Nirvana 2: Project View
When I am looking at a Project with all my task showing under it. I don't like the way the task are separated into groups. The reason I don't like this is because I loose the sequential nature of my task order.
Here is an example.
The Next Action of a Project happens to be something I assign to someone else. Now this task is in the Waiting list and it also shows in my Project view. The problem is that the waiting for task shows up in a new section called Waiting for. This means that the task that followed it is now on top and shows up in my Next list as the Projects Next action, when this is not true.
I can't start the next task until the Waiting for task is completed. I would like for the Waiting for task to remain in the correct order on my list so that I don't loose track of what is truly a next action for that project.
If the task stayed in the correct order, I can clearly see that the project is being held up by someone else and I can call or email that person to take action, complete the task and the project can move forward.
This happens to task that I scheduled as well.
Hope that makes sense.
Showing the most recent page of comments. View the first page
32 Posted by freecloud.may on 19 Apr, 2011 05:58 AM
Give us the ability to mark tasks in the project as "next" as well as " focus" and it would solve all issues.
First of all we would get the real "Next" list because currently the "Next" list actually all actions list and sequential view is useless for me because most projects have more than 1 next action. Also those next actions are in different contexts so if I'm going to see only 1 next action then I'm going to miss the oportunity do others whem I'm in certain contexts.
Then if we could mark waiting for task as "next" it would solve the issue of this thread for people who use sequential view.
I think it's really simple and elegant solution which would make everything work correctly and it makes perfect sense.
What do you think?
33 Posted by freecloud.may on 19 Apr, 2011 06:47 AM
There is also even an easier solution which would work really well too.
Rename "Next" to "All Actions" and also rename "Focus" to "Next Actions". and that would actually solve all issues with parallel and sequential actions in projects and waiting for.
Also for those users that still want to use "focus" list - just add a "focus" tag to actions.
34 Posted by Proximo on 19 Apr, 2011 06:54 PM
@may
I feel that you are suggesting for Nirvana to destroy their great UI. :-(
Nirvana simply needs to address some of the issues and we will be golden. Don't break the great UI everyone has come to love because it's just a work around instead of a real solution.
:-)
35 Posted by freecloud.may on 19 Apr, 2011 07:06 PM
Yeah I agree, it's not the best solution, I just provided an example of how easy it could be to fix the issue :)
36 Posted by Proximo on 19 Apr, 2011 08:06 PM
@may
I understand. Great suggestions for sure, but I really want Nirvana to add the functionality while keeping the UI the way it is. :-)
37 Posted by freecloud.may on 19 Apr, 2011 08:25 PM
I agree, I like the focus list and don't really want to loose it even though it might be not an essential part of a gtd workflow.
With an electronic system it makes a lot of sense because it's very easy to star and unstar actions unlike in paper system where you have to rewrite things over and over.
38 Posted by Proximo on 19 Apr, 2011 08:31 PM
I love the Focus list.
It's great when you have a "Waiting for" task that someone else must do but you want to get a follow up on the progress. You add the star during your weekly review, it shows up in the focus list to get your attention. You get the update, you can edit the note field to record what was said and click the star again to make the task disappear and ready for the next review.
There is a trap with the Focus list if people are not careful. Don't add too many things in the Focus list and leave them there for weeks. This nags you about task that no longer are the best choices according to your Time, Energy and Context but you keep them there and procrastinate any action on them.
Balance is key.
39 Posted by freecloud.may on 20 Apr, 2011 09:25 PM
Actually there is the same issue with scheduled tasks aswell as waiting for, ie scheduled task is not going to appear in next actions which is correct, but you will see other actions from the project in next actions which aren't real next actions until scheduled action gets done.
Let me share a workaround that I find to be the most close to proper GTD implementation for this waiting for issue as well as the whole "Next" list not having real next actions.
After trying lots of different workarounds/hacks I've found that it's best to move actions in a project that are not real next actions to "Waiting" list and use the term "other action" as contact. This approach does make the most sense in terms of GTD because those actions do actually wait for other actions (or in other words you wait until you complete other actions). That way you will see only real next actions in the "Next" list.
Now it's obviously just a workaround and not the best solution because it makes things a little more complicated that they should be. Also you will get a lot of actions in "Waiting" list which is not how it is supposed to be. However it is very easy to differentiate between real Waiting for actions and actions that are simply not next actions yet. When you go to "Waiting" list you can filter by contact and if that's still not good enough for you you can add "waiting" context to all real Waiting for actions ( by real I mean actions that you wait to get done by others instead of yourself).
Now it is just a workaround that I find to work best at the moment. It is not a proper solution.
Other workarounds that I've tried:
As I've mentioned in other thread:
The real solution is to simply let next actions stay in their project lists and not move them to the "next" view unless the user chooses it. Then your next actions list becomes a proper next actions list.
And you will have some next actions that just sit in their projects lists so you would have to check you projects as in a proper GTD system. We shouldn't have to move them to "later" list or to waititng for or to someday, they should really just not go anywhere until user chooses to.
40 Posted by freecloud.may on 20 Apr, 2011 11:13 PM
Also I would like to add that the "Next" list issue is the biggest problem at the moment in my opinion, even though there are workarounds that do work perfectly fine. It's a fundamental flaw imo. Overall the Nirvana is really good however.
I'm not asking to fix this as soon as possible because I can use Nirvana as is without any problem, but I'm really interested in a reply from Nirvana team about this issue and how they look at it.
41 Posted by freecloud.may on 21 Apr, 2011 12:02 AM
I would like to express my opinion about someday items in projects since it's being discussed in this thread too.
Look there are some actions in a project that I'm not sure if I'm going to do or not but I still want to keep them. The true GTD approach would be to write those actions in project support material. However it's just more convinient to keep them in a project and Nirvana manages that extremely well because they are still listed separately in "Someday" list.
The best thing about keeping someday actions in a project is that after all next actions are done then the project becomes a Someday project. It's simple and very convinient. It's basically the same thing as keeping those someday actions in project support files except it speeds up the workflow. I don't see any problem with that.
However if that option is removed it's not going to be a big deal for me but I like the flexibility of current implentation. If you want to be as strict in GTD then you can, it's not like you are forced to add someday actions to a project :)
42 Posted by Proximo on 21 Apr, 2011 12:23 AM
GTD is simple and in the end what's important is to do what works best for you. I implement GTD almost exactly like David Allen teaches but it's still not 100%. You can implement GTD to fit your needs and still make it work.
I tend to stick to the methodology David Allen teaches and it's been great. This may not be true for everyone since we all think differently.
I think that some fundamentals work well in just about any circumstance but there are little things that may be tweaked by each individual that makes the system work for them.
The Next list needs an overhaul and I really wish we had the "Unified Next List" we asked for a long time ago.