Tell me about your GTD implementation

[Longstreet]

This has indeed been a great discussion! I think I have created a firestorm, which is EXACTLY what I wanted to do -- stimulate some discussion here.. Within everything I have said, I wish to clarify a few things. First, I still do like to schedule major, high-focus actions right on the calendar -- my big rocks, if you will. Doing so for me heightens my sense of commitment to getting this important action done and at the same time, keeps my valuable, best-time-of-day for me protected. However, these are only a relatively small number of actions that go directly in my calendar -- and I still keep them in my next actions list (I use Nirvanahq) so if something comes up that is even more important...and I do not want to reschedule....the action is still there on my lists. What do I do the rest of the time? I follow the GTD 4-criteria model for what is best for me to do at the moment. So, yes...I do follow GTD in this regard.

Folke, you asked why one that "bends" the rules of GTD stays with GTD. For me it is simple. GTD is by far THE BEST system/practice out there for managing one's life. The concepts of getting everything out of your head and into a usable system is of paramount importance. Having dedicated weekly reviews is another major component that I find invaluable. GTD simply works. As others have pointed out, it is perfectly within the practice of GTD to block things on your calendar if you need the protected "doing" time. Listen again to the GTD Connect webinar entitled "The Daily Grind". Here it is made very clear. Also, look at this GTD coach response to blocking time on the calendar.

http://gettingthingsdone.com/2009/08/when-to-block-your-calendar/

I think I can rest my case -- I AM working completely within the GTD framework and acceptance. Besides....the GTD police have NOT arrived at my office door.

 

[Folke]

GTD's date philosophy boils down to putting "hard dates" on the calendar, and avoiding scheduling things you "want" to do on certain dates.
...
I think it's a misunderstanding of GTD to believe that it discourages dating tasks - or at the very least, an oversimplification.

I see no real difference of opinion between us. Hard dates are hard. Period. They are part of the hard landscape. Definitely GTD. For example, appointments, stipulated submission deadlines, adapting to other people's firm schedules etc. These are hard. Totally agreed. And if you happen to have tons of hard deadlines in your work, then that is just the reality.

The discussion earlier in this thread, though, as I interpreted it, was about using dates even for other things as an artificial means to getting yourself to do them - a kind of "trick" to heighten your awareness of them. Although I can understand the reason why this is so popular, as I too can find long lists overwhelming, as I said in my later post above I prefer to use a few different colors for that purpose than to use phony soft dates (that I will probably choose to readjust over and over).

Not scheduling tasks, or having deadlines, really and truly isn't that big of a portion of the method.

That's probably true - percentage-wise. And that is probably the very key to my question.

Most of the GTD material discusses other things, most of which is not in question by anyone. Read your inbox. Empty your head. Etc. This is what makes GTD "complete", but also less unique. There is no way to tell whether a person is a GTD lover or hater if all you know is that he or she does all those things (gets it down on paper, defines actions and projects etc etc.) Everyone does that. David's tough stance on unnecessary dating is one of the few things that stand out. And the bipolar view on priorities. And his insistence on deciding as much as possible in the moment.

For me it is simple. GTD is by far THE BEST system/practice out there for managing one's life. The concepts of getting everything out of your head and into a usable system is of paramount importance. Having dedicated weekly reviews is another major component that I find invaluable. GTD simply works.

Yes, I am beginning to believe more and more that this is the answer to my question. It is very complete and it works. 99% of the "volume" is probably almost the same as every other approach or methodology (to get stuff out of your head etc), but David wins out due to the overall completeness.

The people who hate GTD are usually the ones who want to do extensive soft scheduling (planning) or rigid prioritization, and who see no value in adapting to the current context, energy etc. These areas combined are just a small fraction of the GTD text volume, but are the areas where there are significant differences.

... it is perfectly within the practice of GTD to block things on your calendar if you need the protected "doing" time.

Sure, there is the same difference between hard and soft when it comes to blocking as there is for specific actions.

 

[Longstreet]

I see no real difference of opinion between us. Hard dates are hard. Period. They are part of the hard landscape. Definitely GTD. For example, appointments, stipulated submission deadlines, adapting to other people's firm schedules etc. These are hard. Totally agreed. And if you happen to have tons of hard deadlines in your work, then that is just the reality.

The discussion earlier in this thread, though, as I interpreted it, was about using dates even for other things as an artificial means to getting yourself to do them - a kind of "trick" to heighten your awareness of them. Although I can understand the reason why this is so popular, as I too can find long lists overwhelming, as I said in my later post above I prefer to use a few different colors for that purpose than to use phony soft dates (that I will probably choose to readjust over and over).

That's probably true - percentage-wise. And that is probably the very key to my question.

