Discussion Forum > How to Handle Projects
Here is a blog post on the Secrets book Authorized Project list
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/2/20/authorised-projects-list.html
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/2/20/authorised-projects-list.html
July 31, 2025 at 3:30 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2008/3/1/dealing-with-projects-that-dont-have-a-deadline.html
This is an early article from 2008. It divides projects into three groups, and advocates doing the projects without a deadline one at a time.
This is an early article from 2008. It divides projects into three groups, and advocates doing the projects without a deadline one at a time.
July 31, 2025 at 3:44 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
The advice of DIT is to make the one at a time project without a deadline the Current Initiative.
July 31, 2025 at 3:52 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2014/3/30/the-spinning-plates-method-of-project-control-experimental.html
Here the advice is start with one project and add another one, and another, until one has as many as can be managed.
Here the advice is start with one project and add another one, and another, until one has as many as can be managed.
July 31, 2025 at 3:59 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
Continuous projects in Autofocus
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/846816
Here is a thread about continuous projects. Different ways of handling these: write them in Autofocus, or assign a fixed time (as in DIT), do both. Mark Forster advised keeping a separate list for the continuous project of piano practice.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/846816
Here is a thread about continuous projects. Different ways of handling these: write them in Autofocus, or assign a fixed time (as in DIT), do both. Mark Forster advised keeping a separate list for the continuous project of piano practice.
July 31, 2025 at 4:09 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
After doing some more searching of the forum:
It seems to me that
1. GTD advises a next action list, and a current project list. The advice is to make sure that each current project has a next action.
2. Autofocus allowed mixing projects with next actions.
3. Others like to work by projects. Timeblocking seems to fit this method, and keeping the project tasks together.
After only doing a little searching on the forum it becomes evident that, although some of the methods can be combined, some of the methods here are mutually exclusive. Resembling card games, where although the cards remain the same, the rules change from game to game.
So with a long list, several of the algorithms can be used, yet the list is maintained.
But if the long list is the major method of working, if one adds checklists, no lists, timeblocking projects - at some point the long list can get lost if not worked on enough.
It seems to me that
1. GTD advises a next action list, and a current project list. The advice is to make sure that each current project has a next action.
2. Autofocus allowed mixing projects with next actions.
3. Others like to work by projects. Timeblocking seems to fit this method, and keeping the project tasks together.
After only doing a little searching on the forum it becomes evident that, although some of the methods can be combined, some of the methods here are mutually exclusive. Resembling card games, where although the cards remain the same, the rules change from game to game.
So with a long list, several of the algorithms can be used, yet the list is maintained.
But if the long list is the major method of working, if one adds checklists, no lists, timeblocking projects - at some point the long list can get lost if not worked on enough.
July 31, 2025 at 5:22 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
Nice list. The Spinning Plates article always seemed the most sensible in encouraging the proper review and "Taking necessary action to keep on top of project" Often it is assumed that means to define the next action and and do it. My personal experience has told me that simply focusing on the next action isn't always enough. An added element to keeping on top of the project is evaluating it's actual definition and progress and perhaps refining the scope of the project.
July 31, 2025 at 16:58 |
Brent
Brent
In Get Everything Done, page 96, the advice is to list routine activities and projects, no more than 10, and rotate around the list, starting with 5 minute intervals. Several methods of timeboxing are suggested.
July 31, 2025 at 19:37 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2007/2/6/one-thing-at-a-time.html
Here is an article from 2004 recommending that projects be done one at a time, estimating how long each will take, and done in order of urgency.
However, there is a note from MF saying that his thinking has changed, and linking to this article:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2008/3/1/dealing-with-projects-that-dont-have-a-deadline.html
The advice is still to deal with each project one at a time.
Here is an article from 2004 recommending that projects be done one at a time, estimating how long each will take, and done in order of urgency.
However, there is a note from MF saying that his thinking has changed, and linking to this article:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2008/3/1/dealing-with-projects-that-dont-have-a-deadline.html
The advice is still to deal with each project one at a time.
July 31, 2025 at 19:50 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/691561#post691750
This is a thread about time blocking to work on a project.
