FV and FVP Forum > Why FV and not GTD?
GTD is a fantastic system and "philosophy" of work. I used it for years and simply found it to be cumbersome. When I found Mark Forster's website I gave AF a shot and liked the gist of it and I've stuck around ever since. When I can simplify, I like to. FV is dead simple and very effective.
April 19, 2012 at 3:04 |
Zack Allen
Zack Allen
Gtd helps you make a list of tasks "next actions" but is of no help in deciding what next to do.
And besides, who has time to do a weekly review?
And besides, who has time to do a weekly review?
April 19, 2012 at 3:31 |
Vegheadjones
Vegheadjones
Adore listening to D. Allen. However I disagree with the following:
CONTEXTS - an outdated idea that is being reinterpreted by many (these efforts - to my mind - are silly attempts to justify using Omnifocus [by design, forces you to use contexts for certain features to work])
MIND LIKE WATER - c'mon, I mean, seriously! If you're neurotic and anxious pre-GTD, you'll still be neurotic and anxious with GTD, but well versed in productivity software.
RUNWAY METAPHOR & GOAL SETTING - D. Allen and co. spend most of their time, and get quite giddy about, minutiae and label makers. Zzzzzzzzzzz
I won't comment on FV, but I still find Mark's ideas very helpful, mainly:
* little and often
* the unconscious dreaming, etc
* standing out
CONTEXTS - an outdated idea that is being reinterpreted by many (these efforts - to my mind - are silly attempts to justify using Omnifocus [by design, forces you to use contexts for certain features to work])
MIND LIKE WATER - c'mon, I mean, seriously! If you're neurotic and anxious pre-GTD, you'll still be neurotic and anxious with GTD, but well versed in productivity software.
RUNWAY METAPHOR & GOAL SETTING - D. Allen and co. spend most of their time, and get quite giddy about, minutiae and label makers. Zzzzzzzzzzz
I won't comment on FV, but I still find Mark's ideas very helpful, mainly:
* little and often
* the unconscious dreaming, etc
* standing out
April 19, 2012 at 3:33 |
avrum
avrum
As the demon from hell says when summoned by Dr. Faustus (in Christopher Marlowe's version of the story), "Why this is hell nor am I out of it." You can apply FV as a strategy to move through your next action lists and still be doing GTD. From this perspective, FV is just an algorithm for list traversal. And I use Omnifocus to do it. With contexts. I know, I'm a wicked sinner.
April 19, 2012 at 3:50 |
mcogilvie
mcogilvie
Nice one, mcogilvie! Of course one can do all of GTD, but use FV for processing one's action lists. Perhaps a very good combination.
April 19, 2012 at 4:08 |
David Drkae
David Drkae
The context, time, effort, priority bit seems counterintuitive on many levels. If something is a priority why does it matter what context I'm in? Shouldn't I just haul my behind to that context if its a priority in the first place? Time estimation and effort seem cumbersome to estimate and consider respectively.
Also counterintuitive, a project was no longer what I thought a project was all these years. All of a sudden it was a non singular action? Instead of first, second and third actions... I had next action and actions?
"mind like water" lol. Never got there. Weekly review? Never did it. 2 minute rule do it, but >3 minutes defer it or delegate." Delegate to who?
Sure, maybe the af systems and fv have their jargons "little and often", "ready to be done", "question", "ladder", "preselect", "open", "close" "standing out". But at least they are simple, practical and understandable.
I could go on and on. Sure maybe I fully didn't tap into that understanding of the correct procedures for GTD and sure maybe it is a fantastic system, but at the end of the day I shouldn't have to go through so much learning and cumbersome prep work to write a list and cross items off. The one thing I got from GTD which I'm greatful for is the waiting for list and "capture" part. The "process, organize, review," parts were to much of an interruption to get to 'doing'.
This is a heavy loaded question. But in short, very short, GTD is great and you can pick things from it. However, the reason I FOUND Mark's system is out of research for an easier system than GTD. All of the systems by Mark, even the worst, have been easier to follow and allowed me to be much more productive (more output using the same input) than GTD. FV is the latest, and though it is too early to tell if its great for me, I'm trusting it.
