Getting Things Done: The Science behind Stress-Free Productivity

Francis Heylighen and Clment Vidal

CC! - volution" Com#le$ity and Cognition research grou# Vri%e &niversiteit 'russel (Free &niversity o) 'russels* +ri%gs,undestraat --" ../0 'russels" 'elgium Phone 1-2-2-/30 /4 -4 Fa$ 1-2-2-/330433 htt#:55#c#6vub6ac6be5H 786html" htt#:55clement6vidal6#hiloso#hons6com

Abstract: 9llen (200.* #ro#osed the :Getting Things Done; (GTD* method )or #ersonal #roductivity enhancement" and reduction o) the stress caused by in)ormation overload6 This #a#er argues that recent insights in #sychology and cognitive science su##ort and e$tend GTD<s recommendations6 =e )irst summari>e GTD ?ith the hel# o) a )lo?chart6 =e then revie? the theories o) situated" embodied and distributed cognition that #ur#ort to e$#lain ho? the brain #rocesses in)ormation and #lans actions in the real ?orld6 The conclusion is that the brain heavily relies on the environment" to )unction as an e$ternal memory" a trigger )or actions" and a source o) a))ordances" disturbances and )eedbac,6 =e then sho? ho? these #rinci#les are #ractically im#lemented in GTD" ?ith its )ocus on organi>ing tas,s into :actionable; e$ternal memories" and on o##ortunistic" situation-de#endent e$ecution6 Finally" ?e #ro#ose an e$tension o) GTD to su##ort collaborative ?or," ins#ired by the conce#t o) stigmergy6 Keywords: #ersonal #roductivity" #ersonal in)ormation management" time management" tas, management" #ra$eology" situated and embodied cognition" stigmergy" in)ormation overload6

1. Introduction
!ur #resent society is characteri>ed by @uic,ly gro?ing com#le$ity and change: o##ortunities" constraints" and ob%ectives are in a constant )lu$6 Aanaging the situation re@uires gathering and #rocessing an incessant stream o) #otentially relevant in)ormation6 9s such" most o) our day-today activities )all under the heading o) knowledge work (Druc,er" .B4-*6 'ut ho? can ?e e))iciently organi>e such heavily in)ormation-de#endent ?or,C =hile there is a large and established literature on ho? to organi>e traditional #hysical activities" such as industrial #rocesses" the literature on ,no?ledge management is as yet much less ?ell develo#ed" and mostly concerns the static storage and reuse o) e$isting ,no?ledge rather than the #rocessing o) incoming in)ormation6 The e$tensive literature on in)ormation #rocessing" on the other hand" mostly concerns com#uter systems rather than human in)ormation #rocessing6 Some as#ects o) human in)ormation #rocessing" such as decision-ma,ing" #ro%ect #lanning and #roblem solving" have been ?ell investigated6 Ho?ever" the corres#onding theories are not really hel#)ul to co#e ?ith the in)ormation e$#losion" since they generally assume a given range o) #ossibilities )rom ?hich the best #ossible one is to be chosen6 Ho?ever" in a situation ?here ne? in)ormation may arrive by the minute" both the relevant o#tions and the criteria )or deciding bet?een them are constantly changing6 This ma,es )ormal o#timi>ation methods basically useless in day-to-day ,no?ledge ?or,6 9s Simon (.BB4* #ointed out long ago" rationality is bounded: ?e never have the )ull in)ormation needed to ma,e o#timal choices6 'ut Simon<s alternative strategy o) :satis)icing; is )la?ed too: a choice that is satis)actory no?" may not a##ear so good anymore ?hen ne? in)ormation comes in6 Dn #ractice" #eo#le )ollo? a strategy o) :bettering;: choosing ?hat seems best )rom the available o#tions no?" but being ready to s?itch to something better ?hen ne? in)ormation arrives6 This o##ortunistic mode o) decision-ma,ing is #ervasive in today<s )ast-#aced and uncertain ?orld6 Ho?ever" its lac, o) a clear )ocus ma,es it li,ely that #eo#le ?ould not really ,no? ?hat to aim )or" ?hat to do" and ?hat not to do6 Aoreover" the constant bombardment ?ith ne? in)ormation means that #revious #lans" decisions and relevant data are o)ten )orgotten or neglected6 The last t?o decades have seen an e$#losion o) methods )or :time management;" :tas, management;" or :#ersonal #roductivity enhancement; that try to teach ,no?ledge ?or,ers e))icient routines )or dealing ?ith this overload o) ever changing demands (e6g6 Covey" Aerrill E Aerrill" .BB3*6 Aost o) the recommendations concern concrete tools and techni@ues" such as installing s#am )ilters" using #ersonal organi>ers" sharing calendars" etc6 Dnso)ar that they loo, at the ?ider #icture" ho?ever" they tend to remain ?ithin the o#timi>ation #aradigm: they suggest )irst to )ormulate clear ob%ectives or #riorities (o#timi>ation criteria*" and then to order the di))erent tas,s according to (a* ho? much they contribute to the #riorities" (b* ho? much time" e))ort or other resources you need to invest in them6 The recommendation is then to )ocus on the tas,s that contribute ma$imally to the chosen ob%ectives ?hile re@uiring minimal resources6 9lthough this strategy may seem sel)-evident" it does not ta,e into account the )act that )or ,no?ledge ?or, both #riorities and resources are in general ill de)ined and constantly changing6 The reason is that in)ormation" unli,e material resources" is not a conserved @uantity: it can a##ear (be discovered or communicated* or disa##ear (become outdated* at any moment6 For e$am#le" an engineer #lanning the construction o) a bridge can be #retty con)ident that the amount o) concrete and steel necessary )or the construction ?ill not suddenly change6 !n the other hand" an author #lanning to ?rite a boo, about ho? to use this great ne? communication so)t?are may suddenly )ind out that the so)t?are has a )atal security )la?" or that another ?riter has %ust )inished a com#rehensive treatment o) the same sub%ect6 D) that author had #lanned her com#lete ?or, schedule around the boo, #ro%ect" she ?ould have to start her #lanning )rom scratch6 Aore generally" a##lying an o#timi>ation strategy to ,no?ledge ?or, may produce rather than reduce stress" as #eo#le ?orry about ?hat #riorities to accord to di))erent alternatives"

and then )eel guilty or disoriented ?hen they have not managed to )ollo? their o?n #rescri#tions because o) un)oreseen changes6 The #ersonal #roductivity consultant David 9llen (200.* has #ro#osed a )undamentally di))erent a##roach6 'ased on years o) e$#erience in teaching ,no?ledge ?or,ers ho? to deal ?ith their bac,log o) un#rocessed issues" the method is ,no?n as :Getting Things Done;" or GTD )or short6 GTD is intended to minimi>e stress and an$iety ?hile ma$imi>ing #roductivityFin the sense o) ma$imi>ing the number o) use)ul tas,s #er)ormed" not in the sense o) ma$imally achieving a given ob%ective6 The method has become remar,ably #o#ular in a very short time6 9ccording to the 9ma>on ?eb boo,sho#" in !ctober 2004 9llen<s boo, ran,ed number one in the bestseller lists )or both the domains :time management; and :business: health and stress;6 9t the same time" a search via Google )ound more than a million ?eb #ages re)erring to this methodology6 Gumerous so)t?are a##lications and ada#tations o) e$isting so)t?are have been created to hel# #eo#le im#lement GTD in their daily li)e (=i,i#edia contributors" 2004*6 Dn s#ite o) the many testimonials that GTD ?or,s in #ractice" ho?ever" as yet no academic #a#ers have investigated this method6 9 search (!ctober 2004* )or articles re)erring to (9llen" 200.* turned u# a mere .3 documents" none o) ?hich discusses the method in any detail6 The #resent #a#er intends to )ill this ga# in the scienti)ic literature6 =hile it ?ould be interesting to test GTD em#irically" e6g6 by com#aring the #roductivity o) #eo#le using GTD ?ith the one o) #eo#le using di))erent methods" this is intrinsically di))icult6 The reason is that because GTD does not embrace e$#licit #riorities or o#timi>ation criteria" there is no obvious standard by ?hich to measure e$#ected #roductivity enhancements6 9 sim#ler a##roach may be sub%ective evaluation: ho? satis)ied ?ith their ?or, are GTD users com#ared to users o) other methodsC Ho?ever" this ?ill still teach us little about #recisely ho? and ?hy GTD is su##osed to ?or,6 The #resent a##roach has chosen to address this last issue )rom a theoretical angle" starting )rom recent insights in cognitive science and cybernetics6 =e ?ish to vie? GTD and its #ro#osed theoretical )oundation as a )irst ste# to?ards a concrete praxeology" i6e6 a theory o) #ractical action" ?ith s#eci)ic a##lication to ,no?ledge ?or,6 9 #ra$eology has been recogni>ed by the #hiloso#her 8eo 9#ostel as one o) the )undamentals com#onents o) a ?orldvie? (9erts et al6" .BB3*6 Such a theory is inde#endent o) any s#eci)ic goals or values: these are chosen by the individuals #er)orming the actions6 Dn GTD" ho?ever" the im#licit value is to ma$imi>e #roductivity" i6e6 to do more (tas,s* ?ith less (time" e))ort" resources*6 Dn our #resent in)ormation society" mental resources in #articular tend to be strained6 Dndeed" in Simon<s (.B4." #6 30* memorable #hrase" :a ?ealth o) in)ormation creates a #overty o) attention;6 Given that the amount o) attention that ?e can devote to our ?or, is )inite" a gro?ing amount o) in)ormation clamoring )or our attention must at a certain moment #roduce an overload" ?here a number o) (#otentially im#ortant* items sim#ly can no longer be #rocessed6 GTD is intended to )acilitate this unavoidable #rocess o) selectively ignoring demands ?hile remaining ma$imally in control o) the situation6 9lthough the method is rooted in #ractical e$#erience" ?e ?ill try to sho? that its success can be %usti)ied on the basis o) solid theoretical )oundations6 To do that" ?e ?ill need to revie? ?hat the most recent theories about cognition and the brain tell us about in)ormation #rocessing in the real ?orldFas o##osed to an abstract realm o) logic and rationality6 'ut )irst ?e need to outline the basic #rinci#les o) GTD6

