next »

[Jamie Phelps]

The granularity of most tasks is stupid. "Look up Fred's phone number. Call Fred to ask about the whatsit." When I look at the project, I go, "Oh, yah. I need to call Fred. What's Fred's number? {Open Address Book} Ah, that's it...." and then I am calling Fred to ask about the whatsit. I know the project can't move forward until I talk to Fred. The nice thing about the human brain is that it does recursion quite naturally. So, a lot of that granularity can be handled on the fly by my brain with really no overhead. If I don't have Fred's info handy, I can have Sandy or similar remind me to call Fred later. Done.

[Patrick Rhone]

The reason I might write down Fred's number next to a task is because it saves me the step of having to look in my address book. Also, I might not have it with me when I have a moment to call Fred.

This would be different of course if I actually had a phone that synced with my computer (a la iPhone). I don't. I suppose, once I do, writing down the number will not be important.

[pstanoch]

I like having the number on my @Calls list because I sync my tasks with my Treo.  Al I have to do is highlight the number and hit "dial".

I an added bonus for me is that I am forced to get the number for whomever I am calling because of the template I keep for my task list.

Ex: Call xxxxx re: xxxxx - (nnn) nnn-nnnn

[Michael Ramm]

I have always attached a phone number to the person in my NA list. It saves steps and help me be a little more productive when I need to make a call.

Michael

[Jason Echols]

I too have a tendency to add the phone number to the task when I set it up.  That way I need to take no extra effort to look up the information.  So when I set up the task, I typically go ahead and look up the number and add it then.

As far aas granularity is concerned, Jamie...I guess that is up to the user.  I personally do not need too much detail if the steps are logical as in your example.  My task would be something like..."Contact Fred re: Whatsit (555-1234)".

[David]

I also try to get the information necessary to complete the task into the task listing, wherever I can, so I end up with a calls list (for example) that I can use without needing access to other information. The risk of relying on recursion on a simple task like 'call Fred' is that I'll be in the back of a taxi with time to make calls but no way of getting hold of Fred's number at the time I need it. If I can't complete the next action in one step, then it makes the list that little bit less useful ... and therefore less likely to be used.

[esc.lt]

I also try to get the information necessary to complete the task into the task listing, wherever I can, so I end up with a calls list (for example) that I can use without needing access to other information. The risk of relying on recursion on a simple task like 'call Fred' is that I'll be in the back of a taxi with time to make calls but no way of getting hold of Fred's number at the time I need it. If I can't complete the next action in one step, then it makes the list that little bit less useful ... and therefore less likely to be used.

Exactly.

[Jason Echols]

I also try to get the information necessary to complete the task into the task listing, wherever I can, so I end up with a calls list (for example) that I can use without needing access to other information. The risk of relying on recursion on a simple task like 'call Fred' is that I'll be in the back of a taxi with time to make calls but no way of getting hold of Fred's number at the time I need it. If I can't complete the next action in one step, then it makes the list that little bit less useful ... and therefore less likely to be used.

Well said.

[Jamie Phelps]

I also try to get the information necessary to complete the task into the task listing, wherever I can, so I end up with a calls list (for example) that I can use without needing access to other information. The risk of relying on recursion on a simple task like 'call Fred' is that I'll be in the back of a taxi with time to make calls but no way of getting hold of Fred's number at the time I need it. If I can't complete the next action in one step, then it makes the list that little bit less useful ... and therefore less likely to be used.

By all means, do whatever works for you. My case proves my point though. I only have two phones, my iPhone and my work phone. My contacts stay in sync via MobileMe. I know I have access to my contacts at any given time. If I need a business number, I use Google Maps on the iPhone. My point is that I realized I don't need to break it up into that the very very very next action. If I can make a call, I can just as surely look up whatever info I need to make that call.

Maybe an item on your list today was "make kids lunch for school." Did you really make that into a project with a series of next actions like, "Brainstorm lunch options. Choose one. Get bread from bread box. Get peanut butter and jelly from cabinet. Get knife from drawer. Open jar of peanut butter..."

This is clearly a reductio ad absurdum but it makes my point. You didn't do it that way because it's overkill. You went in the kitchen and said, "What did the kids have for lunch on Friday? Turkey & cheese? OK, let's make PB&J. I need bread, peanut butter, jelly..." If you can allow your brain to recurse to take some of the cruft away, there's no sense writing it down.

[David]

I don't actually think we're in disagreement -- certainly, my calls list doesn't read

• pick up phone
• using index finger, dial number listed on page
• place handset to ear

and so on. But I do think it's important to strike the balance between detail and efficiency so that you have as much information as you need at the time, but no more, and as little detail as you can get away with, but no less.

[Jamie Phelps]

[H]ave as much information as you need at the time, but no more, and as little detail as you can get away with, but no less.

Well said.

[technotheory]

This is a tough balance.  I tend to add the details when I think there's any amount of effort that would later detract from my completing the task.  It's not so much whether the information is readily available, but how much of a pain it would be to retrieve it.  For instance, I can look up phone numbers in my contacts with no problem (on the go or at the office).

However, when I had to make a claim for frequent flier miles the other day I wrote down the number for United, my ticket number, and my frequent flier number.  All that information was easy to find but I knew that it would detract me from actually doing it if I didn't have the information at hand when I saw the task in my list.

So for me it's just about knowing my own psychology and removing barriers to task completion that I foresee.

[chris hughes]

Surely the level of granularity is expressed in the GTD book. You need to have thought so you an crank widgets. The act of having completed the thinking will be different for everyone as everyone's brain is triggered in different ways by different stimuli.  Do what works best for you. In fact it's a risk assessment of whether you will get the action done given the information available to you.  If you don't have all  the information to do the task when you have the time to do it; you won't do it will you?   

[DanGTD]

I use batches. I make a list of calls I need to make, then nominate a specific period of time, like 30 minutes then fill up those minutes with the tasks on the list.