"Titles" of Projects on Projects List & When to Define Outcome

[NancyX]

I am trying to help a friend get started with some basic GTD methodology. She has an OVERFLOWING inbox (with MONTHS worth of papers, notes, old lists, etc. in it.) So many of her things are projects according to GTD definitions, but whenever we sit down to start processing, it takes forever if I challenge her to clarify the outcome and come up with a good outcome-oriented "title" for the project, create a project folder, initial project plan page, define a next action, etc. (We are doing all paper as that works best for her right now.)

Because she doesn't have a list yet of what everything is, each item that is unearthed seems vitally important to her and she loves clarifying it and talking about it and deciding the next action to move it forward. But I I know full well that some of these things really need to get parked on a Someday/Maybe list to get them out of the way for now. I think if we can just get through the initial piles and mind sweep, she'll be able to see that more effectively, but for now they all seem urgent.

So my question: Is is okay to write things on the Projects List that don't yet have a clearly defined outcome and outcome-oriented description, just so we can get the inbox under control. Another factor is that I only have about 2 hours/week to work with her and she doesn't "get it" enough yet to process things on her own. She's just working with what we get on the next actions list and trying to keep up with that, so in the meantime the inbox grows more full.

Being in this state of overwhelm is foreign to me as I've been doing some form of GTD for years and I have always been organized as well so I'm looking for strategies I can use to help her.

 

[gtdstudente]

I am trying to help a friend get started with some basic GTD methodology. She has an OVERFLOWING inbox (with MONTHS worth of papers, notes, old lists, etc. in it.) So many of her things are projects according to GTD definitions, but whenever we sit down to start processing, it takes forever if I challenge her to clarify the outcome and come up with a good outcome-oriented "title" for the project, create a project folder, initial project plan page, define a next action, etc. (We are doing all paper as that works best for her right now.)

Because she doesn't have a list yet of what everything is, each item that is unearthed seems vitally important to her and she loves clarifying it and talking about it and deciding the next action to move it forward. But I I know full well that some of these things really need to get parked on a Someday/Maybe list to get them out of the way for now. I think if we can just get through the initial piles and mind sweep, she'll be able to see that more effectively, but for now they all seem urgent.

So my question: Is is okay to write things on the Projects List that don't yet have a clearly defined outcome and outcome-oriented description, just so we can get the inbox under control. Another factor is that I only have about 2 hours/week to work with her and she doesn't "get it" enough yet to process things on her own. She's just working with what we get on the next actions list and trying to keep up with that, so in the meantime the inbox grows more full.

Being in this state of overwhelm is foreign to me as I've been doing some form of GTD for years and I have always been organized as well so I'm looking for strategies I can use to help her.

What I learned from David Allen was 'success' can simply be experiencing what you want to be experiencing. This has been very helpful in making 'outcome thinking' less abstract and more concrete. It also makes for good practical meditation.
As a possible starter: I M P L E M E N T . . . G T D "I am experiencing . . . calm productivity . . . as I accurately as possible [accuracy helps me slow-down and be more mindful] implement my GTD methodology/system"

 

[schmeggahead]

So my question: Is is okay to write things on the Projects List that don't yet have a clearly defined outcome and outcome-oriented description, just so we can get the inbox under control.

I do this all the time, with one caveat: I add a task to my @Focused next action list to "Plan Project x".

Another factor is that I only have about 2 hours/week to work with her and she doesn't "get it" enough yet to process things on her own.

You may try starting out with the project planning for projects from last week/s session and then return to processing the inbox for the rest of the session. The dual experience might help develop both skills and reduce the impact. A change of pace can help.

@MortenRovik & @larsh spoke about simplifying your GTD system in a recent podcast on GTDNordic. When your farm harvesting combine input is very wide, it goes slowly. When you narrow the input, it goes faster.

Hope this helps and Kudos for helping others with their systems.
Clayton.

 

[Gardener]

So my question: Is is okay to write things on the Projects List that don't yet have a clearly defined outcome and outcome-oriented description, just so we can get the inbox under control.

I would create an "Ideas" list, and treat that list as another inbox, rather than muddying the definition of a project. So her inbox would go from a pile of paper to a list, and then you'd go through that list and choose which items become projects, and which items go into a Someday/Maybe list. This might mean that you have to dive into the papers again once in a while when something does become a project, but I think it would be worthwhile anyway.

This is what I do electronically at work. Initially centered on my email, I have:

- a gathering stage where anything that might be actionable gets pulled together. This includes stuff coming from others, plus my own thoughts--my main inbox for random thoughts is sending an email to myself
- a preprocessing stage where I pull out stuff that can be relatively mindlessly processed--for example, it's already done because it abruptly became work on demand, it's just reading so I dump it in the reading folder, it's obviously a wild idea that for now goes in someday/maybe, it's redundant with another item, etc. This gets me down to what requires actual thought.
- and THEN an actual processing stage.

I'm not saying this is GTD practice. It's just what I do. And I don't regard it as incompatible with GTD--it just adds an additional processing stage, to cope with high volumes of stuff to process.

Huh. I just realized this is very close to Dana K. White's five step decluttering process. It's startling how many things her process works for, when you treat it as being full of metaphors instead of literally about physical stuff.

Her process is:

(1) Trash. (That's not even a task, or I already did it, or it's the first fourteen emails in a thread and I can just process the fifteenth because it has the whole conversation.)
(2) Do the easy stuff. (Stuff with an obvious home, like "read this.")
(3) "Duh" clutter. (Stuff you already know, without a struggle, you're never going to do.)
(4) Does it have an established place? Take It There Right Now. (Put it in an existing project or make a project.)
(5) Container Concept. If you have too many projects, pick your favorites and get rid of (in the case of clutter, trash or donate; in the case of GTD, delete or Someday/Maybe) the others.