2. The GTD method: summary

GTD is a sim#le and )le$ible method )or managing your day-to-day tas,s or activities" so as to ma$imi>e #ersonal #roductivity6 The intended result o) a##lying GTD is being able to ,ee# u# ?ith a high ?or,)lo? in a rela$ed manner6 The main #rinci#le is to get everything that is nagging you out o) your mind and into a trusted e$ternal memory ()ile system*" so that you can stay )ocused on ?hat you actually have to do no?" rather than on various ideas" #lans and commitments )or later6 To achieve this" GTD #rovides a com#ilation o) ti#s and tools" organi>ed around a central )lo?chart" as de#icted in Fig6 .6 !rgani>ed #eo#le ?ill certainly already use calendars" to-do lists" note-ta,ing devices" and other tools6 =hat GTD adds" ho?ever" is a method )or using those tools systematically together6 9llen distinguishes )ive basic stages in our ?or,:
=e (.* collect things that command our attentionH (2* process ?hat they mean and ?hat to do ?ith themH and (-* organize the results" ?hich ?e (3* review as o#tions )or ?hat ?e choose to (I* do6 (9llen" 200." 23*

Collect (1) The )irst #hase is to collect everything that catches your attention as #otentially relevant to your activities" ?hatever its sub%ect" im#ortance or degree o) urgency6 This includes incoming letters" emails" #hone calls" re#orts" articles )rom maga>ines" agenda items" suggestions and re@uests )rom other #eo#le" and #ersonal ideas and memories6 For the collecting #rocess" you need one or more collection tools" ?hich can be #hysical (trays" )olders" noteboo," etc6*" or electronic (email a##lication" outliner" or ?ord #rocessor" on a com#uter or a PD9*6 These together de)ine your :in-bas,et;6 Collection is %ust the )irst ste#: to gain control over the collected materials" you need to em#ty the in-bas,et regularly6 m#tying means deciding ?hat to do ?ithFnot actually doingF the items in the collection6 This ha##ens by #rocessing and organi>ing the items one by one6 Process (2) & Organize (3) The #rocessing and organi>ing #hases are summari>ed in the )lo?chart (Fig6.*6

Figure 1: a flowchart depicting the GTD process for organizing and processing incoming stuff into action categories (elaborated from (Allen, 2001, p. 32)). Rectangles represent actions, diamonds represent decision points, stacks represent external memories (lists, folders, files, ) in which reminders are stored. Continuous arrows represent the immediate sequence of processing; broken arrows represent delayed processing, during a review of an external memory; dotted lines represent follow-up processes left implicit in GTD, but whose importance will become clear in the explanation of Fig. 2. The process starts by taking one item out of the In-basket (top-left), and then follows the arrows depending on the answers to the questions. It ends when the item is classified in an external memory or the corresponding action is performed. The most important actions are likely to end up on the bottomright.

The se@uence o) decisions to be made starts )rom the to# le)t o) the )lo?chart and #roceeds do?n?ards6 The )irst @uestion to as, is: :=hat is this stu))C; Gote that :stu)); is a catchall ?ord" ?hich can re)er to an email" something at the bac, o) your mind" a note" a voice-mail" a scra# )rom a ne?s#a#er" etc6" i6e6 any item that has been collected6 Aore #recisely" the crucial @uestion is: :Ds it actionableC;" i6e6 does it re@uire you to #er)orm an actionC i) it is not actionable" there are three #ossibilities: o eliminate the item i) you really ?ill not use it (i6e6 thro? it in the trash bin*H o incubate the item )or #ossible im#lementation later (i6e6 store it in a Someday/maybe )ile that you ?ill revie? at a later time*H o reference the item i) it does not re@uire action but may need to be consulted later (i6e6 store it in a Reference )ile" ?hich is organi>ed so that items are easy to classi)y and retrieve*6 i) it is actionable" then you have to decide" :=hat is the ne$t #hysical actionC; o i) there is more than one action re@uired" store it in your ro!ects list6 o i) the action re@uires less than t?o minutes" it is not ?orth the e))ort o) entering it into the system: better #er)orm it immediately6 o i) you are not the best #erson to do it" delegate the action to a more @uali)ied #erson5organi>ation" and ,ee# trac, o) ?hether you get bac, the desired result by entering a note in the "aitin# for )ile6 o i) the action is to be done on a #articular day and time" de)er it to this moment" and note it on your $a%endar6 o i) the only time constraint is that you should do it as soon as you can" #ut it in your &e't actions )ile6

=hen you revie? your ro!ects list" )or each #ro%ect you should start develo#ing a ro!ect (%an6 This in general does not mean a )ormal scheme ?ith milestones" deadlines and ob%ectives" but a )ormulation o) the overall goal or desired outcome" ?ith a )ocus on the list o) ne$t actions re@uired to move to?ards this goal6 !nce these actions are de)ined" they need to be revie?ed" ?hich means that they should )ollo? the #art o) the )lo?chart that describes the decision tree )or actionable items6 There is in general no need to #lan actions )ar ahead: once the )irst :ne$t action; is done" the ne$t :ne$t action; ?ill #robably become obvious6 To ma,e this summary more concrete" table D sho?s an e$am#le o) a very sim#le GTD list o) reminders arranged in their a##ro#riate categories6 Gote that items are susce#tible to move )rom one category to another6 For e$am#le" the item :#lane tic,ets )or 'russels; ?as initially in the ro!ect %an :Travel to 'elgium;" reminding you to order the tic,etsH no? you are "aitin# for them to arrive by #ostH i) they don<t arrive" it ?ill become a &e't Action to call the com#any about the tic,etsH a)ter you have used them" you may store the tic,ets as a Reference" so that later you could #otentially use them as #roo) o) e$#enses made6

&e't Actions - 'uy a #resent )or llen - Call Peter about the ne? contract ro!ect %an: Travel to 'elgium - 'oo, hotel - Phone tourist o))ice - Change money $a%endar - !ct6 2B: llen<s birthday - Gov6 .2: de#arture )or 'russels "aitin# for - The #lane tic,ets )or 'russels Someday/)aybe - Jead that novel set in 'elgium Reference - Visa #in code: 3I4/ Tab%e I: an e$am#le o) some reminders listed under their corres#onding GTD categories Review (4) The revie?ing #hase is crucial to remind you o) ?hat you still have to do6 The daily review includes revie?ing )irst your $a%endar (?hich are the things that you have to do im#eratively on this dayC*" and then your &e't actions list (?hich are the things that you should do as soon as #racticableC*6 The weekly review is a more in-de#th revie? o) all your (#otentially* actionable )iles (In*bas+et" $a%endar, &e't actions, ro!ects, ro!ect (%ans, "aitin# for, $a%endar and Someday/maybe*6 Dt is essential to get an overvie? o) ?hat has to be done in the coming #eriod" and thus get the )eeling o) being in control6 Concretely" it means that you ma,e sure that the di))erent )iles in your e$ternal memory are ,e#t u#-to-date6 This ?ill include a com#lete cleaning o) your des," email" and other collection #laces" and thus some )urther #rocessing and organi>ing according to the )lo?chart6 9 regular revie? is im#ortant in order to develo# and maintain genuine trust in your system6 Aost #eo#le ?ho are not a##lying GTD do this ,ind o) revie? a )e? times a year" )or e$am#le at the beginning o) a ne? year6 This gives them a great )eeling o) clarity" control" and #ur#ose6 These good intentions" ho?ever" @uic,ly dissi#ate ?hen ne?" un#rocessed things start to accumulate" and #revious #lans become outdated because o) changing circumstances or lac, o) )ollo?-u#6 D) they ?ould do such a revie? systematically every ?ee," this )eeling o) control and goal-directedness could become #ermanent6 Do (5) Having all your lists o) to-dos u#-to-date" ?hat should you do right no?C 9llen #ro#oses three models )or deciding ?hich action to #er)orm6 The )irst is the :)our-criteria model )or choosing 4

