Discussion Forum > A new way of working
Jupiter:
Read Mark Levison's comments to my recent blog post "Key Principles of the New System III: Getting Stuff Done"
Read Mark Levison's comments to my recent blog post "Key Principles of the New System III: Getting Stuff Done"
January 12, 2012 at 21:34 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Jupiter wrote: "I am sure that if I put all the task in AF on the flow I would never succeed and finished these 2 projects".
Eh bien, ne fais pas ça!
He also mentioned: "I am often very perturbed by AF. The mixing of tasks simply doesn't work for me, sometimes. I don't understand why. "
I heard that Sir Isaac Newton frequently had rushes of ideas come into his head before he was even able to get out of bed in the morning. He would just sit there, swinging his legs, and take it all in.
Even us 'non-intellectuals' sometimes have to use whatever happens to be in front of us to capture it all - and this can mess up a good thing.
I think Mark's points in http://www.markforster.net/forum/post/1698586 , regarding the need to get it all refined through the process of Autofocus, tie in well with Jupiter's goal (outright obsession!!) of handling projects.
How can you argue that if you don't go overboard with mind-dumping, a project is as good a place as any to record, and later analyse, a heap of tasks?
Hence, they are taken out of AF (or never get into AF in the first place), and allow AF do its job.
Like Jupiter said one time: Projects are "a place for thinking". (great comment)
Mark's response to Jupiter in http://www.markforster.net/forum/post/1693383 is a good one because I think it is especially convincing concerning project tasks:
"I've never been able to see what the problem is with projects in AF/SF. You've always had the choice of entering projects as a whole or as individual tasks, or both. Having a separate project list is also an option (either composed ad hoc or maintained continually). For any really complicated project you would need to refer to the project documentation in any case".
"So if you find that dealing with individual tasks is messy and without feeling then enter tasks at the project (level) and use a separate project sheet. That is standard AF/SF practice".
If people, especially when they are first learning about MF systems, think that a system like AF is not suitable for their needs because they have a 'ton of projects', then they are making a big mistake. They will miss out on the flow of everything else. Projects are simply a place to put many of the tasks that 'don't really belong in AF'.
On a side note, I am finding that it is helpful to let a selected few project pages mingle with AF pages; interspersing only the current and relative pages is working out so far and helps me prevent things from falling through the cracks. I have yet to find out if this idea will stand the test of time, though.
The key:
However, in any event, the basic idea of just entering a minimal number of lines (like one or two) in AF per project is the real gem (this part probably comes from Alan). If that does not work for you Sherlock, you are just out of luck.
That's my 2 satang.
Eh bien, ne fais pas ça!
He also mentioned: "I am often very perturbed by AF. The mixing of tasks simply doesn't work for me, sometimes. I don't understand why. "
I heard that Sir Isaac Newton frequently had rushes of ideas come into his head before he was even able to get out of bed in the morning. He would just sit there, swinging his legs, and take it all in.
Even us 'non-intellectuals' sometimes have to use whatever happens to be in front of us to capture it all - and this can mess up a good thing.
I think Mark's points in http://www.markforster.net/forum/post/1698586 , regarding the need to get it all refined through the process of Autofocus, tie in well with Jupiter's goal (outright obsession!!) of handling projects.
How can you argue that if you don't go overboard with mind-dumping, a project is as good a place as any to record, and later analyse, a heap of tasks?
Hence, they are taken out of AF (or never get into AF in the first place), and allow AF do its job.
Like Jupiter said one time: Projects are "a place for thinking". (great comment)
Mark's response to Jupiter in http://www.markforster.net/forum/post/1693383 is a good one because I think it is especially convincing concerning project tasks:
"I've never been able to see what the problem is with projects in AF/SF. You've always had the choice of entering projects as a whole or as individual tasks, or both. Having a separate project list is also an option (either composed ad hoc or maintained continually). For any really complicated project you would need to refer to the project documentation in any case".
"So if you find that dealing with individual tasks is messy and without feeling then enter tasks at the project (level) and use a separate project sheet. That is standard AF/SF practice".
If people, especially when they are first learning about MF systems, think that a system like AF is not suitable for their needs because they have a 'ton of projects', then they are making a big mistake. They will miss out on the flow of everything else. Projects are simply a place to put many of the tasks that 'don't really belong in AF'.
On a side note, I am finding that it is helpful to let a selected few project pages mingle with AF pages; interspersing only the current and relative pages is working out so far and helps me prevent things from falling through the cracks. I have yet to find out if this idea will stand the test of time, though.
The key:
However, in any event, the basic idea of just entering a minimal number of lines (like one or two) in AF per project is the real gem (this part probably comes from Alan). If that does not work for you Sherlock, you are just out of luck.
That's my 2 satang.
January 12, 2012 at 21:59 |
BKK
BKK
Mark Forster
"Read Mark Levison's comments to my recent blog post "Key Principles of the New System III: Getting Stuff Done""
Thanks I did not read it. Very interesting. Yes a couple of project were you focus on finishing is indeed interesting and efficient.
