GTD Book Review: What It Is and Does It Work?
Getting Things Done (GTD) is a popular book in the field of personal productivity. This review assesses the GTD system, gives a broad explanation of what the system is designed to do and what it is good for and what it is not good for. This article is approximately 1500 words long and will take 5 to 6 minutes to read.
In the domain of personal development/productivity a big selling book that has generated a lot of following is ‘Getting Things Done’ (or GTD as it is commonly known) by David Allen. I’ve flicked through the book at airports a couple of times and finally decided to buy it to see what the fuss is all about. This article is a review of what I have discovered about the book and what I like and what I don’t like about it.
The basic premise of the book is that you can never feel properly stress free, and hence happy and productive, when you have too many things to do that are left as open loops. An open loop is any activity that you know that you have to do and yet don’t get around to.
This is my interpretation of his point here. Every desire that you create (in this case predominantly objectives to fulfill) becomes a set-point for your emotional guidance system. This system generates emotions based upon whether you fulfill the objective immediately, or not. If you can immediately fulfill the objective then you will feel good. If you can’t then you generate concern and low-level stress because you will continue to assess whether you have fulfilled the objective or not until you either do it, or choose to abandon the desire.
I agree that on-going, underlying stress and negative emotion is often caused by focusing too many unfulfilled objectives consciously and subconsciously at any one time. However, my ideas and methods for dealing with this situation quickly diverge from David Allen’s from this point onwards.
The basic method of GTD is to create a comprehensive system for capturing, storing and organizing all of the activities that you want or need to do. Once the items are captured they are processed according to whether they can be done almost immediately, whether they can and ought to be postponed and whether they should be eliminated.
I totally agree that choosing to eliminate superfluous and undesirable activities is a great way to reduce stress and negative emotion.
I also agree that actively deciding to postpone activities is a good idea as this removes them from present moment focus and hence they don’t become generators of low key but continuous negative emotions.
[Note: It was rightly pointed out that I misunderstood the 2-minute rule. It is for use when reviewing tasks. If something can be done in 2-minutes or less during that review, then it should be done, otherwise it should be deferred until after you stop reviewing and get to work. I've now removed that section as it was in error and misleading. My thanks to Jeff Korentayer for pointing that out.]
I take the view that breaking down a broadly defined activity requires conscious, mental imagining and problem solving first. By thinking through the problem carefully a process for doing the work can be formed, which simultaneously considers the likely problems to come and finds ways to eliminate them or work around them in advance.
Each part of the process should be something that can be done immediately using existing knowledge and skills. In order to ensure a continuation of activity once started, the necessary resources to do the job must be organized in advance. When everything is prepared, the work can start and it will be accomplished quickly due to effective preparation.
I liken each part of the process as a domino that has to be stood up and put into a sequence of dominos to form a line. The idea is to topple the final objective domino as easily as possible. You do this by standing up all of your dominos in advance and then topple the first one. If the dominos are set up correctly and spaced correctly then the momentum created will pass through and topple the final one very easily.
Most people go wrong because they don’t think sufficiently far in advance of how to topple the final domino easily. They tend to set up one domino and then push it over. They then stand up the next one and topple it. They repeat this a few times and then feel exasperated because it seems like frustrating and hard work. GTD seems to design in such an approach and here is the reason why:
GTD is an approach for making efficient use of time but it places an astoundingly low emphasis on making effective use of time. GTD doesn’t care about the design of your sequence of dominos, only whether you are spending as much time as possible to set them up or not.
This is where my general philosophy on time usage and that of GTD differ greatly. I thoroughly recommend that you seek to maximize the leverage that you can create from what you do. It is your productivity measured in terms of the output per unit of working time that you get and not how much input per unit of working time that you give that counts.