Here is MF's advice.
<<My own experience of time blocking is that it's fine for one big project or possibly two, but you need to avoid time blocking more than that per day. The reason: because time blocking reduces your discretionary time, and your discretionary time is when you work on your AF list.>>
and later on separate project lists:
<<You asked about separate project lists. I don't think there's anything wrong with having "Work on Project X" on your AF list and then switching to a separate list for that project. In fact that's the way I would do it myself for some projects. The only difference in my case is that I usually don't have a list written out already - I will write one on the fly and add to it as I think of things. My circumstances are very different from yours, so I wouldn't expect this necessarily to work for you.>>
This is a thread about time blocking to work on a project.
Here is MF's advice.
<<My own experience of time blocking is that it's fine for one big project or possibly two, but you need to avoid time blocking more than that per day. The reason: because time blocking reduces your discretionary time, and your discretionary time is when you work on your AF list.>>
and later on separate project lists:
<<You asked about separate project lists. I don't think there's anything wrong with having "Work on Project X" on your AF list and then switching to a separate list for that project. In fact that's the way I would do it myself for some projects. The only difference in my case is that I usually don't have a list written out already - I will write one on the fly and add to it as I think of things. My circumstances are very different from yours, so I wouldn't expect this necessarily to work for you.>>
July 31, 2025 at 20:13 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2008/12/22/how-to-get-any-project-up-and-running.html
here is an early article which was the basis for the Current Initiative. Recommends working on one project every day.
here is an early article which was the basis for the Current Initiative. Recommends working on one project every day.
July 31, 2025 at 20:21 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
My reflection on this:
I think there is some wisdom to devoting time to at least one project at a time, and giving it more time such 30 minutes a day, first thing, as in a Current Initiative. This would not interfere with maintaining a long list.
Although the projects could be on the long list, I have found sometimes there is not enough time spent on a more time-consuming project.
Also, although Mark Forster recommended using projects without a deadline for the Current Initiative, I am wondering if it would be better to use it for projects with a deadline, in order of urgency, as he recommended early on his blog.
While I was searching the website, I found a post, but cannot locate it now, where Mark Forster said that dealing with a project one at a time was meant to get the project up and running, and not to mean one could not work on multiple projects at the same time. This is similar to the idea of Spinning Plates, where one project at a time is started and gotten up and running before another project is started.
I think there is some wisdom to devoting time to at least one project at a time, and giving it more time such 30 minutes a day, first thing, as in a Current Initiative. This would not interfere with maintaining a long list.
Although the projects could be on the long list, I have found sometimes there is not enough time spent on a more time-consuming project.
Also, although Mark Forster recommended using projects without a deadline for the Current Initiative, I am wondering if it would be better to use it for projects with a deadline, in order of urgency, as he recommended early on his blog.
While I was searching the website, I found a post, but cannot locate it now, where Mark Forster said that dealing with a project one at a time was meant to get the project up and running, and not to mean one could not work on multiple projects at the same time. This is similar to the idea of Spinning Plates, where one project at a time is started and gotten up and running before another project is started.
July 31, 2025 at 23:36 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
I think the best answer depends a lot on what time management issue you're trying to solve. I don't have an organization problem when it comes to projects, so that tends not to worry me. if it did, i would want to solve that first.
Next, is the issue progress on projects or something else?
For myself, I find that it is easy to "start" too many projects, often to procrastinate on others. Finishing, IME, is harder than starting. So, in that respect, it's helpful for me to actively reduce my set of projects that I actively work on, and only pull in projects after others are finished. I can do this with any time management method, but Personal Kanban is the most explicit about managing a strict Work-in-progress limit.
With my re:zero experiment, I'm just working on the projects that I know are my focus right now, and I have one or two speculative ones on there, but my sense of resistance is quite sensitive to "doing too many things at once" by now, so I find that I don't tend to do too many projects.
One thing that can crop up is having trouble "getting going" on a project once I have the initial momentum exhausted. Or, sometimes, a project is quite complex, and a number of things pop up that I need to make sure I handle. Not handling that complexity often leads to stagnation as my mind tries to deal with it on the fly.