Also counterintuitive, a project was no longer what I thought a project was all these years. All of a sudden it was a non singular action? Instead of first, second and third actions... I had next action and actions?
"mind like water" lol. Never got there. Weekly review? Never did it. 2 minute rule do it, but >3 minutes defer it or delegate." Delegate to who?
Sure, maybe the af systems and fv have their jargons "little and often", "ready to be done", "question", "ladder", "preselect", "open", "close" "standing out". But at least they are simple, practical and understandable.
I could go on and on. Sure maybe I fully didn't tap into that understanding of the correct procedures for GTD and sure maybe it is a fantastic system, but at the end of the day I shouldn't have to go through so much learning and cumbersome prep work to write a list and cross items off. The one thing I got from GTD which I'm greatful for is the waiting for list and "capture" part. The "process, organize, review," parts were to much of an interruption to get to 'doing'.
This is a heavy loaded question. But in short, very short, GTD is great and you can pick things from it. However, the reason I FOUND Mark's system is out of research for an easier system than GTD. All of the systems by Mark, even the worst, have been easier to follow and allowed me to be much more productive (more output using the same input) than GTD. FV is the latest, and though it is too early to tell if its great for me, I'm trusting it.
April 19, 2012 at 4:28 |
GMBW
GMBW
GTD:FV::Keynes:Adams
The book sounded great, but when human beings try it, we spend most of our time tricking ourselves into following it and scolding ourselves for failing.
The book sounded great, but when human beings try it, we spend most of our time tricking ourselves into following it and scolding ourselves for failing.
April 19, 2012 at 7:52 |
Bernie
Bernie
Adams?? Did I say Adams? I meant Smith as in Adam Smith.
Serves me right for posting to web sites in the middle of the night, instead of sleeping like a normal person. Plus, I seem to have pressed Submit in the middle of the thought.
CORRECTED (and less obtuse)
-----
GTD:FV::Keynes:Smith
GTD - The book sounded great, but it makes an enemy of human nature. When human beings try it, we spend most of our time tricking ourselves into following it and scolding ourselves for failing.
FV - Bottom-up synthesis, welcomes human nature and harnesses it for good.
-----
Now, off to sleep like a normal person.
(FWIW, Mises fits better than Smith, but he is far less well known. Same general idea.)
Serves me right for posting to web sites in the middle of the night, instead of sleeping like a normal person. Plus, I seem to have pressed Submit in the middle of the thought.
CORRECTED (and less obtuse)
-----
GTD:FV::Keynes:Smith
GTD - The book sounded great, but it makes an enemy of human nature. When human beings try it, we spend most of our time tricking ourselves into following it and scolding ourselves for failing.
FV - Bottom-up synthesis, welcomes human nature and harnesses it for good.
-----
Now, off to sleep like a normal person.
(FWIW, Mises fits better than Smith, but he is far less well known. Same general idea.)
April 19, 2012 at 9:02 |
Bernie
Bernie
A lot of the ideas in GTD are excellent. The 5-step "back of the envelope" project management approach, the filing guidance and the advice on labelmakers all just work and significantly helped me.
I don't have the discipline for the task management and I find that the reviews take me far too long.
The contexts are either better suited to people with a much more varied life than mine or are a disguised method of splitting the list into manageable chunks.
I don't have the discipline for the task management and I find that the reviews take me far too long.
The contexts are either better suited to people with a much more varied life than mine or are a disguised method of splitting the list into manageable chunks.
April 19, 2012 at 11:16 |
Will
Will
A lot of people complain that the label maker is just a gimmick. So what? I agree with Will: it helped along with the filing recommendations.
Gimmicks that work are great. But only for those they work for.
Some would say FV (or AF) are just gimmicks and that you should just make a list and do it. So what? FV is a great gimmick for getting me to do my list. It just didn't get done otherwise. It doesn't really matter why.
GTD in its entirety was just plain too hard. Too much work without getting much done.
Gimmicks that work are great. But only for those they work for.
Some would say FV (or AF) are just gimmicks and that you should just make a list and do it. So what? FV is a great gimmick for getting me to do my list. It just didn't get done otherwise. It doesn't really matter why.
