How nice for so many replies. As to mindmapping and outlining, both are useful to me. Some of the reports have some sections that lend themselves well to mind mapping--when the information I am processing is qualitative and more idiosyncratic, or when there are pieces of information that do not fit well standard sections. For most of the reports, at least a half of the report, I write most easily from an outline because the content is pretty closed ended, the observations and data do not need much interpretation and the implications are straightforward.
I just sense that if I could break these projects down into smaller pieces, then I would not have to immerse myself for 6 hours. My colleague says he never revises, he sits down and knows exactly what he wants to say and writes it out! It takes him 2 hours and lot less paper! What the problems are for me are 1) I seem to have to rewrite almost every sentence after I read things back! Once I change one sentence, then I have to change another, and another, etc. If I start reading back early in the writing process I do, in fact, get a better focus and can narrow the scope of the work better and make it more cohesive. This is the opposite of what I have been taught in writing classes where I was told to write the first draft from beginning to end, then revise.
2) As I write and read back my thinking expands and expands, then it kind of contracts and finds its way.
3) Narration, description, explanation get all interwoven for me in these reports.
So, any thoughts on using GTD to analyze the problems and solve them?