Time, Attention, and Creative Work. After 4 years and a lot of productivity pr0n, we’re shifting gears. Re-learn how to use 43 Folders. Then back to work. [»]
”What’s 43 Folders?”
43Folders.com is Merlin Mann’s website about finding the time and attention to do your best creative work.
Clarification on some of the books principles.
Kris | Aug 27 2007
Hi all. I've just finished reading Getting Things Done about a week ago, and am starting on my second pass (hitting the main topics) to try and cement these ideas. However, I'm still left with some uncertainties on a few topics. Reading through some past posts cleared a couple up, but there's still some remaining. I'm hoping with the vast experience some of you seem to have, you wouldn't mind helping this amateur out a little bit. ;) First up: projects. I took David's advice and created a project reference file system. I'm used to planning out projects when I get them, and detailing the steps needed on the road to completion, albeit at usually a broader scale, so I decided to refine this. When processing a project from "in", I plan it out right there, except instead of a broad set of steps, I create a list of narrowly defined next actions, write the first NA on it's proper list in my organizer, and file the project plan. However, from the sounds of it, you can/should only have the current NA for a project on list, but I find that if I'm not at home where my filing is, and I complete the NA, yet have time to do more, how do I know what my next NA is (since I shouldn't be keeping that in my head)? Do you guys take project plans with you in whatever you use to organize things? Do you write down the next few NA's on a list, just incase? I'm probably over-thinking this, I just don't want to become terribly inefficient. Aw, son of a... I had more questions, but for the life of me I can't remember them at the moment (my memory is terrible. Hence my attempt at GTD :p ). They'll probably come to me in a day or two, so I'll reply again when they pop up. Thanks for now! 11 Comments
POSTED IN:
Ok. I sorta remembered my...Submitted by Kris on August 28, 2007 - 9:50am.
Ok. I sorta remembered my other question. From the sounds of it, you should only have one NA for a project. But what if there are a couple things that could be done next on the project, independantly of one another? Lets say I could make a call to someone about one part of the project, or pick up some needed supplies for another part of the project. Is it a bad idea to put an NA on both my @Phone and @Errand lists? Is this acceptable? Am I thinking about this wrong? :confused: »
From the sounds of it,...Submitted by SteveC on August 28, 2007 - 10:03am.
Kris;10154 wrote:
From the sounds of it, you should only have one NA for a project. But what if there are a couple things that could be done next on the project, independantly of one another? Lets say I could make a call to someone about one part of the project, or pick up some needed supplies for another part of the project. Is it a bad idea to put an NA on both my @Phone and @Errand lists? Is this acceptable? Am I thinking about this wrong? :confused: NAs in different contexts are fine. It's putting things on the action lists that aren't actions which causes the problem. So, an NA saying @calls-phone Fred about project X and @errands-buy chipboard for project X is fine. In fact, I see nothing wrong with @calls-phone Fred about project X As long as the calls are INDEPENDENT. If you need information from Fred before you can speak to Harry, then phone Harry is not an NA. Similarly, if you need to talk to Fred before buying the chiboard, then the latter is not an NA (yet). Does that help? Steve »
Thanks Steve, that does indeed...Submitted by Kris on August 28, 2007 - 10:47am.
Thanks Steve, that does indeed help. If I'm going to be doing this sort of thing though, where parts of a project are independant of other parts, would it be best to scrap the original project and create smaller projects for each independant piece, in order to keep clear outcomes? Or does this just introduce more complexity into the system than it's worth? »
Up to you...Submitted by SteveC on August 29, 2007 - 4:46am.
