Get Everything Done

I have posted a new idea related to project management which I think will be very helpful for people who are frustrated with time management even AF due to their need to manage projects. By treating projects as a unit, it introduces a simple project management technique which is helpful to focus one's attention. I have used as a template the AF instructions. I have been doing this for about a week an it seems to work great for me.



Project Focus


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Project Focus is a simple project management system based upon some the principals of Mark Forster’s Autofocus System and his other works, along with some of my ideas.

The modifications are based upon the thought that for a number of people their work is really managing a series of projects many of which are not being managed with formal project management methods. For some people a traditional time management system even AF will not be as effective for their particular situation as Project Focus. Project Focus is designed to get people to review as a part of their time/self management the projects/commitments as a part of their time management process.



These instructions assume you are familiar with Autofocus, so if you are not become a tester and get the instructions.



The advantages of this method are;



It is simple.



It is flexible in that it quickly allows new projects to be introduced to the system.



It provides a system which allows one to cycle through all of their projects in a systematic manner and advance each and every one of them on at least a daily basis.


The groupings by project provide a way to see the entirety of a project in one place versus scattered throughout a system making project planning easier and more intuitive



It retains many of the advantages of Autofocus which Mark has enumerated in his instructions.


Supplies Needed



1. Legal pad or notebook paper three hole punched.
2. Manila folder or three ring binder.
3. Pencil or pen
4. Stapler
5. Highlighter



Quick Start






The system consists of a folder or three ring binder with a page(s) representing each of the discreet projects you are working on. In this system unlike AF having a way to insert pages is most important.

The top of the page is titled with the outcome of the project, such as build ABC office building in Cleveland, buy new car or launch on-line business. Below the title is a list of all of the tasks required to bring the project to fruition. Leave a few lines of space after each task, you will see why later.

As you think of new tasks related to a project, add them to the end of the individual project page(s).

Each project is a self contained unit. If a project requires more than one page you staple as many sheets as needed so it stays as one unit

As you think of new projects, simply jot the title of the project on a new piece of paper and put it in the back of the folder or binder with as many of the tasks related to the project as you wish to add to get it started. Just the idea is ok as a title.



You work through the project units one unit at a time in the following manner:

1. Read quickly through all the items in the first project unit without taking action on any of them.
2. Go through the project unit page(s) more slowly looking at the items in order until one stands out for you.
3. Work on that item for as long as you feel like doing so. Use the standard AF method of dismissing tasks within the project unit.
4. Continue going round the same project in the same way. Don't move onto the next project page until you complete a pass of the project unit without any item standing out
5. Move onto the next project unit and repeat the process
6. If you go to a project unit and no item stands out for you on your first pass through it, then the entire the project is dismissed.
7. Once you've finished with the project unit, re-start at the first project. Repeat



Other Instructions



Don’t do a task without writing it down.


If a task appears too overwhelming, use the procrastination buster, which is write an easier part of the task you are not resistant too.

For instance if you realize you are not getting: Hire an architect done, below it write review three architects’ website and do it.


Create a project unit for things like Return Calls and as you take them off your voicemail add the calls to the list. You will return as many of them as “stand out” when you get to that page.


Projects like clear in tray or clean desk will also automatically get done using the little and often principal. Each time the project unit comes up, you will do at least one thing to move this project forward before moving on to the next project.


Like AF keep a folder or binder for office and home if you work on these projects separately.


You can use the AF method of re-writing tasks at your discretion if you find it helpful.

Or, I could just plan the project and write tasks in AF, if, when, and as needed.

Yes, this modification is designed for multiple projects. I agree that a single AF notebook could be a great project planning tool for a single project.

This is a way to handle 10 projects at once like I need to do at work. Putting all the tasks into a single AF notebook caused lost perspective on the goal of each project and constantly putting review project plan for ABC, XYZ etc on the AF list scattered the info around too many places.

That's something I like about this X47 notebook I got: it has an insert that they call a "databank", which consists of a dozen tabbed sections of six lined pages each. This seems really good for collecting project-oriented "next steps" which can then be dropped into my Autofocus list (on a lined insert in the same binder...)

Hello,

I already do this way of managing projetc. I have a binder wich is didided in 2. Active project and non active project. At the beginning of each part i have a project list with deadlines. The advantage of this method is a very fast access to project and a very good controle about items.

I never used it as AF for the items. But i use in A GTD way with David allen metodology of managing projects.