GTD in its entirety was just plain too hard. Too much work without getting much done.
April 19, 2012 at 13:23 |
MartyH
MartyH
@ mcogilvie and David
I totally agree with you. Dont make a total distinction betwween gtd and FV.
Gtd us my basic sytem i use all principle : review, projects, control and perspective, contexts sometime. But i also use FV for acting. I use omnifocus so everything is simple
I simply flag and date what must be reviewing the active projects then use a perspective which let me show the item when they were created so after i reverse when i act.
Some others times i simply work on my projects
Others i simply add notes in projects or anywhere
Fv is not suffisant for me. It replace most of the times contexts for acting. But when i have to work on a project i just goto the project and do it as a batch
So NOT AT ALL Fv is not in opposition with GTD
FV is a fantastic tool for acting but fir managing my life i believe in GTD because FV is just un able to take altitude on a project or help me determine how i will act in my life.
Hope thats help
I totally agree with you. Dont make a total distinction betwween gtd and FV.
Gtd us my basic sytem i use all principle : review, projects, control and perspective, contexts sometime. But i also use FV for acting. I use omnifocus so everything is simple
I simply flag and date what must be reviewing the active projects then use a perspective which let me show the item when they were created so after i reverse when i act.
Some others times i simply work on my projects
Others i simply add notes in projects or anywhere
Fv is not suffisant for me. It replace most of the times contexts for acting. But when i have to work on a project i just goto the project and do it as a batch
So NOT AT ALL Fv is not in opposition with GTD
FV is a fantastic tool for acting but fir managing my life i believe in GTD because FV is just un able to take altitude on a project or help me determine how i will act in my life.
Hope thats help
April 19, 2012 at 14:48 |
Jupiter
Jupiter
I too struggled with GTD before coming to this site and using several of Mark's systems. But having a background in GTD was probably a necessary prerequisite for me. Without GTD, I wouldn't have a general-reference filing system (and a nice label-maker!), a tickler file, a single In tray for all incoming paper, a next-action-focused approach to projects and meetings, etc. I'm not sure I would trust FV without this supporting structure.
Likewise, Franklin-Covey was good preparation for GTD, and Alan Lakein was good prep for FC.
Likewise, Franklin-Covey was good preparation for GTD, and Alan Lakein was good prep for FC.
April 19, 2012 at 15:02 |
ubi
ubi
FV is not a complete answer to GTD by itself. It doesn't explain delegation, filing, ticklers, planning, organizing. FV is a great foundation for building a complete answer. I fully hope Mark's booklet will complete the picture.
In the end I believe I could point to each GTD practice and describe a more effective way to achieve the same purpose, by building on FV.
In the end I believe I could point to each GTD practice and describe a more effective way to achieve the same purpose, by building on FV.
April 19, 2012 at 15:11 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Lets not confuse the theory behind GTD with the endlessly tweaked implementations. Better to compare paper-based implementations of GTD and FV/SF/AF etc., than to get distracted by the knobs exposed by OmniFocus and the like. The core 'doing' part of David Allen's own implementation seems to consist largely of flat lists, even though they're stored electronically.
Contexts have moved on since GTD was written. Technology has eroded the number of sensible contexts. No longer 'resource' based, my contexts list largely consists of physical locations, including being physically present with a person. These are the same few contexts that 'pure' FV/SF/AF users wrestle with.
Like FV/SF/AF, GTD doesn't pre-prioritise, promotes little-and-often, etc. Both promote recording everything into a trusted system so that your brain can stop trying to remember. Both have mechanisms to dismiss outdated tasks. Both try to reduce the frictional cost of getting done the things that you want to accomplish. Of the elements covered by FV/SF/AF, they're topologically similar, though one might fit your particular brain better than the other.
Like many who have tried to stick with GTD as written, I often fell at the hurdle of selecting an available task and actually doing it. FV/SF/AF have helped me tremendously, particularly the mandated top-of-the-list task in FV. I still haven't cracked the home/office division.
Contexts have moved on since GTD was written. Technology has eroded the number of sensible contexts. No longer 'resource' based, my contexts list largely consists of physical locations, including being physically present with a person. These are the same few contexts that 'pure' FV/SF/AF users wrestle with.
