Getting Things Done: Processing “Stuff”

On the prior page, I wrote quite a bit how the to-do lists that function as part of my external brain in Outlook and in my Palm are organized. The next element of my process is actually getting the task list populated, by processing "stuff".

A flowchart of how I process "stuff" is on the right. (Click image for larger view. Chart is actually based on one assembled by Sylvia.)

In English, it operates something like this:

• I collect "stuff", in the form of email, web articles, notes taken during meetings, ideas that just randomly occur to me, etc.
   
• If the "stuff" requires action in the form of a new project, I file it by creating a new task in the zzProjects category, and then I create as new tasks any actions that may be necessary for that project. For example:
   
  • Let’s say I get email from my property business regarding a rate filing required in state XX.
     
  • I’ll click a button to run a macro converting that email to a task, which I’ll rename "Property: Rate filing - XX". I’ll add any other notes to the new task, and categorize it as "Property, zzProjects".
     
  • I’ll then create specific action(s) associated with that project, which more than likely will be "XX Filing: Figure out what needs to be done", and categorize that/those new task(s) as "@Work, Property"

   

• If the "stuff" is a simple action that needs to be done:
   
  • I’ll just do it if it can be done quickly and non-disruptively. (Folks talk about "the two minute rule". As a practical matter, I’m not bound by a two-minute limit, and tend to operate on the basis of whether it’s "easier"/"faster" to just do it, or to put it into the to-do list.)
     
  • If it’s something that needs to be put on hold until I can get to it:
     
    • If it’s something that must be done at a particular time and date (e.g. a conference call), it gets converted to a calendar item.
       
    • If it’s something that must be done within a specific time-frame, it gets converted to a task item, is given high priority, has start/due dates attached, and is categorized based on context and role.
       
    • If it’s something that needs to be done, but doesn’t currently have time sensitivity, it’s converted to a normal priority task item, and is categorized based on context and role.
       
    • If it’s something that doesn’t need to be done, but I might want to do in the short-to-medium term, it’s converted to a low priority task item, and is categorized based on context and role. (David Allen would have such items be placed in a separate "someday" task list to avoid cluttering up currently-actionable items. However, I prefer to keep one list; filters can keep these out-of-sight until I’m ready to review.)
       
    • If it’s a long-term goal, it’s converted to a task, given low priority, and is categorized as "!Goals".
• If the "stuff" is something that requires no action:
   
  • If it’s something I want to read at some future time, it’ll get moved into my "Read" folder and be categorized as "@Read".
     
  • If it’s something I want to blog about, it’ll get moved into my "Blog" folder and be categorized as "@Blog".
     
  • If it’s reference material that I might need quickly accessible in the future, it’s moved to my "Reference" folder and be categorized as "zzReference".
     
  • Everything else is just simply dumped into my "Filed" folder (if it’s Outlook-based) or saved to my hard drive. Later, space may be conserved via Outlook’s archive functionality and/or archiving it to an external drive/DVD.

…and that’s essentially it.

To further streamline things, I am not shy about queuing up email in Outlook for future delivery. For example, if I know in advance that I need to check-in with someone in the future about some matter, if it’s appropriate, I have no problem with writing the email in advance, and then setting it to send at the right time (under Tools|Options pre-OL07; Options in OL07 — check "do not deliver before" and pick appropriate time).

I should point out a major difference between my system and "true GTD":

David Allen and many of the "GTD cult" make a Big Thing about having simply-organized files (so you can find filed stuff when you need it), and about purging "stuff" if it’s no longer needed (why have it occupying limited space or demanding any "psychic RAM"?).

A few folks have criticized GTD adherents for being too quick on the draw in purging their stuff. Parallel to this is the great email debate of whether it is better to have a full email inbox versus an empty one. That argument distills down to whether it is better to have an uncluttered inbox to make it easier to focus on things that need to be done, versus being able to recover past discussions easily.

Well, when it comes to data, I am a packrat. I’m fortunate in that much of my "stuff" is now in the form of computer data, rather than hardcopy. If it is hardcopy, and it is something that I need to save (e.g. snail-mail letter), a scanner with a document-feeder and Adobe Acrobat, OCR software, or OneNote make quick work of electronic-ifying it. And once it’s on my hard drive, I prefer to keep it around "just in case".

Complicating my data-packrat nature is my dislike of filing (which is, also, why I archive paper files electronically). I used to occasionally "pay" for both of those characteristics whenever (for example) I needed to find that-email-I-know-I-have-in-here-somewhere.

Fortunately, with the advent of desktop search tools (like Windows Desktop Search or Google Desktop), I feel far less of a need to spend time attempting to organize my mammoth email and file archive. I do try to maintain some organization with computer files, but when it comes to email, I’m perfectly happy to stick everything into the same archive, and rely on WDS when I need to find something archived.

On this and the prior page, I spent a bit of time discussing how I organize "stuff" in order to build the contextual task lists I work off of. However, my to-do list is only part of the system. The other major part of the process is in making periodic reviews a habit.

Previous: Contextual Task Lists | Next: Periodic Reviews