Discussion Forum > The Dreaded Lingering Home Office Mess
Here's what I'd do. I'd get two or three file boxes - maybe one for each year - and a stack of manilla folders.
Then I'd take about six inches of stuff at a time, and quickly triage into three piles:
1. Definitely keep
2. Definitely trash
3. Not sure
I can triage a pile of that size in about 5-10 minutes.
For the first set - "definitely keep". Try to get a sense for the date range of the material you are handling. Let's say it seems to be mostly from February and March of 2011. OK, make a folder for March 2011 and put it all in there. Put the folders, sorted by date, into the file boxes.
Then sort through the "Not sure" pile, and read each item a little more closely, then still decide "keep" or "trash", and file the "keepers" in the same way as above.
I've been assuming none of this material needs any action, since it's been sitting around for so long. If this assumption is wrong, then maybe start another box for actionable material.
This can whittle it down pretty quickly to a small set of boxes that you can put in a closet for now and process more fully later, to sort by subject matter if you really need to. Personally I'd just keep it sorted by date, because that's how I manage my general filing anyway. Keeps it really simple, and it's usually pretty easy to find things.
I'd personally try to get through your giant stack all in one go. I find that as I work through a pile like that, it becomes clearer and clearer how much of it is trash, and I just want to throw stuff away so I can get it done. Any real keepers tend to really jump out at me when I am going quickly like this.
So let's say you have an eight-foot stack, and it takes 15 minutes to process each 6 inches. That means it could be done in a single four-hour stretch. But if you did it all at once, I'd bet you could finish in 2 hours.
Sorting by date can be advantageous if you do end up hunting for a loan payoff statement or something like that -- at least you'll have a rough idea of what box and folder to look in.
Then I'd take about six inches of stuff at a time, and quickly triage into three piles:
1. Definitely keep
2. Definitely trash
3. Not sure
I can triage a pile of that size in about 5-10 minutes.
For the first set - "definitely keep". Try to get a sense for the date range of the material you are handling. Let's say it seems to be mostly from February and March of 2011. OK, make a folder for March 2011 and put it all in there. Put the folders, sorted by date, into the file boxes.
Then sort through the "Not sure" pile, and read each item a little more closely, then still decide "keep" or "trash", and file the "keepers" in the same way as above.
I've been assuming none of this material needs any action, since it's been sitting around for so long. If this assumption is wrong, then maybe start another box for actionable material.
This can whittle it down pretty quickly to a small set of boxes that you can put in a closet for now and process more fully later, to sort by subject matter if you really need to. Personally I'd just keep it sorted by date, because that's how I manage my general filing anyway. Keeps it really simple, and it's usually pretty easy to find things.
I'd personally try to get through your giant stack all in one go. I find that as I work through a pile like that, it becomes clearer and clearer how much of it is trash, and I just want to throw stuff away so I can get it done. Any real keepers tend to really jump out at me when I am going quickly like this.
So let's say you have an eight-foot stack, and it takes 15 minutes to process each 6 inches. That means it could be done in a single four-hour stretch. But if you did it all at once, I'd bet you could finish in 2 hours.
Sorting by date can be advantageous if you do end up hunting for a loan payoff statement or something like that -- at least you'll have a rough idea of what box and folder to look in.
November 23, 2013 at 23:46 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Thanks Seraphim, I will give this a go and report back the results--best, TK
November 24, 2013 at 22:51 |
TK
TK
I think Seraphim's advice is good, but if you want to do a more thorough job on your papers then you might want to consider the halving method.
Find a description that covers about half the papers. In my case it would be "Work Papers". I would then sort all the papers into "Work" and "Everything Else".
Then take the "Work" pile and once more find a description that covers about half the papers in that file. In my case that might be "Coaching". Again sort the papers into "Coaching" and "Everything Else".
Keep doing this until you have a pile of one document only. Delete it or file it, opening a new file if necessary.
Then go back to the previous pile and halve that in the same way. Delete or file in the same file as before.
Keep doing this until you have dealt with all the papers. As you go along, shred or otherwise dispose of any papers which don't need to be kept. Open new files as needed.
If you come across any papers needing action, put a red flag on them when you file them and note the action required in your task management system with the name of the file they are to be found in.
The advantages of doing things this way are:
1. The only decision you need to make is whether each document belongs to the category you are currently sorting.
2. A logical filing system creates itself.
3. Every document is dealt with in context because it is surrounded by the other documents relating to the same subject. This makes it easy to decide which documents can be deleted.
Find a description that covers about half the papers. In my case it would be "Work Papers". I would then sort all the papers into "Work" and "Everything Else".
Then take the "Work" pile and once more find a description that covers about half the papers in that file. In my case that might be "Coaching". Again sort the papers into "Coaching" and "Everything Else".
Keep doing this until you have a pile of one document only. Delete it or file it, opening a new file if necessary.
