The dangers of linking tasks to projects, etc… (Project as an Outlook Contact item. A

[justin caise]

Hi,

I've heard/read about avoiding linking tasks to projects, etc. as it tends to over-complicate things - but how can I resist?
While trying to expose and rectify the bottleneck/timesuck issue which I'm facing during process and organizing phase, and during my weekly reviews, I came upon a website (Bill Kratz' method) wherein the author details steps to set up MS Outlook in a way that is much more automatic than the convoluted methods/system I'm currently operating. (Which only might be responsible for the friction I'm experiencing.)
The site is rather old now and because of this I wonder if any of you more experienced GTD'rs have tried this format out and how well it worked for you. Or have all of you good black-belters entirely shunned the idea of linking and grouping in favor of intuitively knowing a projects NA, or an NA's project?
Here is an excerpt from that site -
"This method is based on treating a Project as if it were an Outlook Contact item. As a result, you can link all of your associated tasks, contacts, notes, journal entries, documents and any other “objects” to your project, and view them from an Activities Tab, just as you would with a “person” contact. You can maintain a simple list of projects and “drill down” through the Outlook forms to any level of detail desired. You can display your Next Actions on any task list or your calendar. You will have a complete history of your project at any time, and can archive that history if necessary. You can employ the full sorting, filtering and viewing capability of Outlook on any of your project data. http://home.comcast.net/~whkratz/id3.htm
Speaking of intuitivity (intuitiveness?) Yeah, I sort of suspect that I'm being a little too anal about the exact size and shape of the hole I'm digging for myself, but… What else is there to do? A weekly review, or somethin?

Reading through the forum using the search feature before posting this I heard mention of the netcentrics add in - I haven't got it yet. Does it do the same thing? Is it cumbersome? One post said that it complicates the weekly review somewhat. True?

[clango]

..and what do you think about this:

https://secure.davidco.com/store/catalog/GTD-and-Outlook-2003-NEW-Contains-Updated-Material-p-16173.php

This work pretty well, I'm using it regularly and I feel happy when I use it!

[Brent]

Heh. I enjoyed reading your post!

When I first implemented GTD, I linked NAs to Projects. I think I put the project name at the end of each action.

In practice, I found it wasn't worth the time. For the vast majority of NAs, I could look at them and immediately knew what project they were part of. So why should I spend the time to write down the project for every single one?

Now, I will still sometimes note within the NA the project I'm trying to accomplish, especially if the NA is extremely atomic ("Open Player's Guide"). Yes, I sometimes have to make an NA that simple so that I'll actually do it!

So, I say, go ahead and try it for a while. Either it will be effective for you (in which case, great!), or you'll find it's not worth the effort. Either way, the exercise will teach you something.

[nondual]

I use 'Things' for Mac, so my NAs are automagically linked to projects. I have a few 'orphan' one-off actions that don't relate to a project, but the program itself sort of pushes you into grouping NAs by project.

[kewms]

In practice, I found it wasn't worth the time. For the vast majority of NAs, I could look at them and immediately knew what project they were part of. So why should I spend the time to write down the project for every single one?

This was my experience as well.

Katherine

[petdr]

For those who don't link NA to Projects, are there time you need to look at the list of NA for your Projects? If yes, how are you getting that list if you have an electronic list? Do you have those NA listed again in your Project support material? Or don't you ever need to review the past/current/future NA of a Project?

I can tell which Project the NA belongs to when I do my NA or Weekly Review. But if I ever review my projects several months later, I do find it helpful that I can pull up a project and have all the NA that were linked to that project.

[kewms]

For those who don't link NA to Projects, are there time you need to look at the list of NA for your Projects? If yes, how are you getting that list if you have an electronic list? Do you have those NA listed again in your Project support material? Or don't you ever need to review the past/current/future NA of a Project?

I can tell which Project the NA belongs to when I do my NA or Weekly Review. But if I ever review my projects several months later, I do find it helpful that I can pull up a project and have all the NA that were linked to that project.

