Archive for the ‘organization’ Category

Giving myself the "Getting Things Done" treatment

Monday, October 13th, 2008

I knew I had to improve my organizing skills early in the summer when I missed two scheduled conference calls in the period of a month. In the moment, I blamed the meeting organizers, who had not attached reminders to the meeting requests, so my Blackberry didn’t buzz 15 minutes in advance. After reflection, I realized it wasn’t the responsibility of the meeting organizers to account for my time-management peculiarities. I also realized that making a habit of missing conference calls I had committed to attend was bad business.

Around the same time, I listened to a podcast interviewing David Allen, author of Getting Things Done. I liked what he had to say, and a few mouse clicks later I had ordered his book, determined to give myself the GTD treatment.

It wasn’t painless, and it took quite a while, but I’ve been more or less successful at organizing my work and home commitments. I feel like I’m getting more done, and the stress level has decreased because I have all my commitments (work & personal) documented in the same list, and I review that list regularly (though the review could be more regular and more thorough).

First, a look at Allen’s key prescriptions:

  1. Collecting all items that need to be looked at in your inbox
  2. Emptying the inbox frequently
  3. Deciding what to do with an inbox item immediately (acting on it if it can be done in 2 minutes or less, disposing of it if no action required, scheduling action or adding to task list otherwise)–i.e., no returning items to the inbox!
  4. Filing inbox items where they can be easily retrieved
  5. Organizing task lists by context (computer, phone call, errand, on-line, reading, waiting-for)
  6. Reviewing your calendar and task lists regularly

There’s a lot more, obviously, that you can find in the book, but those are the highlights.

In my experience implementing GTD, here’s what I found:

  • Collecting all my stuff and processing it took a long time–upwards of two weeks. I had to-do’s written on note cards in my bedroom, written on my white board, in notebooks, on existing task lists, and in the inbox already. I had piles of unread books in several places, and articles I wanted to read scattered in my computer directories. At the end, the collection pile measured more than one foot high in my inbox and another three feet or so on the floor beside it.

  • Filing was easier than I thought. Allen recommends one alphabetically-arranged filing cabinet, rather than files organized by some subject (like home, work, finance, etc.). This works for me, although I keep my finance files in a separate accordion file. All the others are in one cabinet.
  • I ended up with a large task list (probably 75-80 items), and it hasn’t gone down much if at all. Some people find such a large list intimidating (God, what a lot I have to do!). For me, it was a relief to know that I had everything on paper, and didn’t need to carry it in my head–a key benefit that Allen cites for his system.
  • Personal organizer systems don’t deal with the Allen approach very well. I tried both the Macintosh iCal system, which didn’t allow for even a first-level categorization, and Microsoft Entourage. Entourage allowed two levels of categorization with manageable sorting problems, but couldn’t handle three at all… and I wanted three for my list. I was able to work around the problems, but it would be nice to have an automated application that could sync with a mobile device and handle the entire GTD system.
  • Like many people, I don’t review the lists enough. I schedule a brief review every day, and a more comprehensive review on Friday. I usually get through the every-day review, but the Friday review is frequently no more substantial than the dailies. I need to work on that.

Like any major change in habits, GTD takes a lot of commitment, time and persistence. For me, at least, it was worth it. I feel more in control of my life and prepared to take on more work than I was a few months ago.

Would anyone out there like to comment on their GTD experiences?

, ,

WorldBlu 2008 List of Democratic Workplaces released

Friday, April 25th, 2008

WorldBlu, the organization headed by friend of this blog Traci Fenton, has unveiled its second annual list of democratic workplaces.

Workplace democracy is still a rare concept, but a growing number of companies are allowing workers a voice in their company, encouraging dissent, and otherwise involving the entire employee base in shaping and running the organization. WorldBlu evaluates companies on these factors:

1. PURPOSE AND VISION
A democratic organization is clear about why it exists (its purpose) and where it is headed and what it hopes to achieve (its vision). These act as its true North, offering guidance and discipline to the organization’s direction.

2. TRANSPARENCY
Say goodbye to the “secret society” mentality. Democratic organizations are transparent and open with employees about the financial health, strategy, and agenda of the organization.