actions in the moment;" ?hich advises that you consider the )ollo?ing )actors in the listed order: .6 $onte't: =hat can you do here and no?C 7ou cannot do the same actions ?hen you are at your des, as ?hen you are ?al,ing in the street6 The conte$t limits your choices to the tas,s you can (#ractically* #er)orm6 D) you have a large number o) :ne$t actions;" it is recommended to classi)y them by conte$t (:o))ice;" :home;" :errant;" etc6*" so that actions re@uiring the same conte$t can easily be #er)ormed together6 26 Time a-ai%ab%e: Ho? much time do you have no?C Fit the duration o) the ne$t action you choose to the amount o) time available: i) the time is limited" do only short actions6 -6 .ner#y a-ai%ab%e: Ho? much energy do you have at this momentC 9da#t your choice o) action to your level o) #hysical and mental energy: ?hen you are tired do only routine actions" and ,ee# di))icult actions )or ?hen you )eel more energetic6 36 riority: =hat are your #rioritiesC Given the conte$t" the time and energy available" ?hat action should be done )irstC The t?o )ollo?ing models hel# you to ans?er that @uestion6 The :three)old model )or evaluating daily ?or,; #ro#oses the )ollo?ing #ossible strategies: (.* Do ?or, as it sho?s u# (2* Do #rede)ined ?or, (-* De)ine your ?or, Ds the work that shows up (.* the most urgent thing you have to doC =hen you accom#lish tas,s as they a##ear (ans?ering a #hone call" chatting ?ith a colleague #assing by" re#lying to an email that %ust arrived" etc6* by de)ault it means that you are deciding that these tas,s are the most im#ortant ones at this moment6 9lternatively" you can decide" i) #ossible" to #ost#one the ?or, that sho?s u#" in order to )ocus on your predefined work (2*. This means that you systematically go through your &e't actions list6 D) you do not have any ne$t actions listed" or i) you do not )eel con)ident that the listed :ne$t action; is the best thing to do" you have to define your work (-*. This is similar to the revie?ing #hase" ?here you clear your mind by u#dating your system o) todos6 Still" to be con)ident that ?hat you are doing is truly im#ortant" you need a dee#er insight in your general goals and values6 The :si$-level model )or revie?ing your o?n ?or,; can su##ort such clari)ication6 9llen uses an air#lane analogy to de)ine the levels (9llen" 200." #6 I.*: I0" 0001 )eet: 8i)e 30" 000 )eet: Three- to )ive-year vision -0" 000 )eet: !ne- or t?o-year goals 20" 000 )eet: 9reas o) res#onsibility .0" 000 )eet: Current #ro%ects Jun?ay: Current actions

7ou can de)ine goals )or di))erent terms or time-s#ans" )rom tas,s to underta,e immediately (Jun?ay* to missions that e$tend over the rest o) your li)e s#an (8i)e*6 The latter re@uire you to ans?er almost #hiloso#hical @uestions" li,e :=hat is my #ur#ose in li)eC; Dt is im#ortant to engage )rom time to time in this :vertical thin,ing; (9llen" 200." #6 20-2.*" and ?rite do?n and revie? those lists o) goals" so as not to be constantly chasing #riorities at the run?ay level6

/. $o#niti-e foundations of +now%ed#e wor+

+no?ledge ?or, consists o) various )orms o) human in)ormation #rocessing" ?hich includes such activities as data gathering" inter#retation" classi)ication" #roblem solving" and decisionma,ing6 These mental #rocesses have been studied since the .BI0<s by cognitive science (e6g6 8uger" .BB3H Thagard" 200I*6 Limitations of s m!olic cognition Dnitially" the guiding meta#hor )or analy>ing cognitive #rocesses ?as the mani#ulation o) symbols according to a com#le$ #rogram or algorithm6 This led to the symbolic #aradigm )or cognition6 Dts basic assum#tion is that ,no?ledge is an abstract" internal re#resentation o) the e$ternal environment6 The main tas, o) cognition is to solve #roblems" i6e6 ans?er @ueries about that environment and design #lans to achieve goals in that environment6 This is done by mani#ulating the elements (symbols* o) the re#resentation according to given in)erence rules in order to )ind the combination that best solves the #roblem6 The symbolic #aradigm thus sees reasoning" #lanning and (bounded* rationality as the essence o) cognition6 The symbolic #aradigm ?as im#lemented in arti)icial intelligence (9D*" a general a##roach to simulate cognitive #rocesses by means o) com#uter #rograms6 Ho?ever" symbolic 9D has been much less success)ul than e$#ectedFin #articular in terms o) re#roducing actual human #er)ormance6 Dn contrast to the logical reasoning o) 9D #rograms" #eo#le<s reactions are based on intuition" ?hich is rooted in their sub%ective e$#erience o) the situation6 This ma,es them much more )le$ible in dealing ?ith com#le$ and un)oreseen circumstances6 Dn #art as a result o) these )ailures" the symbolic vie? o) cognition has come under harsh criticism over the #ast t?o decades (e6g6 'ic,hard E Terveen" .BB/H Clancey" .BB4H Suchman" .BB0*6 Dt has no? been largely overta,en by a :ne?; cognitive science" ?hich is ins#ired more by the concrete )unctioning o) the human mind (biologically" neurologically" #sychologically" socially* than by abstract theories o) logic and com#utation6 !ne )undamental criticism o) symbolic theories is that i) you try to re#resent all the relevant as#ects o) the real ?orld ?ith symbols" your re#resentation becomes much too com#le$ to be systematically e$#lored by a com#uter" and a fortiori by the human brain6 Dndeed" the brain is limited by the )amous :magical number seven; (Ailler" .BI/*: not more than about seven items can be held simultaneously in ?or,ing memory6 9 su))iciently detailed descri#tion o) a real?orld situation ?ill ty#ically include hundreds o) symbols (?ords" conce#ts" )eatures* that can be combined in millions o) di))erent ?ays" ma,ing it essentially im#ossible to mani#ulate these symbols in order to systematically e$#lore all their #otentially relevant combinations6 Dnstead" the brain relies on its long-term memory" ?hich can store millions o) )acts" to @uic,ly recognize patterns in the incoming in)ormation6 Jecogni>ed #atterns )unction as stimuli that trigger a##ro#riate res#onses or actions6 &nli,e a com#uter #rogram" the neural net?or, structure o) the brain is very good at identi)ying #atterns" at associating #erceived #atterns ?ith the a##ro#riate actions" and at storing #atterns and associations in long-term memory6 Ho?ever" it is very #oor at simultaneously ,ee#ing several such #atterns actively in mind ?hile reasoning" because the corres#onding #atterns o) neural activation tend to inter)ere ?ith each other6 Aoreover" activation @uic,ly decays because o) di))usion and neuronal )atigue6 Finally" ?hile long-term memory is very e))ective at recognition" it is rather #oor at recall" i6e6 reviving memory #atterns ?ithout #erce#tual stimulation6 This is illustrated by the :ti# o) the tongue; #henomenon" ?here a )act" such as a colleague<s name" cannot be recalledFeven though you ,no? the memory is there6 Dn that sense" human memory is much less reliable than a com#uter memory )or retrieving a )act outside o) the concrete conte$t that reminds you o) that )act6

"it#ate$ an$ %m!o$ie$ Cognition !ne o) the ,ey insights o) the ne? cognitive science is that cognition is necessarily situated and embodied (Clar," .BB4" .BBBH Clancey" .BB4H 9nderson E Aichael" 200-*6 This means that a cognitive system" such as the human mind" is al?ays interacting ?ith its environmental situation via its bodily sensors (eyes" ears" touchL* that #erceive" and e))ectors (hands" vocal chordsL* that #roduce actions6 The com#le$ity o) the real ?orld is dealt ?ith not by mani#ulating an abstract internal re#resentation" but by mani#ulating the ?orld itsel)" i6e6 by #er)orming actions and monitoring their results via #erce#tions6 This interaction is controlled via sensory-motor feedback: #erce#tions trigger actionsH actions #roduce changes in the environmental situationH these changes are again #erceived" these #erce#tions trigger ne? actions toFi) necessaryFcorrect or e$tend the e))ects o) the #revious actions6 Di))erent situations ?ill #roduce di))erent #erce#tions" and there)ore trigger di))erent actions6 'oth cognition and action there)ore are situated: they are determined much more by the concrete e$ternal situation than by internal reasoning or #lanning (Suchman" .BB0H Susi E Miem,e" 200.H Clancey" .BB4*6 This shi)ts most o) the burden o) memory and reasoning )rom the brain to the environment: instead o) having to conceive" #redict and remember the #otential results o) an action" the action is sim#ly e$ecuted so that its actual results can be read o)) )rom the environmental situation6 ))ective actions leave their mar, on the environment6 Dnso)ar that this mar, is made in a stable medium" such as stone" #a#er or silicon" it )unctions li,e an ob%ective registration o) ?hat has ha##ened" storing the in)ormation )or later ins#ection by the brain6 Dn that ?ay" the brain can :o))load; in)ormation and store it in an e$ternal memory that is more reliable and less energy consuming than its o?n ?or,ing memory6 Dn this case" ?e may say that the mind extends into the #hysical environment (Clar, E Chalmers" .BBK*" or that cognition is distributed across the brain and various material su##orts (Hollan" Hutchins E +irsh" 2000H Hutchins" .BBI*6 9 sim#le e$am#le is ta,ing notes6 The mar,ings on the #a#er change as the results o) our actions (?riting*6 !n the other hand" they remain sa)ely stored ?hile ?e do not interact ?ith the #a#er6 =hen #erceived (read*" they trigger thoughts and corres#onding ne? actions" such as adding a related item to the list o) already registered items6 9 use)ul #aradigm to conce#tuali>e the dynamics o) such environmentally mediated activity is the conce#t o) stigmergy (Paruna," 200/H Susi E Miem,e" 200.H Heylighen" .BBB" 2004*6 9n activity is stigmergic i) the action by an agent leaves a mar, (stigma in Gree,* in the environment that stimulates an agent (the same or another one* to #er)orm )urther ?or, (ergon in Gree,*6 This subse@uent action ?ill leave another mar, ?hich in turn ?ill stimulate yet another action6 Thus" di))erent actions indirectly trigger each other" via the traces they leave in the environment6 For e$am#le" u#on noticing that someone has used u# all the #a#er" you leave a note to your secretary to buy #a#erH the subse@uent a##earance o) #a#er reminds you to #rint that long re#ortH the #rintout in turn stimulates you to study its recommendationsH etc6 Stigmergy ?as initially conceived by Grass (.BIB* to e$#lain the activity o) social insects" such as termites and ants6 This collaborative activity" such as nest building" is a##arently com#le$" intelligent and goaldirected6 7et" the individual insects are intrinsically very dumb" lac,ing anything li,e a ?or,ing memory or ability to #lan6 Than,s to the mechanism o) stigmergy their ?or, is e))iciently coordinated6