Can you give an example? I can think of lots of situations where I might need to track time and effort on a project, all of which I would handle by logging my time using one of the many tools available for that purpose. But I can't think of a situation where I would need to log the specific NAs connected to a given project.

Remember that the NA is just a bookmark. I might do two hours of work starting with an NA as simple as "@Read Widget Company project proposal." The reading might inspire phone calls, emails, further research online, all kinds of stuff. *That* activity I would log, if I needed to. But the specific NA that put me in motion doesn't really matter for my purposes.

Katherine

[warren_t]

Hi Justin,

I've been using the Projects-as-contacts method that Bill Kratz put together for around 4 years and its worked well for me.

I initially had to invest some time in understanding how to set this up, but I found that investment worthwhile. The ability to see next actions by both project and context and be able to flick through the 2 quickly has been very useful. Over the 4 years that I've used ths approach I've added to it by using different task views in outlook and customising the default form for the Projects folder so that I can record custom information like project types, orginators, start and end dates, etc. Please note that I purchased the GTD whitepaper on customising Outlook so my system is a hybrid of the 2 approaches. This PDF is worth it if you are an outlook user.

The custom views are great for being able to do things like seperate personal and work NA's (or see them both together), show older completed NA's that I can archive when required. I also use these views for completing weekly reviews.

I have looked at alternative approaches and software to this approach, but the reasons I keep coming back to this set up are:

1) Outlook is the corporate standard for my company,

2) I like being able to drag and drop emails and documents directly into tasks to create a NA

3) I've learned the keyboard shortcuts to outlook so well that a new system would take time to learn and slow me down.

4) Custom views have really worked for me in speeding me through managing my NA lists.

5) I have a lot of NA's (@ 120...:???: ) I have found that I need the project linkage to know what that NA related to.

Some of the cons of this approach:

1) It doesn't synchronize the link to the custom project folder to my Windows Smartphone. The tasks come across, but there is no linkage to the project. This hasn't been a big deal though.

2) It's time consuming to set up if you are not technically minded. Learning speed keys and short cuts has helped me get over this issue. Bill's web site has plenty of material in it to help you get to where you need to be to do this.

If my job changed I might look at an online approach like Nozbe or Remember the Milk. But for now, My systerm works for me and I'd rather focus on the "behaviours and the doing" rather than the "systems and the software".

Hope this helps

Regards
Warren

[Oogiem]

Can you give an example? ....I can't think of a situation where I would need to log the specific NAs connected to a given project.

Not the original poster but here are several examples where you need to know the sequence of next actions as you refer to the projects.

Planting rotation for a pasture. You need to know when you planted and what the last crop was including variety, the fertilizer used if any and the final AU days of grazing or hay you got. Weather data are also required to adjust the plans for the future.

Breeding plans for any domesticated species, plant or animal. If you don't know what actions you took, even years later, you will have no clue where to go next. And since the outcome can't be known for years it's easy to lose the details if you can't refer back to the specific mating plans and next actions you took.

Weaving projects all require that you keep track of the details of the WPI, EPI, PPI, fiber type, twist angle, twist direction etc of the yarns involved because how the fabric behaves in the end will all depend on your actions as you create it. If the fabric isn't as you wanted you have to be able to go back and see what you did to figure out what to try next to get the outcome you wanted. You need to refer to the prior next actions to determine what to try next.

In general any project that covers a long time span requires you to keep details and any project where the next actions results may be applicable to a future project will also require that linkage.

[abhay]

For those who don't link NA to Projects, are there time you need to look at the list of NA for your Projects? If yes, how are you getting that list if you have an electronic list? Do you have those NA listed again in your Project support material? Or don't you ever need to review the past/current/future NA of a Project?

As soon as I look at the project, I recall what is or are the actions for this project in my actions list. That's because I review the entire action lists once a day. So looking at a project, I don't need to search the actions list for a related action.



