Understanding "waiting for" list (vs. calendar)

[Andrea!]

Hello,

as I understand the "waiting for" list, it is for items that someone else is supposed to to. In the end, my only job is to remind the person responsible if they are not doing their job.

Of course I don't want to wait forever. That means I have to look through this list regularly. Is that the usual procedure?

Thank you
Andreas

 

[ivanjay205]

Just following this as I maintain the waiting list and check it every morning and as necessary follow up. And it does leave me really on top of things.... But curious what others are doing...

 

[fooddude]

I use it for anything I am waiting for. (Edit: I did not mean that how it sounds.) Either someone to do something or an answer from someone about a project or even a piece of mail. If it has a date specific I will put it on my calendar to follow up then. If not I may stick an arbitrary date on the list with the item. But my waiting for list is looked at during the weekly review so it is never missed. If it is not time sensitive, during my weekly review I might add it to the agenda for that person. When I talk to them it is right there.

 

[Gardener]

Things I might be waiting for:

- Another person, yes.
- A meeting.
- An event, like tax time or the monthly trip to the warehouse store.
- A prerequisite, like appropriate weather, or the arrival of a purchased item.
- A process that has waiting as an innate part of the process, like planting seeds or waiting for concrete to cure.

If the wait is somewhat predictable, I'll enter a Defer date (in OmniFocus) so that the item hides until the date, then pops back up when it might have become actionable. Really, even if it's not I'll probably give it a Defer date and then just Defer it again if it isn't actionable. That saves me from having to actually review Waiting For.

I was going to say that "appropriate weather" doesn't really work for this, since it's not predictable, and realized that I might want to treat "Gardening Weather" like an Agenda instead.

 

[fooddude]

I was going to say that "appropriate weather" doesn't really work for this, since it's not predictable, and realized that I might want to treat "Gardening Weather" like an Agenda instead.

Probably more like a context. Just like @Home is for things you can do only at home. There must be some things you can only do @gardening weather. So if its a context you would never need to look at that list til you have "gardening weather". As I thought about it, this is a pretty good idea to get those things off your mind when you can't do them (given your profession?). Agendas are more for people and the things you need to discuss with them when you see them. I always have a list of things I need to discuss with my manager. It goes on the list and I don't need to bother him until I see him. Then I just go down the list.

 

[mcogilvie]

Hello,

as I understand the "waiting for" list, it is for items that someone else is supposed to to. In the end, my only job is to remind the person responsible if they are not doing their job.

Of course I don't want to wait forever. That means I have to look through this list regularly. Is that the usual procedure?

Thank you
Andreas

Waiting For is a category (list, if you like) which gets reviewed at least every week, during the weekly review. You can review it more often as needed. Even using paper, you can note a deadline for follow up: Fred- tire info? (1-24).

 

[Andrea!]

Thank you all for your input!

In the end, "waiting for" appears to me optional. Let me explain with an example for something that I really want someone else to do:

I write and send an invoice that says "please pay until end of January." For February, 4th, I put a note into my calendar (tickler file): "Check, if the invoice is paid, if necessary, remind Jim to pay it now." Of course, this task is not due exactly at 4th of February. So, at that date, I just move the task to "next actions."

This way, I can react in a timely manner. Without occupying a specific date.

If I put this matter on the "waiting for" list only, I have to read this list regularly and completely.

OTOH, the "waiting for" list gives an overview, that my tickler file cannot serve.

Jake Desyllas has a similiar approach:

An Alternative to “Waiting For” in GTD — Jake Desyllas

David Allen’s Getting Things Done (GTD) is a brilliant and life-changing methodology for productivity, but one idea in the original book doesn’t make sense to me: the context “waiting for”. At the heart of GTD is the method of always defining the next action on a project, in order to keep things mo

www.jakedesyllas.com

All the Best
Andrea

 

[mcogilvie]

Thank you all for your input!

In the end, "waiting for" appears to me optional. Let me explain with an example for something that I really want someone else to do:

I write and send an invoice that says "please pay until end of January." For February, 4th, I put a note into my calendar (tickler file): "Check, if the invoice is paid, if necessary, remind Jim to pay it now." Of course, this task is not due exactly at 4th of February. So, at that date, I just move the task to "next actions."