Then go back to the previous pile and halve that in the same way. Delete or file in the same file as before.
Keep doing this until you have dealt with all the papers. As you go along, shred or otherwise dispose of any papers which don't need to be kept. Open new files as needed.
If you come across any papers needing action, put a red flag on them when you file them and note the action required in your task management system with the name of the file they are to be found in.
The advantages of doing things this way are:
1. The only decision you need to make is whether each document belongs to the category you are currently sorting.
2. A logical filing system creates itself.
3. Every document is dealt with in context because it is surrounded by the other documents relating to the same subject. This makes it easy to decide which documents can be deleted.
November 25, 2013 at 17:10 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I second Mark's suggestion of using the halving method (two-pile sorting). But I like to do it with reverse focus: what's the biggest percentage of the pile that can be dispatched quickly? In many cases, it's the Trash portion. Ideally, that'll be more than half of the entire pile. And I think it's important to do each sorting pass in one session (not little-and-often, although you could take a break after each complete pass). With this approach, you actually get rid of a substantial portion of the 'mountain' on each pass, which is very motivating.
In your specific example, TK, the mountain of documents could be sorted thus:
1. Trash or Not? Actually take away the trash (or put in to-be-shredded boxes in another room).
2. File-away (without examining) or Not? Actually file those items or put in to-be-filed box in another room).
3. Scan or Not? Actually scan those items or put in to-be-scanned box in another room.
etc.
By handling the (hopefully) larger 'halves' on each pass (or at least removing them from sight with clear action to be done later), you quickly get down to just a few important documents that require special treatment.
Good luck!
In your specific example, TK, the mountain of documents could be sorted thus:
1. Trash or Not? Actually take away the trash (or put in to-be-shredded boxes in another room).
2. File-away (without examining) or Not? Actually file those items or put in to-be-filed box in another room).
3. Scan or Not? Actually scan those items or put in to-be-scanned box in another room.
etc.
By handling the (hopefully) larger 'halves' on each pass (or at least removing them from sight with clear action to be done later), you quickly get down to just a few important documents that require special treatment.
Good luck!
November 26, 2013 at 22:46 |
ubi
ubi
This is how I've done it in the past.
1) Sit at a clear space - I use the floor, you could use table or bed.
2) Put a section of to-be-sorted papers in front of you, and a wastebin next to you.
3) Take first paper.
4) It's either rubbish, or goes an existing pile, or needs a new category. If it needs a new category (which it will do, as its the first bit of paper!), start a new pile, for that category.
5)Take next paper: repeat last step, of adding to an existing pile or starting a new one.
6) If there are action items, I create an action pile.
7) Eventually you will get to the point where there is no room within reach to start a new pile.
8) At this point, file all the piles, and tidy the space you've been working. This is a good moment for a break, depending on how things have been going.
Try not to create tiny piles - eg "coaching clients 2011", not "client Bob"
1) Sit at a clear space - I use the floor, you could use table or bed.
2) Put a section of to-be-sorted papers in front of you, and a wastebin next to you.
3) Take first paper.
4) It's either rubbish, or goes an existing pile, or needs a new category. If it needs a new category (which it will do, as its the first bit of paper!), start a new pile, for that category.
5)Take next paper: repeat last step, of adding to an existing pile or starting a new one.
6) If there are action items, I create an action pile.
7) Eventually you will get to the point where there is no room within reach to start a new pile.
8) At this point, file all the piles, and tidy the space you've been working. This is a good moment for a break, depending on how things have been going.
Try not to create tiny piles - eg "coaching clients 2011", not "client Bob"
November 28, 2013 at 10:15 |
Penny
Penny
Put it all in the loft (attic, storeroom) and forget about it. Sort through it if you ever need to find something. I mean, what if you painstakingly sort it all into files, and then never need to refer to it again?
November 29, 2013 at 11:45 |
Wooba
Wooba
I've done it the same way as Penny except I did it in an empty room in one go and had around 80 piles on the floor each containing their relevant papers at the end. I then put each pile into a clear plastic pocket and wrote what it was in permanent marker on the pocket. They all went into a plastic storage box. That just left behind the unwanted papers which I shredded afterwards.
From that point on I dumped new docs into the storage box and every few months put them into the relevant pockets or shredded as appropriate.
From that point on I dumped new docs into the storage box and every few months put them into the relevant pockets or shredded as appropriate.
November 30, 2013 at 3:38 |
Chris
Chris
Consider what will happen if you can't find the paper. A life-time warranty on a $10 kitchen gadget isn't worth the effort of filing.
Ask when you'll need it again. I keep all tax-related documents together, by year, with one folder for "ongoing". (Canada's system for tax on sale of shares is nuts.) Medical receipts, once they go through insurance, also go in the tax folder, because that's when we'll need them again. My husband hates it, but I put my membership receipt for Storytellers of Canada in the tax folder, even though I have no storytelling income to claim it against.
