
GTD sucks for creative work. Here’s an alternative system - pmoriarty
http://heydave.org/post/24286720323/gtd-sucks-for-creative-work-heres-an-alternative
======
uzomanwosu
It's funny how some people lambaste GTD and then proceed to offer a
productivity solution that's basically GTD plus some extra steps or tools. The
basic tenets of GTD are sound and not new. David Allen just simplified the
process and provided some psychological justifications to why they work. So as
long as you collect everything out of your head and into a system where you
can review and prioritize, that's GTD for everyone regardless of your station
in life.

~~~
btilly
GTD is NOT for everyone.

A productivity system that doesn't make you feel good about your daily life is
not be sustainable in the long run. It doesn't matter how effective it is,
that's not a life you want to be living.

What makes you feel better about your daily life will depend on your
temperament. The author of this blog post found that GTD resulted in his
feeling like he had a never-ending river of stress ahead of him. GTD failed
for him.

Another example where GTD fails is for anyone who is doing sustained creative
work. As Paul Graham describes in
[http://www.paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html](http://www.paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html),
it is very important for those people to have large blocks of time set aside
for focused work. GTD's focus on breaking things into simple tasks whose
execution is routine is the antithesis of how work needs to be organized for a
maker.

That said, GTD is life-changing for many people. If it works for you, by all
means do it. But don't make the mistake of trying to convert everyone else to
it. It isn't always right.

~~~
luketych
GTD IS for everyone. All GTD is, is acknowledging how our brains function at a
very fundamental level, and then building a trustable system around that.

Why can't create tasks work in GTD? GTD methodology doesn't say that you HAVE
TO break everything up into 2-minute chunks. It can be 2 hours set aside for
creativity.

Saying "X doesn't work for everyone" sounds nice, as does "everything in
moderation." But I get skeptical when someone uses "everything in moderation"
to excuse their smoking habit, or "___ is NOT for everyone" . Hundreds of
years ago I'm sure there were people arguing that "reading and writing is not
for everyone." Eating vegetables is not for everyone, etc.

~~~
orblivion
I get skeptical when people are so enthusiastic about some newfangled anything
that they compare it to reading and eating vegetables. GTD _could_ be that
good but it's an extraordinary claim and it deserves to be scrutinized
accordingly.

~~~
luketych
As you should. It's not my job to sell Gtd to you. But I have to challenge
your emotional intelligence if you let other peoples' enthusiasm cloud your
own view.

~~~
orblivion
I base it off my my own experience getting enthusiastic about things.

