ForumsGetting Things Done®Projects: do you use "Folders" or "Goals" for projects?

No idea. Sorry. But I have got the impression that many use tasks and subtasks - tasks then being the "project".

For example, I have a "Repair Window" task in my Projects context. I have a subtask for "call repair man" with a context of Phone. As I'm on my lunch break, I look at my Phone list and go OK I need to call my repair man. We schedule a time to have him come over and he says 'please move any furniture you have in front of the window.' Since I can't do it now, I hit the new task button and put "Move furniture from window" and give it a 'Home' context. Now that task is orphaned, unconnected to the "Repair Window" project. I would have had to navigate to the Projects list, open the "Repair Window" task and then hit "create subtask" inorder for it to be properly categorized. The experiance with the web app, while somewhat simpler, is similar.

All my tasks are atomic (otherwise I will procrastrinate on them) If I have tasks that take several days to complete they are projects for me.
The distinction task/project is not just semantics in GTD. A project is more than just work projects in the normal sense. Any outcome which takes more than one physical activity to complete is a project according to GTD.

In my opinion, one of the serious flaws in GTD, Allen's definition of a project. By his definition, brushing my teeth is a project because it "takes more than one physical activity to complete".

1. Go to bathroom
2. Open cabinet
3. Grasp toothbrush in right hand
4. Grasp toothpaste in left hand
etc.

By Allen's definition, virtually any human activity is a project. It is far to vague to be a definition.

Posted by Salgud:


I don't think that's how David Allen intends a next action, that wont be workable.

Posted by mpc_janssen:


I don't think I implied, and certainly didn't mean to imply, that's how he meant it. That's why it's a bad definition. It can be easily misinterpreted.

I honestly don't understand the obsession people seem to have with linking actions to projects. Are you implying that in the situation above, if you see the task "move furniture" you don't remember why you were supposed to do this?
If you need a link between project and actions, that's a very good sign you are not rigorous enough in your weekly review. The weekly review will tie it all together.
I simply have a project list with no link to any specific actions and I never wonder if a project is without next action or what project an action links to because I review all that on a weekly basis.

As a long time GTD adherant, I would sugest keeping it simple. GTD is based arround gaining confidence from using a system that you trust to make good choices about what to do next. That is, its a way of management based on intuition.

My setup is very simple.

One folder that lists all my projects; no star, status or any other settings. I do use a due date but only for those projects that actually are due on or by a specific date.

One folder for my Next Actions by context; @home, @office, @errands, @staff meeting, @agendas with a few key people having thier own context (@Tom), etc. I have a couple of standing meetings that I'll throw things I want to discuss in here as well; @staff meeting, etc.

And seperate folders for Waiting For and Someday/Maybe.

Subtasks...NOPE. I used to use them planning out every single next action for every single project (more than 2 actions) and it was too wieldy. My next actions only contain that single next action I need to take to move it forward to completion. I use Evernote for a lot of my large project plans. As for smaller ones, I just use the notes section of the project task.

I do use goals though. These are more in the 30-40k foot level. Not all of them are in TD, but a few are where there is an active project to support their accomplishment.

As you can see, its a vanilla copy of the GTD Book.

I have been wanting to strip my system down in recent weeks and the project to task link is something I would like to stop doing to speed things up. I have a couple of questions about your method (and I'm guessing David Allen does something similar);

1. Do you ever review your project list and wonder if you have done a certain task that you had planned to do but then forgotten?
2. When planning a project, how do you identify and then handle tasks that cannot be done yet?
3. Do you make reflective notes during the weekly review to keep track?

Thanks

Almost any commonly used word needs multiple definitions to convey its range of meaning. David Allen says very explicitly that the level of granularity in your next actions, which determines what is and is not a project, is up to you. He very explicitly rejects your example as absurd. But if you need a flow chart to brush your teeth, go for it.

mpc_janssen David Allen has spoken many times about not needing to link your projects to tasks. A projects list is all you need since you shouldn't be looking at your projects daily rather only during your weekly review and just your context/NA list daily.