Like FV/SF/AF, GTD doesn't pre-prioritise, promotes little-and-often, etc. Both promote recording everything into a trusted system so that your brain can stop trying to remember. Both have mechanisms to dismiss outdated tasks. Both try to reduce the frictional cost of getting done the things that you want to accomplish. Of the elements covered by FV/SF/AF, they're topologically similar, though one might fit your particular brain better than the other.
Like many who have tried to stick with GTD as written, I often fell at the hurdle of selecting an available task and actually doing it. FV/SF/AF have helped me tremendously, particularly the mandated top-of-the-list task in FV. I still haven't cracked the home/office division.
April 19, 2012 at 15:32 |
Philip
Philip
I found GTD promoted busy-work. If I was making good progress on a project, so it never raised the "maybe I shouldn't even be doing it" flag. If a next action could only be done in a rarely-occurring context, the project stalled.
Having many folders doesn't work for me. Speed of filing is more important than ease of finding. The rare time I need something, it takes very little time to look through an inch of paper -- but if it doesn't make it to that inch, forget it! It's also faster to use pencil than a label maker.
The weekly review is hypocritical. DA himself says he gets anxious if he doesn't do it regularly -- but if a system is doing its job and keeping your mind like water, there shouldn't be any anxiety. You should be consistently confident that each project is getting regular attention, not wait until your anxiety is so high you need to look at absolutely everything and realize you spent the week on the wrong thing or you really should have made that rare context happen.
On the other hand, GTD firmly established my habit of thinking of next actions automatically. It started me thinking about contexts. Sometimes it makes sense to collect things you can do in a specific context, like when the kids are out, or the only ten minutes you have with your boss this week. It also helped me separate reference material from active material.
I need to go back to Covey's Roles and Goals. Pick one goal each week from each area of your life. My son is a great kid, very low maintenance, but he's happy playing video games or reading so we aren't building family memories with him. That will work in FV. "Quality time with Son for week of April 19".
Having many folders doesn't work for me. Speed of filing is more important than ease of finding. The rare time I need something, it takes very little time to look through an inch of paper -- but if it doesn't make it to that inch, forget it! It's also faster to use pencil than a label maker.
The weekly review is hypocritical. DA himself says he gets anxious if he doesn't do it regularly -- but if a system is doing its job and keeping your mind like water, there shouldn't be any anxiety. You should be consistently confident that each project is getting regular attention, not wait until your anxiety is so high you need to look at absolutely everything and realize you spent the week on the wrong thing or you really should have made that rare context happen.
On the other hand, GTD firmly established my habit of thinking of next actions automatically. It started me thinking about contexts. Sometimes it makes sense to collect things you can do in a specific context, like when the kids are out, or the only ten minutes you have with your boss this week. It also helped me separate reference material from active material.
I need to go back to Covey's Roles and Goals. Pick one goal each week from each area of your life. My son is a great kid, very low maintenance, but he's happy playing video games or reading so we aren't building family memories with him. That will work in FV. "Quality time with Son for week of April 19".
April 19, 2012 at 16:40 |
Cricket
Cricket
I also found this site while researching and using GTD. I found GTD had a few good ideas like the simple A - Z filing system along with alot of jargon and overhead. I never thought contexts were of much help for a traditional office worker. I found that generally it was too much organizing work and not enough doing of work. It did get me to write a couple of TM ebooks. One was a GTD lite approach and one was even simpler. I found that GTD appeals to a certain hyper focused gizmo oriented tweaking personality type and ultimately I was not that type.
With all TM systems I would encourage people to first sit and think about what they need and where their current system or lack of system is causing to fall through the cracks. If one of the off the shelf systems fixes these issue great if not why implement it. I found that I am forgetful and need to have a simple system of all of my to-dos and commitments in one place. With this done, I have achieved a huge productivity improvement, the 80/20 principal. The rest was just some tweaking that did not add much improvement.
Gerry
With all TM systems I would encourage people to first sit and think about what they need and where their current system or lack of system is causing to fall through the cracks. If one of the off the shelf systems fixes these issue great if not why implement it. I found that I am forgetful and need to have a simple system of all of my to-dos and commitments in one place. With this done, I have achieved a huge productivity improvement, the 80/20 principal. The rest was just some tweaking that did not add much improvement.
