Get Everything Done

Just for everyone's interest -- there is a discussion on the merit of GTD versus AF on the David Allen Forum. Both "sides" are making very good points. David Allen himself has not added his thoughts; Mark, this would be a good opportunity for you to respond first.

http://www.davidco.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=5

-David

I presume that the majority of posters there are die-hard GTD fans. Since they're happy with their approach, I don't see them switching, even if the case for AF is made effectively. I almost wonder if all the work GTD requires is a sort of badge of honor. Like, "See what I have to do to handle my amazingly busy, productive life?" Not saying these people AREN'T amazingly busy and productive. :-) I heard something this week that I think rings true here: Usually the simplest explanation is the right one. If you have to spend tons of time explaining your rationale for time management, it may not be the right approach. I'm the first one to try to complicate things. That's why I appreciate Mark's steadfastness in promoting AF's simplicity.

I just want to say that moises and ludlow provided extremely excellent responses to the criticisms. You guys rock!

I was suprised t read than the guy on GTD forum said that he lost his mind like water. I don't agree at all. First because as David Allen said GTD is a collection of trick. Thatr does nt mean that you have to do all of it. When you use AF you can do some shary picking and i do ! As a GTD "blackbely" (hope i am !!!) i can tell you that AF is really a fantastic tool. It works perfectly and i never be so efficient using all of autofocus method and all GTD except context list.

I thought the discussion on the GTD board had ended. But I decided to follow David's link, above, and saw that it continues.

The poster named TesTeq made an important point that is quite relevant to AF. GTD puts great emphasis on specifying tasks by their next physical action and specifying projects by defining the outcome that one desires.

There have been a number of threads on this forum about how to word items on one's AF list. My experience has been that, quite often, vague and indefinite is good.

Here's why. Sometimes I am feeling a lot of resistance to an item. Then I will use the DIT trick and say to myself, "I am not going to reconcile the bank account, I am just going to take a look at the bank statement."

Note that, on the face of it, GTD and AF are quite similar. GTD might call the next action "Look at bank statement" and the project "Bank account reconciled." But what I have found is that how I describe the action is extremely dependent on how much time is available, my emotional state, how much energy I have, how messy my desk is, etc. In other words, it doesn't make sense to write in my AF list "Look at bank statement," since, if I am feeling energetic and enthusiastic I might tell myself "I feel like reconciling the bank account now." Work does not have a fixed description. How I choose to describe what I am going to do is highly dependent on many, rapidly-changing, factors.

So I am better off, in many instances, putting something vague on my AF list, like "Bank reconciliation," and then, when I get to that item on my AF list, decide if my action is going to be "Get out of my chair and walk to the file cabinet," or "Clear a space on my desk," or "Find the bank statement," or "Reconcile the bank account."

Mel,

Re: the simplest explanation: FWIW, go here for the whole story:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam%27s_razor

That wasn't really a simple explanation of the law of parsimony, but it was interesting! Thanks. :-)

Interesting discussion. As usual, many people have scanned the instructions, not tried it, and concluded that it is impossible that it can work. Some with some major hostility. Funny ;-)

Very clear responses by moisis!

Hi moises,

Your post on the David Allen website was right on the mark! GTD is outstanding for collecting, processing, and organizing one's commitments. In fact, the rules are strict and relatively easy to follow. But the fascinating part comes in on the doing....and here it is so open. Trust your intuition, your gut, etc. I too had real problems on this level. My lists would grow and grow and I would become intimidated with all of those actions staring at me, with no real mechansim for choosing what to to do. Context helps some, priority....well, I have multiple actions that are ALL high priority!

Now we have AF....and like you, I follow a lot of the GTD concepts, and then AF for the doing!

Best regards,
-David

Some of the comments resonated with me...I pretty much had a 'mind like water' and felt more in control of my commitments and time, not with GTD but with DIT. After 3 weeks or so using AF I have found myself in a bit of a mess and definitely overwhelmed with (now scheduled) commitments.

It's so amazing, like David i do the same " I follow a lot of the GTD concepts, and then AF for the doing! " it sounds like if Mark put a new brick in GTD wall, but no a little one an essential one if missing would make a real danger to the equilibrium of the wall !
Since i use AF i dont understand why but every thing seem easy. My mind is like water thanks to gtd i know every thing is under controle. But i have to add that my mind is like water too because i know that watever the tasks could be they are on autofocus and i only have to read at it just to decide to do it or not. I am indeed serious. I have been working for 25 years did a lot of things and management in my life never i have been so astonished with the outcome of the combination of the two methods. It simply works for me and i dont know why.