Most of the GTD material discusses other things, most of which is not in question by anyone. Read your inbox. Empty your head. Etc. This is what makes GTD "complete", but also less unique. There is no way to tell whether a person is a GTD lover or hater if all you know is that he or she does all those things (gets it down on paper, defines actions and projects etc etc.) Everyone does that. David's tough stance on unnecessary dating is one of the few things that stand out. And the bipolar view on priorities. And his insistence on deciding as much as possible in the moment.

Yes, I am beginning to believe more and more that this is the answer to my question. It is very complete and it works. 99% of the "volume" is probably almost the same as every other approach or methodology (to get stuff out of your head etc), but David wins out due to the overall completeness.

The people who hate GTD are usually the ones who want to do extensive soft scheduling (planning) or rigid prioritization, and who see no value in adapting to the current context, energy etc. These areas combined are just a small fraction of the GTD text volume, but are the areas where there are significant differences.

Sure, there is the same difference between hard and soft when it comes to blocking as there is for specific actions.

Nice assessment, Folke. Blocking specific actions -- major ones that require 1+ hours to complete -- even though they are not due on that particular day is a good way to make sure you have dedicated "doing" time to do your important work - is an important component I believe in GTD. But as coach Riley stated, you must be careful in doing this and make sure you honor that blocked time.

 

[Folke]

I have not listened to coach Riley, but I am very skeptical to "honoring" soft things of any kind - simply because I know that I am unable to. If I know the whole exactness of the date is phony I just cannot make myself heed it; I actually even get annoyed that someone (I myself, in this case) could be silly enough to try to manipulate me with such a cheap trick. ;-) It just does not work for me.

But if the time and date are truly hard - externally promised or stipulated etc, nothing I can change with the stroke of a pen but must negotiate with the external world - then it is a different story. And this is why I like to note the hard date if there is one, or just my colors if there is no hard date - a red marker is not fake; in my list it represents an objectively true fact (that I will not be able to deny even the next day) that this task is important and I am "in danger".

 

[mommoe436]

I don't think people who block time or set interim/internal deadlines are creating phony dates or using cheap tricks to fool themselves into getting things done. They are simply trying to manage the limited time they have and make sure their big rocks, as Longstreet referred to them, get done. I don't think this is much different than your red list, just a different format. You color code items you want to have heightened awareness of, others block out time on their calendar, others write them on a hot list.

The ability to make every decision in the moment will depend on the complexity of the work,the quantity of work, how fast things are moving and an individual's personality and work style.

The great thing is that GTD is a method, a set of best practices, which we are permitted, and even encouraged, to modify into something that works for our world.

 

[Longstreet]

@mommoe436: Exactly! This is what I have been trying to say. Everyone has a different style of work. Mine is scheduling important actions onto my calendar. The heart of what I do is based in GTD for sure. But each of us....as I said....has to find our style and what works best for us. One size will never fit all.

 

[Folke]

I perfectly understand and respect the reasons, and even the solution, if it works for you. What I would be inclined to advise you, though, as I think somebody has already suggested in this thread, is to use a separate "sub-calendar" (color) for these "soft appointments". One of the major disadvantages of soft scheduling is the fact that they make it hard to see the "real" (hard) appointments (that you cannot easily change). If you have them in a separate sub-calendar you could easily just hide that whole calendar if you need to see the hard landscape more clearly.

Yes, mommoe436, I agree that it all boils down to alternative methods of making sure you really see the important things. And that takes us back to the basics, to the fact that core GTD does not have any solid built-in method to deal with "attention" - it is all primarily based on making informed situational decisions at the spur of the moment from a looong list (or too many shorter lists), and many of us do not feel comfortable with that, so we improve on it a bit - with colors or hot lists or soft dates or whatever we can come up with. I personally have not only my three "review attention colors" but also a Tentative Today list, but I have no soft dates; others have just soft dates or soft dates and a hot list etc. Others abandon GTD altogether or even reject it without trying it (and stick to the ubiquitous soft scheduling approach).

I think there is a high degree of agreement between us here in this forum. We all fundamentally like GTD and its dynamic, situational approach.

 

[mommoe436]

Folke - I use a separate calendar for my blocks, unless it is a "have to" in which case it goes on my normal calendar. The calendars overlap and have different colors.

 

[SiobhanBR]

I think an important distinction between GTD and some other systems is that in GTD even if you create a "hot list" or block time on a calendar to work on something that is just a shadow task. The real task lives on your GTD Next Actions list, which is a complete inventory of what you have committed to do. The result? If something happens to change your day and you don't get those things done, you can throw the list away and delete that calendar timeblock and know that the task is still on your list.

Some other systems I've tried, I would be moving that to-do from day to day to day and never getting it done but not able to delete it because I had no other trusted place to put it.