.0

The environment not only #rovides a #assive medium that registers the e))ect o) actions: it actively intervenes in the agent<s activity" #roducing o##ortunities to #er)orm ne? actions or disturbances that ma,e the actions< result deviate )rom ?hat ?as intended6 Dn situated cognition" o##ortunities )or action created by the #resence o) s#eci)ic ob%ects or situations are called affordances (Gorman" .BBB*6 For e$am#le" the #resence o) a #hone a))ords you the o##ortunity to ma,e a call6 'ecause our brain has evolved to @uic,ly ada#t to its environmental situation" our #erce#tion is es#ecially tuned to the recognition o) both disturbances" that create #roblems that need to be addressed" and a))ordances" that may hel# us to solve #roblems and achieve our goals (Gibson" .BK/*6

&eing in control 9nother sim#le #aradigm to understand this agent-environment interaction is the cybernetic notion o) feedback control (Po?ers" .B4-H Heylighen E Noslyn" 200.*" ?hich is also ,no?n as error-controlled regulation6 9 goal-directed agent" such as an ant or a human" tries to achieve its goals by eliminating any di))erence bet?een its #resent situation (#erce#tion* and its desired situation (goal*6 9 goal here should not be understood as a com#letely s#eci)ied ob%ective or endstate" but merely as an (e$#licit or im#licit* #re)erence )or certain situations over others6 For every #erceived di))erence bet?een the #resent situation and the goal" an action is #er)ormed to reduce that deviation" i6e6 bring the situation closer to the #re)erred one6 D) the result as #erceived is not su))icient" a ne$t action is #er)ormed to again bring the situation closer to the goal" and so on" until the agent is satis)ied6 9lthough some actions may be counter#roductive (in that they increase the distance to the goal*" the overall #rocess tends to >oom in e))iciently on the goal because o) negative )eedbac,: every ne? action tends to correct the errors created or le)t over by the #revious action6 $ternal disturbances are dealt ?ith in the same ?ay: ?hatever caused the deviation or error" the system<s reaction is to try to ma$imally reduce it" until there is no deviation le)t6 Dn that ?ay" the system remains in control o) the situation" by e))iciently counteracting any movement a?ay )rom its desired course o) action6 Dn )eedbac, control" there is no need )or #lanning or )or com#le$ reasoning6 This ma,es the mechanism very robust" and able to deal ?ith the most com#le$ circumstances (Gershenson E Heylighen" 2003*6 This cybernetic notion o) control is at the basis o) the #sychological state o) flow (Csi,s>entmihalyi E Ga,amura" 2002*6 Flo? is the #leasurable state that #eo#le e$#erience ?hen they are absorbed in an activity that demands their )ull attention" but such that they )eel in control" i6e6 able to e))ectively move to?ards their goal" ho?ever )ar a?ay this goal still may be6 The #sychologist Csi,s>entmihalyi (.BB0* discovered the )lo? state by )inding common #atterns in those activities during ?hich #eo#le re#orted the highest level o) #leasant )eelings" as measured by the method o) e$#erience sam#ling6 Flo? is characteri>ed by a clear sense o) goals" and by continuous )eedbac, indicating in ho? )ar the last action brought the situation closer to the goal6 To e$#erience )lo?" challenges should match s,ills" i6e6 the tas, should be neither too di))icult" ?hich ?ould #roduce stress and an$iety" nor too easy" ?hich ?ould #roduce boredom6 During )lo?" #eo#le tend to )orget their ?orries and even their notion o) time" )ocusing com#letely on the tas, at hand6 Ty#ical )lo? #roducing activities ()or those ?ho are good at them* are #laying a video game" #er)orming music" #ainting" #laying tennis" or climbing roc,s6 'ut )lo? can also be achieved during everyday ?or,Feven during something as #rosaic as assembly ?or, on a )actory conveyor beltF#rovided the above conditions are met (Csi,s>entmihalyi" .BB0*6

..

"it#ate$ cognition' concl#sion =e may conclude that the )eelings o) stress" an$iety" and in)ormation overload (Shen," .BB4* that are o)ten e$#erienced during ,no?ledge ?or, may be avoided by restoring a sense o) control6 Given the limitations o) the brain" this is best achieved ?hen the intrinsically di))icult )unctions o) in)ormation #rocessing" memory" and the triggering o) actions are as much as #ossible delegated to the environment (c)6 +irsh" .BB/" 2000*6 This means that ?e should choose or arrange the e$ternal situation in such a ?ay that it can reliably store in)ormation" stimulate ne? actions" and #rovide )eedbac, about the e))ectiveness o) #revious actions6 Dn that ?ay" it ?ill allo? a com#le$ train o) activity to be e))iciently sustained" coordinated" and steered to?ards its intended goals6 The di))erent com#onents o) this mind-environment interaction are summari>ed in Fig6 26 =e can distinguish t?o nested levels o) mind: .* the traditional idea o) mind as inherent in the brainH 2* the :e$tended mind; (Clar, E Chalmers" .BBK* ?hich encom#asses the brain together ?ith any e$ternal memories that are used to su##ort in)ormation #rocessing6 Dn the traditional #ers#ective" e$ternal memory is #art o) the environment6 Dn the cybernetic or distributed cognition #ers#ective" ho?ever" it is #art o) the agent" since it is com#letely controlled by the agent6 The #art o) the environment that is not under controlFi6e6 ?hich does not #er)orm merely as the agent e$#ectsFintervenes in the agent<s activity via ?hat ?e have called a))ordances and disturbances6 These" together ?ith the )eedbac, received via the environment about #revious actions and the reminders stored in the e$ternal memory" determine the situation as #erceived by the agent" and there)ore the agent<s )urther actions6

0i#. 2: the ma%or com#onents o) mind-environment interaction6 The environmental situation ?ith its a))ordances and disturbances is #erceived by the mind5brain6 The in)ormation in this #erce#tion is #rocessed and com#ared ?ith the goal or #re)erred situation6 This determines an action to correct any deviation bet?een #erce#tion and goal6 The action a))ects the situation" and some as#ects o) this ne? situation" in)luenced by )urther disturbances and a))ordances" are again #erceived ()eedbac, via the environment*6 Some actions merely )unction to register in)ormation )or later revie? in an e$ternal memory" ?hich is not a))ected by disturbances6 The e$ternal memory together ?ith the mind5brain constitutes the :e$tended mind;" i6e6 everything that is under the direct control o) the agent6

.2

1. $o#niti-e (aradi#ms a((%ied to GTD

Given the situated and embodied #ers#ective on cognition and action" ?e are ready to #rovide a scienti)ic motivation )or the di))erent recommendations o) GTD6 =e can )irst note that Fig6 2 can be seen as a sim#li)ied version o) the GTD )lo?chart in Fig6 ." ?ith the di))erent e$ternal memories colla#sed into a single one6 The a))ordances and disturbances o) Fig6 2 are sim#ly the :stu)); collected in the In*bas+et o) Fig6 .6 The )eedbac, in Fig6 2 ma,es e$#licit the )act that the monitoring o) #er)ormed actions generally suggest )urther actions to be added to the In*bas+et6 8et us no? summari>e the most im#ortant innovations #ro#osed by GTD and inter#ret them )rom ?ithin this cybernetic5cognitive )rame?or,6

