I found this earlier post from Lisa S., in which she described certain contexts as "Locations in the mind" rather than actual physical contexts. (my paraphrase) I think daily and weekly planning are places in my head, with the right set of "tools" (a tool can be a context), like the tools of being focused, ready to think about something, and with time set aside for that specific, limited set of purposes. So I'm ready to give this concept a try, using contexts that way, for my "Rule of 3" (ARR3) planning setup. Now it's time to go do it instead of writing about it. :-)
Lisa S 6/14/12 No worries, thanks! What I ended up trying is Contexts that have a specific focus to them -- so instead of locations in my world, I use locations in my head :) For example, "Selfcare" in the morning...does NOT include cleaning the kitchen, checking facebook, even pulling dinner out of the freezer. "Daily planning" may involve a quick email check to see if someone has gotten back to me, but does not include responding to MLO emails or checking on the comments to my facebook post :) I broke up my @Computer context into similar contexts with the main things I really need to focus on. We'll see how long I stick with it though. Lisa - show quoted text - -- Lisa On Monday, November 18, 2013 3:30:58 PM UTC-8, James D wrote: > > Hi Elizabeth, > > I try to keep the use of contexts as close to the "pure" GTD usage of > contexts, so my first thought is not to use contexts. However... > Thinking about it from the standpoint that my "Daily Planning" could be a > context, in that I *try* to do it in the same way in the same time in the > same place each day, I am finding I can mentally go there with you on this > one. > The other trick is that I do this separately from a work and personal > standpoint, so I need a (set) of contexts for each one. > > In the meantime, I have been working with the Weekly/Monthly/Yearly goals > approach. However, the two approaches aren't mutually exclusive. I think > creating a context I can filter on, say, "ARR3 Planning" might make sense, > and then tag my top 3 Weekly/Monthly/Yearly goals with that context. In > fact, that approach is sounding more and more appealing in terms of working > with the way that MLO and the mobile MLO clients seem to work. > > Thank you for the thoughts, and I'll provide updates here on what I wind > up with. > > James > > On Saturday, November 16, 2013 7:01:38 AM UTC-8, Elizabeth Lindsay wrote: >> >> Hi James, >> >> This sounds interesting. I do think the method of implementation might >> be a bit hard with all the maintaining of folders. Have you considered >> using the contexts to indicate which group of 3 it is a part of versus >> folders? I personally use GTD with MLO. The keys for me are to have a >> context on everything, have projects flagged as projects, and to have >> everything captured in a way that is easy for me to find it again (without >> relying on searching). I've found that I prefer my list to be alphabetical >> (I typically use the naming structure of "GOAL: ACTION" for sorting). I >> will then use the star or goal to indicate items of current focus. >> >> Please do let us know how it is going. >> >> Elizabeth >> >> On Thursday, November 14, 2013 7:18:38 PM UTC-6, James D wrote: >>> >>> >>> Greetings, >>> >>> I am looking for guidance in implementing the Agile Results >>> methods/approach within MLO. I am coming back to MLO after a couple years >>> away, and in truth I didn't really master much the first time because I >>> wound up going back to Ecco Pro, an excellent 1997 outline-based PIM. I'm >>> back for good. I will just call the system I'm implementing ARR3, as in >>> Agile Results/Rule of 3 (J.D. Meier should come up with a catchy acronym, >>> for marketing purposes certainly!) ARR3 is a hybrid of Covey, GTD, ZTD, and >>> Agile. I am liking very much so far, and can see it as my long-term >>> approach, and that it will scale. It also seems like MLO has an excellently >>> match of features to the approach of ARR3. Below is some summary >>> information about ARR3. I am currently working on setting up, in MLO, the >>> 3 results for the day, 3 results for the week, 3 results for the year >>> areas. I currently have a set of 3 for Work & Personal.I will focus on the >>> Work and Personal here. >>> >>> Right now I'm just trying to get the right "feel" for working >>> productively in MLO with this setup. So far, in MLO, I have separate >>> outline folder branches set up for Work, Personal and RoadMap (my analog to >>> ARR3 "Hotspots" and Areas of Focus/Roles and Goals). I primarily work in >>> the Personal and Work areas. >>> Under each Work/Personal branch, I have the following 3 folders set up: >>> Daily Outcomes, Rule of 3; Weekly