Hi Steve, Thanks for the tips. Do you think the Urgency slider will work if *all* my items are flagged as Weekly Goals? (That's the only way that items make the cut into my Today list currently.)
In any case, I will try using another flag (like an "@Today" context) and see how just using the Urgency slider works. I had the same problems with using dates that you mention, so I avoid them where possible. However, I do have to use Start Dates occasionally so that items don't appear on my list until they're relevant. I'll see how re-ordering with the Urgency slider works in a mixed list (some with Start Dates, some without.) -- will report back and let you know. Nick On Mar 11, 2:36 pm, "Steve Wynn" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Nick, > > Order does matter considerably with open lists - it all comes down to > deciding what to leave as well as what to actually do. Which in essence I > think is part of the problem with those types of lists. > > The scenario you talk about I can quite easily get working with just urgency > in MLO but I would have to utilise something else to flag the tasks for > today. The Weekly Goal in itself is like a super-charge on priority - like > having nitrous oxide in your car. While that is operating you will never be > able to order very well at all with any of the sliders. You really would > have to drop that as you method of selection for daily tasks. Even if a daily > goal or something was added to MLO it would probably be a similar scenario. > > If you can come up with an alternate method to select your daily tasks, then > just utilising Urgency should work as you expect. For example every standard > task by default has a medium/normal urgency. Move up the list - increase the > urgency and down the list decrease the urgency. Supercharge to the top - add > a Weekly Goal. > > If you sort by Urgency in the list you also have other options of sorting as > well, so you could sort by caption - prefix items with A-, B- is an option, > or use symbols @!_+ etc. Or utilise the effort sliders as an extra option for > order. But I would only implement extra options once the urgency order > worked as you expect. > > Now I have to be honest the simplest way to me to achieve a today grouping is > utilising dates - which is a bit anti-GTD. But even with dates you have to > consider they in themselves add priority with regards to the algorithm. So > for ordering purposes you would need to adopt consistent usage if you decide > to group by date. For example flag all tasks for today as start/due today. > Then the urgency slider will work as desired. But if you have different start > dates, then that will also be a factor in the ordering. > > I would seriously consider looking at either Do It Tomorrow (DIT) or > Autofocus (AF) because they both deal with Closed Lists. Which is like the > principle you are adopting in a way with your today list, but the systems > add more structure so that ordering is less of an issue. Definitely worth > checking out - I would perhaps angle at DIT because it deals heavily with > interruptions, dealing with a day's work in a day etc. Very good system. > > Like I say with just urgency you should be able to order as expected but only > once you remove the Weekly Goal as your daily selection. > > All the best > > Steve > > ----- Original message ---------------------------------------- > From: metroboy <[email protected]> > To: MyLifeOrganized <[email protected]> > > Received: 11/03/2009 18:58:32 > Subject: [MLO] Re: Prioritizing Items ToDo Today - Suggestions Wanted > > >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 > > >No virus found in this incoming message. > >Checked by AVG -www.avg.com > >Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.10/1995 - > >Release Date: 03/11/09 08:28:00 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
