How do you distinguish between sequential and parallel tasks?
Hi,
I just want to post an open question to see what other people do for this situation, if they do anything at all.
It has to do with projects that have a mix of sequential and parallel tasks. The question is, how do you identify them to keep them straight. Parallel tasks can be in any order, and sequential tasks will be ordered, well, sequentially. But if you have a mix, or worse still, more than one set of sequential tasks, what do you do to keep them straight.
My concern is quickly identifying the relationships during review, or when one of the sequential tasks is completed, I'd like to find the next one quickly. The simplest thing that comes to mind is to put some sort of code in the task title.
I've just moved all my personal tasks into Nirvana from Toodledo, but my home life is relatively simple. I'm starting to tackle my work tasks now, which are anything but. Before I get too far into it, I thought I would see if anyone has an opinion on this.
(Not to derail the subject before it even starts, but subprojects would really help me here, so a +1 from me on that.)
Roddy
Comments are currently closed for this discussion. You can start a new one.
2 Posted by Proximo on 19 Apr, 2010 09:14 PM
This has been discussed on the forums and there are different schools of thought.
My opinion is that having the ability to create sub-task with in a project would benefit users who require them. I understand the need for these and I do run into an occasional project that would benefit from sub-task.
As long as Nirvana remains very simple to use and does not try to add every feature imaginable in the world, I am all for this.
How to handle it today is a different issue. I don't run into this much and currently don't have anything that would require it. Would be interested in hearing from people who do.
3 Posted by roddyt on 22 Apr, 2010 12:44 PM
I only mentioned subprojects as a potential solution, but my question isn't related to them at all.
Let me rephrase the question. I'll use a very simple example. Let's say I have a project with five tasks:
1) create code script
2) execute code script
3) read project-related memo
4) act on memo
5) meet with Joe and Mary
1 & 2 are sequential as are 3 & 4, but neither, as well as 5, depend on each other. That means that 1, 3, and 5 are next actions in that I am able to do any of the three to move the project forward.
Taking the example further, let's say I've created the project in Nirvana, but I'm not ready to work on it, so I make it inactive. A month later I come back to it and have to decide what I can do. Also, imagine that the task relationships aren't as obvious as I wrote them above, and maybe there are more of them. Time has taken its toll and I have to think about each task a little more than I would have a month ago.
Now the relationships aren't quite so obvious, I have to think about each to decide if I can do it or not. So I figure out that I can do 1, 3, or 5. From those, I work on and complete 3, but again, it takes more than a quick scan to identify 4, and not 2 as a possible next action.
That was a long-winded example just to ask a simple question. Which is, if anyone has a scenario similar to this, do you do something special to identify the relationships between tasks?
This isn't unusual in my projects. I'm toying with the idea of starting the task name with some kind of identifying code so when I'm scanning my projects, I can at least quickly identify dependencies. I'm just curious as to whether anyone else does anything special.
Roddy
4 Posted by Proximo on 22 Apr, 2010 03:06 PM
@roddyt,
That was an excellent example and a great question. Now that I think about it, I do have scenarios like that but my Projects are probably not as complicated as what you deal with.
I can think of a particular project where I had several task just as you described and I simply knew which ones I can work on in Parallel and which ones had sequential relationships to the others. The only reason It worked for me was due to the small size of the project.
I think this is a great discussion and would love to hear feedback from others.
You just made me realize that this would be a great benefit to me as well. Never really thought about it at that level.
Having the ability to create sub-task would be a good way to manage this and something we need to push for implementation. I don't have any tips or ideas of my own at this time because I simply have not tried to manage it as you described, although I realize that It would be a major benefit in doing so.
Using the check list feature inside notes is not a good solution because you can't add dates, context and extra notes as needed. For those who do not know you can do this. Adding a check list to a note is done by simply typing a "Hyphen" and then the text. ( I want to thank wm-woman for pointing out that it's a hyphen.)
- text
- text
This creates a check list in your notes but would not be a solution for what you are wanting.
Using your example, I can envision sub-task like this.
1. Code creation
Write code
Execute code
2. Project Memo
Review memo
Respond/Act on memo
3. Meet with Joe and Mary
Now you can clearly see what is sequential and what can be done in Parallel.
Looking forward to some ideas on this. I believe sub-task have already been suggested to the Nirvana crew.
5 Posted by DC Clarke on 22 Apr, 2010 04:12 PM
Wouldn't subprojects (as opposed to subtasks) be more in line with GTD methodology? I think of tasks as ground/runway level actions that have to be done. When you have more than one action to achieve an outcome, you now have a new project, even if it is a subproject of a larger one.