Seriously, what ever works for you is 'best'. Slightly more helpfully, perhaps, is 'sometimes'. This something that doesn't come over very well in the book, but DA has spoken and written about (and I could probably find the reference I'm thinking of if I wasn't at work stuck behind the firewall). Not all projects are alike! Many projects (most?) won't require any significant planning. There will be few enough NAs so that you won't need to worry about splitting things into sub projects. If we use the earlier example, the project could be 'put flooring down in the roofspace of the garage'. You need to buy the chipboard and invite a few mates to come round to help (with the promise of beers, perhaps :D). Doesn't need splitting up -- even if you make it more complicated and so some phoning round to get the best price on the chipboard. Something like 'build the garage' would require much more planning and might well end up spawning sub-projects. That's how I'd do it. anyway! Steve »
Haha. Yeah, I guess it...Submitted by Kris on August 29, 2007 - 2:51pm.
Haha. Yeah, I guess it makes sense to go with whatever works for me. It's just that I've tried organization many times before, and they've all failed. I was just trying to stay as rigidly by-the-book as possible, in hopes that it would keep me from making a mistake. Suppose I should put a little slack in the reigns... What you said makes sense though. Scope is something I have trouble with, but I'll just have to stick to using my judgement on it. Thanks again though for answering my question about multiple NA's. That was a big help. :) »
This something that doesn't come...Submitted by SteveC on August 30, 2007 - 4:58am.
SteveC;10166 wrote:
This something that doesn't come over very well in the book, but DA has spoken and written about (and I could probably find the reference I'm thinking of if I wasn't at work stuck behind the firewall). What I was thinking of was Stew of this parish. Might help - explains things more clearly than I managed S »
What I was thinking of...Submitted by Stew on August 30, 2007 - 8:53am.
SteveC;10179 wrote:
What I was thinking of was Stew of this parish. Thanks for the link, Steve! I'm glad you found it helpful. :) Kris, et al. - »
Thanks Stew/Steve. That was a...Submitted by Kris on August 30, 2007 - 2:19pm.
Thanks Stew/Steve. That was a great read. I think I was following a similar path of over-analysing every project. I'm a little obsessive compulsive, so losening my grasp might be tough. I'll definitely give it a shot though. :D Thanks again. »
Haha. Yeah, I guess it...Submitted by Antemeridian on August 31, 2007 - 7:49am.
Kris;10174 wrote:
Haha. Yeah, I guess it makes sense to go with whatever works for me. It's just that I've tried organization many times before, and they've all failed. I was just trying to stay as rigidly by-the-book as possible, in hopes that it would keep me from making a mistake. Suppose I should put a little slack in the reigns... Hi Kris, before trying GTD I was like you. I had tried several organization systems, and I just wasn't able to make them work for me and how I worked. The thing is, I've found that GTD was actually the first system that is designed to be flexible, and DA even mentions that (in the project planning bit quoted above). I don't need to treat remembering to buy dog food in the same way I need to treat managing a multi-million dollar project. Good Luck! Adam »
I'll add a few thoughts...Submitted by cornell on September 3, 2007 - 5:19am.
I'll add a few thoughts to the other terrific comments above. o How much project planning you need to do is a combination of personal preference and the complexity/scope of the project. You decide. *However*, doing it while processing your inbox is not a good idea - it will slow you down from getting it to zero, which is crucial. If two minutes of "back of the napkin" sketching is adequate, great. Otherwise, make an action called "plan project x." That said, if you have a ton of ideas just from looking at the sheet of paper, by all means capture them. It's not work losing them (as you experienced with your "I just had it" question). o Each project needs at least one active action, but more (if they're independent) is fine. You're call - how fast do you want to move the project ahead? o Contexts are optional. I've worked with people who have 200+ actions and *like* a single "actions" list. Your call - try both, see which works. o If you're away from your files and you'll be working on the project, make sure to bring the plans with you. I recommend to clients they carry the following: o calendar o "sub" projects: If it helps mentally to create separate projects for different parts of a main project, that's OK. The main project might have an overarching set of plans and ideas, which are implemented by the sub-projects. In general, keep it simple if possible. One tip: If you want to keep paper from separate aspects of the project grouped together, try prefixing the file folders with the project name then the subcategory, e.g., "NASA consult - plans", "NASA consult - contract", "NASA consult - travel", etc. Hope that helps! »
About Kris |
|
| EXPLORE 43Folders | THE GOOD STUFF |