%(ternalizing memor The )irst basic message o) GTD is that you should as much as #ossible get everything out o) your mind and into a trusted e$ternal memory" e6g6 by ?riting it do?n on #a#er or in a com#uter )ile6 Dn that ?ay" not only ?on<t you )orget im#ortant or sim#ly interesting tas,s" #lans" re)erences or ideas" but you ?ill )eel much less stressed by the need to remember all that :stu));6 Dndeed" the limitations o) both ?or,ing and long-term memory are such that you cannot rely on them to recall all the im#ortant )acts ?hen they are needed6 Trying to do that ?ill merely overburden the brain" as it re@uires several #atterns o) neural e$citation to be ,e#t activated ?ithout getting distracted or undergoing inter)erence ?ith ne? in)ormation coming in6 The brain is an intrinsically active medium ?here #atterns are al?ays in )lu$6 9s such" it is #oor at ,ee#ing trac, o) unchanging details6 The #assive media o) #a#er or hard dis, are much better at storing in)ormation in an invariant ?ay" so that you can be sure that ?hat comes out is e$actly ?hat you #ut in6

"tigmergic action The ne$t basic message o) GTD is that you should register in)ormation as much as #ossible in an :actionable; )orm" i6e6 in a ?ay that stimulates you to act ?hen you revie? your e$ternal memory6 This )its in ?ith the #erce#tionaction logic that underlies situated cognition or cybernetic control6 Jevie?ing your e$ternal memory means re-entering it into your brain so that its underlying #atterns can be recogni>ed by your long-term memory6 D) the meaning o) those #atterns is not clear" the brain ?ill need to )urther #rocess them" by combining them ?ith various other related #atterns" in the ho#e that some ne? #attern ?ill emerge in ?hich everything )its6 This #attern may then suggest a s#eci)ic action6 =hile such inter#retation #rocesses are necessary in com#le$ or novel situations" they demand a lot o) additional e))ort" ?ithout any guarantee o) success6 There)ore" to ?or, e))iciently" such #rocesses should as much as #ossible be avoided" or at least be #er)ormed inde#endently o) the actions that eventually need to be e$ecuted6 GTD recommends #er)orming this re)lection before the #attern is registered in the e$ternal memory6 Dn that case" revie?ing the e$ternal memory ?ill avoid remaining vagueness and ambiguity" and the #rocrastination that this ty#ically engenders6 Dnstead" the revie?ed item should directly suggest the action to be ta,en" maintaining the )lo? o) activity ?ithout interru#tion )or )urther re)lection6 The ?hole activity can then be #er)ormed in a @uasi-automatic" :stigmergic; mode" ?here the note read immediately triggers an a##ro#riate action6 Aoreover" GTD ma,es items more actionable by classi)ying them in a number o) discrete categories" each demanding a s#eci)ic ty#e o) action (&e't action #er)orm" ro!ect #lan" Someday/maybe reconsider666*" so that there is no doubt in your mind about ?hat the ne$t ste# is6

.-

"it#ate$ action 9nother basic #rinci#le o) the GTD method is that the decision to #er)orm an action should de#end )irst o) all on the situation" i6e6 the local circumstances that determine in ho? )ar the action is easy to #er)orm here and no?6 This is considered more im#ortant than ordering to-dos by #riority" #ro%ect" or #lanning6 For e$am#le" it is recommended that you arrange all #hone calls you have to ma,e together in an :at #hone; conte$t" and all things you have to discuss ?ith your boss in a :meeting ?ith boss; conte$t6 =hen deciding ?hich o) several #ossible actions to do )irst" you moreover ta,e into account more sub%ective situational )actors" such as :ho? much time do D haveC;" and :ho? much energy do D haveC;6 !nly a)ter all these )actors have been considered should you thin, about #riorities ?hen deciding about ?hat action to do no?6 The #rinci#le is that an action is #er)ormed most e))iciently in the #resence o) the mental and #hysical resources" triggers" and a))ordances that )acilitate #er)orming it6 For e$am#le" sitting in a @uiet room ne$t to your #hone ?ith its #re#rogrammed numbers ma,es calling easy6 Dn #rinci#le" you could #er)orm the same calls standing ne$t to a #ublic #hone on a noisy street corner" but obviously this ?ill seriously reduce your #roductivity ?hile increasing your stress level6 !n the other hand" the street corner may constitute the a##ro#riate situation )or buying )lo?ers" as the #resence o) a )lo?er sho# not only a))ords you the o##ortunity o) #urchase (?hich also e$ists via the #hone or Dnternet*" but also stimulates your senses o) sight" touch and smell" so that you can intuitively #ic, the best o#tion6 9 similar )acilitation occurs on the mental level6 For e$am#le" it is easier to re)lect about ho? to tac,le a #articular #ro%ect a)ter you %ust had a conversation or read a re#ort about that #ro%ect" because the relevant as#ects are still )resh in your mind6 Po#ular culture ,no?s about this #rinci#le through the #roverb :you should stri,e ?hile the iron is hot;6 !n the other hand" s?itching (mental or #hysical* conte$t costs time and energy" so it is better to minimi>e it6 For e$am#le" a)ter you %ust read a re#ort about #ro%ect 9" somebody calls you to discuss #ro%ect '6 9)ter the #hone call" to continue ?ith 9 you ?ill have to #ut ' out o) your mind and try to remember the relevant issues in 96 This re)ocusing e))ort is a #ure ?aste o) mental resources: i) you had )inished your ?or, regarding 9 be)ore addressing '" the ?hole o#eration ?ould have consumed less time and attention" and most li,ely have had better results6 This is ?hy disru#tions are to be avoided6 Fre@uent interru#tions" e6g6 by incoming email messages or #hone calls" signi)icantly reduce a ?or,er<s #roductivity" #resumably because the mind )inds it di))icult to reac@uire its )ocus a)ter having to shi)t its attention (C>er?ins,i" Horvit> E =ilhite" 2003*6 The #rinci#le o) staying ?ithin the same conte$t also a##ears in the :t?o minute rule; o) GTD: i) it ta,es less than t?o minutes to #er)orm an action" do it immediately rather than )ile it )or later #rocessing6 Dndeed" considering an item in order to decide ?hich ty#e o) action it re@uires already sets u# a mental conte$t around that item6 9 short action ?ill be #er)ormed most easily ?ithin that conte$t6 D) instead the item is classi)ied )or later #rocessing" this mental set ?ill have to be recreated6 This may ta,e more time than the t?o minutes it ta,es to #er)orm the action no? and thus eliminate the item )rom the to-do list6

)$a*ting more im*ortant t+an *lanning &nli,e other :#ro%ect management; or :time management; methods" GTD does not em#hasi>e e$#licitly de)ined #riorities" milestones" or deadlines" i6e6 )ormali>ed #lanning schemes and ob%ectives6 These may be necessary )or large-scale but ?ell-de)ined #ro%ects" such as building a )actory or organi>ing a customer survey6 Ho?ever" they tend to be counter#roductive )or everyday tas,s and duties" such as ans?ering your mail" arranging a meeting" or sim#ly organi>ing your thoughts6 !ne reason is that setting u# a #lan demands @uite a lot o) mental

.3

e))ort" involving the ,ind o) abstract symbol mani#ulations )or ?hich our brain is not very ?ell suited6 For sim#le" routine activities" starting the %ob ?ith %ust a )e? reminders o) ?hat should be done ?ill get you to the desired result more @uic,ly6 Aoreover" in our @uic,ly evolving in)ormation society ?e are bombarded ?ith ne? constraints" challenges and o##ortunities (?hat ?e have called a))ordances and disturbances*" so that #riorities and #lans constantly need to ada#t6 =hat seemed to be a good idea t?o months ago may ?ell a##ear outdated today6 9s a result" you cannot loo, ahead in any detail )or more than a )e? months6 9##lying GTD means being ready )or any o##ortunity that arises" but ?ithout )orgetting earlier commitments6 To achieve that" you sim#ly need to register all the interesting o##ortunities and decide ?hether you commit to them no? or merely )ile them as Someday/maybe6 =hen the situation changes or ne? in)ormation comes in" some o) the &e't actions you had committed to may no longer a##ear so im#ortant" ?hereas a Someday/maybe may no? turn out to be ?orth committing to6 Dn any case" the interesting o##ortunities ?ill still be available in your e$ternal memory" ready to #roduce actionsFunli,e a more rigid #lan ?here everything ?ill have to be rescheduled once it turns out that some ob%ectives are no longer ?orth achieving6 This )le$ible and #ragmatic a##roach )its in ?ith the cybernetic #aradigm" ?hich notes that errorcontrolled regulation or )eedbac, (reacting a)ter the event* is more basic and de#endable than antici#atory regulation or )eed)or?ard (acting on the basis o) #lans or #redictions* (Heylighen E Noslyn" 200.H Gershenson E Heylighen" 2003*6 The reason is that #redictions can never be )ully reliable: there are al?ays un)oreseen events that disturb the most care)ully laid out #lans6 Feedbac, control" on the other hand" is s#eci)ically intended to co#e ?ith disturbances6 =hatever the nature o) the disturbance" once it has been assessed" a counteraction is #roduced to reduce its e))ect6 D) this corrective reaction occurs @uic,ly enough" the disturbance ?ill be dealt ?ith at the early stage ?hen it is still easy to handle" and not have the time to gro? into a serious #roblem6 Planning" o) course" is still use)ulFand necessary in those cases ?here #roblems may be )oreseen" such as catastro#hes" that are too large to be counteracted a)ter the event6 'ut the #lanning mode advocated by 9llen (200." #6 I3* is loose and )le$ible" em#hasi>ing a clear sense o) overall #ur#ose cou#led ?ith a s#ontaneous :brainstorming; a##roach ?here di))erent ideas on ho? to a##roach the goals are ?ritten do?n in an e$ternal memory" and then organi>ed according to their intuitive relationshi#s" rather than an im#osed" )ormal structure6 This :natural; #lanning method )its in much better ?ith the ?ay our brain ?or,s" and is more li,ely to ada#t easily to un)oreseen circumstances6 Dndeed" the situated action a##roach (Suchman" .BB0* reminds us that #lans must al?ays remain subordinated to the situation: ?henever something une$#ected ha##ens" control s?itches bac, to the )eedbac, mode" and any #lans ?ill have to be ada#ted or im#rovised )rom scratch6 This a##lies in #articular to basic research" ?hich is in a sense the e#itome o) ,no?ledge ?or,6 There is an un)ortunate tendency in science )unding to demand detailed and e$#licit #lanning o) research #ro%ects6 Jesearch" by de)inition" is intended to be creative or innovative6 This means that its results cannot be #redicted: i) you could antici#ate a discovery" it ?ould not be a discovery6 Aoreover" as an almost #urely in)ormation-based enter#rise in a very ra#idly changing environment" its ob%ectives constantly have to ada#t to ne? insights and observations6 Je@uiring the achievement o) a #riori )i$ed ob%ectives" deadlines" milestones and deliverables is absolutely counter#roductive to innovation" as it )orces #ractitioners to restrict their goals to sa)e and #redictable outcomes" ?hile ignoring une$#ected o##ortunities6

