seems especially clear in GTD for Teens ?
Thank you very much
As you see GTD fit. . . .
Thank you for your very good GTD post
1. Little unclear:
"I usually have single next actions in the form of 2-minute tasks or tasks that I complete when they appear (three-fold nature of work)."
You seeming to be saying you have "2-minute tasks or tasks" akin to as a "2-minute checklist reminder' imbedded in your Next Action list(s) ?
Interesting, if so, while unnecessary, and as an aside, is this particular imbedded checklist corralled in its own "little box" on the Next Action list(s) ?
On this end, it seems OK to have longer list than might very well be unconventionally longer with "additions" embedded as long as one's embedment's are not undermining the lists' practical purpose's through distraction, numbness, and the like ?
2. "This means that I almost only have next actions in my lists that are linked to a project."
Unless the Next Action is a 'stand-alone' action for completion, then it would be -- at least implicitly -- 'linked' to a project
Very good
Ps. In reading @mcogilvie good reply, how the concept 'linked' is being used in this context is unclear, and as such, reply herein thinking of 'link' universally vs. possible "digital link"
3. Is it similar for you?
Yes
Additionally, generally speaking, the GTD methodology can tolerate personal adaptations, however, on this end prefer to test on one part of one's GTD systems for 'stand-up overtime worthiness' prior to implementing any personal adaptations throughout one's system with personal adaptations if that makes sense ?
Likewise, at least until verified, it might also be prudent to give one's personal adaptations some sort of subtle notion, i.e., * , italicize, etc. just to know/track what is not 'pure' GTD in one's system . . . while everything in life is subject to improvements, GTD has been very well thought out for "out of the box" implementation as seems especially clear in GTD for Teens ?
Thank you very much
As you see GTD fit. . . .
Last edited:
schmeggahead
Registered
This caught my eye because of the 2-minute rule:
If it takes less than 2 minutes and you are ever going to do it, do it now because it takes longer to put it in your system than it takes to do it.
These tasks never make it into your system.
Hope this helps,
Clayton.
Out of control is ok - know how to regain control - David Allen
Yes. That's one reason, why I have not many single tasks in my context list (they are all done before because my single tasks mostly do not need more than 2 minutes).
No, see my answer above.
gtdstudente
Registered
Thank you, sir.
I use someday/maybe list for my digital capture (inbox). If it is a 2 minute or single action I'm not going to do right now, I put it on this list. I will pick it up during review. It may not go on a next action list and I do it right then. Or I put it in a context next action. So not all next actions are associated with projects.
Yes, this is the case for me too. Almost every action has an associated project.
I have noticed that for some tasks that the next action is not all that useful. For example, if I am writing the code for a software feature, the next action does not help me all that much. It has made me wonder whether implementing the feature should just be an action rather than the project. The advice is often to make the next action as granular as possible but I maybe in some cases deliberately going for larger next actions could be advantageous.
That wouldn't work for me. I stick closely to the original GTD system for the lists: S/M contains commitments that have already been clarified, so nothing that I'm collecting (I use the inbox for this). Tasks that need to be done within the next 7 days or so are added to the list of next actions contexts. What is in S/M has a longer time horizon. I only review this list once a week and like to call it the "parking lot". - But if your approach works for you, that's of course okay.
Translated with DeepL.com (free version)
My understanding is that S/M contains things that you are not committed to that you want to be reminded of in the future.
I agree with your main point, that it wouldn't work as an inbox for me.
True but when I thought about it all input is SM. When I look at my SM list I pick up the projects or next actions I want to move to other lists. If it is truly a SM item I just leave it there. Also since it is my inbox I look at that list more often. It's digital so I can access it often and quickly.
I agree with you. I would better have written: "S/M contains input, that has already been processed."
Not here. Most of my processed Input MUST (not maybe) be done ASAP (not someday).
I see the logic, but I would worry that new inputs might get missed if I lump them in with things that I have decided not to progress at the moment. If it works for you then great.
I felt that way too. But after using it, I eliminated a bin to check and as I said, I can access that note anywhere. I can process an item pretty quickly to where I need it. Again, I process two minute items right then. I have to be careful how this is perceived, but I don't classify any thing by importance only context. I also find when looking at SM list, I move many items to my project list or I find it doesn't interest me any more, I can delete it.
Oogiem
0
I have a much looser interpretation.: S/M are things that I may want to do, or for sure want to do at some point sometime later. So much more open ended. But they NEVER stay in any inbox I have, they always get processed somehow even if it's just a line item in a note in Obsidian.
I end up with a lot of R and D actions that aren't attached to any project. I often hear about things in meetings or events, like other companies or healthcare products I don't know, and make a note to look into them at some point. At that point I add "R and D product X" to my task manager in the form of a single next action.
Those actually sound like projects. Maybe not.