In general I do not schedule anything without a hard date, but I will block generic Doing or Next Action time on my calendar if necessary to ensure I have some. Without that, my entire calendar can be scheduled by others leaving me no time to do any of my predefined work.

 

[Gardener]

Now, I'm not your target audience here, because I do object to planning things by date. But I thought I'd comment.

LSome say "the next action" concept - but which methodology does not have something like that? Some say the "project" concept - but don't they all have that.

IMO, most of them don't have it. Many methods have you plan out a whole project, or at least a substantial part of it. The idea that you only need to find one thing to move the project forward, and that the one thing should be something small that you can do, and that you can trust yourself to figure out the next thing after this thing is done, is IMO fairly unique to GTD.

And "inbox zero" - jeeez (didn't even the old cowboys know they must open the letters that the stage coach brought them?

But it's not about opening the letters, it's about opening them and processing them, so that they don't sit there quietly composting until the end of time. Open the email, extract its actions into the system, and file the email away. That email might serve for reference, but it's not an unknown source of possible obligations any more.

 

[Longstreet]

I forgot to mention that I schedule major next actions in the mornings (my prime work time) AND on a separate Outlook calendar I have named "Planning Calendar". This way, only the absolute things that have to be done that day go on my hard landscape calendar, which is in line with David Allen's writings and teaching. But having a working game plan I think is a good thing.

 

[GTD-Sweden]

A thought to get some further perspective on this debate. Both putting artificially scheduled due dates in the calendar and making an A, B or C priority in the system is just a minor adjustment and does not take away the fact that GTD is by far the best time management system when it comes to getting things done and to enjoy life at the same time.

These adjustments are really not necessary if you have the discipline to scale down your active projects to what is really important. Then you should manage with your NA-lists during the week.

Unfortunately I´m not there at that black belt level yet, and find it to be a good way to use the calendar as a tool to get important stuff done.

 

[Longstreet]

@GTD-Sweden: I agree with you except that even if one is highly skilled at GTD and has been practicing it for years, it is still okay to use a planning calendar as I have described, or a hot list with different colors like Folke has described.

 

[Folke]

I actually use BOTH a "flagged hotlist" (my "Tentative Selection for Today") AND colored markers all over my Next and Waiting For lists. The hotlist flag I toggle quite often, as the day evolves, but the "attention" (red/blue/turquoise) marker is very stable.

Just because something is "red hot" does not mean I will necessarily aim to do it today (e.g. not possible due to many meetings), so I will not put it on the Today list. And vice versa. I usually also even put some "cool turquoise" stuff on my Today list if they match other actions that I have already put there (e.g. additional errands in the same part of town where I have an appointment).

(And I color code my Someday stuff, too. Guess what a hot Someday is? ;-) ).

 

[Longstreet]

@Folke: Is a "Hot Someday" similar to a "Hot Date"? LOL!

 

[bcmyers2112]

How do you handle soft deadlines for your actions (e.g. a Next Action that you should do by a certain date, but it isn't set in stone)? Do you put these on your Calendar, or do you simply mark it somewhere on a NA list?

I don't know what a "soft" deadline is. To me a deadline or due date is real or it is not; missing it comes with negative consequences significant enough that blowing it off is not an option.

How do you handle recurring tasks (for stuff like "Exercise 30 minutes" or "Read Spanish textbook for 1 hour")? Do these go on your Calendar? Do you feel a sense of accomplishment even if you do the same things everyday?

I struggle with this one myself. I have not found it effective to put these things in my calendar nor to include them in my next actions lists with due dates. One thing that has helped me with exercising is to sign up for classes at a club; if I miss the class, I still have to pay for it. That creates some motivation.

How do you handle unexpected changes to your blocked Calendar time? That is, if something more important comes up and interrupts the time you set aside to do something, do you reschedule it elsewhere on the Calendar?

I am in sales and my priorities can (and usually do) change on a minute-to-minute basis with one phone call from my boss, a client, a prospect, etc. I don't schedule time for tasks; my calendar is truly reserved for "hard landscape" items like appointments, or tasks that can only be done and must be done on a certain date.

In the rare instances where I run into a calendar conflict (where I have an existing appointment but someone else requests I meet with them at the same time) I weigh the incoming request against the existing commitment. Usually the latter wins, but sometimes the incoming request is urgent enough that I ask if I can reschedule the existing appointment.

When looking at your NA lists, how do you keep yourself from doing smaller, less important things instead of larger, more urgent things? Is it just a matter of discipline and motivation?

That's a tough one. I'm getting better at it, mainly because as I get a better handle on my "runway" and "10,000 ft" altitudes, it's easier to understand my priorities. In my professional role as a salesperson, revenue generating tasks are the most important. It doesn't hurt that I enjoy my job!

What are your most useful contexts?

