Next Next-Action

[context]

@stopped_clock I generally use Mark Jantzen's approach:

"[...] limit next actions to only the literal next physical, visible action."

[JoshuaRamirez]

So yea... To echo the previous comments, I'm disinclined to plan out multiple, ordered steps for a project. I seem to recall that David's first book points out that your brain can do quite a good job at doing that when the time comes. What it's not so good at is reminding you when you need to do it. So that's what the lists/reminders are for.

I think a few major points should be brought to light to bring a little simplicity into your system. First, the system should always have a "least-resistance" main flow. This is another way of saying that it shouldn't get in the way of offloading your stuff into itself. Because of the vast amount of electronic, supposed, gtd-systems out there, many people tend to think that it's about the manifestation of the system that shouldn't get in your way. While this is true, many times it's ignored that the conceptual system that you attempt to implement is entirely more important than the implementation itself. Trying to find the most efficient user experience for a flawed workflow isn't going to solve the root issue.

So, consider letting go of the need to control the order of hypothetical next actions. Instead, put your project on a simple list, and write a single next action to move that project forward. When you've finished that action, you'll be in a very good place to decide what the very next physical action should be to again move the project forward. Doesn't that sound like a more organic and natural way of maintaining your small to medium projects?

After all, if you're always going to enter the order of hypothetical next-actions into your system, you'll always have the nagging sensation that they'll need to be constantly maintained if the nature of the project changes. If the project dictates that certain actions no longer apply, some actions get re-ordered, and new ones appear, you'll need to go in and maintain that reflection of the project. But ask yourself, "What am I gaining out of doing this? How does this reduce the amount of psychic chaos in my head?" I'd wager that maintaining hypothetical next actions on most of your projects gives you no net positive effect.

[Oogiem]

I'm very different in my project planning. If I've taken the time to think out a project I put into my system every next action whether independent or dependent even if I won't get to that action for several months or years.

The reason is once I've thought of something I hate to lose that effort and it's easier to put it into my system than develop a different project support system for most of my projects. It's easy to hide all but the true next action and I don't mind going back and re-visiting my plan when I work on that project at all.

I have much more chaos inside my head if I try to ignore those thoughts about "oh yeah and when X is done I really need to do Y next" so I just put them all in and sort them out at review if the project has changed.

Plus in my world very few projects actually change once I've thought of them, even ones that take 10-12 years to complete.

[JoshuaRamirez]

I'm very different in my project planning. If I've taken the time to think out a project I put into my system every next action whether independent or dependent even if I won't get to that action for several months or years.

Right on... Do you normally do that with the larger projects?

[Oogiem]

Do you normally do that with the larger projects?

Generally. If I've thought of it and it's an action it goes into my Omnifocus system.

[rdgeorge]

To follow up on what Oogie said, Omnifocus is exceptionally well-suited for loading in lots of action steps for a given project, with the context for each action step assigned on the fly (in the In Box function). Projects can be sequential (a given step has to be done before the next step is done) or not. If this general subject is of high importance to you, perhaps you could consider ways to make Omnifocus available to you wherever you go, including a Windows work environment.

Everyone's mileage may vary, but for me, having Omnifocus available wherever I go, with NA's presented by Context, or by Project, is a complete game-changer.

Evernote is "icing on the cake..."

rdgeorge

[Oogiem]

A note, I tend to use Omnifocus as my place to hold my project support materials. Most of my projects do not have lots of external paper stuff and I've tried but just flat can't wrap my brain around mind maps or similar graphic ways to do project management. So for me as I plan a project I put my notes and stuff into Omnifocus.

[rsailer]

I think it is ok to set out more actions then one in a project plan or in omnifocus.

However, I think it is key that you are able to "let go" of a next action that comes up if it doesn't quite make sense anymore. Something you have learned along the way may make a next-next action not really apply or be attractive. In the weekly review, you need to be fairly ruthless on evaluating the next step that comes up.

Randy