Car repair details, including the tire warranty (they never puncture near home) and emissions certificate, go in the car.
Keep the original papers. Companies use "not the original, don't have to pay" often enough that it's worth it.
Don't trust bank websites to keep the records. Ours only keeps 18 months. It only keeps cheque images for 90 days. I save a copy to my hard-drive.
Don't spend more time organizing things in sub-sub-sub-folders than you'll spend looking for something. Knitting patterns are one big file, several inches. Tax for the year is about 2 inches, and takes 30 minutes to put in order, as opposed to pulling out the file so I can put each paper in exactly the right order as it arrives.
Ubi's method is closest to my usual. I sometimes use three piles. If in doubt, I assume that the first few things in the stack represent the most-common categories. I've also used Penny's method, but it doesn't give me confidence if I suspect I'll need something urgently or something needing action is hiding.
Include a "throw away on December 31 this year" pile. And a "throw away on December 31 2014" pile. That buys you time, without making you go through the paper again just before tossing.
I find it easy to deal with papers that I can quickly file upstairs. My backlog is stuff I'm not sure what to do with, and things that need to go downstairs.
Ask when you'll need it again. I keep all tax-related documents together, by year, with one folder for "ongoing". (Canada's system for tax on sale of shares is nuts.) Medical receipts, once they go through insurance, also go in the tax folder, because that's when we'll need them again. My husband hates it, but I put my membership receipt for Storytellers of Canada in the tax folder, even though I have no storytelling income to claim it against.
Car repair details, including the tire warranty (they never puncture near home) and emissions certificate, go in the car.
Keep the original papers. Companies use "not the original, don't have to pay" often enough that it's worth it.
Don't trust bank websites to keep the records. Ours only keeps 18 months. It only keeps cheque images for 90 days. I save a copy to my hard-drive.
Don't spend more time organizing things in sub-sub-sub-folders than you'll spend looking for something. Knitting patterns are one big file, several inches. Tax for the year is about 2 inches, and takes 30 minutes to put in order, as opposed to pulling out the file so I can put each paper in exactly the right order as it arrives.
Ubi's method is closest to my usual. I sometimes use three piles. If in doubt, I assume that the first few things in the stack represent the most-common categories. I've also used Penny's method, but it doesn't give me confidence if I suspect I'll need something urgently or something needing action is hiding.
Include a "throw away on December 31 this year" pile. And a "throw away on December 31 2014" pile. That buys you time, without making you go through the paper again just before tossing.
I find it easy to deal with papers that I can quickly file upstairs. My backlog is stuff I'm not sure what to do with, and things that need to go downstairs.
December 1, 2013 at 4:33 |
Cricket
Cricket
Tackling another of my own piles today, I remembered something else:
Incoming stuff only goes on the pile if it's as unimportant as the rest of the pile. Anything that has a time limit goes into the new system and is dealt with properly.
That way you have no reason to start at the top, and you can work on the big backlog from the bottom.
Reasons for Starting at the Bottom:
If you always start at the top, and keep adding to the top, you'll never get to that paper from 20 years ago.
Older papers are easiest to deal with. They're more likely to be expired.
Those papers you haven't seen in years and wish you could find are more likely to be in the older strata.
You'll see progress. The date on the papers will slowly approach today's date.
You'll be less tempted to put things back in the pile. If you do, you won't see that progress. You won't be able to say "August is done!" because some of August's papers are in the December layer.
++++
A last tip, from experience (which means I've made the mistake before). Don't let the "file in another room" pile get too large. If you do, it becomes another backlog. I find 15 minutes works. When that pile will take 15 minutes to deal with, do so. That might be an inch of papers that need to be filed individually, or a much larger stack that just needs to be dropped into a box. (Remember that if that box is full, you'll have to spend several minutes, or even a shopping trip, getting the next box ready.)
Incoming stuff only goes on the pile if it's as unimportant as the rest of the pile. Anything that has a time limit goes into the new system and is dealt with properly.
That way you have no reason to start at the top, and you can work on the big backlog from the bottom.
Reasons for Starting at the Bottom:
If you always start at the top, and keep adding to the top, you'll never get to that paper from 20 years ago.
Older papers are easiest to deal with. They're more likely to be expired.
Those papers you haven't seen in years and wish you could find are more likely to be in the older strata.
You'll see progress. The date on the papers will slowly approach today's date.
You'll be less tempted to put things back in the pile. If you do, you won't see that progress. You won't be able to say "August is done!" because some of August's papers are in the December layer.
++++
A last tip, from experience (which means I've made the mistake before). Don't let the "file in another room" pile get too large. If you do, it becomes another backlog. I find 15 minutes works. When that pile will take 15 minutes to deal with, do so. That might be an inch of papers that need to be filed individually, or a much larger stack that just needs to be dropped into a box. (Remember that if that box is full, you'll have to spend several minutes, or even a shopping trip, getting the next box ready.)
