Productivity system comparison

[Michael Grant]

I started sketching some preliminary notes for a blog post, or more
likely a series of blog posts, comparing the strengths, weaknesses,
and potential complementarities of some of the leading personal
productivity systems -- Covey/First Things First, Allen/GTD,
Forster/Do It Tomorrow, plus Project Management Institute–style
project management with Gantt charts, work breakdown structures, etc.

Below are some of my initial thoughts on comparing the various systems
-- I hope they're not too elliptical.

One thing that I feel is missing from any of them is a way to break
the long-term lifetime or ten-year visions down through shorter-term
goals and objectives and link them to day-to-day actions. I use a
system of leapyear day, annual, quarterly, monthly, and weekly
reviews, but it can be unwieldy and I'm not really satisfied with it.
Another element that could be useful is a habit development structure.

I'd appreciate any feedback or observations you may have.

Michael

FTF
=====
Strengths
Alignment with values, principles
Big-picture thinking

Weaknesses
No execution support
Rigidity
Task scheduling is brittle, demotivating if disrupted

PMI
=====
Strengths
Managing complex projects
Timetables and budgets

Weaknesses
Not designed for personal productivity
Overkill for small and less complex projects
No larger framework ("why?") for projects

GTD
=====
Strengths
Defining actionable tasks
"Mind like water" -- keeping track of all commitments
Efficiency of contexts
Tips and tricks

Weaknesses
Lack of day-to-day accountability
Creates temptation to tinker with system rather than actually
"getting things done"
Weak support for high-level/top-down/long-term planning

DIT
=====
Strengths
Little-and-often and Current Initiative concepts
Handling of incoming work
Power of closed list concept
Day-to-day accountability
Develops skill of estimating personal work capacity

Weaknesses
Encourages "urgency" mentality -- too easy to lose sight of goals
beyond even a one- or two-day horizon
Breaks down if estimation of daily capacity is off

--
I never metadata I didn't like.

[Dennis C. During]

We would all benefit from this effort. I have inserted comments below.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Grant
>
> I started sketching some preliminary notes for a blog post,
> or more likely a series of blog posts, comparing the
> strengths, weaknesses, and potential complementarities of
> some of the leading personal productivity systems --
> Covey/First Things First, Allen/GTD, Forster/Do It Tomorrow,

> plus Project Management Institute-style project management

> with Gantt charts, work breakdown structures, etc.

> Below are some of my initial thoughts on comparing the various systems
> -- I hope they're not too elliptical.

They are elliptical, but better to get feedback at an early stage if you
can.

> One thing that I feel is missing from any of them is a way to
> break the long-term lifetime or ten-year visions down through
> shorter-term goals and objectives and link them to day-to-day
> actions. I use a system of leapyear day, annual, quarterly,
> monthly, and weekly reviews, but it can be unwieldy and I'm
> not really satisfied with it.

I am skeptical that a set of values that is rich enough to encompass a full,
healthy life can be reduced to a set of propositions that can enable you to
have a fully conscious, explicit hierarchy of propositions that eventually
get you to propositions that characterize projects and actions. It reminds
me of the problem of incorporating common-sense knowledge into artificial
intelligence. It also makes me wonder whether there is the equivalent of
Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem for ethical/intentional/action systems.

Of course, the logical impossibility of the complete, ultimate project
doesn’t mean that something useful can’t be done, just that your level of
aspiration should be appropriate and that you should check any mechanistic
notions at the door before really digging into the values/goals project.
Some folks on other GTD lists have said nice things about Your Best Year
Yet, by Jinny S. Ditzler.

> Another element that could be useful is a habit development structure.

I would argue that this is *essential* to actually get to the point of
actually ‘getting things done’ as opposed to tweaking the system. It might
happen as a result of simply repeatedly using the system with success. The
repeated, reinforced practices thereby become unconscious, habitual ones.

> I'd appreciate any feedback or observations you may have.

Don’t say it if you don’t mean it !!!

> FTF
> =====
> Strengths
> Alignment with values, principles
> Big-picture thinking

> Weaknesses
> No execution support
> Rigidity
> Task scheduling is brittle, demotivating if disrupted

I think this system is intended for folks who have a strong set of somewhat
abstract values, to help them bring those to their daily lives. The
rigidity is probably considered a virtue if you are trying to force strongly
held values into action.

