Reach for the moon, but start with your (two) shoelaces

In ‘Getting Things Done‘ David Allen affirms that the size of projects does not matter (for those who are not familiar with the GTD methodology, Allen defines “project” as any desired result that requires more than one simple action-i.e. a “pack” of actions with a defined purpose), and in terms of logic, he is right. Everything in his book is rigorously logic. But it makes me think of certain Zen masters.

Zen masters are superb human beings who can reach incredible peaks of consciousness and awareness, but, once in “the other side”, they not always seem to realize how far they are from common mortals. Example: when explaining a certain meditation technique, Dogen Zenji, 224creator of one of Zen’s main branches, mentioned a certain stage where “a couple of inhalations…” were required. A few centuries later, another Zen master, Katsuki Sekida, remarked in his controversial (but excellent) book ‘Zen Training‘, that “two inhalations” would do… for an experienced monk after 30 years of meditation! For the rest of us, maybe 20 minutes of inhalations or more could be necessary before reaching the desired mental state.

Well, maybe sensei Allen is a bit on the Zen side about this issue. It is said that GTD, like tennis, takes 2 years to master. But nobody mentions that, just like any other skill, in terms of motivation, it is always better to grow organically, starting small and rewarding oneself after every small step. GTD is a meaningful structure intended to cover every actionable area in your life. What I question here is the size of the chunks; psychologically, it is better to start with 15 tiny projects, many of which you’ll be able to accomplish along the week or even the day, than having one endless, confusing, 15-tentacles octopus that never seems to come to an end. I think it is better to say that project size is flexible. The methodology allows it. But it is humans who apply such methodology: project size does matter. And besides…

Tiny projects force you to stay “granular”; with few tasks to define, it is easier to avoid poorly defined actions, which are a sure way to stagnation for a project.
It sets a more balanced do/plan ratio. Of course you can always have a huge project and divide planning into several sessions, but it leaves a taste of “open thread”. By defining smaller projects, you can “plan it to done” all the way and enjoy a nice and frequent feeling of accomplishment time after time.

One should not underestimate the effect of many previous years of mistakes and unproductive practices. It takes some time before you get used to move EVERYTHING from your head to a note taking device, it takes some time before you learn to automatically produce the most simple and manageable definition of a task… even if you have the right, attentive attitude, a lot of things still conspire against your new habits, there is a lot to unlearn… so it is better to start small. This is turning to be a very oriental kind of post, but it now comes to my mind a quote from Lao Tzu’s ‘Tao Te Ching‘:

“everything that is complex started being simple”.

Do you have problems managing huge projects? Do you like their complexity so as to play with mindmaps, software, etc? Do you prefer small projects? You think you’ve reached “the other side” so you don’t mind?

Posted by Nacho Jordi on Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

January 19, 2010 at 7:09 pm by Nacho Jordi
Tags: Books, Capture, Classification, David Allen, Dogen Zenji, Education, Experience, Focus, Growth, GTD, Habits, Katsuki Sekida, Learning, Lists, Meditation, Motivation, Perception, Personal productivity, Planning, Projects, Subliminal, Tasks, Thinking, Time management, Tips, Transcendence, Zen