« The belt that keeps the pants up | Main | The 2AM Worry Club »
October 22, 2007
Matching Brain Toast
One of the temptations when starting with GTD is to over-engineer it. I see it all of the time. The more creative people are, the more they want to create a sophisticated system for their lists with lots of bells, whistles, cross-referencing, categorization, color-coding, flagging systems, ad nauseam. Believe me, I can go shoulder to shoulder with anyone about all of the cool implementations for GTD. But if you saw my system, most of you would be amazed how simple it is. It's really just a simple set of lists that I can easily get stuff in and out of. That's my primary criteria. The categories are sorted by the primary tools, people and places I need to get stuff done. I don't use reminders, follow-up flags or priority codes. I'm not saying any of that stuff can't work, but often those things slow me down because they make me think more about my stuff than I need to. My guideline is that it should take about 30 seconds or less to get something onto a list. More than that, and my brain starts convincing me it's easier to hold in my head than do the "work" it takes to get it on a list.
One of our coaches, Ana Maria, has a great tip for setting up a system: create it based on what would you feel like maintaining if you were sick in bed with the flu. Start there. Think about it. If you create your system based on always being in your "zone" and having the energy and attention span required to use a complex system for your stuff, then you've got a challenge on your hands when you're not in that place. Think of all of the times when your brain is toast and what you felt like doing--as little as possible. That's how my system is setup--to meet me at brain toast, not brain complex.
I do lots of GTD classes for high-tech companies. I had an engineer come up to me at the end of my class recently who said he'd been playing around with GTD for 2 years, got lots of good tips out of the class, but was still struggling trying to find the "perfect" software program for managing his lists. He was convinced he would need to build it. My advice is to keep it simple. In my experience, many of the programs out there trying to automate GTD make it too complex and miss the point. A simple system can be profoundly efficient.
Progress means simplifying, not complicating.
- Bruno Munari
Posted by Kelly at October 22, 2007 09:19 AM
Comments
Terrific! Finally something I can show to people who keep thinking the system needs to be perfect and missing that perfection is in the simplicity.
Posted by: William at October 22, 2007 06:28 PM
Thanks Kelly. If only we could keep the complex thinkers and marketers out of system design. You got it right. Start simple and only add features as needed.
Posted by: Simone at October 22, 2007 06:32 PM
I couldn't agree more with you on this issue. When I got introduced to GTD, I tried the Ajax based GTD programs, software and the works. I even worked with a couple of Mind Map managers etc. Finally i settled for a pen and paper thingie:
A. Because I don't have a laptop my diary can go with me everyday.
B. Even if I have a thought in the middle of the night I can just scribble it without making too much of an effort to be close to a computer
Simplicity is the KEY!
Posted by: Kapil at October 22, 2007 10:24 PM
Sometimes simplicity requires great complexity upfront, in order to remove the fluff that might inhibit efficiency and clarity.
Or in other words, your system has to engage you enough to consistently use it, reliable enough for you to trust it, and complex enough to produce the results that you need. And then it needs absolutely nothing more.
Just my 2 cents, tax included. :)
Posted by: Jim Krenz at October 22, 2007 10:41 PM
I always tell people to start working on paper and only switch to automated systems after using GTD for at least six months. This brings them three benefits:
1. By working on paper they are not limited by the interpretation of GTD of the tool's programmer;
2. If you know how to set up your system on paper you will have a fall-back tool in case technology fails;
3. You won't lose so much time tweaking your system.
Posted by: Jeroen Sangers at October 23, 2007 12:29 AM
Kelly:
I agree. My systems have gotten more and more simply over time.
For instance, I used to use a bunch of Categories in Outlook for Contexts. Now, I just use two: Work and Home.
Craig
Posted by: Craig Huggart at October 23, 2007 08:31 AM
I'll see your quote and raise you with an Albert Einstein, "Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler."
While I agree that people often tend towards too much complexity in search of perfection I've also seen people struggle with too much simplicity. For instance, isn't trying to keep all your 'stuff' in your head the simplest of all systems?
I'm a software engineer and I've also really struggled to find an implementation that really works for me. My test is that it should be like my TiVo in that it just works to the point where it is essentially invisible. The gmail implementation comes close as it allows me easy access to my lists at home and work (I don't travel much so that's about as much mobility I require) but it has significant drawbacks around managing projects and editing items that have been added to a list.
Posted by: Andrew at October 23, 2007 11:54 AM
Kelly:
I couldn't agree with you more!
I've tried a number of systems to make GTD "better" and more "efficient" but nothing quite works as well as a very simple system that holds my hard landscape appointments and my NA lists.
I'm done tinkering for a better system and will stick with what works - simply!
Posted by: Dean at October 23, 2007 09:20 PM
Thanks to all for your posts.
I do think simplicity is in the eye of the beholder. My simplicity is another person's complexity. I think it comes down to personal preference. Not much different really than choosing a house to live in. Find one you like that you can easily maintain.
Kelly
Posted by: Kelly at October 24, 2007 04:05 PM