> PMI
> =====
> Strengths
> Managing complex projects
> Timetables and budgets
>
> Weaknesses
> Not designed for personal productivity
> Overkill for small and less complex projects
> No larger framework ("why?") for projects

I find this incredibly easy to dismiss for personal productivity.

> GTD
> =====
> Strengths
> Defining actionable tasks
> "Mind like water" -- keeping track of all commitments
> Efficiency of contexts
> Tips and tricks

> Weaknesses
> Lack of day-to-day accountability
> Creates temptation to tinker with system rather than actually
"getting things done"
> Weak support for high-level/top-down/long-term planning

This system is great for highly motivated folks as well, but way more
executive-/business-oriented than FTF.

> DIT
> =====
> Strengths
> Little-and-often and Current Initiative concepts
> Handling of incoming work
> Power of closed list concept
> Day-to-day accountability
> Develops skill of estimating personal work capacity
>
> Weaknesses
> Encourages "urgency" mentality -- too easy to lose sight of goals
beyond even a one- or two-day horizon
> Breaks down if estimation of daily capacity is off

The most realistic, easy-to-implement of the systems for personal
productivity that I have seen. It should meet the needs of the less
intensely motivated better than either GTD or FTF. It can even work for
some types of procrastinators.

You might also want to look at some of the oldies, but goodies: Alan
Lakein’s ‘How to Get Control of Your Time and Your Life’, for example. He
is an early champion of the ABC (and A1, A2, etc.) priority system. He has
a lightweight version of life-goals planning that is probably good enough to
get someone moving, which may be all that should be expected from goals
exercises. I’ve gotten less out of McKay, McKenzie, and Winston. I have
not gotten enough enthusiasm for any of the dozens of other personal
productivity gurus. Charles R. Hobbs and Byrum Smith are, in my mind, part
of the Deseret School of productivity management, with Covey, even though
Hobbs had disputes with the other two.

Dennis C. During

"To make laws that man cannot, and will not obey, serves to bring all law
into contempt." - Elizabeth Cady Stanton, American women's rights advocate
(1815-1902)
"What is not surrounded by uncertainty cannot be the truth." - Richard P.
Feynman, Nobelist, physicist, raconteur, bongo player, safe-cracker

http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/SelfExperimenters/

[triciawriting]

On May 27, 1:57 pm, "Dennis C. During" <dcdur...@gmail.com> wrote:

>This system [GTD] is great for highly motivated folks as well, but way more executive-/business-oriented than FTF.<

Interesting. I find it just the opposite. I'm neither an executive nor
particularly business-oriented*, but I MUCH prefer GTD.

(*I'm a writer and, yes, I should be more business-oriented than I am,
but at the moment I can't say that I am.)

Tricia

[Michael Grant]

Would you mind expanding a little on what it is you prefer about GTD over FTF?
Thanks,
Michael

[Mike De Bruyn]

Hi Michael,

 

On 5/27/07, Michael Grant <mgr...@gmail.com> wrote:

One thing that I feel is missing from any of them is a way to break
the long-term lifetime or ten-year visions down through shorter-term
goals and objectives and link them to day-to-day actions. I use a
system of leapyear day, annual, quarterly, monthly, and weekly
reviews, but it can be unwieldy and I'm not really satisfied with it.
Another element that could be useful is a habit development structure.

 

Just to echo what Dennis said on this point ...

 

I used the Lakein system when I found it many years ago.  It is pretty easy to break down long term goals, into shorter milestones and, ultimately, actions.  Maybe that would be one thing to discourage some ... it is just so simple.  No electronics required ;-)

 

So my point is, I guess, is that why should we be distressed that others don't cover the goals breakdown.  I mean, if Lakein did it, why should we demand that everyone else do it as well?

 

So far as other systems are concerned, once you have your life goals broken down to Projects and Actions, GTD and other systems can pick it up from there.

 

FWIW, my system of breakdown has always been:

 

- Life Goals

- 20 Year Goals

- 10 Year Goals

- 5 Year Goals

- 2 Year Goals

- 1 Year Goals

- Six month Goals/Milestones

- Three month Goals/Milestones

- 1 month Goals/milestones/projects

- 1 week milestones/projects

 

Obviously, what you call a goal or milestone or project may be subject for a fascinating debate, but it really does not matter much.  In the end, there are only actions and results.

--
Cheers,
Mike