This way, I can react in a timely manner. Without occupying a specific date.

If I put this matter on the "waiting for" list only, I have to read this list regularly and completely.

OTOH, the "waiting for" list gives an overview, that my tickler file cannot serve.

Jake Desyllas has a similiar approach:

An Alternative to “Waiting For” in GTD — Jake Desyllas

David Allen’s Getting Things Done (GTD) is a brilliant and life-changing methodology for productivity, but one idea in the original book doesn’t make sense to me: the context “waiting for”. At the heart of GTD is the method of always defining the next action on a project, in order to keep things mo

www.jakedesyllas.com

All the Best
Andrea

In my life, there is a lot going on. With the approach you describe, I might not remember what happened when the tickler surfaces. Did the Lego’s arrive for my niece’s birthday? I don’t remember. Furthermore, deadlines change, and you might need to move a waiting for up in time or even delete it altogether. The goal for me is not to reduce the number of lists. Simplification is removing ambiguity and reducing and clarifying my actions. So I use both ticklers and waiting for.

 

[TesTeq]

I write and send an invoice that says "please pay until end of January." For February, 4th, I put a note into my calendar (tickler file): "Check, if the invoice is paid, if necessary, remind Jim to pay it now." Of course, this task is not due exactly at 4th of February. So, at that date, I just move the task to "next actions."

@Andrea! An off topic warning: do not send (inside your company) invoice payment orders by email. Especially "urgent" orders. Hackers are able to spoof your email address and induce the recipient of an email to make a payment to their account. It happens all the time.

 

[Andrea!]

In my life, there is a lot going on. With the approach you describe, I might not remember what happened when the tickler surfaces.

That is, of course, a question of how detailed the sheet in the tickler file is.

However, to maintain a "waiting for" item at two places at the same time (a list and the tickler file) appears to create some overhead. And splitting, thus putting more important things into the tickler while adding less important items to the "waiting for" list will break the overview.

All the best
Andrea

 

[fooddude]

However, to maintain a "waiting for" item at two places at the same time (a list and the tickler file) appears to create some overhead. And splitting, thus putting more important things into the tickler while adding less important items to the "waiting for" list will break the overview.

For me that is either or. If it is time sensitive it would be on my calendar. If not it would go on the @Waiting for list. It wouldn't be important vs unimportant. I might put an about date on the waiting for list. That list is reviewed weekly.

 

[mcogilvie]

That is, of course, a question of how detailed the sheet in the tickler file is.

However, to maintain a "waiting for" item at two places at the same time (a list and the tickler file) appears to create some overhead. And splitting, thus putting more important things into the tickler while adding less important items to the "waiting for" list will break the overview.

All the best
Andrea

I’m really not understanding your concern. To me, a tickler means on a specific date, I will be reminded of something. This is essentially a start date, or maybe a re-start date. Until then, I don’t necessarily think about it unless something changes, and I don’t necessarily review it. A waiting-for, on the other hand, is something where I do not know when it will happen or when something will appear. Whatever the condition is, it is the trigger, not a date. In a digital system that has both start dates and due dates, and I use one, either a tickler or a waiting for can have a deadline. You can mimic this behavior with paper by simply writing a date in the entry. A deadline on a waiting for means I need to follow up- I’m done waiting. A deadline on a tickler item just means I need to get it done by the deadline like any other project or next action. I don’t pay any attention to importance when deciding what goes where. It’s a purely functional distinction.

 

[Matt_M]

Hello,

as I understand the "waiting for" list, it is for items that someone else is supposed to to. In the end, my only job is to remind the person responsible if they are not doing their job.

Of course I don't want to wait forever. That means I have to look through this list regularly. Is that the usual procedure?

Thank you
Andreas

Thank you all for your input!

In the end, "waiting for" appears to me optional. Let me explain with an example for something that I really want someone else to do:

I write and send an invoice that says "please pay until end of January." For February, 4th, I put a note into my calendar (tickler file): "Check, if the invoice is paid, if necessary, remind Jim to pay it now." Of course, this task is not due exactly at 4th of February. So, at that date, I just move the task to "next actions."