Organizing from t+e !ottom,#* 9gain in contrast to more traditional management methods" GTD starts )rom the bottom (concrete

.I

issues you have to deal ?ith* rather than )rom the to# (high-level goals and values*6 The rationale is that modern ?or, and li)e are so com#le$ that i) you start )rom abstract" idealistic goals and try to ?or, your ?ay do?n to their concrete im#lementation" you ?ill sim#ly be over?helmed by the number o) #ossibilities you have to ta,e into account6 This is li,ely to result in a scheme that is either un?or,ably ambitious" or rigidly limited6 GTD #ro#oses that you )irst tac,le the concrete issues that #resently demand your attention" until you )eel more or less in control6 !nly then should you start considering long-term im#lications o) ?hat you are doing" at increasingly more abstract levels6 D) this long-term e$tra#olation a##ears unsatis)actory" it may be time to rede)ine your higher #riorities and change course" sa)e in the ,no?ledge that at least the short-term #roblems are under control6 This recommendation can again be motivated )rom cognitive and cybernetic #rinci#les6 8ongterm #lanning re@uires the ,ind o) abstract symbol mani#ulation that is intrinsically very demanding on the brain6 Aoreover" given the lac, o) sensory )eedbac," the #lans that are laid out in this ?ay are li,ely to remain vague" abstract and unrealistic6 Aa,ing them more concrete ?ill run into all the contingencies and un)oreseen #erturbations that ma,e detailed #lans intrinsically unde#endable6 !n the other hand" any unsolved #resent issues ?ill remain nagging" creating a sense o) an$iety and lac, o) control" that ma,es it di))icult )or the mind to )ocus on something )ara?ay6 =hen daily activities are running smoothly and on course" it becomes easier to e$tra#olate this course to?ards an increasingly distant )uture" thus getting a sense o) ?here longterm #riorities are best laid6

-sing fee$!ac. to .ee* on trac. =ithout #lanning" the danger is that you ?ould %ust ?ander )rom one thing to the ne$t" ?ithout clear goal or direction6 To counter that" GTD teaches you to cou#le a sense o) overall #ur#ose ?ith a concrete list o) &e't actions" i6e6 the very ne$t ste#s you need to ta,e to move your #ro%ect(s* )or?ard6 ach time you have #er)ormed one o) these tas,s" you can mar, it o))" thus getting the concrete )eedbac, signal and satis)action that you are moving )or?ard" and be ready to #er)orm or de)ine a subse@uent :ne$t action;6 Dn that ?ay" you are constantly advancing to?ards your goal at the most e))icient s#eed" ?ithout the need )or a deadline or other?ise arti)icially im#osed time schedule to ma,e sure that you attain your ob%ectives6 Such )eedbac,-driven" uninterru#ted advance to?ards your goals" at the highest #ace you still )eel com)ortable ?ith" is #recisely ?hat Csi,s>entmihalyi (.BB0* )ound to #roduce the e$#erience o) )lo?6 9llen (200." #6 .0* re)ers to the corres#onding mental state as the :mind li,e ?ater; e$#erienced in martial arts6 The idea is that i) your GTD tas, management system is set u# ?ell" doing your ?or, becomes stress-)ree" seemingly e))ortless" and a source o) continual satis)action6 =hile ?e #ersonally have not yet reached that Men-li,e state ?hile dealing ?ith various administrative hassles" Csi,s>entmihalyi<s (.BB0* ?or, ma,es it very #lausible that a##lying GTD" ?ith its em#hasis on clearly de)ined goals" )eedbac,s and e))orts ada#ted to the concrete challenges o) the situation" ?ould indeed bring one closer to a )lo? state6

2. .'tendin# GTD to su((ort co%%aborati-e wor+

GTD is intended as a method to enhance the #roductivity o) individual ,no?ledge ?or,6 Ho?ever" as 9llen (200." #6 2II-2I/* #oints out" its a##lication in an organi>ational )rame?or, ?ill moreover #roduce collective bene)its6 Aost obviously" i) every individual in the organi>ation becomes more e))icient" the grou# as a ?hole #ro)its6 Aore s#eci)ically" GTD is intended to ma,e individual ?or, more de#endable" by reducing the ris, that commitments are neglected6 D) you ./

are less li,ely to )orget or #ost#one the #romises you made to your co-?or,ers" your co-?or,ers ?ill have more trust in your contributions6 D) all #eo#le in an organi>ation become similarly more reliable in #er)orming the tas,s they have committed to" the organi>ation as a ?hole ?ill )unction much more e))iciently" #ro)iting )rom increased trust" synergy and social ca#ital" ?hile being less vulnerable to )riction" con)lict and con)usion6 Ho?ever" in addition to these s#ontaneous organi>ational :side-e))ects; o) GTD" ?e can envisage more direct contributions to organi>ational e))iciency" by e$tending the underlying cognitive and cybernetic #rinci#les to collaborative ?or,6 To do that" ?e can build )urther u#on the #aradigm o) stigmergy" ?hich ?as initially #ro#osed to describe the collaborative organi>ation o) social insects6 The advantage o) e$ternali>ing in)ormation into the environment is not only that it su##orts individual in)ormation #rocessing" but also that it )acilitates sharing bet?een di))erent individuals6 Dndeed" an e$ternal memory" such as a library or database" can ty#ically be used by many #eo#leFunli,e the memories in your brain6 'ut the stigmergic5GTD #aradigm )ocuses on more than mere in)ormation storage: it demands the e$ternali>ation o) tas,s" to-dos or :ne$t actions;" i6e6 the registration o) concrete stimuli that trigger an activity ?hen encountered in the right conte$t6 'y sharing these" coordination bet?een di))erent agents becomes much easier6 8et us illustrate this ?ith a classic e$am#le o) insect stigmergy ('onabeau et al6" .BBBH Heylighen" .BBB*: the creation o) a net?or, o) #heromone trails by ants6 =hen an ant )inds )ood" it ?ill leave a trail o) #heromones (smell molecules* on its ?ay bac, to the nest6 9n ant setting out )rom the nest loo,ing )or )ood ?ill #re)erentially ?al, along such a #heromone-mar,ed #ath6 D) it too )inds )ood" it ?ill come bac, along the same route leaving more #heromone6 The larger the )ood source" the more ants ?ill thus come bac, )rom it ?hile adding #heromone" and thus the stronger the trace ?ill become6 The stronger the trail" the more ants ?ill )ollo? it to )ind )ood6 !nce the )ood is e$hausted" no more #heromone ?ill be added and the trail ?ill @uic,ly eva#orate6 Dn this ?ay" ants are e))iciently steered to?ards the #resently most #romising locations )or carrying out their main tas,: bringing )ood to the nest6 They need neither to individually remember locations" nor to communicate them to other ants: the #heromone net?or, #er)orms the )unction o) both a shared e$ternal memory and an indirect communication medium that triggers #roductive action6 8et us try to imagine ho? such a mechanism could be im#lemented in a collective GTDli,e system6 Aost obviously" ?e can #rovide shared access to most com#onents o) the GTD )iling system6 Aodern com#uter and net?or, technology ma,es it easy to create a shared re)erence system" ?here all bits o) in)ormation that are #otentially use)ul )or one o) the members o) an organi>ation are stored )or all to be consulted6 For e$am#le" i) you get an announcement o) an interesting ne? #ublication or the address o) a #otential customer" you can store it in the organi>ation database" ?here others can )ind it by entering relevant ,ey?ords6 9nother already e$isting tool is a shared calendar" ?here members o) a ?or,ing grou# can mar, meetings" #resentations" or other events that are relevant to more than one individual6 Similarly" ?e have recently seen the a##earance o) grou# tools )or brainstorming" mindma##ing or outlining" ?hich can be used to su##ort the :#ro%ect #lanning; stage o) GTD6 Aore com#le$ ?or,)lo? systems can su##ort the #rocess o) delegating tas,s to co?or,ers6 Ho?ever" these tools ty#ically assume a rigid scheme that s#eci)ies e$actly ?ho does ?hat ?hen6 Such e$#licit #lans run counter to the #hiloso#hy o) ada#tability" o##ortunism and sel)-organi>ation that characteri>es GTD and stigmergy6 9 more )le$ible a##roach is suggested by %ob tic,eting systems" ?hich are used in organi>ations such as call centers that #rovide su##ort about technical #roblems concerning so)t?are or hard?are6 =hen a customer calls in ?ith a s#eci)ic @uestion" an e$#ert needs to be located that has the relevant ,no?ledge and that is available as soon as #ossible6 Jather than immediately delegating the tas, to a s#eci)ic individual" the system creates a :%ob tic,et; ?ith a short descri#tion o) the ty#e o) #roblem6 These tic,ets are added to a shared #ool o) tas,s to be #er)ormed6 =hen one o) the technicians has )inished a tas," he or she ?ill immediately consult the #ool and select the tas, that best )alls ?ithin his or her .4

