Tracking a Project's next action(s)

[gtdstudente]

Thanks for posting this. I also use a paper system and recently decided what my context lists are (most of my work is @computer and I do few errands or phone calls. This is for my job, btw. I keep my personal separate and haven't tackled that yet). Plus, I can make calls anytime and prefer to follow up on that call with a NA for the given topic/project than move on to another call that will break my flow.

So my spiral bound book is divided into sections by NA contexts plus waiting for, agendas, someday/maybe, and a projects list. My capture tool(s) are separate. I also track email things within Outlook, although I planned to write each in my notebook so I have 1 tracking device, but I don't seem to want to take the time.

I find I rarely go into my book. I scan it weekly, which seems far too infrequent. I end up doing actions that have some urgency before I can capture and enter them on a list. This does not give me a sense of calm.

What I've gained so far from GTD is Waiting For and Agenda lists as well as moving items directly to my calendar that have clear due dates. What I've lost over my previous system is the ability to scan a single list to see what's undone and to do what I feel needs doing at that time. I feel uneasy about this.

I'm tempted to go back to a single list but with 3 to 4 columns: project, action, due date, and context. This would be a hybrid of my old continuous list, which worked for the most part and new things I've gained from GTD. I'm hoping this will relieve my inner tension.

Sounds good . . . you have me 'GTD Thinking' because you are using a Spiral Bound [Note] Book, one could use the last page(s) for Capturing and the Clarify/Process to the 'front' of the Notebook . . . with the added 'feature' of almost 'Weekly Reviewing' at the same time! Thank you for helping me "GTD Think"

 

[PBees]

I use Trello and found a template for GTD in the templates - saved me heaps of time as I didn’t have to create. I’m very visual and the Kanban system in Trello seems to be working for me. Early days however. Still learning to hone Trello to meet my needs.

 

[schmeggahead]

What I've lost over my previous system is the ability to scan a single list to see what's undone and to do what I feel needs doing at that time. I feel uneasy about this.

I have heard coaches talk about people starting out with a single list of Next Actions and let the contexts eventually be discovered. With a paper system, placing the context does not give you the benefit of sorting the list. Adding the extra work of writing context may or may not help you using a single list.

When I find I am not using something in my GTD system, it is summarily dropped. Sometimes they come back, but it is few and far between.

I can make calls anytime and prefer to follow up on that call with a NA for the given topic/project than move on to another call that will break my flow.

This reinforces for me that separating by context may be a wasted activity at this point. Especially because:

I find I rarely go into my book.

Maybe you need room for your book to open on your desk, easily accessible. It can fuel your work rather than just track it.

I end up doing actions that have some urgency before I can capture and enter them on a list. This does not give me a sense of calm.

This sounds like the 3 fold nature of work, doing work as it arrives is one of the 3.
The other 2 are, doing planned work, and defining your work.

If by saying "I end up doing actions that have some urgency" you mean that you process those items enough to determine next actions and capture projects with outcomes in the moment, then that is just as much GTD.

The key for me when doing urgent work as it arrives, was having that stack of blank printer paper that I can take the top sheet, date stamp it, and write out as I clarify. When I've finished the urgent part and have to move on to something else, I can toss that sheet into IN so I can process the rest of it.

If I have the time to confirm I have fully completed that urgent outcome, it goes into the shred/recycle bin.

although I planned to write each in my notebook so I have 1 tracking device, but I don't seem to want to take the time.

When I felt this way about my system, I really looked at my email structure to ensure that actionable items were separate from reference and reading. I added Action Support when I started actually adding next actions to my system.

If all of those factors were met with clean lines between each, I felt more calm.

I hope all of this helps,
Clayton.

Remember that capture is about speed and facility; clarify is about precision and completeness. - Jared Caron

 

[Botany_Bill]

I have heard coaches talk about people starting out with a single list of Next Actions and let the contexts eventually be discovered. With a paper system, placing the context does not give you the benefit of sorting the list. Adding the extra work of writing context may or may not help you using a single list.

When I find I am not using something in my GTD system, it is summarily dropped. Sometimes they come back, but it is few and far between.


This reinforces for me that separating by context may be a wasted activity at this point. Especially because:

Maybe you need room for your book to open on your desk, easily accessible. It can fuel your work rather than just track it.


