I read jkgrossi's post of GTD a "flawed system" and echo his points about the frustration of the daily FC ABC/123, as well as the dilemma about injecting a sense of importance or urgency into the GTD NA lists.
Lately I've been thinking that there may be a semantic issue here in how we use the word "Priority".
1. One way to think about priorities is the importance of given a NA relative to all other NA's on the list. In my experience, this assessment, once made (assuming comprehensive collection, processing and organizing) is fairly static, at least in the short run and certainly in the time between weekly reviews. The short-term challenge here is deciding where new inputs or interruptions fit in.
2. Another way of thinking about priorities is "what is the most appropriate thing for me to be doing right now. In my experience, that assessment is extremely dynamic, and depends on the types of filters GTD refers to as context, time available and energy.
I think the latter is the sense of the word DA uses in eschewing daily/weekly pre-prioritized ToDo lists ala FC's ABC/123. However, I don't see where this precludes a priority assessment in the former sense of the word, if reviewed and re-calibrated as necessary at each weekly review.
For example, GTD points out that if the most important NA job-wise requires a computer and my server's down, or requires at least an hour and I've only got ten minutes, or requires concentrated focus and high energy and I'm toast, then it's not really an option in that moment.
However, given my job, >95% of my time is spent at my desk, so my @office, @computer and @calls lists are all in play. Lately my "hard landscape" has been pretty open, so I've got mostly discretionary time. Therefore, the first two filters of options in GTD (context and time) don't narrow my choices significantly. At times like that I want to be able to look at my list, realize that I'm really motivated, and pick out the most important task on the list without having to re-think; or realize that I'm fried, and knock off some low priority stuff, again without having to re-think.
My problem is that, even with good energy, if I've got to look through long @office, @computer and @calls lists to see the full set of choices, more times than not I'll gravitate toward those "surf the web for . . . " NA's, while the bigger, less pleasant things, get pushed off.
Lately I've been thinking that there may be a semantic issue here in how we use the word "Priority".
1. One way to think about priorities is the importance of given a NA relative to all other NA's on the list. In my experience, this assessment, once made (assuming comprehensive collection, processing and organizing) is fairly static, at least in the short run and certainly in the time between weekly reviews. The short-term challenge here is deciding where new inputs or interruptions fit in.
2. Another way of thinking about priorities is "what is the most appropriate thing for me to be doing right now. In my experience, that assessment is extremely dynamic, and depends on the types of filters GTD refers to as context, time available and energy.
I think the latter is the sense of the word DA uses in eschewing daily/weekly pre-prioritized ToDo lists ala FC's ABC/123. However, I don't see where this precludes a priority assessment in the former sense of the word, if reviewed and re-calibrated as necessary at each weekly review.
For example, GTD points out that if the most important NA job-wise requires a computer and my server's down, or requires at least an hour and I've only got ten minutes, or requires concentrated focus and high energy and I'm toast, then it's not really an option in that moment.
However, given my job, >95% of my time is spent at my desk, so my @office, @computer and @calls lists are all in play. Lately my "hard landscape" has been pretty open, so I've got mostly discretionary time. Therefore, the first two filters of options in GTD (context and time) don't narrow my choices significantly. At times like that I want to be able to look at my list, realize that I'm really motivated, and pick out the most important task on the list without having to re-think; or realize that I'm fried, and knock off some low priority stuff, again without having to re-think.
My problem is that, even with good energy, if I've got to look through long @office, @computer and @calls lists to see the full set of choices, more times than not I'll gravitate toward those "surf the web for . . . " NA's, while the bigger, less pleasant things, get pushed off.
