Separate lists for Projects and NA or not?

[annewalsh]

Hi
I have been implementing GTD since last year (and one of the things I really like about it is the sense of there being depths of competency! - so I'm learning all the time). This may sound like a stupid question to you people but at the moment I'm using an Excel workbook for my projects - linked into another Excel sheet which has my next actions.
I use pen and paper to capture (or a voice recorder if I'm out walking) stuff but how many next actions should I set out for each project...?
Is it sufficient to identify just one...then note the next action that emerges as I complete this one? Any one got ideas for best practice?
Thanks..
Anne

[jknecht]

Is it sufficient to identify just one...then note the next action that emerges as I complete this one?

Absolutely. To me, this is one of core the ideas of GTD -- if you had nothing else to work on but that one project, what is the very next thing you could possibly do to push that project forward? And if you can't do it until something else is done first, only put that first thing on the next action list (the second thing goes in a project plan somewhere).

[annewalsh]

Thanks for responding to my thread. Much appreciated!
I suppose I want to get pretty granular about it. I was using a combine Projects and NA list (sometimes with a few NA for the same project) but now I'm experimenting (after listening to the GTD system CDs) with having a master project list that has projects only and then having a next actions list that I update a couple of times a week.
I was just wondered what other people were doing that really worked for them..
Could you say a bit more about the following..."only put that first thing on the next action list (the second thing goes in a project plan somewhere)."
Thanks!
Anne

[Brent]

Welcome!

Hi
how many next actions should I set out for each project...?
Is it sufficient to identify just one...then note the next action that emerges as I complete this one?

It's called a Next Action for a reason.

You only need one. If a Project has several truly independent NAs, you can write down all of them. If you want to record future Actions, you can put those in your Project support materials.

All other things being equal, the closer you are to one Next Action, the better. It's easy to overwhelm an NA list with several independent NAs per Project, thus inviting analysis paralysis, as opposed to picking one. It's not like you'll have a small list of NAs to choose from anyway!

[El_Stiff]

I only have more than one NA if the each is completely separate and independent, preferably in different contexts. The whole point of GTD is to have a specific next action to do, so if you're dithering between two (or more) the system breaks down.

But, I do often list the "next" Next Action under the one that is currently active. Sometimes I have several listed - they're usually more like notes, and not set in stone. But there's not harm in jotting down what might come after the action that is current active.

[Cpu_Modern]

First, let me say I like your Excel system. Many people take half the fun out of GTD by using Outlook.

Thanks for responding to my thread. Much appreciated!
I suppose I want to get pretty granular about it.

Pretty granular is good. Use NAs as jumppoints, not as descriptions of a whole stream of actions.

I was just wondered what other people were doing that really worked for them..

Just plain vanilla GTD works fine for me for years now. I have every possible NA in my system - not 'artificially reduced to one NA per Project. I have one NA per moving part of each project (p. 76 in GTD book).

I review my lists constantly. Most of the time I work off of my head because the constant reviewing makes me conscious for what is the 'best use of my time.

I use that olde trick of starting the day with a pre-defined most important task.

Could you say a bit more about the following..."only put that first thing on the next action list (the second thing goes in a project plan somewhere)."

Only put true NAs on the context-lists. Put other already apparent actions, milestones, sub-project, definitions of outcomes and so on into an action plan for the project. Each project that needs more planning than the NA to make you stop thinking about it, get's an project plan. There is a chapter in GTD about project planning / natural planning.

[GTDWorks]

I used to believe that I could only have 1 next action per project. But the members here were very helpful to instruct me on a better practice and I have not looked back. I now have multiple independent actions on my lists and accomplish a lot more as a result.

[Gardener]

It's plenty to have just one - in fact, I think that it may technically be a violation to have more than one. I've been trying to suppress my frequent urge to write a long elaborate set of actions, because often I end up following a different path, and I have to clean up those actions. Thats not much work, because I use an electronic system, but it's still two pieces of time wasted - the time to write all the actions, and the time to turn around and delete or rearrange them.

I _do_ sometimes wrote a long series of terribly obvious actions when I'm feeling overwhelmed by a task. If I find the bits of the task that I _do_ understand, write them up as actions to make them important, and then nibble away at the problem by working them and checking them off, I often find that by the time I get to the center of the problem, I know how to handle it. Without tricking myself with all of those little actions, I might still be staring blankly at the outside of the task.

[annewalsh]

Hi Brent...
Was intrigued by this
"You only need one. If a Project has several truly independent NAs, you can write down all of them. If you want to record future Actions, you can put those in your Project support materials."
So would you suggest that I have a folder per project (I've got lots of projects and the idea of creating folders - well - to use the GTD term "repels" me!

Any thoughts on that..
Thank you
Anne

[annewalsh]

I only have more than one NA if the each is completely separate and independent, preferably in different contexts. The whole point of GTD is to have a specific next action to do, so if you're dithering between two (or more) the system breaks down.

But, I do often list the "next" Next Action under the one that is currently active. Sometimes I have several listed - they're usually more like notes, and not set in stone. But there's not harm in jotting down what might come after the action that is current active.

Thanks for this...I got a a-ha with this...so it looks as though it would be fine to have more than one NA - as long as they are in different contexts - e.g. if my project requires both research and a few phone calls...I could put the research under @computer and maybe one or two of the calls under @Phone
Thanks for that..