~~~
luketych
lol, but isn't your own enthusiasm at least somewhat affected by other
peoples' enthusiasm or lack there of?

~~~
orblivion
Sure. I'm not sure what your point is, maybe my point wasn't clear. I'm just
saying that I've been in the position at least once where I was excited about
something and I overblew its potential in solving problems. So when I see
others doing it, I can relate, but know that they're likely clouded in their
judgement.

------
moron4hire
I don't think that was a failure of GTD. I think that was a failure to
understand your own limitations and what you're realistically going to be able
to accomplish in any given timeframe. It really sounds like a fundamental
failure to _properly_ understand GTD.

If you actually read _the book_ \--rather than the BusinessInsider, et. al.
listicles summarizing it--Allen makes the point that the most important
feature of any task tracking system be that it is not cumbersome. All else be
damned. If whatever system you're using to keep track of what you need to do
is getting in the way of keeping track of what you need to do, then it is no
good.

He also makes the point that nobody is meant to do everything in the book. The
book is meant to be a cookbook, you are meant to try different things in the
book up to the point of gaining control of your work _and then put the book
down_. You're supposed to stop reading GTD when you start to get things done.
Don't mess with a good recipe.

I keep a single sheet of paper as my TODO list. If it doesn't fit on the
paper, it doesn't go on the list. It's one list for both work and personal
issues, because I only have one life, I can't clone myself and work on two
lists in parallel. I scratch things off and reuse the paper until it's full. I
then rewrite the list on a new sheet of paper, with items that have gone
undone for a long time naturally bubbling up to the top of the list.

And if something has been ignored at the top of the list for a long time, I
just throw it away. If it didn't get done in the last month, clearly it's not
that important. If it were more important, I would have made the time to do
it.

Get better about throwing away your emotional baggage.

------
VladimirGolovin
I too find GTD unsuitable for creative work, mostly because it doesn't handle
open-ended, non-tickboxy tasks well, though I can't say that I was using GTD
properly -- for example, I couldn't bring myself to do weekly reviews.
Overall, GTD felt like it requires too much willpower to run.

Have you tried Mark Forster's Autofocus or Final Version Perfected systems? If
not, you owe yourself a try. The systems, at their core, are very simple:

1\. You have a long list of tasks (the same 'ubiquitous capture' principle as
in GTD and other systems) 2. You scan the list for tasks that 'stand out' for
you as 'ripe' to be done / worked on. This means that you're mentally ready to
do these tasks. 3. Work these tasks for as long as you feel like. It's not
necessary to finish these tasks. 4. After you've dont with a task, you either
cross it off the list, or re-append it to the end of the list.

I found his systems much more tolerant of creative work, and much less
willpower hungry. A downside of these systems is that they're not capable of
handling tasks with start / due dates.

Also, regarding de-cluttering todo lists, I firmly believe that:

1\. ALL your tasks and actionable thoughts must be captured in your system. 2.
Your _current_ todo list must only show items that you are ready to do _right
now_ , at the moment. For example, your todo list shouldn't show the task
'Vacuum the floor' if you're not at home. Therefore, there must be ways of de-
cluttering your todo list that allow you to defer the tasks until your
external (or internal!) conditions are more conducive to working on these
tasks.

(I got fed up with the inability of most todo apps to do the above, so I'm
working on my own todo app).

~~~
sametmax
This is actually a perfect application of GTD. Most people don't realize how
flexible GTD is, and feel like everythin must be well define, and have a time
frame. It doesn't. You have the reviews for that. You have the "projects" list
for that. You have "waiting for" for that.

"Spending time on 'creative job x'" is actually a perfectly good task name to
add to your "project" list.

In your daily review, you scan the one you want to work and and you add the
ones you feel like to your "next" list.

GTS itself must NEVER be applied as-is, and should be adapted to your line of
work, rythm, life style and personnalité. And it's very good at it.

~~~
VladimirGolovin
I guess I couldn't stomach the idea that GTD mandates dedicated review stages,
while in Autofocus / FVP and in my own system review is a continuous process.

Ideally, I'd like to have the ability to do 'makeshift reviews' per-task, and
on different timescales. For example, if I don't feel like doing Task X today,
I'd defer it for 5 days, so its next review will happen in 5 days. But if
there's another task I'll probably want to do tomorrow, I'd defer it to
tomorrow, so I'll review it tomorrow.

On the other hand, I do seem to have a de-facto review stage. In the morning I
usually go through my task list in Wunderlist (which I hate but use daily) and
mark items I'd like to do today. But this is probably because Wunderlist
doesn't offer a proper Defer / Hide Until ability that doesn't screw with
tasks' due date.

(And I have a recurring task 'Review all items', a relic from a bygone era
when I attempted to do GTD properly.)

------
rbrogan
From what I am reading, the author is saying they are effectively time slicing
their week. Each day is like a "task", in the software sense, that gets to run
and make progress to its goal. You have to consider all the things that you
could do, but then decide which should be prioritized because it will deliver
results towards the goal. This may be better for creative work, because it is
easy to otherwise keep busy doing things that seem important, but if you think
about it they do not really do enough to get you to your goal. (Like how easy
it is to drift towards unnecessary feature work over maintenance.) At the same
time, "next actions" may not quite work because the work is often non-linear
(though I would not say they suck). It will be interesting to see how personal
management plays out in the long, long run and how it develops against AI.

------
galfarragem
GTD is not for creative work. GTD is great to deal with _type 2
procrastination_ [1] because not everybody can afford to have somebody doing
their important errands. So it is just an efficient method of preventing my
(your) life to become a mess. Listing every micro action in a fancy way (in my
case I use Evernote [2]) would be wasted time (that is better spent deciding
what is the next action or doing real work), a sheet of paper is more
efficient for that.

[1]
[http://paulgraham.com/procrastination.html](http://paulgraham.com/procrastination.html)

[2] [https://github.com/we-build-dreams/hamster-gtd](https://github.com/we-
build-dreams/hamster-gtd) (a simple implementation that you can use as a
starting point)

~~~
moron4hire
I don't agree that it is not for creative work. I think most people just don't
understand the process of creativity enough to be able to think about it on a
meta level.

