Navigation
User login
Only Next Actions
Hi all,
I’m new with KGTD - but it seem’s to be a very usefull tool. Thanks.
(First: sorry for my english - it’s somewhere between bad and worst)
I have two questions:
1. Is it possible to hide all the “not next actions” in Actions?
When i write down a project, i create a plan of actions - following one after the other. But when i do all the things - i’m interested only in the “next action”. All the things which can be done AFTER this one and only “next action” should be away from my head. So looking in the actions-section, i would like to hide them.
2. The “waiting-for” context should be something like a showstopper - and the next action after a “waiting-for-action” should be hidden as long the “waiting-for-action” lasts. But all i can do is to mark an action as i.e. “wait-” and see the following action as “next action”. But this seem wrong to me - because i have to wait and there is nothing i can do until the delegation comes back to me. If i use i. e. “wait” (without the minus), KGTD reminds me to do the “wait-action” - and this makes also no sense to me.
It would be nice if someone can help me …
Thanks,
Ernst
Only Next Actions - really no answer?
Hello,
is there anything i did wrong?
I feel myself to be a little bit ignored.
Please tell me, why there is no answer.
Thanks,
Ernst
Ernst,
Ernst,
It is possible to view all next actions in the Next Action Summary Section (turn this on in kGTD Settings > Next Action Settings > Include next-action Summary section > true). This is a one shot view of all your NA’s, currently unsorted though I’m looking at efficient ways to sort it quickly.
Waiting for might or might not hold up a project. You’ve already discovered how to set that context to either take or not take next action status via the suffix (“-“). I’d recommend that you address this being a “show stopper” one of two ways:
I’m open to changes in this behavior, but I don’t think that waiting-for items will universally stop projects, so I probably won’t change the behavior of the “-” context suffix on this point. Open to suggestions, as always, however…
Does any of this make sense?
It is possible to view all
It is possible to view all next actions in the Next Action Summary Section (turn this on in kGTD Settings > Next Action Settings > Include next-action Summary section > true).
Where is this “kGTD Settings?” Also, is this feature described in a manual somewhere?
Many thanks!
**G5 2Ghz tower-10.4.3-a billion Ram-dual 20” LCDs**
Free download backgammon
Free download backgammon Super :)
Open the kGTD doc (the one
Open the kGTD doc (the one of your choice) and use either the Sections dropdown menu in the Toolbar and click kGTD Settings or click kGTD Settings in the Utilities Drawer to navigate to the section. If you don’t see the individual configuration settings click the little triangles to open the sections of settings.
The User Guide is not in downloadable format like a .pdf, but is on-line here; (sorry, I don’t know how to make a clickable link, copy and paste this in your browser address bar.)
http://www.kinkless.com/kgtd/guide
David
Monterrey, MX
I have further
I have further question…comment…about this topic.
I am very torn about how to achieve the optimum short list of next actions (in the NA section itself).
I have already contextualised my entire project list. But like others have found, I too think that the resulting NA section becomes utterly overwhelming with non-NA tasks. I can see all my non-NA’s in the Project view…so I’m wondering why I want to see them again lined up in the (ever-growing) NA view?
As far as I can tell, the only way to see NA’s only in the NA view is either to:
1. Set a blank context for items you don’t want to show up in the NA view. Or..
2. Only look at the NA Summary.
No.1 is a problem for my list because it requires me to ‘review’ and manually add contexts constantly, in order to make them show up as the Next Action. A huge amount of manual work - which seems to negate the efficient concept behind the KGTD system a little?
No.2 is a workaround IMO…because it obliterates the larger context category headings, thus making visual referencing of what context your NA belongs to much harder.
For me, the ideal behaviour would be:
1. To be able to contextualise everything AS you create it in the Projects view (one of the joys of KGTD!)
2. But to have a true/false setting that allows one to hide NA’s in waiting in the NA view (option, in case others want them all in there).
This way I would still be able to see the contexts of my NA’s in the NA view. Obviously each context heading would only have ONE NA underneath (or a few if I’ve chosen the multiple NA’s true). This is fine and very logical to me.
Once complete, that NA would be archived and be replaced in the NA view with the NEXT NA (because they are all contextualised and ready to rip!)