My favorite synopsis of the difference between efficient people and effective people is this one by General Von Manstein:
“There are only four types of officer. First there are the lazy, stupid ones. Leave them alone, they do no harm… Second, there are the hard-working intelligent ones. They make excellent staff officers, ensuring that every detail is properly considered. Third there are the hard-working, stupid ones. These people are a menace and must be fired at once. They create irrelevant work for everybody. Finally, there are the intelligent lazy ones. They are suited for the highest office.”
In the right hands, GTD would suit the hard-working intelligent types but since it gives insufficient methods and distinctions about how to work effectively it will also prove valuable to the hard-working stupid types, who create irrelevant work for everybody.
If you want to live your life with highly effective productivity then become a student of Richard Koch’s ‘80/20 Principle’. That’s one of the few books that I’ve ever read that was a life changer. I can also highly recommend Tim Ferriss’s ‘The Four Hour Work Week’ as it is another great book steeped in the principles of effective living (There is a lot of hype about Tim and the book and he does come across as having a huge ego, but put that aside and focus on the principles that he advocates. He gives a master class in effective living).
In my opinion, the objective is to create a simple life where you do a few things so effectively that you create massive leverage and massive resources for yourself. Those resources are usually money or freedom of time. When you get that right you will no longer feel harried and GTD becomes superfluous.
On the whole, I don’t advocate GTD as method to implement in its entirety. It’s always to your benefit to manage your desires through elimination of unnecessary desires and the acceptance of postponement of fulfillment. However, once you choose to fulfill a desire then GTD does not give you the knowledge and methods that you need to do so effectively.
GTD is primarily an organizational tool and I find it somewhat perverse that in order to manage objective desires so that they don’t cause stress it institutes a system of such exacting standards that keeping to the system will prove far beyond the means of most people. I won’t use the system because the expectations of GTD will create more ill feeling than I get from having open loops in my mind (The idea of implementing it is daunting, especially when he says that it takes about 2-years to introduce the system fully into your life!).
I’d recommend it for sorting out your email inbox at work but not for much else (To do that delete unnecessary emails that require no action or have no reason to be stored. For those that you want to attend to another time, create topic specific folders to store them in with subfolders for ‘important short term’ ‘important long-term’ ‘not important interest only’. For mails that require action keep them in your in box until done, or delegate the task and store the mail in a folder titled ‘delegated: for review’ and follow up on those delegated actions as often as you feel the need until they are completed and then shift them to one of your other folders).
Finally, GTD is one of the most boring books that I’ve ever read and considering that I’m something of a geek when it comes to productivity methods, that’s saying something.
If you use it and find it effective, or if you’ve read the book and struggle with it, then I’d love to hear what your opinion of GTD is.
#1 - Permalink Pearl January 28th, 2009 at 12:34 amI liked GTD because prior to reading it I didn’t know a lot about personal productivity. The Inbox idea for all papers, mail, etc. has been a life saver for me.
About 1 year after having read the book and trying out the principles in it however, I would have to agree with you on this being suited for the “intelligent, hard-working” type, and having scant information regarding time effectiveness. It takes me far too much time to delegate my ideas and information, when I could be using that time to work on the projects which are most important to me. Recently I’ve become a fan of the author of Illuminated Mind; he’s got alot of great ideas about focusing on what’s important.
I really liked your domino analogy; have to remember that the next time I go through my inbox.
#2 - Permalink admin January 28th, 2009 at 4:01 amThanks for your response, Pearl. I shall check out the book ‘Illuminated Mind’
#3 - Permalink tucsoncarinsuranceguy February 14th, 2009 at 10:06 pmThanks for this post - interesting slant on things…
#4 - Permalink Al Jennings March 25th, 2009 at 11:49 amI enjoyed GTD and do implement the system in it’s entirety. It is the first system that I heard about that gives you a system for organizing your “stuff”. Having placeholders or buckets allows me to know where my stuff is when I need it. It also gave me a simple solution for staying on top of projects that I delegate.
That said, for me, the system gives me more time to focus clearly (because it keeps things off my mind) and focus on what’s most important, the “few” things that I need to do, and creative thinking. It’s also huge for me to have a place for creative ideas that pop into my head at any time and put it into my capturing tool (onmi-focus software & iPhone app).