In both these cases, I've found a long list or some kind of list helpful. I will start breaking apart the project into a bunch of little items that need to be done and put them on the list. This is especially helpful in keeping me focused while I'm working on some aspect of the project, because it's very easy for me to keep a record for future work in the long list, and I don't have to go through the overhead of managing such stuff in another system (like a formal project management system). That's just enough extra structure for me.
I find that doing this often does two things: it makes more of my long list focused on thinking about that specific project, and it tends to make it more likely that I'll do the thing.
As far as dedicating time to work on a project, I've tried that as well, and the best I've found is to have a specific thing that I know I want to work on for a given day, set up or determined the night before, and then I do the Ikario 90 minute protocol, which involved specifying the task, understanding why I'm doing it, journaling quickly about that, and then doing a 90-minute timebox on that thing where I have no stimulation in my environment except for that thing. Then, I can sit there, or I can do that thing, but nothing else.
This has worked well in the past precisely because it eases me into the work while also not allowing distractions, but it isn't tied to "starting" at a specific time, which I have never had work for me.
At the moment, with re:zero, I find that as long as I am dotting the projects that I care about often enough, I tend to "get into" them sufficiently well that I don't have an issue with not spending enough time with them, provided that I actually dot them. If I feel like I'm not dotting them enough, well, that's time for some reflection that I can spend some time thinking about and adjust my internal systems.
This means that I have tended to prefer putting all the projects into my long list and working on them like that, rather than using some other mechanism; this all assumes that you don't put more projects than you should on the list. I'll put new ideas on the list, but then as I work them, they'll usually quickly end up on a "someday" list for later consideration since they aren't active.
Next, is the issue progress on projects or something else?
For myself, I find that it is easy to "start" too many projects, often to procrastinate on others. Finishing, IME, is harder than starting. So, in that respect, it's helpful for me to actively reduce my set of projects that I actively work on, and only pull in projects after others are finished. I can do this with any time management method, but Personal Kanban is the most explicit about managing a strict Work-in-progress limit.
With my re:zero experiment, I'm just working on the projects that I know are my focus right now, and I have one or two speculative ones on there, but my sense of resistance is quite sensitive to "doing too many things at once" by now, so I find that I don't tend to do too many projects.
One thing that can crop up is having trouble "getting going" on a project once I have the initial momentum exhausted. Or, sometimes, a project is quite complex, and a number of things pop up that I need to make sure I handle. Not handling that complexity often leads to stagnation as my mind tries to deal with it on the fly.
In both these cases, I've found a long list or some kind of list helpful. I will start breaking apart the project into a bunch of little items that need to be done and put them on the list. This is especially helpful in keeping me focused while I'm working on some aspect of the project, because it's very easy for me to keep a record for future work in the long list, and I don't have to go through the overhead of managing such stuff in another system (like a formal project management system). That's just enough extra structure for me.
I find that doing this often does two things: it makes more of my long list focused on thinking about that specific project, and it tends to make it more likely that I'll do the thing.
As far as dedicating time to work on a project, I've tried that as well, and the best I've found is to have a specific thing that I know I want to work on for a given day, set up or determined the night before, and then I do the Ikario 90 minute protocol, which involved specifying the task, understanding why I'm doing it, journaling quickly about that, and then doing a 90-minute timebox on that thing where I have no stimulation in my environment except for that thing. Then, I can sit there, or I can do that thing, but nothing else.
This has worked well in the past precisely because it eases me into the work while also not allowing distractions, but it isn't tied to "starting" at a specific time, which I have never had work for me.
At the moment, with re:zero, I find that as long as I am dotting the projects that I care about often enough, I tend to "get into" them sufficiently well that I don't have an issue with not spending enough time with them, provided that I actually dot them. If I feel like I'm not dotting them enough, well, that's time for some reflection that I can spend some time thinking about and adjust my internal systems.