December 2, 2013 at 14:31 |
Cricket
Cricket
Hope your dreaded home office mess has been sorted. if not, this might help.
I moved house recently and had to sort through about 20-30 archive boxes of old business papers, thousands of books, dvds cds, reference material etc.Had to decide to either shred/ throw/ charity/put in storage/take to new home. Was probably about two weeks work. Couldn't put it off too much, had deadline for moving.
I used incremental(?) timeboxing - decided to do in 45 min bursts, so set timer for 9 mins, then 8, 7 etc. Had the effect of somehow making it less daunting, and preventing me from getting absorbed in reading something out of a box instead of working, because the timer would go off!
Hope this is unnecessary now, but worth mentioning as a way of getting stuff done that you maybe have been putting of for years, and finally cant put off any more.
I moved house recently and had to sort through about 20-30 archive boxes of old business papers, thousands of books, dvds cds, reference material etc.Had to decide to either shred/ throw/ charity/put in storage/take to new home. Was probably about two weeks work. Couldn't put it off too much, had deadline for moving.
I used incremental(?) timeboxing - decided to do in 45 min bursts, so set timer for 9 mins, then 8, 7 etc. Had the effect of somehow making it less daunting, and preventing me from getting absorbed in reading something out of a box instead of working, because the timer would go off!
Hope this is unnecessary now, but worth mentioning as a way of getting stuff done that you maybe have been putting of for years, and finally cant put off any more.
December 7, 2013 at 9:59 |
jimp
jimp
jimp:
<< I used incremental(?) timeboxing - decided to do in 45 min bursts, so set timer for 9 mins, then 8, 7 etc. >>
You queried whether "incremental" was the right word. In fact what you describe is decremental time boxing - where the time boxes get shorter and shorter. Incremental time boxing is where they get longer and longer, e.g. 1 min, 2 mins, 3 mins ...
You can also combine the two so that you start short, work up to a predetermined maximum and then go back down again.
<< I used incremental(?) timeboxing - decided to do in 45 min bursts, so set timer for 9 mins, then 8, 7 etc. >>
You queried whether "incremental" was the right word. In fact what you describe is decremental time boxing - where the time boxes get shorter and shorter. Incremental time boxing is where they get longer and longer, e.g. 1 min, 2 mins, 3 mins ...
You can also combine the two so that you start short, work up to a predetermined maximum and then go back down again.
December 7, 2013 at 11:40 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Here's a handy tool to see what kind of increments you can use for different total durations of work. Works with incremental, decremental, and combined approaches.
http://www.dropbox.com/s/0cox2cqzpv55s5x/Incremental%20Decremental%20Time%20Blocking.xlsx
[Link amended - MF]
http://www.dropbox.com/s/0cox2cqzpv55s5x/Incremental%20Decremental%20Time%20Blocking.xlsx
[Link amended - MF]
December 8, 2013 at 22:06 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
For future reference, when posting an https link remove the 's' so that it's http - otherwise the link won't go live.
For future reference, when posting an https link remove the 's' so that it's http - otherwise the link won't go live.
December 10, 2013 at 15:14 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Thanks Mark!
December 12, 2013 at 18:19 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I do it the same as Chris and Penny, piles into plastic wallets into plastic storage boxes, though I do keep a box for important time independent documents like passports, birth certificates etc.
I s'pose putting a years worth of unsorted bank statements or bills into a wallet is a good enough balance between filing time and retrieval time, I also write the contents on a sheet of paper and put it in the front so the wallet can be reused. :-)
I s'pose putting a years worth of unsorted bank statements or bills into a wallet is a good enough balance between filing time and retrieval time, I also write the contents on a sheet of paper and put it in the front so the wallet can be reused. :-)
December 13, 2013 at 0:09 |
smileypete
smileypete
I put a yellow sticky on the *inside* of the wallet, and write the contents on the backside (where it sticks) of the sticky note. That makes for an exchangeable index on the wallet that is a bit more difficult to lose than a sheet of paper.
December 16, 2013 at 10:24 |
Nicole
Nicole
My contemplations are the following:
1. How much of this stuff do I actually need to keep? I thought of setting an arbitrary deadline to shred documents that were not "major" from pre-2008. However, I just heard about a case in the US where a student loan company succeeded in a legal action against a guy that had claimed to have paid off his loans 10+ years ago but no longer had the documents to substantiate that he had done so.
2. Can I just scan it and then shred it? I do not know, I do not have a high-speed document scanner and this seems as time consuming as just filing the documents.
Any advice here in what may make the process faster or more efficient? I am looking for input on what should be kept as well as organization methods that may make this task less daunting. TYIA