His latest book, “Making It All Work”, does a better job (IMO) discussing “perspective” and dealing with “horizons of focus” which deals with making the right decision about what you should be doing. Other books such as, “The 4-Hr. Work Week” is an excellent book which (I think) complements David Allen’s system, at least in my implementation of GTD.
#5 - Permalink Al Jennings March 25th, 2009 at 12:01 pmBTW, In David Allen’s recent podcast, he gives an overview of his recent book and how it differs from the first one, with a Q&A at the end.
#6 - Permalink admin March 25th, 2009 at 2:30 pmHi Al,
Thanks for a very informative response. I agree that good organization is key to allowing work to flow easily and getting rid of myriad small things from the mind makes it easier to concentrate.
I think that there are two kinds of productivity improvements: efficiency - getting more done per unit of time and effectiveness - getting more out per unit of time. I always favor effectiveness as the prime focus until routine systems and routine production is in place. At that point, efficiency measures are worth introducing.
#7 - Permalink Jeff Korentayer March 25th, 2009 at 8:12 pmYou’ve completely misunderstood what David Allen instructed about the “two minute rule” - it is NOT that you should only define do-able tasks that are in 2-minute chunks. The two minute rule only applies to the specific situation of the PROCESSING phase of the GTD workflow. Here, the rule is that when you are “processing” your stuff, you are NOT doing your stuff, but just cranking through all the new inputs and making decisions about what they mean to you. IF and only if something can be done in 2 minutes or less, THEN it is better to do it right there on the spot, rather than add it to a list, and then have to come across it later - the overhead gets to be too much then.
In fact, most next actions will be filled of items longer than 2 minutes, and sometimes quite a bit longer - its not at all unusual to have a “next action” which can take 1 or 2 hours to do. Most will be shorter than that, though.
Have you read GTD, or just skimmed through it?
#8 - Permalink admin March 26th, 2009 at 1:42 amHi Jeff,
Thank for pointing out my mistake. I have re-read the section on the 2-minute rule and you are right - I misunderstood it. I’ve taken that section out of the post and left a note about it.
That said, I still won’t use GTD, nor recommend it to others for the reasons stated in the post.
In my opinion, effectiveness reigns supremely over efficiency. That’s what I focus the most attention on.
#9 - Permalink Al Jennings March 26th, 2009 at 7:46 amOk: I think I get what you are saying. If I understand you correctly about efficiency over effectiveness (more “out” rather than “more” done), I agree TOTALLY! And I don’t pretend to speak for David Allen, nor am I his representative. But my guess is that he would agree with you also. Having read, studied, and implemented the GTD system, I see no conflict with what you are saying and the GTD system. It doesn’t elaborate on above points that you mentioned, but the system doesn’t stop my “effectiveness” , but rather allows me to get more “out”. Of course, I can only speak for me, not anyone else. For example, I have some lists/placeholders for ideas and projects. When an idea pops in my head, I write it down and forget about it. But when I work, it’s up to me to make the appropriate choices about what I work on based on the “horizons of focus” that he speaks of in his book. I can feel good about what I’m not doing, because I know what I’m not doing.
So are you implying that the book should address the efficiency issue? IMO, there are other books for that. Do you think David Allen is not efficient (assuming he practices GTD)? Obviously, there are people who do use it’s principles. Do you think everyone who uses it is not effective (by using the system), therefore, you can’t possibly get more out?
And what do you think about the section about the “horizons of focus” http://www.organizeit.co.uk/20.....-of-focus/
You raise excellent points and thank you for your response. I just don’t see how your views conflict with Allen’s system. What he doesn’t seem to elaborate on in detail, aren’t there other books that address those issues? Maybe you’ve written a book that does, but to me that doesn’t take away from the principles of GTD.