This way, I can react in a timely manner. Without occupying a specific date.

If I put this matter on the "waiting for" list only, I have to read this list regularly and completely.

OTOH, the "waiting for" list gives an overview, that my tickler file cannot serve.

Jake Desyllas has a similiar approach:

An Alternative to “Waiting For” in GTD — Jake Desyllas

David Allen’s Getting Things Done (GTD) is a brilliant and life-changing methodology for productivity, but one idea in the original book doesn’t make sense to me: the context “waiting for”. At the heart of GTD is the method of always defining the next action on a project, in order to keep things mo

www.jakedesyllas.com

All the Best
Andrea

Put simply, the whole point of GTD is to use the lists that you create and check them often to make sure you are doing the right things and making the most effective use of the time available. What lists you make, what you name them, how you define them, etc. are all irrelevant details. Do whatever works for you and gets results. It's just important that you have them and use them as often as possible.

You said it's your job to make sure the tasks get done, so it's probably a wise idea to check those lists as often as possible, probably several times a day. You are accountable and responsible for the tasks at the end of the day, so you should probably stay ahead of any issues, delays, or unexpected occurrences to make sure the work gets done (even if that means you have to do it yourself or escalate to more senior people). Knowing sooner that something is at risk to not get done on time is always better than finding out when it blows up.

A simple truth: nobody cares how you get work done just that it gets done and gets a result.

I know this all might seem harsh and that's not my intention. However, it's fairly clear and not something to sugar coat.

 

[TesTeq]

For me that is either or. If it is time sensitive it would be on my calendar. If not it would go on the @Waiting for list. It wouldn't be important vs unimportant. I might put an about date on the waiting for list. That list is reviewed weekly.

@fooddude I think the distinguishing characteristic of the WaitingFor items is that they become time-sensitive as time passes. And given that most often the other person has to do something that will take some time, it is not a zero to one change on the deadline but it happens gradually before the @mcogilvie 's deadline.

 

[mcogilvie]

@fooddude I think the distinguishing characteristic of the WaitingFor items is that they become time-sensitive as time passes. And given that most often the other person has to do something that will take some time, it is not a zero to one change on the deadline but it happens gradually before the @mcogilvie 's deadline.

Sure. Because Waiting For is a list I look at frequently, the status gets updated at least mentally. A simple example is deliveries, but I will also check in with colleagues and staff at work as I see them, and with my wife at home. The object of GTD is not to never think of batteries outside of the weekly review, but to think about them when batteries are relevant. (Great, I just compared my wife to a battery. ) What I mean is that GTD is not about mechanicalizing relationships. The Weekly Review and frequent list scanning build a trustworthy situational awareness.

 

[RomanS]

Entries in my Waiting for list (only) have a due date if I need to check their status before the next Weekly Review.

 

[Jared Caron]

Thank you all for your input!

In the end, "waiting for" appears to me optional. Let me explain with an example for something that I really want someone else to do:

I write and send an invoice that says "please pay until end of January." For February, 4th, I put a note into my calendar (tickler file): "Check, if the invoice is paid, if necessary, remind Jim to pay it now." Of course, this task is not due exactly at 4th of February. So, at that date, I just move the task to "next actions."

This way, I can react in a timely manner. Without occupying a specific date.

If I put this matter on the "waiting for" list only, I have to read this list regularly and completely.

OTOH, the "waiting for" list gives an overview, that my tickler file cannot serve.

Jake Desyllas has a similiar approach:

An Alternative to “Waiting For” in GTD — Jake Desyllas

David Allen’s Getting Things Done (GTD) is a brilliant and life-changing methodology for productivity, but one idea in the original book doesn’t make sense to me: the context “waiting for”. At the heart of GTD is the method of always defining the next action on a project, in order to keep things mo

www.jakedesyllas.com

All the Best
Andrea

I think the biggest advantage of the waiting for list over the physical tickler file is simplicity and sustainability. The WF list is simple to maintain - just add an item to the list with whom your waiting on and its "start" date, and then review it periodically. If you have a reliable weekly review practice, this means you won't go too long without looking at it. The overhead required to keep it up to date and act on it is very low.

