Get Everything Done

Let's say that today, February 5th, I enter the task "Organize Kitchen Cabinets" into the system.
I would enter it on March 5th.
Then let's say I worked on it for 10 minutes but still had plenty more to do.
I would re-enter it on February 12th.
Let's I didn't do any more work on the kitchen cabinets until February 11th. If I did SOME work on the 11th, I would then re-enter the task on February 18th. Right?
And if so, wouldn't I then have another week to complete the task?
Or is the February 12th date -- the first re-entry date -- somehow a FINAL date which heralds the final dismissal of the task-- and if so, what happens to the task I re-entered for the 18th?

When you worked on the cabinets on the 11th, you can cross it off the Feb 12 page. The 18th is the new 'expiration date' (at least, that's how I'd do it)

As long as you keep working on a task before it's date passes by, you get to send it another 7 days into the future.

I think of it like being at the end of a conveyor belt (metaphor borrowed from Michael Linenberger's "Total Workday Control, 2nd ed."). It takes a month for the conveyor to move a task from the beginning to the end. At first, everything starts at the opposite end of the conveyor, moving slowly toward you.

Initially, you can walk along the conveyor and pick and choose your tasks. Eventually, some will start to get close to the end and be at risk of falling off. By taking any small action on them, you get to place them a little farther back on the conveyor (1 week). That's how you keep it alive.

It may not be a perfect metaphor, but that's what I imagined when I finally "got" this new system.

Thanks, the conveyor belt metaphor makes it very clear. I still wonder, though, how this is fundamentally different from Autofocus, which also allowed to you to keep a task alive by simply doing SOME action on it by a certain point.

For me, it's the difference between looking backwards (Autofocus) about what I didn't get done yesterday and looking foward (DWM) to what's coming 'down the pike' to get it done ahead of time.

"For me, it's the difference between looking backwards (Autofocus) about what I didn't get done yesterday and looking foward (DWM) to what's coming 'down the pike' to get it done ahead of time."

This might be the single substantive comment on the relationship between AF and DWM I have read so far. Although I would characterize AF more as unfinished business in the present.

AFx has been incredibly helpful for me, so I have not found a compelling reason to go to DWM. I think tasks which are more complex and require some effort applied over time have not found their fair share of my attention in AFx. In light of your comment, I think DWM might help those tasks properly get my attention.

Thanks for the insight.

Thanks everyone for this post, I have found it really helpful to clarify the real differentiator between AF and DWM into a tangible context. Like Norman I have found AF to be incredibly helpful but complex, longer projects have not faired as well as I would like.

Using the conveyor belt metaphor and backwards/forwards focus descriptor does make sense of the systems differences, I can see how the forward checking aspect of moving through the (current & future) dated pages gives that progressive feel to tasks.

I loved original DIT for it's diary aspect and AF for it's capture capability, and on reflection I think that DWM actually utilises both those positive features well.

My large task diary arrives today/monday so I can start in ernest then. I'll continue to run my tickler file and appointments diary separately as this works well as a system for me, and will avoid the need for having to annotate the entries in the task diary which for me is a detraction to the "autofocus" element.

In preparation I am going to compete a final dismissal review of my current AF list which still contains far to many hangers-on, so I have a clearer idea of "real" tasks to take forward rather than the someday-maybes that have crept in!

Repeating what I posted in another topic:

Isn't DWM more a AF5? Differences to AF1-4 are:
* different dismissal system (every day one page is dismissed and the next one is marked for dismissal tomorrow)
* different task entry (two entry points instead of one)
* simpler circulation (you go just round and round and do whatever "stands out")

Am I completely wrong?

>>> For me, it's the difference between looking backwards (Autofocus) about what I didn't get done yesterday and looking foward (DWM) to what's coming 'down the pike' to get it done ahead of time. <<<

Yes, that is exactly the difference. One way or another the previous versions of AF gave the feeling of playing catchup. Or at least browsing a list of possibilities to pick out what might be good to work on.

This version makes an intuitively clear statement about the tasks: They are there to be done and MUST be done. Yes, you can "game" the system by doing SOME work on a task to keep it alive for 7 more days ... you can game ANY system. But this system simply has a different feel to it. It more accurately reflects life, if you will.

"AFx has been incredibly helpful for me, so I have not found a compelling reason to go to DWM. " (Norman)

I agree, though I'll probably switch in due course as my subconscious absorbs DWM from all this traffic. DWM's greatest competitor is the great effectiveness of AF4.

Christian,

You are not wrong, but I think what you cite is not what is essential about the system... how it works. What is really different is that tasks expire automatically based on time. IOW, in the other systems things expired because of other conditions about the task or other tasks. In this one it is much more Draconian. It is the inexorable march of time ;-)

For me, the big difference between AF4 and DWM is that it gives me a much better feeling for whether I have too much on my plate or not. With AF4, I could prevent dismissal indefinitely by working a little bit on a task, which caused my list to grow indefinitely :-(. With DWM, the march of time is relentless, and if I have too much on my list in the next 7 days, it shows much more clearly.