Outcomes, Rule of 3; and Yearly >>> Outcomes, Rule of 3. (With a "W" or "P" prefix in front of the folder name) >>> >>> Then, under each Week/Month/Year "Outcomes, Rule of 3" folder, I created >>> 3 folders, for each of the three "Projects"/Outcomes I want to create >>> within the time period. On the outcomes folders for week, month, and year, >>> I marked each subfolder/project as "Goal" for Week/Month/Year, as >>> appropriate. Then, under each folder, I place the >>> projects/subprojects/tasks that support accomplishment of each goal. >>> >>> I would like to just work with Goals, Projects, and Tasks in outline >>> view, and perhaps have a Goals view I can look at that would show me only >>> my Rule of 3 outcomes for week/month/year, and not have to have these items >>> under a "Weekly Outcomes, Rule of 3" or "Monthly Outcomes, Rule of 3" >>> >>> That is where I am right now. I am curious if anyone else has tried >>> implementing this ARR3 system, or something very similar, in MLO, and what >>> advice they have to share. The trick is to capture things to be done in a >>> trusted system, that then helps you remember and execute them in a >>> productive way. The challenge for me is spending too much time creating >>> and managing lists of what "could" be done and not enough time "doing" it. >>> That is where a tool like MLO comes in as effective, to help help keep >>> focus on the "doing" >>> >>> James D. >>> >>> AGILE RESULTS SUMMARY >>> =============================================== >>> Agile Results: >>> http://www.30daysofgettingresults.com/2011/10/day-1-take-tour-of-getting-results.html >>> Essential Principles: >>> *The Three Key Parts of Agile Results* >>> Here are the three key parts to Agile Results: >>> >>> 1. *The Rule of 3* >>> 2. *Monday Vision, Daily Outcomes, and Friday Reflection* >>> 3. *Hot Spots* >>> >>> In Agile Results, we use The Rule of Three to map out what we want to >>> accomplish in sets of three’s: >>> >>> - *3 results for the day* >>> - *3 results for the week* >>> - *3 results for the month* >>> - *3 results for the year* >>> >>> >>> =============================================== >>> >>> BACKGROUND >>> Recently I tried a bunch of GTD-focused tools and chose Nozbe, which >>> works quite well for people with shorter lists of projects, but bogged down >>> badly as my list of projects grew, and does not support breaking projects >>> and tasks down (outlining), and does not have any linkage between projects >>> and the goals they support. It does many, many things well though; possibly >>> a different post to contrast/compare what MLO could learn from the >>> GTD-Cloud-Crowd apps like Nozbe, NirvanaHQ, etc. In Nozbe (a cloud GTD >>> app) it was simple enough to set each up as "Projects" and each result as a >>> "Task" under that project, but of course with no outline capabilities and >>> no linkage of goals & priorities to projects that support those goals, it >>> broke down. So I came running back screaming to MLO. I am back to MLO to >>> stay, and committed to learning it well this time. (The availability of >>> Android and iOS apps was the key to coming back, that and especially the >>> active, communicative development leadership, that I can bet on continued >>> existence and improvement of the MLO toolset.) >>> >>> I have tried tons of different approaches, from Covey to GTD to ZTD to >>> Agile/Scrum to Kanban to Forster's AutoFocus to Flylady to you name it. >>> (And tried tons of different tools, too distracting to mention here.) The >>> approach that seems to work best for me is a blend of GTD, ZTD, but also >>> broken down by areas of life, like Covey's approach. I also find I really >>> want to keep my personal and work mostly separate. As I am also involved in >>> software development, at my work we are recently emphasizing agile >>> methodologies and Scrum in particular. I recently happened to run across >>> J.D. Meier's "Getting Results the Agile Way". I will just call it ARR3, as >>> in Agile Results/Rule of 3 (he should come up with a catchy acronym, for >>> marketing purposes certainly!) ARR3 is a hybrid of Covey, GTD, ZTD, and >>> Agile which I am liking very much so far, and can see it as my long-term >>> approach. It also seems like MLO has an excellent match of features to the >>> approach of ARR3. >>> >>> >>> LINKS >>> ZTD: http://productivemag.com/1/zen-to-done-ztd >>> >>> http://zenhabits.net/zen-to-done-ztd-the-ultimate-simple-productivity-system/ >>> >>> http://zenhabits.net/minimal-ztd-the-simplest-system-possible/ >>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MyLifeOrganized" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/263cd59d-d010-49e7-bef6-e430b167453f%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