I can tell which Project the NA belongs to when I do my NA or Weekly Review. But if I ever review my projects several months later, I do find it helpful that I can pull up a project and have all the NA that were linked to that project.

Dangerous :twisted: !!!!! One of the most important factors is doing the weekly review weekly. If it's a project, it should have been looked at once a week! Several months is just too much!!

Regards,
Abhay

[kewms]

Not the original poster but here are several examples where you need to know the sequence of next actions as you refer to the projects.

Planting rotation for a pasture. You need to know when you planted and what the last crop was including variety, the fertilizer used if any and the final AU days of grazing or hay you got. Weather data are also required to adjust the plans for the future.

Oh, I agree. There are lots and lots of situations where you need a log of what you did. My point is that the *list of next actions* does not necessarily provide that log. If your next action was "@farm till back pasture," then that information alone doesn't actually help you much. Certainly not as much as "September 15, 2008. Tilled cornstalks under and planted XYZ variety alfalfa as cover crop for back pasture. Used xx pounds of seed, mixed with yy pounds of Type Z fertilizer. Weather was rainy, 60 degrees."

If you need a log, keep one.

Katherine

[Moggy72]

I found projects-as-contacts didn't work for me so I have projects as task items . This is mainly so projects and actions both sync across all my devices - projects (and higher levels) have a separate category.

When I do link actions to projects - I use the companies field (each project has a number). This does make for a neat search that shows projects at the top and actions - either completed or not - lower down. You can also link projects to areas of focus etc. in a similar way.

However, I find I rarely have the need to link actions to projects in this way - for most of my work it just doesn't seem worth it.

Bryn

[Brent]

For those who don't link NA to Projects, are there time you need to look at the list of NA for your Projects?

Ah, but I don't have lists of NAs for each Project! Each Project has one NA.

If I think of more than one thing to do on a Project, I'll write them up in a list and keep it in my project support materials in either A-Z reference or on the computer.

If you're talking about past NAs, nope, I don't record those. Don't see the value, personally, but then I've never really thought about it.

Does that help?

[Oogiem]

Oh, I agree. There are lots and lots of situations where you need a log of what you did. My point is that the *list of next actions* does not necessarily provide that log.

I define my next actions as completely as possible so in my case a list of all the next actions taken on a project is a log file. And I like to see the actions taken on a project by project basis when I review them. Creating a separate log is cumbersome when a simple listing of NAs taken will do.

[mwkoehler]

For those who don't link NA to Projects, are there time you need to look at the list of NA for your Projects? If yes, how are you getting that list if you have an electronic list? Do you have those NA listed again in your Project support material? Or don't you ever need to review the past/current/future NA of a Project?

I can tell which Project the NA belongs to when I do my NA or Weekly Review. But if I ever review my projects several months later, I do find it helpful that I can pull up a project and have all the NA that were linked to that project.

Lots of things have been said that I agree with:

1. One NA per project in most cases, more is usually counterproductive.
2. I usually do not link NA to project or project to NA - it's usually just obvious.

The exceptions:

1. Sometimes there is more than one NA that could be done next. Since order is not relevant I put them all on the list. Sometime they have different contexts and energy levels required, so which one actually is next gets decided in the moment.

2. Some projects are projects not in the GTD sense, but in the Project Management sense: a project with a long list of tasks, to be done by a great host of people, with a lot of $$$ being spent. These are done with full project plans (and the project name on my projects list). If I have a personal NA from that Project Plan, then I add it to my list. Waiting for's are usually handled in project review meetings. The point of the GTD project is that 99% of the time you need a simple system.

Finally, another software product that I can recommend for Outlook users is ClearContext. In their system categories are used to assign context, and folders are used for projects. They call a project/folder a Topic and allow you to assign them to emails, tasks, and calendar items. I use it everyday so in a sense I do link projects and NAs, but it only comes up for me as a way to look back at history. They have a GTD guide here: http://www.clearcontext.com/resources/attachments/Using_IMS_for_Outlook_with_GTD.pdf. In addition lots of help and videos on the site. The Personal edition is free.