I try to avoid all details prefering the big rock and the outcome. The is the reason why i use a lot of heuristic shemes they force me to focus on the results and not on details. For details when i need them or subpart i use AF including the project as an item. At the begining i use to duplicate the item on my project and on my context list (i worked with context, no more...) but i lost time and efficiency. Now the only thing i do is when a "rock" is done on AF i report it on my project just to remember i did it for my reporting.
The result is fantastic it works perfecly. I wont dont it on computer i tried and it was a wash out !.

Since one month about using GTD i realised that one one the stengh of AF is the mixt up of all project and task wich make your brain decides for you the best way to do things

When i works on a project and do a task about it happens that i just do a pause on autofocus process and make a little review of all the page very fastly (it takes me about 30 secondes for 10 pages) just to be sur i did not forget an important item somewhere and then if i find something so important in the first pages that i must do it fast but i can(t now i just cross it and report it on my last page mostly giving it a new formulation.

So my binder is one of my GTD process i kept and i can tell you after 1 year of working with it that nothing is more efficient except autofocus.

I trust the system and it works for me.

Just a mistake. 2 years of experience using GTD, 1 month experience using autofocus ;))

Gerry wrote:
"Projects like clear in tray or clean desk will also automatically get done using the little and often principal."

Gerry, how do you define the term "project"?
Are "clearing the in-tray" and "cleaning the desk" projects for you?

Looks like a good plan, I agree for multiple projects it could be best to analyse outcomes and tasks independently of the AF list.

However I'd prefer to progressively add (ie not dump!) project actions to the AF list, then I can prioritise between projects intuitively.

Rainer

Yes, I realized they have become projects as they just were not getting done. So this makes them pop up and using the little and often principal they are getting done.

Gerry

I think this where there is a link with DIT. A lot of my projects of this nature came about as a result of "declaring a backlog" under DIT. I was never able to totally avoid the creation of "new" backlogs under DIT but with AF that is happening very rarely, and always with an accompanying insight into the reason :-)

And my old backlogs are really going! :-)

Hi,
I've been trying to implement a simpler version of this: "One page per project", because it was difficult to have tasks for the same project scattered around the various AF pages. My mind somehow wanted them collected together on 1 page.

Hope this works out better for me.

You might try working from the back of the AF book, using one page per project then in the main AF list, just reference the project. You can then go to the project list for detail.

I AGREE WITH MIKE
I tried to collect all my task on a separate sheet in a binder. the result was wash out. AF is efficient if and only if everything is collected on one place for me.

Then the idea of collecting thing about a major project on one page seems to be a very good idea.

Other idea wich works for me i have a lot of future task i took a page for it then i have april, may and of course next week/ i cross them on my AF & repport them on that page.

I do the same for things i am waiting for coming coming next week and after ie april, may ....

Anywat, all this tips works well for me. Of course i am not really following marks methodand i am quiet worry about this but these are the only bypass i do.

Hi Jupiter

In your post you say that you are concerned that you are not following Mark's method - the way you are doing AF is very easy to bring into line with the instructions. When Mike details his method of using one page per project, what he is actually describing is a form of Project Management, using AF style lists within that "system". Note that he says "in the main AF list, just reference the project". That is where the "project management system" (i.e. the individual lists) is brought into AF, for example "work on Project X". I use a very similar approach but keep my project "lists" in a separate location to my AF notebook as opposed to at the back of the notebook.

Where you talk about having separate lists for future tasks, then you are effectively just scheduling those, which is also a recommendation of AF. Again I do something similar. If I have an appointment in July, it goes into AF as "add July appointment to schedule". It is actioned when I enter it onto the schedule, and I have a recurring task to "check schedule".

If it is a task, rather than an appointment, that CAN be done earlier I will leave it on the AF list, perhaps with a reminder on my schedule, eg Tax Return Due. Items where I am waiting for a response will be entered as "has Fred phoned back?" This acts as a reminder and at an appropriate time I will either cross it off (because he has called back) or action it by a follow up call.

All of these tasks can be easily managed within AF, by managing the schedule and project lists themselves from within AF.

Hope that helps .....

Part of why I am using this approach is I am getting bothered by all of the pages to sift through and rewriting of tasks. I am finding that by writing the outcome(s) and not all the small tasks I am working more intuitively. If I need to sell a property and list all of the things I need to accomplish to do it, it is less important to put call bob etc. My mind is focused on the outcome not the steps, my mind will fill in the steps and create the roadmap.