If you're using a digital list manager or task app, most will also allow a due date, which I sometimes add as a reminder to follow up. The other advantage of a WF list is you can (if needed) have multiple WF lists. In your case, for instance, you could have a list of just outstanding invoices which might have some utility versus other types of items you wait on.

Personally, I dont know how I would function without WF lists. It was one of the most immediately impactful aspects of GTD for me.

In any case, the strategies described in GTD are a toolbox. If you find one tool more useful than another, that's fine. There are no GTD police coming to audit your use of the 10 lists from the book.

The question to ask is - are the things you're waiting for off your mind? Do you ever get surprised or blindsided by something you were waiting for and forgot about? If you're comfortable with the answers, you're system is doing its job and there's nothing to worry about. If something about those answers needs attention, perhaps leaning into the WF list would help.

 

[Andrea!]

With the approach you describe, I might not remember what happened when the tickler surfaces. Did the Lego’s arrive for my niece’s birthday? I don’t remember.

That is a very good point! (I did not understand your word at the first glance).

What do you do, if an item on your "waiting for" list turns into "actionable"? Will you move it to "next actions"?

I’m really not understanding your concern. To me, a tickler means on a specific date, I will be reminded of something. This is essentially a start date [...] Whatever the condition is, it is the trigger, not a date.

The trigger may be a date: "Check, if James payes the bill–if necessary remind him" - Of course, I will have to make a decision

What lists you make, what you name them, how you define them, etc. are all irrelevant details. Do whatever works for you and gets results.

That's exactly what I try to do. This also includes asking about other people's experiences.


-------------------------
My summary so far: "Waiting for" it is about items, that
A) can become actionable ("remind Jimbob of something") at some point, but not on a specific date.
B) are done by someone else (Jimbob returned my money).

I see two approaches:

1) Let's say, I add the following line to the "waiting for" list:
"Gave Jimbob $ 20 on January 25th–did he return the money?"
When I read this line, I will have to make a decision if: (a) I delete the line, (b) I want to wait another week or (c) I covert this line into a "next action" ("remind Jimbob..."). That means, of course, I have to make a decision about the same item several times.

2) Let's say, I don't use the "waiting for" list, so I instead put a note sheet into the February 27th compartment of the tickler file. On that date, I do not need to tace action–I just move the sheet to "next actions"–or I throw it away when the matter is settled. The advantage is, obviously, I do not have to deal with the same item more than once. On to other hand, I may have forgotten if Jimbob returned the money or not.

All the best
Andrea

 

[Y_Lherieau]

Hello,

as I understand the "waiting for" list, it is for items that someone else is supposed to to. In the end, my only job is to remind the person responsible if they are not doing their job.

Of course I don't want to wait forever. That means I have to look through this list regularly. Is that the usual procedure?

Thank you
Andreas

I approach the “Waiting For” list with a setup that has worked very effectively for me, leveraging Todoist and some automation. Here’s how I handle it:

1. “Waiting For” in Projects:

Each “Waiting For” item is linked to its respective project in Todoist and placed in a dedicated “WF” section within the board view. This way, I have a clear visual representation of all “Waiting For” items, sitting neatly in the far-right column of each project board.

2. Reminder Dates:

Every “Waiting For” task is assigned a specific date in Todoist. This is the date I want to be reminded to follow up if the person I delegated to hasn’t delivered yet. This ensures I stay on top of tasks without needing to constantly scan my lists.

3. Labels for System-wide Visibility:

Each “Waiting For” task is tagged with a “WF” label in Todoist. This allows me to pull up a global view of all my “Waiting For” items across projects whenever I need a quick overview.

4. Automated Workflow in Outlook:

To streamline delegation, I’ve automated this process in Outlook (desktop PC client version). When I send an email, a popup asks whether I want to create a “Waiting For” task in Todoist. I can select the relevant project, set the WF label automatically, and assign a reminder date directly through the popup. The task is then created in Todoist via an API call, landing in the designated project’s WF section automatically.

This approach ensures that nothing slips through the cracks, and the combination of visual organization, date-based reminders, and automation helps keep the system effortless and efficient. My “Today” view in Todoist will flag any follow-up to be done.