[petdr]

Dangerous :twisted: !!!!! One of the most important factors is doing the weekly review weekly. If it's a project, it should have been looked at once a week! Several months is just too much!!


My apologies for not being very clear in my initial post. The reviewing the Projects several months later were completed Projects or archived Projects, if you prefer. They are not active Projects.

As for examples, they are similar to what Oogiem posted. Some of my Projects are veterinary patients with chronic illnesses involving different treatments. Several are undergoing what are still considered "alternative" treatments in the US (acupuncture and herbs). So it's often an ongoing research project, reading journals, coming up with treatment principles, and keeping track of the responses or lack thereof.

Those details are recorded in patient records and/or my journal. But what I also find helpful is to review the NAs that led me to an "ah ha!" Yes, NAs are bookmarks only but, to me, bookmarks are akind to signposts or markers along the road. I can look back at the bookmarks and see where I went wrong (if the outcome was not desirable) or where I went right. And if I'm lucky, I'll see a trend of where things went right/wrong and that can really make a significant change in my workflow or thought process.

[petdr]

If you're talking about past NAs, nope, I don't record those. Don't see the value, personally, but then I've never really thought about it.

Does that help?

Yes, that helped.
It seems to depend on how you use your NA list. Probably like Oogiem, I add notes to my NA when I do them. For instance:
@Call 555-1212 Rosie's response to so-and-so supplement [P:RosieValdez][P:so-and-so supplement] --- note: real project names are usually more abbreviated.
When I make the call, I enter the notes in the notes section of the task and check it off.

Months later, if I want to see what type of response I had with so-and-so supplement, I review that project with its back-links to all the pertinent NAs. Even if there is no specific NA @Call response for every patient, there will usually be some NA linked to that supplement at least once per patient (using that supplement), giving me a list of patients to review.

So my NA list end up being a log of sort.
I can see where the above is not important if you use your NA list strictly as a temporary bookmark holder and dispose of it when completed.

[abhay]

First of all, sorry for misunderstanding!


My apologies for not being very clear in my initial post. The reviewing the Projects several months later were completed Projects or archived Projects, if you prefer. They are not active Projects.

As for examples, they are similar to what Oogiem posted. Some of my Projects are veterinary patients with chronic illnesses involving different treatments. Several are undergoing what are still considered "alternative" treatments in the US (acupuncture and herbs). So it's often an ongoing research project, reading journals, coming up with treatment principles, and keeping track of the responses or lack thereof.

Those details are recorded in patient records and/or my journal. But what I also find helpful is to review the NAs that led me to an "ah ha!" Yes, NAs are bookmarks only but, to me, bookmarks are akind to signposts or markers along the road. I can look back at the bookmarks and see where I went wrong (if the outcome was not desirable) or where I went right. And if I'm lucky, I'll see a trend of where things went right/wrong and that can really make a significant change in my workflow or thought process.

I think this is one of your area of focus: to keep organizing the information and knowledge that you generate as you complete your projects. (It is not the NA or projects per se that are of interest here, I suppose.) One way that I immediately think of would be to write a note regarding the new piece of information that you generated and put it in the inbox during your work. Then either during your daily processing or weekly review, organize this information in a more accessible fashion, apart from your usual practices of updating journal and patient records. Maybe you just add the patient reference number and some keywords regarding the peculiarities of his/her disease in a reference file devoted to that or those kinds of disease, or perhaps a copy of the whole patient record.

In fact on a second thought, since you already maintain patient records and a journal, it may be easier just to go through the last week updates of both in the weekly review, and organize the information generated.

Hope this helps,
Regards,
Abhay

[Brent]

Thanks for the clarifications, petdr! And now I understand the meaning of your name. :-)

Were I in your position, I would keep my system the same, except that I'd archive all my NAs in a distinct location once completed. They'd have to go into a folder/tag/whatever by Project. So, if I had a computer-based system for NAs, I'd probably have a separate text file for each Project, and cut-and-paste each NA into the appropriate text file. Then those archived NAs would become part of my reference system.