I am also trying to cut down on rewriting as a way to actually get more done. I am also thinking of going to a notebook I can add and subtract pages to in order to have less pages and clutter. So after I am done with a page It will be gone and not need to be looked at again.

I am a minimalist who likes a bit less structure than most, so I am trying to find the most minimal system so I know things won't slip through the cracks, while not doing more maintenance than I need.

Gerry

This is so interesting ! Well i just realize than autofocus is really adaptable to every way of working. Anyway, it's efficient !

Hi Gerry

It is frustrating to a degree having loads of pages - I am trying to keep separate lists for projects and just bringing in the odd tasks as a general rule, but as I have had to blitz a couple of projects, bringing absolutely everything into AF has also worked - and to be honest has worked better than expecetd. It has played havoc with the number of new items and pages (and I think I'm getting writer's cramp!) but I have got through a phenomenal amount on some really boring stuff that I just kept leaving.

As Jupiter says AF is really adaptable.

Project Focus appeals to me, I'm using a spreadsheet for AF so it wouldnt be hard to create a tab for each project and split my AF list up. I need a project list and running AF and a project outline is just too time consuming for me. My worry with "PF" is that I'll be wondering what project to work on next all the time, do you find this a problem Mike?

Regards,

Derek.

Hi Derek,

I don't find projects a problem using AF as it was originally described. I do one of two things:

- Put the project name on the AF list (particularly for small projects)

- Put the project in a "file" (most often OneNote but it could be anything and take tasks from there and put them on the AF list. This is particularly good for very big or complex projects.

Basically, the project management part of the thing is about deciding what tasks to do when. Once I know what to do next, it goes on the list to be done as soon as appropriate.

The problem I had with the system as first described (above) was that it seemed to be trying to make project management into AF and/or vice-versa. I don't see the need or the benefit. Just FWIW.

Ah I see, so you outline tasks in one note and cut and paste new ones into AF with a project "tag" in the task name? This then allows you to use AF in the traditional way but one note allows you to project outline. Presumably you always add new tasks to one note for copying into AF later?

Thanks,

Derek.

Derek,

The principle is to do project planning in one place and manage time on the actions (the only thing one actually DOES) in a time management system.

- Project management manages the projects: what to do, what the dependencies are, what resources are needed, etc.

- Time management manages my time as I allocate it to what I must DO (the actions or tasks).

So my project management is done in ANY way that allows me to outline, doodle, noodle, etc. as I figure out the WHAT. Right now this is OneNote. In the past it has been text documents, Word Documents, Excel Documents, or even (gasp) a note book! LOL ;-) Once I have those "whats" (tasks, actions) I move them to AF. If they go into a computerized version of AF, then yes, a tag can go with them. (Right now I'm running a ListPro version of AF in parallel with my pocket notebook. In that case, I put some tags on the items so I can sort and collect similar things for more efficient processing.)

In my pocket notebook, I don't bother tagging anything. I just "know" why something is on the list. "Sharpen Ice axe [Mt. Everest Project]" is not more revealing than just "Sharpen Ice Axe". ;-)

No, I don't add new tasks into OneNote simply to copy them later. In fact, the opposite is more often true. My AF book has become my universal capture, as the GtD people like to call it. The only case in which things hit OneNote first is if I'm thinking about how to do a project and so am in OneNote on that project page doing planning.

AF works beautifully for me except for large, deadlined projects. What I tend to do when operating in AF list mode is to do as many tasks on as many pages as possible to get through the list and move lots of things forward. This works beautifully for most of my tasks. But if I come to a task related to a large project with a deadline, it doesn't work as beautifully. I tend to do very little and kid myself into thinking I'm doing what's necessary on that project. It's true that I could just have the project name on the AF list and work on it as long as I wanted to. It seems, though, that I have two different work styles: the little and often (which I didn't have before AF) and the in-depth style. I like to switch between the two as I feel like it. As noted in other posts, I am using DoThisFirst on the iPhone to track my large projects that must be completed by a certain date. Doing that allows me to work just one project at a time (unlike Gerry's approach which might have a person working on all active projects, again leaving me too little time devoted to my key project) and make significant progress.

>> AF works beautifully for me except for large, deadlined projects.

Perhaps Mark is addressing this in his new setup.