Your TODO list is meant to be an extension of your short-term memory, not
long-term. It's not a log of activity. It's not a planning document for
assigning deadlines and figuring out project length. It's low-friction
reminders of whatever you need reminders for.

Haven't you ever been working on something and realized there were two
different things that had to be done, but in different directions? If you
write a TODO for one of them and start working on the other (without writing a
TODO for it), then you won't have to break your flow just to remember the
other item thereafter. It's okay for things you do to not be on the TODO list,
and it's okay for TODO list items to only live for 15 minutes, so long as it
is longer than it would live in your short-term memory.

A TODO list is not ever meant to be completed. Things go on it and come off
it, it grows and shrinks over time, but it's meant to be a living document. If
you're having problems with your tasks being too large and nebulous to
appropriately use on a TODO list, then your first task is "break job down into
more tasks."

~~~
Scarblac
> Haven't you ever been working on something and realized there were two
> different things that had to be done, but in different directions?

Yes, but who ever needed a TODO to remember that other thing? It's all part of
the whole that you're trying to build, you understand what it's going to look
like and why you're doing it like this, and of course after this part that
other part also still needs doing. You don't need to remember it, it's part of
the bigger picture.

I write down reminders for things outside that, like people who wanted to ask
a question, mails I need to answer, errands. Things that are hard to keep
track of because they're not about the thing you want to be thinking of. The
main thing you're trying to make doesn't need them.

The creative process progresses when ideas come out subconscious processes,
like when you take a morning shower. Todo lists are very conscious things.

~~~
dasil003
I don't know if I fully agree with the GP's idea that this is the canonical
definition of a TODO list, but I don't think short-term memory alone is
sufficient for the current project in all cases. For the creative process of
design I tend to agree you usually don't need to keep notes, but for the
creative process of code architecture I think external notes are often
necessary, especially if there is any significant refactoring of existing code
involved.

------
visakanv
> Too many projects and too many next actions. It was information overload. I
> think my brain couldn’t handle my 50-100 ongoing projects and next actions.

IMHO, this isn't a problem with GTD as a system; it's more of a problem with
the user's prioritization. Nobody should have to have 50-100 ongoing projects
and next actions. Urgent/Important them, and junk the rest.

~~~
dwc
I agree. The whole point of dumping all these things out of your brain and
into the system is so that you can let go off all that because you know it's
in the system and the system works. If you're still fretting over the list of
stuff then you probably don't trust the system. The most likely causes of
distrust are 1) you haven't had enough chance to see it working, or 2) you
haven't implemented/adapted the system correctly _for you_ and the system
_really, actually isn 't working_. Weekly review is a fine place to assess and
tune what you're doing in the larger sense, I think.

------
mto
It would have been nice to give any reference to "GTD" in an introductory
sentence so that readers don't have to google it and interfer from the context
what's meant.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTD](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/GTD)

~~~
everfree
Definitely agreed. I feel like I'm the only one who had no idea whether GTD
was a product or service or some sort of TO-DO methodology...

------
nunodonato
GTD works fine for creative work when you _get_ GTD. Most people don't. it
actually takes quite some time (months/years) to do the needed _click_ and
understand what GTD is all about.

------
mostafah
The part of the “xxx is not for creative work” argument that bothers me is the
assumption that “creative work” cannot be organized and planned. Let’s call
writing, programming, … simply “work,” not “creative work,” and we have to do
them like other kinds of work.

Of course, some parts of everybody’s work need more focus/mental
energy/physical energy/..., but that doesn’t mean they are special and can get
away with being disorganized.