Does that help?

[justin caise]

Ha, ha - I thougth "Black Sheep Shepherdess" was a metaphor.
I thought maybe for somesort of evangelistic/rehabilitative/social work or something.

Typical of me though - always looking way too deep.

Thank you all for your comments/suggestions. And also thak you for the reminder of the GTD and Outlook whitepaper which is one of the first items I pruchased from DAC. I just forgot that I had it and how much is in there. My system has become a hybrid of the suggestions there-in but I'd not refered back to it in quite a while.

I too utilize the company field as catagorization for my projects - they loosely reflect my area of focus. I've become quite adept at the shortcut keys to enter such info and it doesn't hold me back much. So I'm not very far from the "Bill Krantz method".

This linking helps me most during the weekly review where I can use what I call "Trinoculars" (that's three outlook windows open which I can Alt/Tab between) all with proper views to match them up roughly.


The idea here is that I can see altogether the project, it's list of sequential actions, and the NA list. Sometimes a little cumbersome and confusing but most often it helps to verify a next action on each project, and that the NA is truely the NA. ( I've gotta wonder though if that keeps me from excersing my decider muscles for "Is it actionable?")

Also, My favorite statement in all of this is - "I say, go ahead and try it for a while. Either it will be effective for you (in which case, great!), or you'll find it's not worth the effort. Either way, the exercise will teach you something."
Thanks for the encouragement Brent.

More quandries to come - still crankin up my overcomplication machine.
JC

[Oogiem]

Ha, ha - I thougth "Black Sheep Shepherdess" was a metaphor.
I thought maybe for somesort of evangelistic/rehabilitative/social work or something.

giggling hysterically :-) I guess I am evangelic regarding the benefits of wool and I am sure the sheep wish I would do something else on occasion. However I am actually a shepherdess of black sheep, 132 of them to be exact. Now all naked and cold, shearing is done for the year and we're back to winter with snow and rain.

[CoffinDodger]

2. Some projects are projects not in the GTD sense, but in the Project Management sense: a project with a long list of tasks, to be done by a great host of people, with a lot of $$$ being spent. These are done with full project plans (and the project name on my projects list). If I have a personal NA from that Project Plan, then I add it to my list. Waiting for's are usually handled in project review meetings. The point of the GTD project is that 99% of the time you need a simple system.

I read a tip on the forum which I've started using that if these sorts of projects are 6 months or more running it may be appropriate to store them as goals or accountabilities. I lead a team of software developers building long projects for which we have project management and bug tracking databases which contain action plans etc. I don't need to mirror those into my GTD system.

However "Coordinate requirement review for version 22" might then become an individual project in my GTD system with next actions, agendas and waiting fors. It services the goal.

[Gardener]

Some random thoughts:

I never quite got why it's bad to link NAs to projects. Is it bad because it consumes extra time, or for some other reason?

I use OmniFocus, where all actions are linked to a project, though they don't have to be viewed that way. So if it's about viewing, I have the option to look at a Next Action list broken up by context and ignoring Project. But I'm curious as to whether there's another reason.

On multiple actions, I try to make sure that each project has at least one workable NA, but I don't stop myself there - if I'm brainstorming actions, I keep entering future actions until I run out of brainstorm. Otherwise, I'll fear forgetting those ideas, and the idea is that GTD will keep me from worrying about that, right?

I also like the "cranking widgets" idea, which is another reason why I have a bunch of actions. So instead of having a project with just one action:

Project: Complete off-duty personnel report.
NA: Copy on-duty personnel report code as a starting point.

I prefer to have a pre-planned series of widgets:

Project: Complete off-duty personnel report
- Copy on-duty personnel report code as a starting point.
- Confirm that copied code compiles and runs.
- Write query for off-duty personnel.
- Write sort for off-duty personnel.