I know this has been brought up before….
But would it be possible to consider a setting for this Ethan?
My list is far too complex to view all the actions in the NA section…so I currently use the summary - but MISS the contexts….since I’ve spent painful numbers of hours setting them all up in the Projects view.
Ideally, KGTD ‘manages’ what appears as a NA, thrusting them forth one by one when wanted - without extra effort beyond the initial setting-up of projects (and occasional reviews).
Hope that was all clearer than mud!
And constructive?
I just see a little doubling up of effort required to get to the optimum usage (for me) - and also believe that simplification of the NA’s is the key to actually GTD (no matter how grotesquely complex one’s projects are )
Keep up the excellent work!
Linley
x
Linley, glad to see you
Linley, glad to see you posting again here!
Yes, all very clearly described. I think that you’ve described one of the key issues for me in kGTD which is “volume management”. There are a couple strategies I use to manage the volume of actions that show up in my actions lists.
First, regarding the NA section, I am working on sorting the NA summary section to make it more context friendly. I’ll look for other solutions to help clarify that section and make it “easily actionable”. All 0.8x features.
The other issue is what happens when you have all your actions in your context lists. If you build out a lot of complex projects fully to the actions section then it’s going to be huge and at some point the “intuitive scan and act” method described in GTD may not be as effective.
I personally have about 1-10 actions under each project. If you have more than this there are currently only a couple options:
1. Add contexts to all and let them all build to actions (good if you *want* them all in Actions view and if you feel you can cope with the volume intuitively).
2. Add contexts only to the top half dozen or so and, during your project reviews during the day, add the contexts to the inactive tasks to “wake them up” as necessary.
I’m considering other options, like a “use only the first 10 tasks from any given project” setting, but I’m not sure how it would impact sync time yet.
Sorting next actions by context
Ethan—
I just want to chime in here that I would really love to have a way, either in iCal or in kGTD, or even better in both, to sort my NA list by context. With fifty or so next actions, I’m finding I really need this contextual information. I have tried to figure out ways of doing this in Omni Outliner, and have done some searches here on the forum, so I’m sorry if I’ve missed something.
Play backgammon
Play backgammon Super :)
Sorry admin,i tested your blog:)
zxxsdjisif4244243fbsd454vnmzxc125
Backgammon board setup
Backgammon board setup Super :)
Did your do a successfull
… I support Linley’s suggestion of having a switch to turn on display of “other” actions in the Actions section.
John
Sorry admin,i tested your blog:)
zxxsdjisif4244243fbsd454vnmzxc125
Ethan wrote: I’m open to
Ethan wrote: I’m open to changes in this behavior, but I don’t think that waiting-for items will universally stop projects,…
I was of the opinion that any time a waiting for action was next up (ie a next action) then it should not be colored pink, but the action afterwards should not be set as next action.
But when I really started to think about this and realize that, if the Waiting For item is not a show-stopper and you can do another step in the project, then the order (of the project steps) is wrong and the “real”, do-able next action should be moved into its rightful place. If you are worried about the stuff you are waiting for being forgotten, you can add a due/start date (don’t know which would be better - advice requested here) with a note to chase it up.
Anyone see any holes in this thinking?
Cheers
Karen
This is generally my line of
This is generally my line of thinking, though I know that I tend to advocate list re-ordering more than most folks seem keen to do it. I’d encourage others to post thoughts here…
I’m a heavy sub-projecter.
I’m a heavy sub-projecter. I used to use multiple next-actions, but I see now that it’s cleaner to make sub-projects, even if they have only one action in them. These sub-projects represent the “action threads” within a project.
If I set something as waiting-for, it’s because the rest of the things in that thread depend on it. Thus, in my system, they shouldn’t be next actions until the delegated task is complete. Adding a “hound so-and-so” task below each waiting-for isn’t really a solution, because I don’t always need to. If I tell Frank to assemble a report on our shipping options and we agree he can do it in three days, I don’t want to be told to hound him before it’s due.
My vote is in favor of an option to make waiting-fors block setting NA status. Also, it would be nice to be able to set a due date for waiting-fors and have them come to my attention on that date, so I can follow up on the task.
Post new comment