For me they're all useful because each context represents a person, place, or tool required to accomplish a task. I'm not sure why one would be more "useful" than another.

Do you ever find yourself unmotivated/unwilling to use GTD, or are constantly adjusting and shuffling how your implementation works?

Yes although when I run into a roadblock it's usually because I've run into an area where I've made my system unnecessarily complex or difficult. In each case I've gotten past the roadblock by streamlining the system so I eliminate the "psychic resistance" towards using it.

 

[bcmyers2112]

”What gets scheduled gets done”, is the old time-management rule you refer to, I imagine. Can someone really deny that?

In my world, yes, I can deny that. I am in sales and I have to remain flexible. Calls, emails, texts from management, customers, prospects and others often force me to reassess and even renegotiate my priorities and plans. It's not worth it to schedule time for tasks which are not truly part of the hard landscape (i.e. something that must be done on a specific day/time) because I am rarely able to stick with such arbitrary schedules. Which to me is OK -- from my POV it means my life is rarely boring!

 

[bcmyers2112]

Most of the GTD material discusses other things, most of which is not in question by anyone. Read your inbox. Empty your head. Etc. This is what makes GTD "complete", but also less unique. There is no way to tell whether a person is a GTD lover or hater if all you know is that he or she does all those things (gets it down on paper, defines actions and projects etc etc.) Everyone does that. David's tough stance on unnecessary dating is one of the few things that stand out. And the bipolar view on priorities. And his insistence on deciding as much as possible in the moment.

I must respectfully disagree. First, a lot of people I know keep a lot of stuff in their head and the small percentage of things they write down are rarely clarified to the degree suggested by GTD. Second, I believe the thing that makes GTD truly unique -- and is in fact the overarching purpose for and focus of the GTD system as offered by DA -- is the suggestion that you get everything out of your head and into a trusted system in order to be more relaxed and present in the moment. I know of no other system that has that as its bedrock.

I understand that people are free to accept or reject pieces of the system as they see fit. It's a productivity methodology, after all, not a pledge of allegiance to a particular ideology or religion! Still DA has been pretty clear that this is the reasoning behind GTD. I think some of the other things like guidance to avoid "daily to-do lists" are also noteworthy but not as core to the system as presented by DA as the whole "get it out of your head" bit.

 

[bcmyers2112]

@Folke: Is a "Hot Someday" similar to a "Hot Date"? LOL!

Probably not -- if the man/woman you're asking out tells you "someday" that's usually a bad sign...

 

[Folke]

About Hot Someday:

I review my Someday things at different intervals. The Hot Someday (red marker) are so hot that I look at them even if I drop by my Someday list during the week. They are super-tempting; I just have not decided yet whether I will do them at all (e.g. whether I dare or not). The Regular Someday (blue) I check during the weekly review as per standard GTD. The Cool Someday (turquoise) I check only when I do my super-thorough reviews (every 6 months or so).

About what is unique with GTD:

I really and truly understand that we all come from different backgrounds and see different things in GTD. I can agree that many people in the world seem to not follow the principle to get things out of their heads and get it down onto paper. And I am fully aware that GTD teaches precisely that. And it is important and commendable that someone (DA) has bothered to write these detailed instructions. And I know that you all (we all) appreciate the fact that he wrote such a complete description (it even includes recommendations about what garbage dumpsters you can use). BUT: Every methodology that is based on using lists or notes also implicitly uses the "out of your head" premise, even in those cases where they do not emphasize it or even mention it. It is inherent in the use of lists and "structure". The same goes for writing down next actions. These aspects of GTD are like warming up and stretching at the gym - "every" trainer and "every" person knows about it or even does it, whether they care to talk about it or not. Or when it comes to diet, everyone knows you should cut down on sugar and have a balanced amount of protein, monounsaturated fats, vitamins, minerals etc, but they all rhetorically stress totally different things - one stresses high protein, another stresses low GI, another stresses high fat + low carb, and so on, but when you compare and calculate the content of their total recommended diet "menus" they are all strikingly similar.

Gardener mentioned a funny thing earlier - the fact that some consultants teach that you should write down all actions in a project from the start. DA says you don't have to, and lots of people in the real world in fact don't actually do like those consultants say, even if they have never heard of GTD. Many people even play it totally by ear and do not even have the first action identified - they just wait until the inspiration comes! As usual, I tend to agree with DA; that's why I like him; he has a balanced view on things, generally. I can agree that this is, although not totally unique, at least a non-ubiquitous wisdom that is part of GTD which deserves mentioning - the recommendation to write down at least all those actions that could be started now, but not necessarily write down all the rest. This places GTD somewhere in the middle - between the "total planners" and the "play-it-totally-by-ear folks". Good point. Thank you. I had missed that.