I used the GTD approach for many years, but one of the main problems was that I couldn't always maintain the weekly review and consistent...
I used the GTD approach for many years, but one of the main problems was that I couldn't always maintain the weekly review and consistently stick with the system. And in GTD world, that's very bad. At first I thought this mainly had to do with my own lack of discipline, but now I think it's mainly because GTD just doesn't work for every kind of task, project, or occupation. The main problem, I think, is that GTD assumes: 1. that you can always cut up a task into smaller actions 2. that you can do a next action in one sitting, and 3. that having 'stuff' in your head is bad. I've found that for some things this applies, and in those cases one might use GTD. But for many other things these three items don't apply, and then GTD can actually be counter-productive. For example, a creative task might not be doable in one sitting, but it might also not be concrete enough to split up into smaller next actions. Furthermore, for a lot of creative stuff it might actually be very useful to have it 'hanging around' in your head as 'stuff'. Basically, I found that there's an inverse correlation between the effectiveness of GTD and the amount of creativity needed for a task. I've settled on Mark Forster's AutoFocus (Final Version) (as mentioned elsewhere here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8629066 ) for most of my current stuff, as it's more organic and more fitting to what I do now. If I were to have more managerial-type work I might switch back to GTD though. (and of course there are many principles from GTD that are useful to me even if I don't use the full system)
Posted by mercer on Nov 19, 2014, 3:37 PM
Tags
Related issues
- I mean that's the problem though.
- I've always believed the opposite: get conditionals deep in your code so that the higher level control flow is regular.
- The biggest problem with AI isn't being able to do things.
- I am a 3D printing maker type nerd (I make my own tools for other creative tasks, rather than as their own outcomes) and I saw an incredi...
- Of course not, those are clearly scams.
- Claude makes more detailed plans that seem better if you just skim them, but when analyzed, has a lot of errors, usually.
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.9,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (EdTech)
I mean that's the problem though.
I've always believed the opposite: get conditionals deep in your code so that the higher level control flow is regular.
The biggest problem with AI isn't being able to do things.
I am a 3D printing maker type nerd (I make my own tools for other creative tasks, rather than as their own outcomes) and I saw an incredi...
Of course not, those are clearly scams.
Claude makes more detailed plans that seem better if you just skim them, but when analyzed, has a lot of errors, usually.
Effectively everyone is building the same tools with zero quantitative benchmarks or evidence behind the why / ideas … this entire s...
> creating and operating a small company in Germany is a nightmare To be fair, I think the problem operating in Germany is its federated...
I used the GTD approach for many years, but one of the main problems was that I couldn't always maintain the weekly review and consistent...
I used the GTD approach for many years, but one of the main problems was that I couldn't always maintain the weekly review and consistently stick with the system. And in GTD world, that's very bad. At first I thought this mainly had to do with my own lack of discipline, but now I think it's mainly because GTD just doesn't work for every kind of task, project, or occupation. The main problem, I think, is that GTD assumes: 1. that you can always cut up a task into smaller actions 2. that you can do a next action in one sitting, and 3. that having 'stuff' in your head is bad. I've found that for some things this applies, and in those cases one might use GTD. But for many other things these three items don't apply, and then GTD can actually be counter-productive. For example, a creative task might not be doable in one sitting, but it might also not be concrete enough to split up into smaller next actions. Furthermore, for a lot of creative stuff it might actually be very useful to have it 'hanging around' in your head as 'stuff'. Basically, I found that there's an inverse correlation between the effectiveness of GTD and the amount of creativity needed for a task. I've settled on Mark Forster's AutoFocus (Final Version) (as mentioned elsewhere here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8629066 ) for most of my current stuff, as it's more organic and more fitting to what I do now. If I were to have more managerial-type work I might switch back to GTD though. (and of course there are many principles from GTD that are useful to me even if I don't use the full system)
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.