domain o) e$#ertise as a :ne$t action;6 Dn that ?ay" tas,s are #er)ormed in the most e))icient ?ay ?ithout need )or any advanced #lanning" and thus ?ithout a ris, o) unantici#ated #roblems (such as a %ob re@uiring more time than e$#ected so that the designated technician remains unavailable )or a ne?ly delegated tas,*6 =hat ?ill be needed )or a collaborative GTD system is an integration and coordination o) these di))erent systems so that an organi>ation-?ide tas, monitoring system is created6 Dncoming items ?ill )irst have to be #rocessed and classi)ied individually according to the e$isting GTD scheme" e$ce#t that no? an additional decision has to be made about ?hether to )ile the item in the individual or in the organi>ational memory system6 Dtems )or the organi>ational system ?ill have to be classi)ied as Reference, Someday/maybe, $a%endar, &e't action or ro!ect6 Gote that items that individually may )all in one category (e6g6 trash* may collectively )all in another (e6g6 Reference*: ?hat is irrelevant )or one #erson in the organi>ation may be relevant )or someone else6 The most im#ortant items are the ones that are actionable6 Here the additional decision needs to be made who ?ill #er)orm the action6 Dn a truly )le$ible" stigmergic system that decision is ideally made by the individual ?ho commits to the action" not by a boss ?ho delegates the action to a subordinate ?ithout ,no?ing #recisely ?hether that subordinate is available" com#etent or ?illing to #er)orm it6 The #hiloso#hy o) GTD is that #eo#le commit to a certain action on the basis o) #ersonal criteria" such as conte$t" time" energy and #riorityFnot because it is im#osed on them6 Gormally" the individuals themselves are the ones best able to %udge ?hether they are ready to #er)orm a tas,6 Ho?ever" such )reedom entails the ris,s that certain im#ortant tas,s are never e$ecuted" or that certain individuals do not #er)orm their )air share o) the ?or,load6 To avoid this" items could be entered into the shared ?or, #ool ?ith a number o) #oints attached to them" ?here the #oints re#resent an estimate o) the im#ortance o) the tas, )or the organi>ation6 m#loyees ?ho satis)actorily #er)orm one o) the tas,s in the ?or, #ool receive the corres#onding #oints6 9t the end o) the month" their ?ages or bonuses may be calculated in )unction o) the total number o) #oints they have earned6 This ?ould ensure that everyone is motivated to tac,le as many im#ortant tas,s as #ossible6 The system ?ould moreover stimulate an e))icient and )le$ible division o) labor" since em#loyees ?ould tend to select those available tas,s )or ?hich they have most s,ills and the most a##ro#riate situation6 Dndeed" they ?ould #er)orm these tas,s more e))iciently than less @uali)ied colleagues" and there)ore become available more @uic,ly to collect a subse@uent tas, and its associated #oints6 This ability to ?or, on the tas, that one )eels most com#etent in is #art o) the e$#lanation )or the sur#rising success o) o#en-source so)t?are develo#ment" ?here the #rogrammers themselves decide ?hat they contribute to ('en,ler" 2002H Heylighen" 2004*6 D) it turns out that certain tas,s still have not been #er)ormed a)ter an e$tended #eriod" in s#ite o) the #oints they o))er" this may be a signal )or the management that the tas, is either not that interesting and there)ore should better be ?ithdra?n" orFi) it is deemed really im#ortantF that the tas, is more di))icult than e$#ected and there)ore deserves more #oints6 Dn that ?ay" the #ool o) tas,s ?ith their associated #oints and the #ool o) available ?or,ers ?ill mutually ada#t6 Thus" the tas, #ool could start to )unction li,e an internal %ob mar,et ?hose :invisible hand; e))iciently matches su##ly (o) ?or,er<s e))orts* and demand (tas,s in the #ool that re@uire e))ort*6 8i,e the ant trail net?or," such a %ob mar,et is an e$am#le o) quantitative" marker-based stigmergy (Paruna," 200/H Heylighen" 2004*" i6e6 the @uantity o) mar,ers (#oints" or #heromones* attached to a tas, determines the amount o) e))ort that is invested in #er)orming it6

.K

$onc%usion The bombardment ?ith in)ormation that ,no?ledge ?or,ers #resently undergo #roduces a lot o) stress and con)usion (Shen," .BB4*6 Traditional methods )or tas, and time management only #rovide su#er)icial relie)" because they )ail to address the central #roblem: ne? in)ormation ty#ically re@uires reconsideration o) #riorities" ob%ectives and resources6 =hen #riorities are inconsistent" methods based on o#timi>ation or detailed #lanning become ine))ective6 Dn his bestselling boo, o) the same name (9llen" 200.*" David 9llen has #ro#osed an alternative method: :Getting Things Done;" or GTD6 Dn GTD" the )ocus has changed )rom establishing #riorities to meticulously ,ee#ing trac, o) o##ortunities and commitments )or action6 =hen (or even ?hether* these o##ortunities are )ollo?ed u# de#ends more on the a))ordances o) the #resent situation than on any shi)ting #lans )or later6 Je)erring to #lenty o) #ersonal e$#erience" its #ractitioners claim that this method minimi>es stress" ?hile ensuring that ?or, #roceeds smoothly to?ards ma$imal #roductivity6 =hile there are as yet no em#irical studies con)irming these claims" ?e have argued that they can be %usti)ied on theoretical grounds6 For this" ?e have revie?ed a variety o) conce#ts and insights emerging )rom the ne? science o) situated and embodied cognition" ?hich has largely overta,en the older symbolic #aradigm ?ithin cognitive science6 Pro#onents o) situated cognition assert that the basic )unctioning mode o) the human mind is not reasoning and #lanning" but interacting via #erce#tion and action ?ith the environmental situation6 The ,ind o) abstract" internal reasoning envisaged in the symbolic vie? o) cognition is intrinsically hard on the brain" because o) its strict :magical number; limitation on ?or,ing memory and the unreliability o) recall )rom long-term memory6 The more natural a##roach to #roblem solving is sim#ly trying out actions in the environment and using sensory-motor )eedbac, to correct the situation ?hen errors or disturbances ma,e it deviate )rom the goal6 Further actions are ty#ically triggered by such )eedbac, together ?ith the a))ordances and disturbances o) the environment" i6e6 by ne? in)ormation coming in through the sensesFnot by #re-e$isting #lans6 Aoreover" the burden on memory can be very much reduced by :o))loading; in)ormation into a stable e$ternal memory" ?here it is sa)ely stored and ready to trigger action later on6 9lthough 9llen (200." #6 42* merely hints at the #ers#ective o) distributed cognition" GTD a##ears to im#lement these same #rinci#les6 Dt does this by insisting that all tas,-related in)ormation be stored in a system o) e$ternal memories" and this so as to be ma$imally actionable" i6e6 ready to stimulate action6 To achieve this" GTD #ro#oses a detailed )lo?chart (Fig6 .* that )ormali>es the #rocess o) collecting and organi>ing incoming in)ormation into a set o) action categories6 This is )ollo?ed by revie?ing and #er)orming the registered to-dos6 The em#hasis is on )irst doing the actions that best match the a))ordances and constraints o) the #resent situation" rather than the actions ?ith the highest #riority6 Dm#licitly" GTD assumes that all tas,s in the e$ternal memory are ?orth #er)ormingH i) in #ractice not all o) them can be done" then it is better to do as many as #resently #ossible6 To achieve this you should start ?ith the ones that re@uire the least time and e))ort given the constraints and affordances of the situation6 Priorities are sub%ective and li,ely to change6 9))ordances are ob%ectively given" but remain available only as long as the situation lasts6 There)ore" ma$imi>ing #roductivity means o#timally e$#loiting the #resent a))ordances6 This means being ready ?ith a com#rehensive list o) ?orth?hile actions to #er)orm ?henever the occasion #resents itsel)6 GTD<s claim o) ma,ing ?or, stress-)ree can be %usti)ied on t?o grounds6 First" GTD minimi>es the burden on memory and reasoning by systematically e$#loiting e$ternal memories6 9s argued by 9llen" this ?ill reduce the an$iety caused by not being sure that you remember everything you need to remember6 Second" and more )undamentally" the consistent a##lication o) GTD should #romote all the )eatures that characteri>e the )lo? state: a clear sense o) #ur#oseH regular )eedbac, as to-dos are :tic,ed o)); one by oneH on-going" unrestrained advance to?ards the goalsH and challenges (tas,s* ada#ted to s,ills (a))ordances and #ersonal abilities*6 9s e$tensively documented by Csi,s>entmihalyi (.BB0*" activities ?ith these )eatures are .B

