I'm working on increasing my effectiveness in reviewing my projects: which ones bring the most current value, which should be moved to someday/maybe, etc. To that end:
I have a notes field attached to my projects. In that, for *some* projects, I've started to add some meta data at the top of the note. This, so far, includes "goal" and "value":
- Goal: concise reason, value, or output that completing the project will produce. This helps understand both the purpose of the project during review, and in determining relative merit of actions and thus which to act on first.
- Value: What outputs completing the project (or occasionally, single action) supports or enhances. For example, "Exercise for one hour, breaking a sweat." may "Provide energy that is useful for all endeavors"; or "Outsource web site maintenance." can "Improve web presence quality, increase sales, and free up my time for more strategic work." with a value of "Grow my company".
In many cases, the goal is explicit in a properly-phrased project name. In some cases, "goal" and "value" may be one and the same (whether stated as the project name, or as metadata included in a project); in other cases, there may be a project title, separate goal, and separate value.
Ideally, I would use an entry in one of my levels of horizon as a goal.
I'm *not* aiming at including such meta data in all projects by any means, but the idea is compelling for including with some projects, so as to help force me to decide on their relative merit during review, and whether to move to someday/maybe. I admit that I even monkeyed with the idea of a "1", "2", "3" "value" rating. I'm not trying to be a troll by stating that -- I just considered it an honest sharing point. Thoughts?