Gerry
April 19, 2012 at 17:47 |
Gerry
Gerry
Good one Gerry. I find that Gtd by itself is just too complicated. With FV, I have full capture, I am still able to throw grouped-tasks into separate lists, and I have a closed list. Without the closed list, I find that the certain things never surface to the top to get done.
April 19, 2012 at 18:18 |
BKK
BKK
FV is based on people! - the (left and right hemispheres of their ) brains, their resistances, procrastination and their decision making processes. I'd say it was more sympatico in letting the person blend with their motivations. GTD seems too logical to harmonise easily with our non-logical aspects.
April 19, 2012 at 18:18 |
michael
michael
Cricket:
<<I need to go back to Covey's Roles and Goals.>>
I've come to identify Covey's 7 Habits, Mark's Dreams, etc., as "Meaning-Making" productivity systems. I'm in the process of coming up with an analog system combining Roles/Goals, Weekly planning, to be used with a Chronodex - http://www.flickr.com/photos/xzonisy/6804745920/in/pool-1804503@N25/ - and my ARC journal. Wish me luck ;)
<<I need to go back to Covey's Roles and Goals.>>
I've come to identify Covey's 7 Habits, Mark's Dreams, etc., as "Meaning-Making" productivity systems. I'm in the process of coming up with an analog system combining Roles/Goals, Weekly planning, to be used with a Chronodex - http://www.flickr.com/photos/xzonisy/6804745920/in/pool-1804503@N25/ - and my ARC journal. Wish me luck ;)
April 19, 2012 at 18:27 |
avrum
avrum
I can understand some of you are satisfied with only FV. For myself it is more complicated. Using one list for everything makes a real mess and i ger unanle to see what i really need to do at the right time.
Some task are freeze for the future or may be
Some others must be done now
Some must be done later
Some are part of a project
It is not as simple as that
Using a ping pong beetween Fv and projects or thoughts relevant to tasks or projects makes things more comfortable and i can know at a glance where i go and why.
I dont make any critic about AF i used it for years
I also like FV which replaced my gtd contexts (most of them)
But Fv or Af alone doesnt do it. I had about 20 pages of tasks completely mixt up and the result was a multitasking and a huge loose of time
Using FV for what it does well ie acting in the global process of GTD and digitaly made all thibgs easy and fast. My system works and it works well and all tasks are relevant to projects (gtd) this is why it works
Some task are freeze for the future or may be
Some others must be done now
Some must be done later
Some are part of a project
It is not as simple as that
Using a ping pong beetween Fv and projects or thoughts relevant to tasks or projects makes things more comfortable and i can know at a glance where i go and why.
I dont make any critic about AF i used it for years
I also like FV which replaced my gtd contexts (most of them)
But Fv or Af alone doesnt do it. I had about 20 pages of tasks completely mixt up and the result was a multitasking and a huge loose of time
Using FV for what it does well ie acting in the global process of GTD and digitaly made all thibgs easy and fast. My system works and it works well and all tasks are relevant to projects (gtd) this is why it works
April 19, 2012 at 19:10 |
Jupiter
Jupiter
I did GTD for many years before discovering Mark. Pre-GTD I was very disorganized. After starting GTD I stayed organized. To this day I have and use an inbox, projects list, and tickler file, thanks to David Allen. I knew about inboxes and tickler files prior to GTD, but I did not use them.
GTD is a complete system for getting organized. There is clear, stepwise process to follow in order to keep all one's commitments in their place and accessible. But, as has been pointed out by many, there is only a fuzzy set of generalities given for doing the things one has committed to.
Mark does for doing, what GTD does for organizing. Mark gives a clear, stepwise process that we need to follow as we do our commitments.
I am starting to think that the core (or maybe one of the cores) of FV is a gentle kind of behaviorism. Mark hints at this in his reference to structured procrastination.
Example: right now I am trying to recover from an injury that I sustained on vacation in February. I read that my condition can be cured if I do a particular intense exercise twice a day for 12 weeks.