Edited to add: Note that (5) does NOT require you to pre-sort everything. You do it as things arise. You've defined six Widget projects, and the seventh comes along, and you realize that's too many? You choose which of the seven projects has to go. This feels like wasted effort in defining projects, but extra effort while you're progressing is better than an overwhelm that makes it impossible to progress at all.

It feels to me like you're starting with (4). Could you make some progress with steps 1 through 3?

Another factor is that I only have about 2 hours/week to work with her and she doesn't "get it" enough yet to process things on her own. She's just working with what we get on the next actions list and trying to keep up with that, so in the meantime the inbox grows more full.

Yep, I think you need to establish a way for her to be able to pre-process that inbox. Can she go through the papers and make a list? Or, to put it another way, can she do steps 1 through 3, while you guide her in 4 and 5?

 

[GTDengineer]

Simplicity and brevity will help you save time. A project title and the desired outcome can frequently be stated in just a few words. For example, taxes filed, broken window replaced, job application submitted.

 

[cfoley]

One option to manage the overwhelm would be an initial triage of the whole lot, partitioning the inbox into four piles corresponding to Covey quadrants. This could help your friend manage the relative urgency of everything and help your teaching of the various lists.

1. Important and Urgent
2. Important but Not Urgent
3. Unimportant but Urgent
4. Unimportant and Not Urgent

Quadrant 1 obviously has to become current projects and actions. At the level of overwhelm you describe, I would be tempted to defer most in quadrant 2 even though the ideal is to eventually work here most of the time. If possible, I would trash or at least defer everything in quadrant 4. Quadrant 3 is where difficult decisions have to be made based on bandwidth.

it takes forever if I challenge her to clarify the outcome and come up with a good outcome-oriented "title" for the project, create a project folder, initial project plan page, define a next action, etc. (We are doing all paper as that works best for her right now.)

This would take me a long time too. Most of my projects have just a desired outcome and a next action. I can add these in seconds.

So my question: Is is okay to write things on the Projects List that don't yet have a clearly defined outcome and outcome-oriented description, just so we can get the inbox under control. Another factor is that I only have about 2 hours/week to work with her and she doesn't "get it" enough yet to process things on her own. She's just working with what we get on the next actions list and trying to keep up with that, so in the meantime the inbox grows more full.

I feel like putting unclear things on the project list just turns the project list into another inbox. The biggest causes of things not getting done in my system is unclear outcomes and undoable actions. I have to fight hard to keep my lists clean and I would much rather leave unprocessed things in the inbox than move them to the project list prematurely.

I would also encourage her to process things on her own right now. Her processing may not be perfect just now but working through it on her own will create a feedback cycle that probably doesn't exist in a coaching session.

 

[mcogilvie]

I would also encourage her to process things on her own right now. Her processing may not be perfect just now but working through it on her own will create a feedback cycle that probably doesn't exist in a coaching session.

Exactly right. David Allen quotes a proverb “The work will teach you how to do it.” Here we have an application of the three-fold nature of work: doing pre-defined work, doing work as it shows up, and defining our work. Defining our work is work, and you get better at it by doing it. For me, defining next actions and desired outcomes is not necessarily a one-time thing. Clarity sometimes comes slowly, and sometimes I get a sudden BFO (blinding flash of he obvious). New data appears, people change their minds. At a practical level, there is the idea of a “process action”, an action aimed at clarifying and planning something. It is a legitimate next action, but it takes experience to realize that you are not doing something because you don’t know what you’re doing, and you need to refine your understanding.

 

[TesTeq]

This could help your friend manage the relative urgency of everything and help your teaching of the various lists.

1. Important and Urgent
2. Important but Not Urgent
3. Unimportant but Urgent
4. Unimportant and Not Urgent

Quadrant 1 obviously has to become current projects and actions. At the level of overwhelm you describe, I would be tempted to defer most in quadrant 2 even though the ideal is to eventually work here most of the time. If possible, I would trash or at least defer everything in quadrant 4. Quadrant 3 is where difficult decisions have to be made based on bandwidth.

@cfoley You say you would trash or at least defer everything in quadrant 4, if possible. I would do it too but it seems impossible. It's the area where all the guilty pleasures live – all Facebooks, Instagrams, Twitters, stupid TV shows etc. No, it's not possible to trash it!

 

[mcogilvie]

@cfoley You say you would trash or at least defer everything in quadrant 4, if possible. I would do it too but it seems impossible. It's the area where all the guilty pleasures live – all Facebooks, Instagrams, Twitters, stupid TV shows etc. No, it's not possible to trash it!

To say nothing of eating cheese.

 

[schmeggahead]

Exactly right. David Allen quotes a proverb “The work will teach you how to do it.”

I like to experience the reward of deciding some things each day. I like learning better & better ways of deciding.

My focus moved to processing because to hope to capture everything in a single endeavor / event felt a bit like Sisyphus punishment. My life is full of layers of incompletions upon layers of open loops. Trying to discover the extent of this created pure chaos for me.

Only when I let my attention drive filling my system did I finally get to where I trusted what I was doing was a great use of time & focus. My work area for processing got lots of attention so that when I am there, I have a clearer head. I worked my way out from there.
I had to circle back eventually with an already built system to do the massive open loop collection. I finally understood how to handle it: in large area chunks. I have huge numbers of boulders I'm no longer trying to mentally push up the hill.

All the best,
Clayton.

When you deal with what has your attention, you'll find out what really has your attention. - David Allen