This means that I have tended to prefer putting all the projects into my long list and working on them like that, rather than using some other mechanism; this all assumes that you don't put more projects than you should on the list. I'll put new ideas on the list, but then as I work them, they'll usually quickly end up on a "someday" list for later consideration since they aren't active.
August 1, 2025 at 8:44 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
Another thought, but Mark H, what sort of work do you do and what are you considering a project? I guess one thing I don't understand is how your list can be continually growing like you say it would without something else going off the rails?
August 1, 2025 at 8:54 |
Aaron Hsu
Aaron Hsu
Aaron,
Thanks for your post.
I am semi-retired. I teach piano part-time.
So I have more free time now, and a long list helps.
But I do have appointments, and reminder of little things, so the long list helps with that too.
I am right at the beginning of the month, and I have made a list of projects as Mark Forster recommends to keep the catch-all list from being overcommitted. However, in that post on Overcommitment and the Catch-all List he doesn't say how that would help. I have marked those projects that I am most resisting.
Ikario 90-Minute Protocol - I am not familiar with that and I asked ChatGPT about it. That sounds like something I would be interested in.
I do think that the "little and often" mindset and structured procrastination can only go so far, and I find that the items that are more than 7 days old and but can't decide to cross them out - those are often the items that I need to pay attention to, and need to focus on, and suspect there is an underlying emotional conflict that I need to explore, in which case I need to switch to another mindset than "little and often".
One thing I notice searching the forum again is how many different methods and systems there are. So when Autofocus was started, there was quite a number of people who had adopted the previous system of DIT, Do It Tomorrow, who were trying to do both. When the No-list methods came out, it took years for me to realize that Mark Forster was really abandoning the long list. I have tried all the no-list methods, and perhaps 1,2, or 3 worked out for me which is enough. But I could not get the 5T method to fit me, which the Secrets book seems to be based on. I started to read the Dreams book, but abandoned after a few pages.
Probably one method alone is not enough to handle all of life, but one can only get proficient at a few, which is best to be able to do automatically.
Thanks for your post.
I am semi-retired. I teach piano part-time.
So I have more free time now, and a long list helps.
But I do have appointments, and reminder of little things, so the long list helps with that too.
I am right at the beginning of the month, and I have made a list of projects as Mark Forster recommends to keep the catch-all list from being overcommitted. However, in that post on Overcommitment and the Catch-all List he doesn't say how that would help. I have marked those projects that I am most resisting.
Ikario 90-Minute Protocol - I am not familiar with that and I asked ChatGPT about it. That sounds like something I would be interested in.
I do think that the "little and often" mindset and structured procrastination can only go so far, and I find that the items that are more than 7 days old and but can't decide to cross them out - those are often the items that I need to pay attention to, and need to focus on, and suspect there is an underlying emotional conflict that I need to explore, in which case I need to switch to another mindset than "little and often".
One thing I notice searching the forum again is how many different methods and systems there are. So when Autofocus was started, there was quite a number of people who had adopted the previous system of DIT, Do It Tomorrow, who were trying to do both. When the No-list methods came out, it took years for me to realize that Mark Forster was really abandoning the long list. I have tried all the no-list methods, and perhaps 1,2, or 3 worked out for me which is enough. But I could not get the 5T method to fit me, which the Secrets book seems to be based on. I started to read the Dreams book, but abandoned after a few pages.
Probably one method alone is not enough to handle all of life, but one can only get proficient at a few, which is best to be able to do automatically.
August 1, 2025 at 11:05 |
Mark H.
Mark H.
How to handle projects. I am answering this by memory.
1. DIT/Do it Tomorrow. As I recall, projects are divided into:
A. Continuous Projects - the same activity each time. The recommendation is to schedule the same time each occurrence.
B. Projects with a Deadline. (Do in order of start date, or due date?)
C. Projects without a Deadline. Keep a list, and do one at a time as a Current Initiative.
2. Autofocus/long lists. Projects, subprojects, next actions, tasks - are all put on the list without discriminating between them.
As I remember at that time this was introduced, there were ones who liked working by projects as in DIT, and didn't adopt it.
3. Secrets book. Keep a list of current projects. No long list.