Using Just Deliverables And the Natural Planning

F

furashgf

0
I seem to be spending a lot of time keeping my "outlines" (mind maps, actual outlines, etc.) up to date and in synch with my tasks. That is, my outline/mind map might look something like:

My Project
-- Vision & success by stakeholders
--- My boss - sure that I'm not a doofus
--- My team - knows what to do
-- Deliverables
---- Deliverable 1
------ task 1
------ task 2
----- Deliverable 2

I was thinking of, in my outlines/plans, ELIMINATING going all the way down to the task level - just simply listing deliverables (real things that I want to happen). On a day to day basis, I can just keep working those one step at a time and, as I finish one, figure out the next step.
 
i'll take a stab.

pure GTD would only list the deliverables

the next actions (your task level) would go on the appropriate @context next action lists.

so your idea is good if you have a separate place to put the next actions.

however, i find that putting all the tasks into the outline to begin with is a good exercise in planning only as long as you only work on one next action at a time.
 
I think that the following project vision:
--- My boss - sure that I'm not a doofus
Click to expand...
is wrong and it will not work.
For me the vision of success shouldn't be connected with pleasing my boss - it should be based on the absolute values ("company sales increase", "good product development", "saving the world" etc.).
TesTeq
 
Re: Using "Just Deliverables" And the Natural Plan

furashgf said:
I was thinking of, in my outlines/plans, ELIMINATING going all the way down to the task level - just simply listing deliverables (real things that I want to happen). On a day to day basis, I can just keep working those one step at a time and, as I finish one, figure out the next step.
Click to expand...
Furashgf,

I'm not shure if I understand what you mean. Do you mean having a list of deliverables that would "live" at the 5,000 ft level? And then decide what the next action for each deliverable would be and work on it?

Rainer
 
What I was doing was essentially brainstorming to very fine detail. For each deliverable, I'd have multiple next actions (a mini plan for each). This became extremely cumbersome to maintain.
What I've been experimenting with is, in my mind map/outline, brainstorming to the deliverable level.
Each deliverable has a next action item, but THAT ISN'T IN MY MIND MAP/OUTLINE. I'ts in my task list (I'm using FreeMind for my mind maps/plans and outlook/tasks for tasks).
It seems to be working okay for now.
The problem I was encountering was:
1. it was taking forever to complete a plan (my initial brainstorm for the project).
2. the resulting "plan" was very fragile and I had to spend a lot of time updating it.
3. the resulting plan didn't give me the "big picture" - it was too granular.
 
How in-synch do people keep the original outline/plan created as a result of the organizing stage with their next actions.

that is, if I have an outline/plan with lots of deliverables and reminders, and I have one or more n/a for each, do people try to keep all the n/a in their original plan, or just do something like

_ deliverable a
_ My current next action

then figure out the "next next" action when they finish A?
 
The next actions should not be in the original plan, but on the appropriate lists. The next actions you work on come from these NA-lists, not from the project plan.

Is it forbidden to have NA's in the project plan? Of course not; I often come up with a bunch of actions (not necessarily next actions) during a brainstorming. The real next actions go on the lists, the others remain on the project plan. During the weekly review, the actions listed in the project plan can be a source of next actions. If the actions on the project plan have become obsolete (changed circumstances, ..) they just get crossed off.

Some recent postings on next actions:
http://www.davidco.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1277
 
I've started to do just what you describe and it's working well. I just wish I had understood that better when I started!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top