Get Everything Done

AF is a good fit for me, far better than anything else I've tried. However, as others have commented, the complete lack of structure can provide some challenges. In particular, I feel the need to identify daily "must-dos" - I must return that phone call, or the contact will go on leave; I must make that transfer, or the cheque will bounce; that sort of thing.

Also, the "little and often" paradigm isn't always useful. I'm a journalist, and if I'm deep in an article and everything is flowing (or, more likely, I'm over deadline), I may sit for three hours straight getting through it. When I surface, I've lost track of everything. If I need to go out in 30 minutes, I want to quickly rediscover what it is I *must* do next, today.

I've introduced some tweaks to AF that have been useful to me, although they may not be purist. It's very simple: I just draw a little box in front of the task, and use it to encode instructions about the task status.
- empty: undone, obviously
- dot in centre: do today (amazing how this tiny dot stands out of the page. When you add any of the other strokes below, the dot disappears. Very careful usage required, however: ideally, *everything* would be done today.)
- slash top right to lower left: waiting (usually on a return call)
- crossed: done
- slash vertically through middle: done a bit, rewritten elsewhere
- slash horizontally through middle: dismissed.

Mark may argue that this interferes with the rational/intutive interpretation. In my usage, it doesn't interfere with the intuitive side of things, because I just ignore the boxes when I'm scanning the page. But when I need to quickly find what I need to finish today, or what I'm waiting on, this system helps for quick identification.

Seems like a good idea to me. You are just adding extra info to what you originally wrote and saving yourself time in frequent crossings out and then revising and rewriting on to last page.

Hi Matt,

1) I like your ideas. I have done something similar by tagging entries ([W] Waiting for) for example.

2) I'm a bit wary about complicating a simple system. There has to be some balance between adding bells and whistles and having a system which functions well because of its simplicity. I'm nor sure where that line is, but ...

When I started, I tagged everything. Then I realized it was making the list visually "cluttered". So I tagged just a few key things and left empty space where the tag would be on other lines. That made things visually more inviting and the tags stood out even more as they were the only things in that "column". I had thought about adding a date to each item but that made little sense (I just put the date on a separate line one time each day. I thought about dating the completion of items but that only makes sense in a very few instances (paying a bill, perhaps).

This may be my own personal bias but what makes AF really work well for me is simplicity. It is like a little wind up machine that just runs on its own once you switch it on.

MF: "It's fine to tag or mark items which you want to draw your attention to for some reason, but you need to avoid *having* to mark every item with something. If you do that you are introducing a whole new level of complication."

Agreed. Most items just get a cross-off. I use the "do today" dot with extreme caution. Otherwise it's just commonsense.

Whilst I usually love tweaking things, I think the real key to this system is its absolute simplicity, so I'd hesitate before adding too much.

I am smiling at the number of posters complaining that it doesn't 'work' in the case where they know exactly what absolutely needs to be done and have no resistance to doing it. But in those (all too rare in my experience) circumstances, you have no problem with time management, do you?

My only 'tweak' to the rules so far relates to speed of movement. Although in theory one could pass through all the pages in a matter of minutes (and I sometimes do), I'm finding that often, with a large number of pages and if I get engrossed in some tasks, I have some days where I barely get through the list. I simply make sure that I read through the entire list each day (generally on the train to make sure I don't get distracted by actually doing anything on the tasks). I find this 'informs' (sub-consciously) my movement through the list and maintains my confidence that everything is captured.

Not sure if there's anything wrong with this or if it might be better to set a timer to restrict the time I spend on things as others have suggested. (Although that wouldn't be 'as long as I feel like, would it?!)

It sounds as though the system is working well for your particular needs Ed, and that the intuitive side of AF *is* managing your time. You have said that you sometimes pass through your pages quickly and others not, I find exactly the same. The fact that you are making sure to read through the lists daily is, as you say, giving you the confidence that you are not missing anything that has a time urgency (which you would do naturally under the common sense "rule").

It seems to me, from a rational perspective, that the items we have outstanding on our lists have a finite time requirement attached. If, say, those tasks would take 40 man hours, they will take 40 man hours whichever order they are done in. If we have resistance to them they may take longer. If we do them when we feel like it then they won't.

Don't worry if you are getting engrossed in tasks - you have all your common sense checks in place and the system (your intuition) will let you know if and when you need to change tasks. And even if it doesn't then the need for coffee will!!

I am thinking of getting a timer for some sort of "day-end" and meals though.

Mark, you could market this to Weight Watchers - "Don't count points, use AF and meal times will be a thing of the past ........!"

Hi Mark

You're absolutely right. That was what I meant in my post but didn't express clearly enough. When I said "would" take 40 hours I should probably have said "should" take 40 hours, i.e. if working at 100% productivity. I certainly feel tasks are being done quicker. Mind you, I did say that that view was coming from my "rational" perspective so I guess it rather proves AF ......? :-)

Matt, I'm also a compulsive tweaker but I find the simpler I can get AF, the better it seems to work.

I understand the anxiety of must get done today tasks all too well. I suggest any time sensitive tasks get entered into a calendar (so you're not looking through AF for them - though I will put them in the system too if they can be worked ahead of time). The odd tag can be handy but too much and I fear it would break the system and just create anxiety. Deadlines need to be in a calendar or a reminder system (I use RememberTheMilk.com and check it every morning for scheduled items).

What I do to set my mind at ease for tasks that must get done today is a make a line with today's date in my AF book, list those tasks that must be done today and then put a line under it - I then give myself full permission to work this little closed list as often as I want during the day. I tried it before putting it on a separate notepad and found it irritating to juggle the two. Keeping it in the same system (ie notebook) makes it much easier to handle switching from urgent tasks to not so urgent but important tasks throughout the day

I've modified the tweak a bit. I still draw a box, because it's a good way of marking a new task line. But I only use the "do today" dot and the "waiting for" diagonal stroke (and the "Done" cross) because AF renders everything else redundant.

I use my diary to enter time-dependent tasks, and if things are hectic, to jot down the projects I need to keep some sort of focus on in the course of the day. But it's easier to enter everything else on the AF list, and then "dot" them if they suddenly have deadlines. This doesn't happen all that often in my case, certainly not every day. Using AF, I tend to have sorted them out beforehand, which is nothing short of miraculous ...

I should have added in my initial post that there's nothing original in this idea. I see a more sophisticated discussion on the theme elsewhere in the forum. I brought it up because it allowed me to deal with much-discussed issues of urgency and structure with virtually no extra overhead.