3. DIALOGUE + LISTENING
Instead of the top-down monologue or dysfunctional silence that characterizes most workplaces, democratic organizations are committed to having conversations that bring out new levels of meaning and connection.

4. FAIRNESS + DIGNITY
Democratic organizations are committed to fairness and dignity, not treating some people like “somebodies” and other people like “nobodies.”

5. ACCOUNTABILITY
Democratic organizations point fingers, not in a blaming way but in a liberating way! Democratic organizations are crystal clear about who is accountable and responsible for what.

6. INDIVIDUAL + COLLECTIVE
In democratic organizations, the individual is just as important as the whole, meaning employees are valued for their individual contribution as well as for what they do to help achieve the collective goals of the organization.

7. CHOICE
Democratic organizations thrive on giving employees meaningful choices.

8. INTEGRITY
Integrity is the name of the game, and democratic companies have a lot of it. They understand that freedom takes discipline and also doing whatÕs morally and ethically right.

9. DECENTRALIZATION
Democratic organizations distribute leadership and power across their enterprise.

10. REFLECTION + EVALUATION
Democratic organizations are committed to looking in the mirror and asking, “How can we be better?” — not just quarterly or annually, but daily.

Notable new names on the list this year include Pandora, the personalized internet radio site; BzzAgent, which creates viral marketing programs; and DaVita–the first Fortune 500 corporation that’s made the list. Holdovers include 1-800-GOT-JUNK and Linden Lab (with a brand-new CEO, will they be able to maintain their democratic principles?).

You can check out the whole list here.

Related:
Shop Talk Podcast #3 – Traci Fenton on democratic workplaces
Free information -> lateral networks -> less authoritarianism
The Utopian Company

Tags:
, , , ,

Shop Talk Podcast #3 – Traci Fenton on democratic workplaces

Monday, October 29th, 2007

On this edition of the Shop Talk Podcast, I talk to Traci Fenton, CEO of WorldBlu, a business design studio that helps companies adopt democratic processes. Her company created the World’s Most Democratic Workplaces list, featuring companies like Linden Lab and Rite Solutions who embody these ideals.

Traci and I talk about what constitutes a democratic workplace, how it is to work in this type of company, discuss some examples, and learn that while some decision-making may be slower due to seeking consensus, implementation is that much faster and success more assured as a result.

Click here to download the podcast.

Companies mentioned in the podcast:

Linden Lab
Rite-Solutions
General Electric
Whole Foods Market
Southwest Airlines
Motek
SRC Holdings

Errata:

  1. I continually called Linden Lab, the creator of Second Life, Linden Labs. Traci said it right every time, and I never got the hint. My apologies.
  2. If you listen carefully, you will hear a couple of Skype blips during the podcast.

, , , ,

How to read a web newspaper

Thursday, October 25th, 2007

OK, so I know that everything on the web is miscellaneous. But I’ve been wondering why I interact with two highly similar web sites so differently.

I subscribe to both the New York Times and Wall Street Journal newspapers, and read both online (especially when traveling, like today).

When I read the NYT online, I meander through the sections–sports (yay Red Sox), technology, business, arts, books. Pretty much in that order. I just about never read the front page. I go right for the detail.

With the WSJ online, I invariably seek out the button that says “Today’s Newspaper.” Clicking this loads a page where articles are listed in the order they appear in the paper, with page number headings–A1, A2, etc. It’s not laid out like the paper, but for example Marketplace is the second section, starting with page B1, just like the hardcopy edition.

Why do I use these two sites so differently? In part, I’ve always navigated the Times miscellaneously. (Sunday paper reading order–sports, arts, books, business, week in review, styles, magazine. I recall my astonishment seeing my friend Gerry Halstead read the Sunday Times front section once, beginning to end, each article in full. It took him a good hour.)

But I do read the Journal in order: section A (glance at the op-ed page but not too closely so I don’t get annoyed), section B, skip section C (not enough investments to worry about that), section D, if at all, over lunch.

And so it is online. The cool thing about the web, and with well-organized web sites, is that the user can choose. Read it our way, read it your way. Whichever you prefer.

, , , ,