Van Morrison once said in an interview that when he has a song to write he
simply sits down and works on it, whether he feels like it or not. Are our iOS
apps more “creative” than his songs?

~~~
mercer
I agree that everyone needs some way of organizing. But is it really so hard
to imagine that many people _hate_ lists of tasks grouped by tag/project on a
computer or in a filing system?

I've met so many people who do fine with - to me - the most haphazard, chaotic
systems that I hesitate to judge them by _my_ almost OCD-like and definitely
autistic obsession with lists. Their brains just work differently.

------
will_pseudonym
I found GTD and I did not get along. For me, the result was the opposite of
its name, or exactly the name if you define "things" to be all the pointless
things in life that you shouldn't waste your time with.

I found the important/due date quadrant system espoused by Randy Pausch in his
Time Managenent video to be the best way to get important things done. GTD
didn't make that distinction and in my experience, it made it worse.

Disclaimer: I know how overzealous I was about GTD when I was using it, and I
want to say that I'm not interested in talking about why you think I should
try GTD again. I don't want to debate with anyone about GTD. This is only my
experience with trying to use it in my life 5 years ago for about a year. It
didn't mesh with my goals. I am excited for you if it's served you well,
though!

~~~
brazzledazzle
Not debating you, asking so I can be aware of the pitfall when I try out GTD:
Did you try not tracking the pointless things? Is tracking everything a
philosophical aspect of the system?

~~~
will_pseudonym
It seemed like tracking the pointless things was the process, and the benefit
was that they'd be out of your head. Made total sense in the moment, but
looking back I just see it as a very effective psychological defense against
real change.

~~~
jeremysmyth
Unless you're defining "pointless" incorrectly, you're wrong.

The start of the "inbox processing" step is to decide if something is _worth
doing_. That filters the pointless things right at the start. Only then do you
do it (if it's less than 2 minutes work), or add it into the rest of the GTD
process: Delegate it, or defer it.

------
criddell
I read David Allen's book back when the web was at version 2.0 and the one
thing that has stuck with me is this: if something is going to take two
minutes or less, just do it. That simple rule helped me immensely.

------
meesterdude
I'm a creative fella. I use GTD super heavily, because it lets me manage
EVERYTHING in my head - all my creative efforts, in addition to the mundane.

> Most task/to-do software is based around the concept of projects and tasks.
> It’s really too bad. The tendency is to fill up your task software with
> dozens of projects and tasks under each project. But the more you look at
> your projects and tasks every day for the next few weeks, it gets
> discouraging. It feels like a never-ending river of stress.

These are things that are already open in your head in some way. you put them
into a system you trust to get them out of your head, and you review them at
varying intervals because they matter to you in some way, at some level.

> The most important thing for the creative innovator is not a ton of tasks to
> do but rather the ability to see what’s important to focus on and to focus
> on that deeply. The creative innovator needs to go deep on a feature or
> issue, and the deeper they go the more creativity they unleash.. thus
> creating lots of value to the end user.

GTD doesn't stop you from doing this. GTD helps you identify what's important
and ensure it gets done.

> Personally, I can’t bear the thought of trying to organize my work with
> Things for Mac (or similar task management software). Typically, you create
> some projects and fill them with tasks, and before you know it you have so
> many projects and tasks that it’s overwhelming. The whole thing becomes a
> distraction and a drag. It makes work less enjoyable.

OK, I might agree with you there. I had abysmal luck in implementing GTD with
Things and Omnifocus, so I built my own web app that does what I want: focus
on capture, and make review possible from a variety of data points like
creation, tags, metadata; even things like tag or word count.

Overall though, this author doesn't know what he's talking about, doesn't
understand how to properly implement and manage their GTD, and that is simply
NOT GTD's fault. that's theirs. If you're going to make such a bold title that
"GTD sucks for creative work" you better back it up with some solid points and
alternatives. This author did nothing of the sort.