This sounds like the 3 fold nature of work, doing work as it arrives is one of the 3.
The other 2 are, doing planned work, and defining your work.

If by saying "I end up doing actions that have some urgency" you mean that you process those items enough to determine next actions and capture projects with outcomes in the moment, then that is just as much GTD.

The key for me when doing urgent work as it arrives, was having that stack of blank printer paper that I can take the top sheet, date stamp it, and write out as I clarify. When I've finished the urgent part and have to move on to something else, I can toss that sheet into IN so I can process the rest of it.

If I have the time to confirm I have fully completed that urgent outcome, it goes into the shred/recycle bin.


When I felt this way about my system, I really looked at my email structure to ensure that actionable items were separate from reference and reading. I added Action Support when I started actually adding next actions to my system.

If all of those factors were met with clean lines between each, I felt more calm.

I hope all of this helps,
Clayton.

Remember that capture is about speed and facility; clarify is about precision and completeness. - Jared Caron

Clayton, Thank you SO much for your thoughtful response. I feel better already!

In my old system, which is a self-modified version of the Mark Forster GED (Do it Tomorrow - love that title!), I always had my one capture tool open on my desk. It was my work bible. I added to it quickly and scanned for what I wanted/needed to do next. (I did end up with a lot of old items I never got to, but it was because they were of less importance - maybe they belong in a someday/maybe list. But I never lost the old things and would periodically review, attempting a once per month thing I never kept to.) As I'm still trying to adjust to GTD now, I have separate capture tools and my NA notebook sits closed. And I resist opening it because I know I'll want to scan every context before choosing a NA to complete.

So now I'm thinking I go back to the single "bible" and just use what I've learned from GTD to improve it (start actions with a verb, have sections (or something) for waiting for, agendas, errands, etc.) I agree a column for contexts may not help me. But I wonder if I use that sparingly so some things jump out at me. I guess I'll learn that as I go. I may create the column just in case I chose to use it.

And I didn't realize that working on something urgent immediately was GTD. I guess I thought everything had to be done through a slow, methodical way of arriving at the next thing I'd do. This provides clarity about something I've heard DA say: in a weekly review, check off things you've done. I wondered why I wouldn't already have crossed them off because I assumed I got all my NAs from my lists and not other sources (my head, reminder from someone, etc).

Thanks a ton!

 

[Botany_Bill]

I use Trello and found a template for GTD in the templates - saved me heaps of time as I didn’t have to create. I’m very visual and the Kanban system in Trello seems to be working for me. Early days however. Still learning to hone Trello to meet my needs.

Would you know if the GTD template is in the free version of Trello?

 

[bishblaize]

@bishblaize My short answer is: NO! It's just a problem of poorly deigned paper systems. To support the orthogonality between Next Action-Project link and Next Action-Context link you must have system with removable pages. Each page is to a Project and you write down here this Project's Next Actions. Then you group the pages by the Contexts of Next Actions. There is a catch: this sytem works if each Project has one Next Action only. @mcogilvie

Without wishing to sound rude, that doesn't strike me as a great solution. Only being allowed one context per project is an automatic dealbreaker. Plus, I currently have 95 projects, which would mandate a notebook with at least 95 pieces of paper in it. That would be an awful lot of shuffling around at the weekly review. Finally, how do you scan through your contexts when choosing a next action? I currently have 48 @computer actions, would I need to riffle through 48 different pages to find an appropriate action? That feels like an awful lot of effort.

 

[cfoley]

I use a similar system with a box of index cards. Project on one side, next action on the other, and a divider for each context. I am loving it!

Here is my perspective on your points, one by one.

Only being allowed one context per project is an automatic dealbreaker

I am quite strict about one next action per project (and therefore one context). When I complete that, I write the nex next action and file it in the appropriate context. On the rare occasion I need more than next action simultaneously (hasn't happened in the last few months that I can remember) I just write it on another index card. It makes me slightly sad but no real harm has come of it.

That would be an awful lot of shuffling around at the weekly review.

I find it helps me focus in the weekly review. It is easy to look at just one project and really think about it without being distracted by those adjacent in a list. It is also possible to spread them around my desk. I have organised them into Eisenhower matrices, made a stack of the ones that really must get done this week, put them into piles by area of focus. When I have been overwhelmed, I have just taken the least important or urgent and put them in a "projects on hold" stack. Having a physical artefact to manipulate really helps me. Your mileage may vary.

