Get Everything Done

Mark

A real positive for the system for me...

I love the process of doing a mindsweep - nothing better than sitting in a coffe shop with a coffee, notebook and pen and just letting my mind open to the things attracting my attention. This is definitely when I at my most creative and also find most stress relief.

GTD opened me up to this process but the problem with GTD was that I then had to "process" my mind-sweep into multiple lists and horizons of focus and then all the resistance and procrastination crept in and the mindsweep rarely resulted in action or outcome.

With AF the system handles this so naturally - I mind sweep directly onto the end of the list and it is already in the system and I know the system will deal with the items appropriately (including of course dismissing). Add to that you can mix the "horizon" - what I mean by that is that you can write down goals (at any level), outcomes, projects or just sinlge item tasks and the system copes with them all without any need for further classification, re-writing, categorising, transferring into computerised lists etc.

I think this feature alone is so simple and yet, like so many great things, has awesome power.

Love the term Mindsweeps - have not come across that before.

Coffee shops are a great place for doing as you say - a coffee, a notepad and a pen, and the absence of any work/home distractions somehow seems to stimulate creativity. It was a trick I used a lot when on business trips - need to add item to task list "go to Starbucks to Mindsweep" :-)

I find this aspect of AF fascinating as well.

The essence of GTD is "get everything out of your mind into a trusted system". David Allen's insight is that by deciding what you want (deciding the task/project) and then deciding what to do next on it (deciding the Next Action), your mind will let it go as long as it believes that you have entered these items into a "trusted system" which you will look at when the time is right. Hence, you can have an ENORMOUS number of things to do but still have a completely clear mind that can react perfectly and appropriately to whatever comes up. ("Mind Like Water")

What is interesting about AF is that I'm finding that you can get away with even less than what David Allen believes is the minimum. i.e. you don't need to decide a Next Action. Because the tasks/projects are coming up again and again on the AF list, this seems to still allow the mind to let go of the item even if the project/task itself is pretty vague.

I believe David Allen would say that what is really happening is that everytime the task/project comes up on the AF list, you are actually re-thinking (even unconsciously) about what the Next Action would be and either dismissing it at that moment or taking some action towards it. Hence AF would probably be considered inefficient in that sense because you are constantly re-thinking your Next Actions. However, I think that constant re-thinking process is actually quite helpful because you haven't committed upfront to deciding what the Next Action should be.

In my GTD career, I tended to find my Next Actions were quite often hastily decided and not at the correct level of granularity. So when I subsequently looked at them, I would feel a level of resistance that is not present with AF because you don't really commit to any Next Action unless your intuition gives the go-ahead.

One of things about Next Actions however is that they are context-driven so, for example, home actions would not appear on a list you look at when you are at work. This means you get a feeling that everything you NEED to see at that time/location is clearly visible in front of you, further keeping the stress levels down. I work from home so only have one AF list and so I am reaping the full "mind like water" effect that GTD is based around. (Though I do still keep a separate list for items to buy while shopping).

I'm not sure what the "Mind Like Water" effect would be if I had to go to a separate place of work, or even multiple different locations. Am watching those home/work threads with interest.

I agree with Frank in that I'm sure you lose something by having two separate lists, and therefore no single 'trusted system'. Most of my proper work is office based, although obviously I have a busy life outside too, some tasks from which I need to do from work. I'm finding a single list works great for me. I do 'cheat' when at home though and allow myself to go past a page full of work stuff without either actioning or dismissing. (It never happens the other way around for me).

I just love the feeling of having literally EVERYTHING is a little a5 book I can take around with me!

Like Frank I've wondered about my list if I am in a specific work context. Can you imagine if a client or boss saw your list - "complete spreadsheet x" "re-evaluate marketing plan" "clear sock drawer" ..... :-)

So far I have used a travel notebook when on the move and transferred items when I return home (my office base) but my gut feeling is that when I need to, AF will prompt me in the manner of "prepare a task list for project x to work on at y" followed by "update ....." as appropriate.

Yes, Ed C - I've been wondering about whether a "cheat rule" is required for those that just want to keep one complete fully-trusted list with no duplication. I've noticed in another thread the suggestion to re-enter tasks on each separate location list...hmmm...not sure about that yet...and not relevant to me yet because of working from home.

A "cheat rule" along the lines of "tasks don't count if you can't do them where you are" wouldn't work because you may have a page of work tasks with only one home task. At home, that would force you to do that single home task or dismiss that entire page. Not good.

Another idea that springs to mind might be to intersperse pages for different locations within the same overall list. So that when a work task comes along, it goes on the first work task page with available room, otherwise you create a new work task page. At home, you would only use AF on your home pages and similarly only look at work pages at work.

At least you still have one list but can support multiple contexts. It's a bit like running multiple AF systems side-by-side but within the same notebook.

Just throwing an idea out there. <grin>

And, just to clarify...you would still have to read through the interspersed pages in order to get to the next page with a valid context/location. This would be in case there was a task that could be done in the current location but is currently in the wrong context/location.

For example, phone Fred might be on a work page. But if I'm at home, I must still read through any work page that is on my way to the next home page. And then I notice I can "phone Fred". If I decide I don't want to phone Fred at that moment, I get a free pass to the next home page to use AF as normal.

Hope that makes sense!

I'm still experimenting, but using Mr. Forster's "rule" that you would have separate lists for different locales, I just created a duo-purpose list in one notebook by drawing a line down the center of the page.

Left of the line is work, right of the line is home.

This is no different than keeping two completely separate lists, except I like the idea of being able to sneak a peek easily at the other list every once in a while...

ds

Not sure if this would work for others or even if Mark would approve ;-) but I have one list which I throw everything at (except for a separate 'Errands' list at the back of my reporter's notebook for anything that requires going away from home to action). This is because I too work from home so different contexts aren't an issue for me.

When I scan down my active page I sometimes find there are tasks that can't be done yet, perhaps because they involve my husband who isn't around at the time, or for some other reason. If there are no possible tasks that stand out and there are a number of these 'can't do right now' type of tasks then I 'cheat' by not dismissing the remaining tasks on the page - as rewriting them all seems a bit pointless - instead I move to the next page as if I had been able to work on one task as per standard Autofocus. However, if the remaining tasks are all ones I don't want to do simply because I 'could do' them but they don't stand out then I dismiss them and re-evaluate them as per standard Autofocus rules.

I agree with Hannah. There are sometimes tasks which can't be completed because they are genuinely blocked by physical factors rather than psychological resistance. These can include being in the wrong place, not having access to the people and so on. When a page is nearly done, the chance increases that the few tasks outstanding on it are all blocked in this way. But they do need doing, as soon as the obstacles permit.

A general solution to this point would address all the home/work/context/multiple lists issues that have been raised.

I have a number of items like that but think that, as we become more used to how AF works for us, we will automatically phrase things in a way that deals with that, maybe by assigning those items to a project or a separate list such as "items to discuss with x"