#10 - Permalink admin March 26th, 2009 at 9:00 amFor most problems in life there is a cause, an effect (or symptom) and your response. Most people respond to the symptoms only. In order to get more control, they can attempt measures to respond more efficiently.
However, symptoms don’t disappear by themselves. It is when you look at the root cause of the problem and change how you deal with it that major breakthroughs occur. You can either eliminate the cause (to totally stop the symptom), manage the cause (to reduce the magnitude of the symptoms), or find an alternative solution (with the aim of having fewer symptoms). I advocate dealing with the cause of problems as much as possible (and where practical) and not the symptoms.
What troubles me about GTD is that it is a one-sided approach to improving productivity. GTD is almost entirely focused on efficiency.
An efficiency applied to an ineffective process merely increases the rate at which you create ineffective results. I worry that such an outcome will disappoint a lot of people, especially when they are clearly working very efficiently. That’s my gripe, not GTD.
Running around the hamster wheel ever faster doesn’t take you out of the cage.
To respond to your other questions:
If David Allen applies GTD then he works very efficiently but I would have doubts about his effectiveness. Using General von Manstein’s classification he would fit in ‘intelligent and hard-working’ I don’t think he would fit into ‘intelligent and lazy’ Such a person would never come up with a system like GTD.
The Horizons of Focus is not, in my opinion, a way to see if what you are doing is effective or not. The results that you get in life are a direct result of how good your solutions and processes are (that includes how effective and how efficient). The assumption in GTD is that they are fine. I personally am forever questioning them and seeking improvement with a huge bias on finding more effective methods.
#11 - Permalink Bryan Hudson March 26th, 2009 at 9:43 amInteresting perspective by Nick.
I use the Allen’s GTD system in a modified form (something encouraged by Allen). I find the system brilliant and scalable. Clearly, David Allen, his books and concepts are not designed for persons with short attention spans. I chuckled when I read that Nick thought that the GTD book was “boring.” I found it highly interesting and even entertaining on an intellectual level. If you’ve heard Allen speak, you know that he is far from boring. Hence, the GTD experience is more that a book, it represents the passion and wisdom a man as well.
I think Nick’s premise that GTD is primarily designed to reduce stress is not best way to characterize the system. Stress reduction is a by-product, but the main premise of GTD is geting things off your mind so that your mind may be used for more productive purposes such as short/long term planning, problem-solving and spending quality time with people, etc.
It may be better to think about GTD as an approach to how we work, rather than another form of work.
#12 - Permalink admin March 26th, 2009 at 11:54 amHi Bryan,
The subtitle of the book is ‘The art of stress-free productivity.’ You might disagree that that is the nature of the book, but that is how it is promoted.
I don’t find David Allen boring, nor do I find the concept boring. It’s the way that the book is written that is boring. David’s editor has done a poor job, in my opinion. It doesn’t help that immediately after reading GTD, I read ‘On Writing Well’ by William Zinsser, which flowed effortlessly. He said that it’s the responsibility of the writer to make the book easy to read (and I agree with him).
GTD is a real struggle to read. I have a long attention span with books that are easy to read and a short attention span for books that are hard to read. I’ll let you decide whether I truly have a short attention span or not.
It’s a shame that the book is let down in this manner.
#13 - Permalink admin March 26th, 2009 at 11:56 amI’ve written a follow up article to illustrate the difference between efficiency and effectiveness using one of David’s own examples.
http://www.nickpagan.com/blog/189/leave-the-cage/
Again, I don’t want to come across as highly critical of David Allen or GTD. It’s the emphasis on the nature of problem solving that I want to get across.
#14 - Permalink Bryan Hudson March 26th, 2009 at 12:29 pmNick
Thanks for the reply!
The “stress free” sub-title is catchy marketing, but it is not the substance of the book or the GTD concept. Like most proven methods (I’m a media producer), the best results do not come easily. We labor to make life better for others around us. I view Allen as a trainer of leaders. We always get out of a process what we put in, with many value adds.