Finally, how do you scan through your contexts when choosing a next action? I currently have 48 @computer actions, would I need to riffle through 48 different pages to find an appropriate action? That feels like an awful lot of effort.

If I have a small stack for the context, I just have a look through them. When I have a large stack, and it's not already obvious what I should do, I go through and pull out all the actions relevant for the available time, then I pull out all the ones from that stack with the available energy. Then I usually have a much smaller stack to make priority decisions about.

 

[gtdstudente]

I use a similar system with a box of index cards. Project on one side, next action on the other, and a divider for each context. I am loving it!

Here is my perspective on your points, one by one.

Only being allowed one context per project is an automatic dealbreaker

I am quite strict about one next action per project (and therefore one context). When I complete that, I write the nex next action and file it in the appropriate context. On the rare occasion I need more than next action simultaneously (hasn't happened in the last few months that I can remember) I just write it on another index card. It makes me slightly sad but no real harm has come of it.

That would be an awful lot of shuffling around at the weekly review.

I find it helps me focus in the weekly review. It is easy to look at just one project and really think about it without being distracted by those adjacent in a list. It is also possible to spread them around my desk. I have organised them into Eisenhower matrices, made a stack of the ones that really must get done this week, put them into piles by area of focus. When I have been overwhelmed, I have just taken the least important or urgent and put them in a "projects on hold" stack. Having a physical artefact to manipulate really helps me. Your mileage may vary.

Finally, how do you scan through your contexts when choosing a next action? I currently have 48 @computer actions, would I need to riffle through 48 different pages to find an appropriate action? That feels like an awful lot of effort.

If I have a small stack for the context, I just have a look through them. When I have a large stack, and it's not already obvious what I should do, I go through and pull out all the actions relevant for the available time, then I pull out all the ones from that stack with the available energy. Then I usually have a much smaller stack to make priority decisions about.

That is . . .
L o w M a i n t e n a n c e
E a s y R e g r o u p
G T D A W E S O M E !

Ps. In a way I GTD use plain copier paper as, how shall one say, as Extra-Large/Jumbo-Size 'Index Cards' for beginners. Thank you

 

[TesTeq]

Without wishing to sound rude, that doesn't strike me as a great solution. Only being allowed one context per project is an automatic dealbreaker.

@bishblaize Yes, I agree that everybody should use tools that are appropriate for her/his needs and tastes. Fortunately GTD is not about the tools!

 

[gtdstudente]

@bishblaize Yes, I agree that everybody should use tools that are appropriate for her/his needs and tastes. Fortunately GTD is not about the tools!

Appreciate what you are expressing, however: "Fortunately GTD is not about the tools!". If GTD is about 'objectifying' to free one from 'Attention/Mind-Jail' then how is one going to be able GTD objectify without tools? Thus, if tools are deemed GTD necessary, then it is necessary to discover the tools that are subjectively appropriate even if not completely subjective . . . if that makes any GTD sense? Perhaps we are expressing GTD is objectively about 'tools' and GTD is subjectively not about tools' use?

 

[Gardener]

Appreciate what you are expressing, however: "Fortunately GTD is not about the tools!". If GTD is about 'objectifying' to free one from 'Attention/Mind-Jail' then how is one going to be able GTD objectify without tools? Thus, if tools are deemed GTD necessary, then it is necessary to discover the tools that are subjectively appropriate even if not completely subjective . . . if that makes any GTD sense? Perhaps we are expressing GTD is objectively about 'tools' and GTD is subjectively not about tools' use?

A really good layer cake is not about the tools. You need tools to do things--for example, you have to be able to whip the egg whites. But you can whip them with a hand whisk or an electric hand mixer or a standing mixer or whatever. You choose which one is right for you. But the cake is not ABOUT the tools.

 

[gtdstudente]

A really good layer cake is not about the tools. You need tools to do things--for example, you have to be able to whip the egg whites. But you can whip them with a hand whisk or an electric hand mixer or a standing mixer or whatever. You choose which one is right for you. But the cake is not ABOUT the tools.

Love to eat cake made without tools . . . buy it ready made?

No subjective Tools . . . No objective GTD?

 

[Gardener]

Love to eat cake made without tools . . . buy it ready made?