For now, large projects are written down in AF w/o any task. I intuitively know what to do when I encounter them on my list. However, if I need to block off time to work on the project, I do it in iCal. I see no reason to break down large projects into small tasks.

Avrum, I don't see the need for project breakdown either. It's also logical to time block for large projects. I just find that I rebel against scheduling. I do better if I know how much time to devote to a project each day to meet deadline and if I can choose to do the time when I feel like it (as compared to working on my AF list).

Mark, I have only a couple of projects that require that kind of outside planning. Most of what I'm talking about I know what needs to be done, but if I don't break down how much time I need to spend on it each day between now and deadline, I can kid myself by using the "little and often, as much as I feel like approach" to AF. I could certain put "work on project Y for 20 minutes" in my AF list. The problem with that is getting to the page with that task and when I get to it. If it takes all day to get to that task, there's very little likelihood that I'll feel like putting in the time. Yes, I could use the common sense approach, but the DoThisFirst program is so helpful to me in telling me which project is most pressing and how much time is required today. For some reason, keeping the two "lists" separate is very effective for me. I don't feel obliged to work on these big projects; in fact, I am very motivated to do so. I also feel no stress in using my AF list because I know exactly what is required of me where deadlines are concerned. If I had a project with a very long-term deadline, I'd be tempted to stick with AF for it. The kinds of projects I'm talking about are big, short to mid-range ones. I appreciate the fact that DoThisFirst supports little and often by suggesting less time devoted to a project the sooner you get started on it. That's something my AF list just can't do, but what it does do it does very well. :-)

Nice tip Mark Thanks, I'll be using notes in calendar appts for my project lists. Your thoughts on what sorts of projects require a separate list would be much appreciated, I am thinking I'll only plan "stuck" projects - or projects with fast approaching deadlines?

Thanks again for a great system, looking forward to the next!

Derek

>>"Project X" is a high resistance item. "Work on Project X for 20 minutes" is also a high resistance item. "Go to the Project X task list where there are lots and lots of small easy items" is relatively low resistance. >>

Seems like semantics to me Mark. If my conscious brain knows the task list is either: a) unpleasant b) long and complex, I'm going to have resistance regarding the project. Oddly enough, it's your "little and often" and use of intuition of what needs to be done approach to AF that get me grooving on complex projects.

I don't think it's just semantics Avrum. I had been resisting a project at work all week (because it's a stupid make work project I don't think we should have to do) and today finally bit the bullet and wrote down half a dozen steps to do in order to start it. By the time I was on the second or third step, I didn't need the list anymore (my method of tackling in it had deviated from the original list) and polished off the job that seemed so big and ugly in a couple of hours. And the time just flew by.

In my work, any time I have a project that has more than a couple of steps, I write out a list of tasks for it on a scrap piece of paper. I don't like using "little and often" at work because I don't get the satisfaction of completion. And it's a pain to come back to something complex and figure out where I left off.

But I agree, it probably depends on the job. If I can't work at something sequentially and finish it in one session because of dependencies, little and often makes more sense.

Mark, when you wrote:
"So for instance today I had an item on my AF list "Arts Festival Action". I made a Task List which included such items as:"

Did those items given the Autofocus treatment? Or do they remain on a separate list, in a separate notebook?

Mark, I completely agree if we're talking about high resistance projects. The projects I am thinking of aren't high resistance; making a list of all the intermediary steps isn't helpful or necessary in this instance. In fact, it's what I'd do if I were procrastinating on it. But we are in agreement on the spend X minutes vs. do one small task on large highly resisted projects. What Jacqueline said is true too: Simply making a list of steps is often enough to get you ready to move full steam ahead.

Mark, "leave it until the last minute, then do the lot in one big rush" is something I reserve for cleaning before I have company over. :-) But since I'm working on 'little and often' there too, it's not quite such a "big" rush.

"The projects I am thinking of aren't high resistance; making a list of all the intermediary steps isn't helpful or necessary in this instance. In fact, it's what I'd do if I were procrastinating on it. "

Mel, I will sketch out my plan as part of thinking of the best way to do something - what steps can be skipped/consolidated, handed off to someone else, how can I find a way to automate this, do I need to request something from someone else to be able to finish this off (so I should get that done first)? Even if I was doing something like cleaning up before company, I often use a list to figure out the 20% part of the 80/20 principle. What are the things that will make the most difference and what are only the nice to haves?