In fact it is quiet simple.
1. I have a list with a "ton" of project. Some are essential (my business-ie what is supposed to make my living), some which may becomes essential, some which are not, and some I could get rid and I do.
2. AF or SF were are all my tasks is perfect to collect and make advance or eliminate the stuff.
3. The only exception I noticed with the system is that for my 2 crucial project I need to work very closely and focus. I need to study document, write emails, collect the answers, summarize and answer to the question.
What I meant in my topic is that I noticed when I was overwhelmed that taking altitude and staying focus on my one essential project at a time, helped me a lot to remember all about the little details and made me very efficient. I finally closed the big part of the project in 2 days. Usually it takes me a week.
Now I am back to the AF stuff and I can do the most urgent and important tasks about some others project. I don't have to think about the 2 others because they are on the flow.
See I participate at this forum. I did not have time these 2 last days !
I think for me working on a all tasks and document ON these 2 projects as a batch, getting indeed focus on it until there is nothing I can do was indeed very efficient. Now I done my best with them and can not do more. So I can follow the traffic and wait until theses 2 projects will come back to me and needs all my attention.
By the way, having these 2 project on paper is essential for me. If I put them on my computer only I loose all my efficiency.
Strange no ?
"Read Mark Levison's comments to my recent blog post "Key Principles of the New System III: Getting Stuff Done""
Thanks I did not read it. Very interesting. Yes a couple of project were you focus on finishing is indeed interesting and efficient.
In fact it is quiet simple.
1. I have a list with a "ton" of project. Some are essential (my business-ie what is supposed to make my living), some which may becomes essential, some which are not, and some I could get rid and I do.
2. AF or SF were are all my tasks is perfect to collect and make advance or eliminate the stuff.
3. The only exception I noticed with the system is that for my 2 crucial project I need to work very closely and focus. I need to study document, write emails, collect the answers, summarize and answer to the question.
What I meant in my topic is that I noticed when I was overwhelmed that taking altitude and staying focus on my one essential project at a time, helped me a lot to remember all about the little details and made me very efficient. I finally closed the big part of the project in 2 days. Usually it takes me a week.
Now I am back to the AF stuff and I can do the most urgent and important tasks about some others project. I don't have to think about the 2 others because they are on the flow.
See I participate at this forum. I did not have time these 2 last days !
I think for me working on a all tasks and document ON these 2 projects as a batch, getting indeed focus on it until there is nothing I can do was indeed very efficient. Now I done my best with them and can not do more. So I can follow the traffic and wait until theses 2 projects will come back to me and needs all my attention.
By the way, having these 2 project on paper is essential for me. If I put them on my computer only I loose all my efficiency.
Strange no ?
January 13, 2012 at 9:07 |
FocusGuy.
FocusGuy.
BKK:
<< However, in any event, the basic idea of just entering a minimal number of lines (like one or two) in AF per project is the real gem (this part probably comes from Alan). >>
It may have got to you from Alan, but it was dealt with in my books "Get Everything Done" (2000) and "Do It Tomorrow" (2006) (though not specifically for AF as it didn't exist then) and has been recommended by me consistently on this website throughout the three years since AF was introduced.
<< However, in any event, the basic idea of just entering a minimal number of lines (like one or two) in AF per project is the real gem (this part probably comes from Alan). >>
It may have got to you from Alan, but it was dealt with in my books "Get Everything Done" (2000) and "Do It Tomorrow" (2006) (though not specifically for AF as it didn't exist then) and has been recommended by me consistently on this website throughout the three years since AF was introduced.
January 13, 2012 at 9:50 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
perhaps if inspired thoughts come in "blocks" of related ideas they should be added to AF as a block with a line above and below the block - somewhere between "standing out" and "dismiss"?
January 13, 2012 at 17:15 |
michael
michael
I agree, Michael. I can see no problem with adding 'blocks' of grouped items directly on AF pages rather than "just a line or two" (as long as you keep the blocks short enough). This is because it keeps AF "clean enough" to not lose the benefits of handling pages AF-style and should not adversely affect the standing out and processing of the regular AF items on the list (outside these blocks). Good point.
January 13, 2012 at 21:38 |
BKK
BKK
At the beginning of it I was indeed reluctant to do them. There was so many things to do. Doing them on the flow with AF made nothing advance. And these 2 project were crucial for me.
I decided to do something else. I will work one project at a time without doing anything else until I can not go further. I took these 2 projects and did all I could about them for 2 days. When I was fed up I worked on the other one and so on.
It took me 2 days but they are nearly closed.
Yes I did nothing else but I am sure that if I put all the task in AF on the flow I would never succeed and finished these 2 projects.
I noticed I did not think really about the project. I stayed concentrate on it and simply noted some words about the step I had to accomplish to get rid of them in the best way I could.
I am often very perturbed by AF. The mixing of tasks simply doesn't work for me, sometimes. I don't understand why.