I really want my injury to heal, so I really want to make sure I do my exercise twice a day. Maybe the exercise is listed in the first chain of the day or maybe not. At some point, I realize that it's almost lunch time and I haven't done my first set of exercises. That gets my attention and I start to move more quickly through the chain so that I can create a new chain with the exercise in it.
In my case, I use the exercise as a reward. I can't do the exercise, which I really want to do, until I do at least one thing I don't want to do.
There is nothing in GTD that deals with human motivation. For that reason, I had items sit untouched on my GTD lists for years. I dutifully scanned them for years as I did my Weekly Reviews.
GTD is a complete system for getting organized. There is clear, stepwise process to follow in order to keep all one's commitments in their place and accessible. But, as has been pointed out by many, there is only a fuzzy set of generalities given for doing the things one has committed to.
Mark does for doing, what GTD does for organizing. Mark gives a clear, stepwise process that we need to follow as we do our commitments.
I am starting to think that the core (or maybe one of the cores) of FV is a gentle kind of behaviorism. Mark hints at this in his reference to structured procrastination.
Example: right now I am trying to recover from an injury that I sustained on vacation in February. I read that my condition can be cured if I do a particular intense exercise twice a day for 12 weeks.
I really want my injury to heal, so I really want to make sure I do my exercise twice a day. Maybe the exercise is listed in the first chain of the day or maybe not. At some point, I realize that it's almost lunch time and I haven't done my first set of exercises. That gets my attention and I start to move more quickly through the chain so that I can create a new chain with the exercise in it.
In my case, I use the exercise as a reward. I can't do the exercise, which I really want to do, until I do at least one thing I don't want to do.
There is nothing in GTD that deals with human motivation. For that reason, I had items sit untouched on my GTD lists for years. I dutifully scanned them for years as I did my Weekly Reviews.
April 19, 2012 at 22:02 |
moises
moises
Bernie - My first thought was, "Smith? Why not Mises, he's so much more complete, and interesting, and even has a website!!" :-) (mises.org)
April 19, 2012 at 23:25 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Here is my essential issue with GTD.
Look at this very clear and helpful chart of the GTD process: http://www.meadonline.com/pdfs/Workflow_Advanced.aspx (will load PDF) (I think this chart was designed by a reader of this forum?)
The chart demonstrates that 88% of the GTD process is planning & processing. Only 12% is DOING. (Based on surface area of the chart). And the actual guidance for DOING is pretty vague. The chart summarizes the book pretty well I think.
I'm not saying that GTDers spend 88% of their actual TIME or THINKING on the overhead, and only 12% on DOING. My point is that GTD provides you with several collecting, processing, organizing, and reviewing tools that must be mastered for the system to be effective. In fact, 88% of the things you need to master are concerned with collecting, processing, organizing, and reviewing. And all these processes are defined in great detail. How to collect. How to process. How to organize.
What's really lacking is the DO. It gets far less emphasis, both in the overall structure of the system, and in the book's guidance. For example, compare the "Organize" process, with its many steps and many specific pieces of guidance, with the chapter on "Doing".
FV, on the other hand, has very low overhead. The percentage is probably reversed: 12% process overhead, 88% DOING. There's very litle you really need to master to get going with FV. You can get going immediately, and become effective within one day of using the system.
But the GTD book actually recommends a whole day or weekend just to "go through all your stuff" before you can even get started. I did that process over a four-day Thanksgiving weekend. And it was helpful, at least it FELT helpful! But I remember a YEAR LATER, how so many of those things I uncovered and sorted and organized and "next actioned" were still left undone, and how the feeling of overwhelm, procrastination, always feeling behind, etc., had not gone away.
In short: GTD should really be called GTP, "Getting Things Planned". It's very good at that. And that kind of planning does have real value, I think.
But the *real* systems for getting things DONE are here on http://www.markforster.net . And getting things DONE is what it's really all about.
Look at this very clear and helpful chart of the GTD process: http://www.meadonline.com/pdfs/Workflow_Advanced.aspx (will load PDF) (I think this chart was designed by a reader of this forum?)
The chart demonstrates that 88% of the GTD process is planning & processing. Only 12% is DOING. (Based on surface area of the chart). And the actual guidance for DOING is pretty vague. The chart summarizes the book pretty well I think.
