Hi Steve,

I actually agree with most of what you say.

* I'm not really concerned at all with either "Importance" or
"Urgency".

* I don't rank items in my outline by either or these factors, as I
agree with you that they can become a (not-so-subtle) form of
procrastination.

* As I've mentioned before, I have a large outline of tasks, organized
by Project.  I mark the Next Action in each Project (using the Weekly
Goal flag), and then I filter by context (e.g., @work).  The result is
my Today list -- which could be anywhere from 5 to 15 items.

* Without interruptions, I could do all of these tasks in a day.
However, there are two factors that make me want to put this list in a
particular order:

1) I have mild ADHD, and I am easily distracted.  Every time I have to
re-scan that list of 5 to 15 items for my next task, there's a risk
that I will careen off into thinking about my priorities for the day
all over again.  To manage myself well, I really need to make this
decision ONCE for the day (subject to interruptions, see #2!), and get
on with the job of working my way down the task list one by one.

2) my job is (often and unpredictably) interrupt-driven.  A supervisor
can add one, two, or five tasks in a single call or visit (and the
knock-on effect is that one, two or five OTHER tasks won't be able to
be completed today).  Even if the supervisor doesn't add tasks, they
can instantly re-set my priorities for the day.  When this happens, I
need to *instantly* reorder my list to reflect my new work reality.
This is the only circumstance where I ever even touch the "Importance"
or "Urgency" sliders.  I use them as an (ugly) kludge to get my items
to move up or down the To-do list.  As I've mentioned before, more
often than not I become frustrated with this process -- I can't get
the items to land where I want, or the controls are too twitchy.  I
often give up and go to a paper list, leaving MLO aside until things
calm down again.

This frustrates me, as I want MLO to be a useful tool for me
*especially* in times of high stress when there are many moving parts
to my day.

I understand that people may organize their day in completely
different ways from mine.  I understand that many people have complete
control over their day and can work on an uninterrupted basis (in fact
my part-time freelance job is like that). However, I don't think that
the way I am organizing my day -- or the way in which I would like to
use MLO -- is an unreasonable or an unusual one.  I hew pretty closely
to GTD principles.  I don't use any prioritization in order to arrive
at my "Today" list; it's mainly flaggin "Next Actions" in my active
Projects.  But once I *do* determine my Today list for each day, it
helps my concentration a great deal if I am able to quickly shuffle
them into the "correct" order for the day -- based on my intuition and
my subtle understanding of my job. That's all that I'm asking for.

thanks for listening,

Nick


On Mar 11, 5:50 am, "Steve Wynn" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Overall the target of MLO to my mind is not really systems that are heavily 
> concerned with ordering of lists. The order is to an extent obtained more by 
> the grouping of similar items - via things like context.  The general idea 
> being you create 'batches' of items that are related in some way.
>
> I would say if order is important then prioritise on only one factor in MLO - 
> Urgency.  Forget importance because this throws too many different factors 
> into the mix with regards to the priority algorithm.  Only utilise urgency on 
> tasks, not parent items - and remove the importance aspect altogether.  Sort 
> your list's based on Goal and then Urgency.  That way by quickly flagging 
> something as a weekly goal it will pop to the top of the list. By default 
> have all tasks set to normal urgency.  Then moving tasks is just a case of 
> increasing/decreasing the urgency slider.  Of course colour coding/formatting 
> can also be utilised now to highlight specific items.
>
> But I would question the use of ordering if a 'Today' list is in play.  If 
> you have a list of items you will do today, then why would ordering matter?  
> Ordering only matters if you plan on not doing some of the items on your 
> Today list. Which then I think it sort of negates, to my mind, having a 
> 'Today' list in the first place.
>
> Priority ordering as far as understand in GTD is a minor factor. Next action 
> choice being determined by context, time, energy and then priority.  I don't 
> think the idea is to have ordered context based lists that you work top to 
> bottom. Applying priority in that manner is in a way reducing the free-form 
> aspect of GTD as a whole, to my mind.
>
> I think Covey users have a case for more priority based ordering - although a 
> lot can be achieved by the use of contexts.   But an A1,A2, B1, B2 priority 
> method would certainly help them I would imagine. That is if we have any 
> users of Covey? But then their major grouping is really based on Roles which 
> can be achieved via context.
>
> Overall I don't think ordering by importance or urgency really works.  Much 
> better to my mind to have a list of items you 'will-do' today - no excuses.  
> Then ordering gets thrown out of the window. But to complete that list of 
> items you will probably have to adopt different methods of working, make sure 
> the list is Closed and no new items unless same day urgent are added etc.  
>
> I would also consider if the order of a list is stopping you taking action 
> then it might be another subtle form of procrastination.  I would imagine you 
> already really know what your priorities are for the day and don't really 
> need an ordered list to keep you on track.  
>
> I recently adopted Autofocus (AF), after a few difficulties, this system has 
> no order with regards to lists. But utilises a series of Closed Lists, which 
> nullify the need for ordering altogether.  But the system is hyper productive 
> and you can process a large volume of tasks in a very short space of time. So 
> I would be a little wary that applying too much order to lists, it might 
> actually have the opposite effect and be counterproductive.
>
> All the best
>
> Steve
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"MyLifeOrganized" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/myLifeOrganized?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to