Using the example above, item 1 Code Creation is now a project with two tasks: Write Code and Execute code. Subprojects can help separate those sequential tasks from the parallel ones. When two tasks in a project become sequential among other parallel tasks in the same project, the sequential tasks can be combined into a subproject.
In my system, I define cases that I work on as projects. Some cases are short affairs that are resolved in a couple of weeks, others take years. All of the cases have subprojects within them that require numerous tasks, some sequential and others parallel. For example, within the case of Jane vs. Doe, I might have to:
Draft a complaint
File the complaint
Submit copy of the complaint to opposing counsel and client with cover letters
Outline a discovery plan
The Complaint and Discovery are Subprojects to the "Jane v. Doe" case (or project) itself. So one subproject would be "Draft the Complaint" and a second subproject would be "Outline Discovery Plain" Within the Draft the Complaint subproject, I may have many tasks:
Research legal issues on, Breach of Contract and Tort
Draft the Complaint
Review the Complaint
Submit copy to client for review
Make final revisions
etc
In this example, the "Jane v. Doe" project will probably last many months, but the subprojects will come and go. So I need a placeholder or bookmark for the master project, hence the project named after the case, and I need placeholders for the various subprojects that come and going during the life of the case.
I don't really see where a "subtask" would come into play.
Maybe subproject vs. subtasks is merely a conceptual difference, but I think its more. A project and a task (ie "action") are two very distinct things. I would argue that in GTD methodology, there really is no such thing as a subtask--only tasks (actions) and projects (and subprojects).
"So, in conclusion, Your Honor, I move that SubProjects be implemented posthaste!" :)
6 Posted by Proximo on 22 Apr, 2010 05:59 PM
@DC Clarke,
I see your point and it sounds great. I was looking at the Parent task more like a sub-project because I was used to Toodledo. I really don't care how it's named but you do have a very valid point. Based on GTD, the more proper way to do it is a sub-project.
Thanks
7 Posted by Hopsakee on 25 Sep, 2010 06:29 AM
In another post I told I needed subtasks (Like Proximo, thanks to Toodledo :) ). But DC Clarke changed my mind. I would like/need subprojects.
8 Posted by R K Elleson on 26 Sep, 2010 04:17 PM
I have been trying to use GTD for over 3 years now and it has been a genuinely useful technique for taking control of my professional (project manager) and personal life. However, I have never found a satisfactory way of dealing with the situation of several discrete 'physical next actions' which are independent of each other but the overall project can't progress without them all being complete.
I have never seen this addressed before and, despite your helpful suggestions above, I'm afraid that I still only see tactical workarounds and fudges. It is a regular challenge in my use of GTD and I usually have to compromise significantly.
Does anyone know if David Allen has addressed this simple problem?
9 Posted by hallucngn on 27 Sep, 2010 04:02 PM
I've always thought about projects as grouped actions on a list. Well, they are grouped next actions, however David Allen refers to projects in his book as a list of outcomes with a single next action. For example page 212 Most of the outcomes you have identified for your "Projects" list will not need any kind of front-end planning, other than the sort you do in your head, quickly and naturally, to come up with a next action on them. I'm not sure if I should micromanage my projects by setting 3-8 or more next actions or only the next action starters.
10 Posted by fantasai on 22 Nov, 2010 07:38 PM
Being able to set dependencies would solve this problem. Say this task depends on that other task being done. Then as long as a task is blocked by its dependency, it wouldn't show up on the Today page--it's in a Waiting phase. This is probably the main thing that kept me from adopting Nirvana: the Today page is completely useless because it gets filled with tasks that I can't do today. :/
(I'd been using Todoist to track my tasks because I can sort-of work around it by creating subtasks and ordering the sub-items by priority/sequence. But there's no Today page in Todoist to summarize what I should be working on today...)
11 Posted by Proximo on 22 Nov, 2010 10:57 PM
I purposely only consider one task in each Project as a Next Action in order to keep my sanity.
Some of my projects do have task that can be done in parallel but I recently just been focused on the very Next Action before working on another task. Even when technically two task can be done in parallel, I just choose one and get it finished and then tackle the next.
I have plenty of Projects and Single Task to keep me busy and moving so it's been a way for me to avoid the management required. If and when Nirvana supports this feature, I will probably take advantage of it, but for now I keep it simple and just knock things out one at a time. :-)
12 Posted by RK Elleson on 23 Nov, 2010 09:55 AM
-----Original Message-----
From: Proximo [mailto:***@tenderapp.com]
Sent: 22 November 2010 22:57
To: RK Elleson
Subject: Re: How do you distinguish between sequential and parallel tasks? [Questions]
David McLaughlin closed this discussion on 11 Feb, 2011 08:14 AM.