I will still say: GTD is awesome for creative work. I am easily 5x more
creative after learning about GTD. I don't 1:1 implement it, but I take whats
useful and discard what I don't, like inbox zero. Although now that i've been
booking a lot of appointments via email, I might want to revisit that.

~~~
chris11
Do you have a link to your web app? I'm currently looking through
organizational and time management programs.

------
shoover
It's a good insight that other systems may complement GTD for driving deep
creative focus. Todd Henry covers this very well, both conceptually and
tactically, in his book The Accidental Creative. He offers a flexible set of
practices that work together as a system to help you put your money where your
mouth is in terms of what you say is important in your creative work and how
you spend your time and mental energy in light of that. He touches on a lot of
the same principles as the OP but in book form. It's a good read and is backed
by the author's personal experience and work experience helping others tackle
their own creativity and productivity challenges.

One technique relevant to other commenters recognizing that a full task view
is not always relevant for creative projects, or least for the creative aspect
of projects, is to maintain a project list that focuses on the key challenges
or questions that define the creative purpose or problem of the project.
Review that regularly and set aside time to tackle the creative challenges.
You can always use GTD or any other task list tool to track the concrete tasks
generated from those times and work from those lists during pomodoros or heads
down execution time. The point is nurturing creativity does require different
techniques than task execution, but with some care you can manage it within
the constraints of a given day, week, and month. The book says it much better
and more comprehensively than I can and is highly recommended reading.

------
jeffmk
I find that often my interest in projects waxes and wanes periodically, and
seemingly randomly. I like the organizational ideas of GTD, specifically the
getting the ideas out of your head and collecting them into a known place, and
breaking down TODOs into components until they're not so large and abstract as
to cause paralysis -- but I agree that they can still be overwhelming.

This article made me think of an idea of mitigating the former issue; that is,
instead of have a huge list of "next steps" that can cause their own form of
analysis paralysis when I'm feeling indecisive, even if they're small and
easy, but instead have a mechanism to choose and display a single, randomly
chosen item from the list of items.

If I'm not interested in that, I could skip to another one. Otherwise, it
catches my fancy and I now have something concrete to work on, without wasting
any effort trying to figure out what to do myself.

------
yarrel
Surely using the Pomodoro technique for creative work will break flow?

------
joelthelion
I use a simplified version of scrum for personal planning, with one day
"sprints". Works pretty well.

------
mahyarm
GTD is a great managerial schedule. Creative work needs those 4 hour time
boxes and singular mental focus.

------
zimbatm
TODO apps should have an upper-bound on the number of items to force the user
to prioritize his tasks.

I noticed a pattern where the _new_ shiny TODO app is adopted. Then it gets
filled-up until it becomes depressing to open. Then the _new-new_ TODO apps
gets a round of applause. Repeat.

~~~
voyou
This reminds me of something I read a few weeks ago:
[http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/nov/20/oliver-b...](http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2015/nov/20/oliver-
burkeman-time-to-ditch-to-do-list)

"For us list addicts, Forster proposes a minimalist alternative system. On a
piece of paper, write down only the five most important tasks you can think
of. Then do them, in order, crossing them off as you go. (If you stop before
completing one, add it again at the end.) Once the list is only two items
long, add three more, to bring the total back to five. Then repeat.

"The point of this austere approach is that you’re regularly required to ask
what really needs doing, since there are only five slots. With a conventional
list, there are unlimited slots – and it’s hugely tempting to plough through
inessential tasks, just to cross them off. But what if you forget crucial
things, using Forster’s method, because you didn’t write them down? His
response: they probably didn’t matter to begin with."

~~~
robotresearcher
There's a nice extension to this idea - maybe someone can reply with the right
credit as I've forgotten where I read this:

When the five things are done, you are done. Leisure or family time.

Even if you had a little juice left today, you keep some in the tank for the
other parts of your life. This really helps with steady productivity and
headspace for the long term.

------
throwaway999888
I guess GTD sucks for creative types. The type that thinks that their needs
are so special compared to other workers, are very sensitive towards whatever
environmental factor makes them _feel bad_ or _discouraged_ , that any kind of
externally imposed structure cramps their style, and that they should have the
freedom to make up whatever ritual that makes their god-given creative juices
flowing. Which are, again, very sensitive to petty environmental distractions.