I'm not saying that GTDers spend 88% of their actual TIME or THINKING on the overhead, and only 12% on DOING. My point is that GTD provides you with several collecting, processing, organizing, and reviewing tools that must be mastered for the system to be effective. In fact, 88% of the things you need to master are concerned with collecting, processing, organizing, and reviewing. And all these processes are defined in great detail. How to collect. How to process. How to organize.
What's really lacking is the DO. It gets far less emphasis, both in the overall structure of the system, and in the book's guidance. For example, compare the "Organize" process, with its many steps and many specific pieces of guidance, with the chapter on "Doing".
FV, on the other hand, has very low overhead. The percentage is probably reversed: 12% process overhead, 88% DOING. There's very litle you really need to master to get going with FV. You can get going immediately, and become effective within one day of using the system.
But the GTD book actually recommends a whole day or weekend just to "go through all your stuff" before you can even get started. I did that process over a four-day Thanksgiving weekend. And it was helpful, at least it FELT helpful! But I remember a YEAR LATER, how so many of those things I uncovered and sorted and organized and "next actioned" were still left undone, and how the feeling of overwhelm, procrastination, always feeling behind, etc., had not gone away.
In short: GTD should really be called GTP, "Getting Things Planned". It's very good at that. And that kind of planning does have real value, I think.
But the *real* systems for getting things DONE are here on http://www.markforster.net . And getting things DONE is what it's really all about.
April 19, 2012 at 23:43 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
When I tried it I got lost within all the lists and didn't look at them often enough. Being very visual I need to have things in front of me most of the time. That means one list.
April 19, 2012 at 23:55 |
Alison Reeves
Alison Reeves
Very interesting responses. I am not surprised, of course, that most people here would express dislike for GTD. I have done it too for years and have integrated a lot of Mark's methods within the GTD system. I have NEVER had a problem with it being too complicated or "just planning and organizing". I do just fine with using energy, context (I have two offices in two different buildings), and time to determine what actions to do. Furthermore, in David Allens' second book, he spends a LOT of time talking about doing, and the connections between control and perspective.
I do like FV as an algorithm to use on occasion. It is a brilliant system. But for my very complex professional life, with many hats to wear, GTD serves me well.
-David
I do like FV as an algorithm to use on occasion. It is a brilliant system. But for my very complex professional life, with many hats to wear, GTD serves me well.
-David
April 20, 2012 at 3:17 |
David Drkae
David Drkae
Before gtd i was fully desorganized. I began a really complicated life when i decided to work on my own. Gtd saved me. Sure without it i wouldnt succeed and i wiuld bess less quiet in my job.
I agree with seraphim lot of gtd tool are tools for thinking and lot of my business job is about thinking. So as David gtd serve me well and i may say very well indeed. But for me about acting FV iS much better (except contexts call and wait) omnifocus gave me the last part of the system, of gives me a structure to collect, think on my projects, take notes, and of course doing with contexts and perspective . I could not get rid of them. If iwould i thibk my life would turn turn desaster. So i agree MF has brought by his system a tool for acting and gtd would be better calleg getting things planned. The choice is not for me gtd or Fv but indeed gtd and FV
I agree with seraphim lot of gtd tool are tools for thinking and lot of my business job is about thinking. So as David gtd serve me well and i may say very well indeed. But for me about acting FV iS much better (except contexts call and wait) omnifocus gave me the last part of the system, of gives me a structure to collect, think on my projects, take notes, and of course doing with contexts and perspective . I could not get rid of them. If iwould i thibk my life would turn turn desaster. So i agree MF has brought by his system a tool for acting and gtd would be better calleg getting things planned. The choice is not for me gtd or Fv but indeed gtd and FV
April 20, 2012 at 9:03 |
Jupiter
Jupiter
I'd forgotten GTD's advice to spend a weekend dumping everything in the office into one pile. Great if you can get it reassembled in the time allotted, but if you can't? Ugh. All the existing structure is gone (even if it wasn't very good, it was better than everything in a pile in the middle of the floor) and chances are the critical stuff (what you were working on before the push) is mixed with other things at the bottom of the pile, and all your energy (and enthusiasm) have been used up.