The fact that you need tools doesn't mean that it's ABOUT tools.

If you want to go to a baseball game, you go in a car, a bus, a bicycle.

But is the baseball game experience ABOUT the transport tool?

 

[gtdstudente]

The fact that you need tools doesn't mean that it's ABOUT tools.

If you want to go to a baseball game, you go in a car, a bus, a bicycle.

But is the baseball game experience ABOUT the transport tool?

Thank you, as has been likewise hopefully expressed?

Simply, have attempted to express 'Tools' in themselves seem to be GTD indispensable . . . intrinsically necessary for GTD to be practiced.

In other words, while GTD does not depend on any particular 'Tool,' it is never the less 'Tool' dependent?

If any GTD practitioner can show how to practice GTD without any 'Tool' whatsoever . . . then please, please do show [tell] how possible.

Thank you

Ps. As such, is it possible to say that META/Zuckerberg could have saved a $Billion or two . . . by simply reaching-out and touching-base with Davidco for a practical GTD 'META' solution . . . nah?

 

[bishblaize]

The fact that you need tools doesn't mean that it's ABOUT tools.

If you want to go to a baseball game, you go in a car, a bus, a bicycle.

But is the baseball game experience ABOUT the transport tool?

It is if the tool doesnt take you there.

 

[TesTeq]

If any GTD practitioner can show how to practice GTD without any 'Tool' whatsoever . . . then please, please do show [tell] how possible.

@gtdstudente GTD is an effective approach to achieve goals. You can implement it using any tool you like. There's only one requirement: you've got to trust this tool. You can hardly trust a tool that consist of a stick and sand on the beach.

 

[mcogilvie]

@gtdstudente GTD is an effective approach to achieve goals. You can implement it using any tool you like. There's only one requirement: you've got to trust this tool. You can hardly trust a tool that consist of a stick and sand on the beach.

Actually, I have a colleague who for years has used that scenario, stick and sand on the beach of a desert island, to get students to focus on how to calculate a particular desired result. Students often come out of math classes knowing theorems and techniques, but not how to use them. The desert island scenario forces students to think through next actions to a desired outcome!

 

[Botany_Bill]

Only being allowed one context per project is an automatic dealbreaker

I am quite strict about one next action per project (and therefore one context). When I complete that, I write the nex next action and file it in the appropriate context. On the rare occasion I need more than next action simultaneously (hasn't happened in the last few months that I can remember) I just write it on another index card. It makes me slightly sad but no real harm has come of it.

I had forgotten about "1 NA/project" and maybe that's something I need to fix. I tend to write down any action that comes to mind or comes out of team meetings. I may prioritize which to do first but I actually think of all of them (for a single project) as a NA and put them all on the same list (most of mine are 1 context: @computer/office)

So how do you choose what is _the_ NA and what do you do with other identified actions for that project?

 

[TesTeq]

So how do you choose what is _the_ NA and what do you do with other identified actions for that project?

@Botany_Bill Next Action is an action that you can "just do" in its context. Let's say you are a triathlete and the Project is "Triathlon finished". You've got three actions: "Swim", "Cycle" and "Run". On the starting line you've got only one Next Action: "Swim", since you cannot "Cycle" or "Run" before swimming. You keep "Cycle" and "Run" actions in the Project's reference file until you finish swimming. Then you activate "Cycle" as a subsequent Next Action.

 

[Botany_Bill]

@Botany_Bill Next Action is an action that you can "just do" in its context. Let's say you are a triathlete and the Project is "Triathlon finished". You've got three actions: "Swim", "Cycle" and "Run". On the starting line you've got only one Next Action: "Swim", since you cannot "Cycle" or "Run" before swimming. You keep "Cycle" and "Run" actions in the Project's reference file until you finish swimming. Then you activate "Cycle" as a subsequent Next Action.

I can see how that works in something linear where each action follows the previous action. But what about when a project has multiple actions that (seemingly) can happen simultaneously -- I have many of these.

I may kill your example, but in the same project, I will need some equipment (e.g., swim goggles), songs to run to, someone to drive me to the start, and maybe some special food. In my mind, each one of these is a NA and there's no particular order they need to happen in. And I don't want to lose any of them and I want to keep them all near top-of-mind. What would you do about choosing just one to put on your NA list. If I choose to do one of them first, what happens to the other items?