I am a disciple of David Allen. Getting Things Done fluctuates between my modus operandi and unattainable savior. As such, I completely buy into Allen’s bottom-up task management philosophy. In short, he insists that all things that must be done be captured, without fail, as actionable items on contextual lists. These lists need to be available at a moment’s notice to be evaluated based on criteria that makes sense for the occasion. I could fill hundreds of posts expounding upon these principles, but not as eloquently or as effectively as Allen. Read the book; it will pay off in spades. The one thing I want to emphasize of the system is that tasks management is the precursor to project management.
Allen carefully defines a project as any objective that requires more than one action in order to be considered complete. This is an integral part of GTD, but can be difficult for the lay community to accept, as it spans objectives as varied as “End world hunger” and “Replace printer cartridge”. Again, Allen emphasizes the critical bottom-up nature of productivity. Projects defined in this way provide a better framework to manage the various actions that must be carried out to bring a desired outcome come to fruition. For most people, those who are not “project managers” in title, most of the population, this can be a critical paradigm shift.
However, I am a project manager; and for the most part, I am writing for other project managers. To that end, I will say this: task management is still the precursor to project management; yes that project management, the traditional one with Gantt charts and Microsoft Project reports. I think many beginning project managers fail to realize that project management does not manage the hundreds of actionable items or personal commitments that he or she is responsible for. Traditional project management is about attention to detail, progress tracking and reporting. It is not about accomplishing things. However, things still need accomplished. If you are a member of an organization similar to mine, a team of less than ten, you will still need to accomplish a lot. Actions will need to be taken, even if you still need to track the progress of others and report to stakeholders.
For me, even before embarking down the explicit path of project management, action management was critical to my success, and psyche. Randy Pausch, famous for his Last Lecture, wrote in the book adaptation of the same that his wife would tell him to go process his inbox when he got saucy. She knew that he was behind in managing his inputs based on his sour disposition alone. Lately I have been operating in a repeated cycle of binge processing versus a deluge of ad hoc work.
I can only begin to accomplish higher level objectives, those with mid- to long-range timelines, when I have my action-level system down cold. This is how I need to operate in order to be the best worker, let alone project manager, that I can be:
All incoming items, no matter how big or small or clearly defined, must be captured the moment they enter your world. Ideally you will be able to determine desired outcome and appropriate action on the spot. If not, at least capture whatever trigger you can to be processed later.
Have as many inboxes as needed, but as few as you can get by on. This means that you will always be able to accomplish the item above, but will have fewer places to review and process later.
Conduct, or participate in better meetings. Organizations have an even tougher time determining specific objectives and appropriate follow-up actions, delegated to the proper personnel than individuals do. Every meeting should end with a recap of specific desired outcomes and a clearly defined understanding with who will accomplish what to move the “project” forward. Again, a project at its most basic level is any objective that requires two or more steps.
Review, review, review. Check your calendar, capture repositories and master lists of projects and actionable items as often as needed.
Once you are able to stay on top of your lowest-level responsibilities, you will accomplish more with less energy. This is true productivity. One thing that I have not covered here, but is the real heart of GTD, is that the better that you make your personal productivity system, the more clear your mind will be. This clarity will allow you to focus more intensely and more clearly on larger projects and problems. This is what I need now more than ever.
Getting Things Done: Task Management Is a Precurser to Project Management
I am a disciple of David Allen. Getting Things Done fluctuates between my modus operandi and unattainable savior. As such, I completely buy into Allen’s bottom-up task management philosophy. In short, he insists that all things that must be done be captured, without fail, as actionable items on contextual lists. These lists need to be available at a moment’s notice to be evaluated based on criteria that makes sense for the occasion. I could fill hundreds of posts expounding upon these principles, but not as eloquently or as effectively as Allen. Read the book; it will pay off in spades. The one thing I want to emphasize of the system is that tasks management is the precursor to project management.
Allen carefully defines a project as any objective that requires more than one action in order to be considered complete. This is an integral part of GTD, but can be difficult for the lay community to accept, as it spans objectives as varied as “End world hunger” and “Replace printer cartridge”. Again, Allen emphasizes the critical bottom-up nature of productivity. Projects defined in this way provide a better framework to manage the various actions that must be carried out to bring a desired outcome come to fruition. For most people, those who are not “project managers” in title, most of the population, this can be a critical paradigm shift.
However, I am a project manager; and for the most part, I am writing for other project managers. To that end, I will say this: task management is still the precursor to project management; yes that project management, the traditional one with Gantt charts and Microsoft Project reports. I think many beginning project managers fail to realize that project management does not manage the hundreds of actionable items or personal commitments that he or she is responsible for. Traditional project management is about attention to detail, progress tracking and reporting. It is not about accomplishing things. However, things still need accomplished. If you are a member of an organization similar to mine, a team of less than ten, you will still need to accomplish a lot. Actions will need to be taken, even if you still need to track the progress of others and report to stakeholders.
For me, even before embarking down the explicit path of project management, action management was critical to my success, and psyche. Randy Pausch, famous for his Last Lecture, wrote in the book adaptation of the same that his wife would tell him to go process his inbox when he got saucy. She knew that he was behind in managing his inputs based on his sour disposition alone. Lately I have been operating in a repeated cycle of binge processing versus a deluge of ad hoc work.
I can only begin to accomplish higher level objectives, those with mid- to long-range timelines, when I have my action-level system down cold. This is how I need to operate in order to be the best worker, let alone project manager, that I can be:
Once you are able to stay on top of your lowest-level responsibilities, you will accomplish more with less energy. This is true productivity. One thing that I have not covered here, but is the real heart of GTD, is that the better that you make your personal productivity system, the more clear your mind will be. This clarity will allow you to focus more intensely and more clearly on larger projects and problems. This is what I need now more than ever.