I like the Niagara Falls image: there's only so many boats that you can save by yourself.

Thanks Mark, DWM is brilliant!

Mark wrote:
<<<The metaphor that I keep thinking of is a load of boats drifting towards Niagara Falls, and they can only be saved from going over the falls by doing something about them!>>>

Good analogy. Here's another one. It reminds me of a Tetris game. The tasks just keep coming. They relentlessly fall to the bottom of the screen, and if you don't work them properly, they will pile up into a big mess (backlog). But if you keep working them properly, your screen remains clear -- you remain on top of your work.

Nice useful analogies. ;-)

I believe the "niagara falls" is closer to DWM, since you're working from the end where the boats/tasks are falling/expiring from the system.

Whereas "tetris falling blocks", you're working from the end where the blocks/tasks enters the system. May be closer to how AF3/RAF works though.

The contributions above are very helpful in characterising why I might want to try DWM - thank you.

There are a couple of reservations as my current system is a flexible interpretation of AF3 to cope with sporadic discretionary time, a mixture of short turn round tasks and multi-month projects and anything in between. I dismiss 'when I feel like it' - the incentive is to keep the number of pages down. Seeing what's on the whole list makes sure I'm not missing something with a deadline.

How do you cope with 31 pages of tasks to look through? What do you do with tasks which have to be done, but in reality you have longer than a month to do them so rescuing them from falling off the conveyor might not be the best use of time in a given day/week/ fortnight? Can you combine the DWM pages with urgent 'must do today' lists which you might have done 'off list' before?

Thanks for any advice anyone can offer!

Hi Jane,

For longer things I have a Project Planning book. So, to use my now justly famous ;-) "Build Deck" project, it lives in my project book on its own page(s) with measurements, phone numbers of people involved, notes about web sites, etc. I might even have a hand drawn PERT/CPM diagram as well as calculations about boards, screws, and tools to buy.

Most important is SOME kind of list of tasks. It may be in the PERT chart, or it might be a list. So it is the middle of winter now and I'm not going to build the deck so it is no where to be found on my AF lists (either 1-4 or DWM ... it does not matter which system you use). Even if I were using GTD or Covey or whatever, it would NOT be on any "to do" list. The moment I decide that the weather is find and "I ought to get out next weekend and get started on that damned deck", the first task(s) go into DMW (or any other scheduling system). Until I make that decision, I see "Build Deck" as a project in the planning stages. Once I make the decision to start, then it becomes a list of tasks (or next actions, in GTD parlance) and I drop the first ones into my scheduling system.

This system works well for me because it keeps me focused on what I am DOING when I am DOING, and what I am PLANNING when I am PLANNING. Really, it is quite distracting to see long term planing items mixed in with what I need to get on with doing. Also, it keeps the "scheduling" system smaller. I don't have all of the other junk in my book to be hauled around for no purpose.

FWIW, right now some of the things that are in my planning book are:

- Summer Vacation to Italy and Greece
- Learn a bit of Italian
- Renovate Kitchen
- Renovate Master Bath
- Rework Computer system
- Get modern AV system
- Valentine and B'day presents for Wife

The Valentine one has some items moved to the DWM list, as it is getting closer now. One or more tasks from the Vacation and Italian projects have also moved to the DWM system. The other projects are not ready to start yet.

I might add that I review the project book weekly (on Sunday, in fact) so I will see them all today and decide what needs to be done next week and those go on the DWM list.

I hope that has given you an idea or three ;-)

For me, Mike's example shows the beauty of the system (WMD, AF5, DIT2): the Unavoidable Dismissal (dramatic chord!).

If you got build the deck on the list and your 30 days go by, then, SMACK!--Unavoidable Dismissal!

I haven't had 30 days go by yet, but I am honestly excited to just rip that page out of my book. It feels like a crystal clear assessment of what I truly want to be working, what I am avoiding, and what simply cannot be done (the deck).

With the other AFs, I've added in items like "Build the Deck" and they just linger because I really do want to do them, and even though I can't do them now, I don't want them to go away. The Unavoidable Dismissal tells you: you are not working on this task! If you want to keep it, put it somewhere else, because it doesn't belong HERE.

I know the other AFs have had this power, too; but the Unavoidable nature of the new version makes me feel that you will be forced really assess WHY that page is going away, and make you do something about it--either go ahead and trash the task, or really re-think it and put it somewhere more useful: a Future Projects list, a tickler on the calendar, a someday/maybe list, etc.

Seraphim,

nice analogy, though Space Invaders is probably closer.

These were discussed by two sages in the "provisional name" blog post comments: http://www.markforster.net/blog/2010/2/3/provisional-name-for-new-system.html