Blah, blah, blah. I like to plan the coding ahead of time, in sufficiently bite-sized chunks that I can do it even if I'm feeling rather stupid. This is also often a way to gently break through procrastination.

On past actions, I don't generally look back at them, though I wouldn't say that it's inherently bad. In my case, I want any looking to the past to be clearly specified in future actions, if you see what I mean.

For example, if I complete an action to email someone with a question, I immediately create a new action to follow up on that email. If I complete a programming change that will require testing, I immediately create an action to do that testing. And so on. If I have to go back to completed actions, that means that I failed to follow my own system.

Gardener

[kewms]

Some random thoughts:

I never quite got why it's bad to link NAs to projects. Is it bad because it consumes extra time, or for some other reason?

I use OmniFocus, where all actions are linked to a project, though they don't have to be viewed that way. So if it's about viewing, I have the option to look at a Next Action list broken up by context and ignoring Project. But I'm curious as to whether there's another reason.

I don't think it's bad, just unnecessary. The problem is that people who are new to GTD tend to obsess about ways to maintain the NA-Project link, to such an extent that it keeps them from developing a robust system. In a robust system with well-phrased NAs and regular weekly reviews, you don't need an explicit link.

Katherine

[nshram]

Hello everybody!

The subject of this thread (projects as contacts) immediately caught my attention. I have read the original Bill Kratz procedure. However, my requirement was based on different considerations:


I have a j2me based Nokia cellphone (6275).
I wanted a way to capture/sync projects and actions between my PC and cellphone.
Though the hardware on the Nokia 6275 is good, the applications are pathetic. Example : the "todo" list application has a limit of 30 todos!
Some initial attempts : text file, pygtd were unsuccessful.
I then thought : even in a crummy cellphone, which is the one function that has to work fast. Answer: the contacts function/application! Moreover, in these cellphones, it is the only application that is searchable.
So my solution, which I have managed to remain on for the last 6 months is this:



Create projects and next actions as contacts in outlook
Start each project name with ! and another character based on category. Example: !w means a work related project.
Start each next action name with @ and another character based on context. Example: @h means at home.
I have made further refinements on this basic foundation - involving views in outlook, a project number to link into the next action, etc.
Now, after synching outlook contacts with my cellphone, I am able to immediately view projects by searching for "!" and next actions by "@". Further filtering works by entering the second character.


Of course. Many may think all this is another wasteful exercise in trying to find the ultimate GTD implementation. I would agree. All I can say is it works for me, for now!

[mcogilvie]

Of course. Many may think all this is another wasteful exercise in trying to find the ultimate GTD implementation. I would agree. All I can say is it works for me, for now!

I think "ultimate GTD implementations" have more bells and whistles. This is making do with what you've got. If it works for you, go with it.

[Oogiem]

I don't think it's bad, just unnecessary. .....In a robust system with well-phrased NAs and regular weekly reviews, you don't need an explicit link.

I think that for many projects it *is* necessary to keep the link between next action and project. The reason is probably the nature of my projects though. If there is any chance that someone who knows nothing about the project will have to step in and take over the more links you have the better.

A farmer friend just died in the field at age 42 (I won't say how much younger that is than I am!) If all his projects and next actions depend on his own knowledge and weekly review, the farm will be in a rough state until the family can get it all back on track. If there is a clear list and the family knows where it is, they can at least carry on or hire someone to continue without as much disruption. This is particularly critical in that many farming activities are somewhat time dependent. Any delay in doing them could be very bad.

A consultant friend has a "hit by a bus" method of managing all her obligations. She runs her business so that no client or project is ever be in a state that if she was hit by a bus and killed vital data is lost. One of the reasons she keeps getting business at this time is the fact that her clients know that no matter what happens to her, she has a backup plan for their projects such that another person can pick up where she left off and go forward with minimal interruption to their business.

Lists of next actions without that project link and backup are much harder to hand off to someone if you are not there to explain your thinking.