Database to my alpha system - is it needed?

[unstuffed]

I use a slight variant on the purely alpha system.

Firstly, I have one of those plastic briefcase-file things, which has a click-latch to close it, a handle to carry it, and 12 separate sections. In this I put all my financials, by month. All of them. At the end of the financial year, I've got it all ready to pack up and see the accountant, then archive with my tax statement.

Why do I do this? Well, I found that if I needed any of my papers, say a phone bill, I probably also needed the corresponding bank statement. And if I didn't, I knew that I needed February's phone bill, so I could easily find that by looking in the February section of my financials file. The file thingie just sits in front of my file drawer.

Then for everything else, I've got an alpha system in broad categories (which have sticky-up labels), then components of each broad category. So for example my Car category contains various folders such as Insurance, license, maintenance and repair, and so on. I don't bother to arrange these alphabetically because there's only about half a dozen sub-categories for anything. So I look in the centre for the main category label, then leaf through individual folders for the exact item. Easy.

Oh, and I don't use hanging files because they're noisy and inconvenient, and so my file drawers just have folders kept straight using a bookend.

My suggestion: don't set up a database. You probably won't maintain it, at least not as scrupulously as you need to, and once it's out of synch it's basically useless.

And think carefully about your nomenclature - think about why you'll need to retrieve something, which will give you a clue as to how to name things. Don't feel you 'should' name them something just because that's the header at the top of the page, and don't use something that someone else uses without thinking hard about whether it would work for you. Work it out for yourself, because that's the only way you'll be able to find things.

[Frank T]

Hi All

When I first started GTD, I also had a simple 26 folders with A-Z labels. When I needed to file something in that alpha file, I simply dropped it into the respective alphabet folder. I also had a simple database where I typed in the name of that item, and any notes, including expiry date of that item. It was simpler than pulling out a manilla folder and punching in a typeset label to stick on that folder (what do you do with that manilla folder and label when the item expires?). If your computer is on all the time next to your filing system, it is as simple or simpler than typing in the labeler.

My database was a modified Access book catalogue database (comes with the program as a sample). The advantage is that you can periodically print off a list of everything in your General Reference filing system, note which ones are expired, and purge them.

I attach it for your evaluation. The sample data can be deleted.

Regards

Frank

Oh, a problem with attaching the zip file even though it's only 147kb. I'll email to you as private message.

[cornell]

Just to chime in here:

o I've found the simple A-Z works great for most people. No index, no software, etc. This makes filing and retrieving fast.
o I think that indexing file content generally isn't worth it - it slows down creating and retrieving, and usually doesn't warrant the extra effort. YMMV, though...
o In addition to the home-grown computer indexing methods mentioned above, there are dedicated programs to do indexing, e.g., http://thepapertiger.com/

In general, I'd recommend the less is more approach, which underlies much of Allen's thinking...

[Barry]

I also agree that maintaining an index is too much overhead. Just use a basic file system as described in the book.

The file name should be the thing you will think of when looking for the item. If you think of it as "phone bill" then file it like that. If you think of it as "Sprint Bill" then use that. If you want to find it under "Utilities - Phone" or "Bills - Phone" then use one of those. It doesn't really matter. Just be consistent. Once you set up the system the first time, you will find it much easier to maintain because you will have settled on your naming conventions. Worst case is you have to look in 2 or 3 different alpahbetical locations before you find something and even that will only take a minute. Probably no longer than the time it takes to first refer to the index and then find the correct file. You don't have to be perfect the first time you name something, either. The important thing is to get everything filed. If you later decide to change some file labels, then do so at that time. No big deal. The thing you want to avoid is having half your car stuff under "car" and half under "automobile" and the final half under "Ford" and a few other things under "maintenance" and one receipt under "oil changes". Be consistent. When this happens, pull it all together, decide on a single naming convention that makes sense and reorganize it all into one or more folders that are consistent.

If you find that using a label maker takes too much time when creating a new file, you may decide that handwriting labels is a good alternative for you.

When using hanging folders, don't be reluctant to add new ones as needed to handle the bulk. DA advises using one hanging folder for each file. That may not be absolutely necessary, but don't restrict yourself to one per letter of the alphabet. If "M" is 4 times thicker than "Z", it is fine to have 4 or more hanging folders for "M".

[Campion]

HI All,

Thanks so much for all your advices and input.

At the moment, I agree with most that maintaining a database takes more time/effort than its benefits, especially when the volume of my system is not so big.

Frank has sent me a good Access database he derived himself. If later it really grows into a big volume, or some big project needs detail tracking, I'd consider separate that from my main general reference, and use his derived database to track those specifics.

In the mean time, I think staying simple would be good for a general filing.

Thanks again for the insights on nomenclature. It's really helpful and vital, as I've been struggling with that for a while. It's hard to stay consistent on everything in the beginning. Still appreciate more sharing & advices - thanks in advance.