The first weekend of AF (and variations) and FV is much easier. Make a list of everything in your head, which might include all those corners that GTD would have you dump together in one pile on the floor.
*Work the list. Add to the list as you think of things. Repeat from *.
Less drama, more useful results. (I can picture it now. "This Mark guy, he's a waste of money. Here I've told everyone to leave me alone for three days while he organizes me, and he just sits in the corner with a list and asks me what I want to do before he gets me organized. He hasn't dumped a single file drawer or ordered a label maker even torn a page out of my notebook and put it in my inbox. My office looks just the same as yesterday, except for that pile of papers I finally shredded, and those trade magazines I finally admitted I'd never read, and that customer complaint I dealt with the instant it arrived, and the plane tickets I ordered while I could still get my favourite seat, and the expense report it only took five minutes to do -- really surprised accounting on that one -- and the kids artwork I finally hung up.")
The first weekend of AF (and variations) and FV is much easier. Make a list of everything in your head, which might include all those corners that GTD would have you dump together in one pile on the floor.
*Work the list. Add to the list as you think of things. Repeat from *.
Less drama, more useful results. (I can picture it now. "This Mark guy, he's a waste of money. Here I've told everyone to leave me alone for three days while he organizes me, and he just sits in the corner with a list and asks me what I want to do before he gets me organized. He hasn't dumped a single file drawer or ordered a label maker even torn a page out of my notebook and put it in my inbox. My office looks just the same as yesterday, except for that pile of papers I finally shredded, and those trade magazines I finally admitted I'd never read, and that customer complaint I dealt with the instant it arrived, and the plane tickets I ordered while I could still get my favourite seat, and the expense report it only took five minutes to do -- really surprised accounting on that one -- and the kids artwork I finally hung up.")
April 20, 2012 at 16:13 |
Cricket
Cricket
Cricket - your description sounds like the 'but, first' method of prioritizing things I've seen on another site (except there it's meant as a joke :) )
I want to get organized, but first..
I have to shred those papers, but first..
I have to get of the trade magazines I'm not reading, but first..
I have to deal with the customer compliant, but first...
I have to order plane tickets, but first...
I have to do the expense report, but first...
I have to hang up the kids artwork
:) :)
I want to get organized, but first..
I have to shred those papers, but first..
I have to get of the trade magazines I'm not reading, but first..
I have to deal with the customer compliant, but first...
I have to order plane tickets, but first...
I have to do the expense report, but first...
I have to hang up the kids artwork
:) :)
April 20, 2012 at 16:35 |
Lillian
Lillian
Except for FV it's:
I want to get organized, but before that..
I want to shred those papers, but before that..
I want to get of the trade magazines I'm not reading, but before that..
I want to deal with the customer compliant.
New chain:
I want to order plane tickets, but before that...
I want to do the expense report, but before that...
I want to hang up the kids artwork
As opposed to GTD's first day: "but first I have to find the label maker and clear a path through this jumbled pile on the floor."
I want to get organized, but before that..
I want to shred those papers, but before that..
I want to get of the trade magazines I'm not reading, but before that..
I want to deal with the customer compliant.
New chain:
I want to order plane tickets, but before that...
I want to do the expense report, but before that...
I want to hang up the kids artwork
As opposed to GTD's first day: "but first I have to find the label maker and clear a path through this jumbled pile on the floor."
April 20, 2012 at 19:29 |
Cricket
Cricket
This platform is nothing but lie and scam they manipulated my trade and extort me, I should have stopped investing but instead I continued to trade for weeks, gained some money, and then made the decision to stop. I then requested a withdrawal. They answered that my gains have been erased and that I am unable to retrieve my deposit after two days. I was annoyed that this broker doesn't pay client profits! How desperate of them! They even referred to this broker as regulated but it's clearly a lie. I had to research and came across reviews of a reputable recovery team who helped me recovery assets. tanduoritechs@gmail.com is the best in dealing with online scam and assisting victims in receiving assets, tracking down digital brokers, cyber analysis and thorough investigation.
August 22, 2024 at 7:34 |
steven joe
steven joe
-David