characteri>ed by a sense o) control" )ocus" and ?ell-beingFin shar# contrast to the con)usion" an$iety and #rocrastination that accom#any the all-too-common situation o) in)ormation overload (Shen," .BB4*6 !) course" ?e are never )ully master o) our o?n destiny" and )rom time to time challenges ?ill be im#osed u#on us )or ?hich ?e lac, the necessary s,ills6 There)ore" GTD cannot guarantee the absence o) ?or,-related stress" but it clearly seems li,e an im#ortant ste# in the right direction6 The #resent reinter#retation o) GTD on the basis o) recent scienti)ic theories does more than %usti)y GTD<s e$#erience-based claims6 'y grounding the concrete recommendations in a broader theoretical )rame?or," it enables a )urther generali>ation" im#rovement and e$tension o) the methodology6 =e have discussed one e$am#le o) such a suggested e$tension o) GTD" )rom individual to collaborative ?or,6 This e$tension ?as ins#ired by the conce#t o) stigmergy" ?hich e$#lains ho? shared e$ternal memories can su##ort the coordination o) collective activity6 Further research ?ill be needed to e$#lore this and other im#lications o) our a##roach6 Dn the meantime" ?e ho#e that both #ractitioners and theoreticians ?ill be ins#ired by our #a#er to a##ly" test" and )urther develo# GTD as a general method )or ,no?ledge ?or,6 ven i) they do not use GTD #ro#er" ?e ho#e that they ?ill ta,e to heart the general #rinci#les that ?e have revie?ed" such as the im#ortance o) e$ternal memory and situation" and the #riority o) ada#ting over #lanning6 The #hiloso#hy underlying GTD is that true #roductivity should be measured not by the number o) planned objectives that are achieved" but by the number o) intrinsically worthwhile results6 =hether these results ?ere )oreseen or not is com#letely irrelevant to their ultimate value6 =hat counts is the total amount o) #rogress made6 9s ?e have argued" a )le$ible and o##ortunistic a##roach such as GTD is intrinsically better #re#ared to ma$imi>e #roductivity in this sense6

References
9erts" D6 9#ostel" 86 De Aoor" '6 Hellemans" S6 Aae$" 6 Van 'elle" H6 Van der Ve,en" N6 (.BB3* World views. V&' Press6 htt#:55???6vub6ac6be5C8 95#ub5boo,s5?orldvie?s6#d) 9llen" D6 (200.* Getting hings !one" he #rt of $tress-%ree &roductivity" (Penguin*6 9nderson" D6 E Aichael" 86 200-: mbodied cognition: 9 )ield guide" #rtificial 'ntelligence .3B" #6 B.F .-06 'en,ler" 76 (2002* Coase<s #enguin" or" 8inu$ and the nature o) the )irm6 he (ale )aw *ournal" ..2" -/BO 33/6 'ic,hard AH" 8 Terveen (.BB/* %oundational issues in artificial intelligence and cognitive science" lsevier Science Publishers6 htt#:55???6lehigh6edu5Pmhb059DFull6#d) 'onabeau" 6 Dorigo" A6 Theraula>" G6 (.BBB* $warm 'ntelligence" !$)ord &niversity Press6 Clancey =6N6 (.BB4*" $ituated +ognition" Cambridge &niversity Press" Cambridge6 Clar, 96 (.BB4* ,eing here" &utting the ,rain- ,ody and World ogether #gain (ADT Press" Cambridge" A9*6 Clar, 96 (.BBB*: 9n embodied cognitive science" rends in +ognitive $cience -:B" #6 3IF-I.6 Clar, 96 and Chalmers D6 (.BBK*: The $tended Aind" #nalysis IK" #6 4-.B6 Covey" S6" Aerrill 96J6 E Aerrill J6 J6 (.BB3* %irst hings %irst (Simon E Schuster* Csi,s>entmihalyi" A6 E Ga,amura" N6 (2002*6 The conce#t o) )lo?6 Dn: Snyder" C6 J6" E 8o#e>" S6 N6 ( ds6*6 he handbook of positive psychology6 !$)ord &niversity Press" #6 KB O .0I Csi,s>entmihalyi" A6 (.BB0*6 %low" he &sychology of .ptimal /xperience" Har#er Perennial6 C>er?ins,i" A6 Horvit>" 6 =ilhite" S6 (2003* 9 diary study o) tas, s?itching and interru#tions" &roc. 0112 conference on 3uman factors in computing systems (9CA Press" Ge? 7or,*" #6 .4I O .K26 Druc,er" P6 F" (.B4-*6 4anagement" asks- 5esponsibilities- &ractices6 Har#er E Jo?" Ge? 7or,6

20

Gershenson C6 E F6 Heylighen (2003*6 Ho? can ?e thin, the com#le$C in: Jichardson" +6 (ed6* 4anaging the +omplex Vol6 . (Dnstitute )or the Study o) Coherence and mergence5Dn)ormation 9ge Publishing* Gibson" N6N6 (.BK/*6 he /cological #pproach to 6isual &erception6 Hillsdale (GN*: 8a?rence rlbaum6 Grass P6-P6 (.BIB*6 8a Jeconstruction du nid et les Coordinations Dnter-Dndividuelles che> ,ellicositermes 7atalensis et +ubitermes sp. 8a thorie de la Stigmergie6 'nsectes $ociaux" /:3.-K36 Heylighen F6 E Noslyn C6 (200.*: Cybernetics and Second !rder Cybernetics" in: J696 Aeyers (ed6*" /ncyclopedia of &hysical $cience 8 echnology (-rd ed6*" Vol6 3 " (9cademic Press" Ge? 7or,*" #6 .II-.406 Heylighen F6 (.BBB*: Collective Dntelligence and its Dm#lementation on the =eb" +omputational and 4athematical heory of .rganizations I(-*" #6 2I--2K06Heylighen F6 (2004*6 =hy is !#en Source Develo#ment so Success)ulC Stigmergic organi>ation and the economics o) in)ormation" in: '6 8utterbec," A6 'aer?ol)) E J6 96 Gehring (eds6*" .pen $ource *ahrbuch 2004" 8ehmanns Aedia" 2004" #6 ./I-.K06 htt#:55#es#mc.6vub6ac6be5Pa#ers5!#enSourceStigmergy6#d) Hollan" N6" Hutchins" 6 and +irsh" D6 (2000*: Distributed cognition" #+4 ransactions on +omputer3uman 'nteraction 4:2" #6 43F.B/6 Hutchins (.BBI*: +ognition in the Wild (ADT Press*6 +irsh" D6 (.BB/* 9da#ting the nvironment Dnstead o) !nesel)6 #daptive ,ehavior" Vol 3" Go6 -53" 3.I-3I26 +irsh" D6 (2000*: 9 )e? thoughts on cognitive overload" 'ntellectica .:-0" #6 .BFI.6 8uger" G6 (.BB3*6 +ognitive science" the science of intelligent systems6 San Diego: 9cademic Press6 Ailler" G696 (.BI/*: The magical number seven" #lus or minus t?o" &sychological 5eview /-:2" #6 K.-B46 Gorman" D696 (.BBB*6 9))ordances" conventions and design" 'nteractions / (-* ##6 -K O 3-6 Paruna," H6 V6 D6 (200/* 9 survey o) environments and mechanisms )or human-human stigmergy" in: /nvironments for 4ulti-#gent $ystems ''" (8ecture Gotes in Com#uter Science" Vol6 -K-0" S#ringer 'erlin*" #6 ./--.K/6 Po?ers" =6 T6 (.B4-* ,ehavior" the +ontrol of &erception6 9ldine" Chicago6 Shen, D6 (.BB4*: !ata $mog" $urviving the 'nformation Glut (Har#er" San Francisco*6 Simon H696 (.BB4* 4odels of ,ounded 5ationality" ADT Press6 Simon" H696 (.B4.*: Designing organi>ations )or an in)ormation-rich ?orld" in: +omputers+ommunications and the &ublic 'nterest" Aartin Greenberger" ed6" The Nohns Ho#,ins Press6 Suchman 86 96 (.BB0*: &lans and situated action" Cambridge &niversity Press Susi" T6 E Miem,e" T6 (200.*6 Social Cognition" 9rte)acts" and Stigmergy6 +ognitive $ystems 5esearch" 2(3*" 24--2B06 Thagard P6 (200I* 4ind- 'ntroduction to +ognitive $cience6 (2nd ed6* ('rad)ord 'oo,s* =i,i#edia contributors6 (2004* Getting Things Done6 =i,i#edia" The Free ncyclo#edia6 htt#:55en6?i,i#edia6org5?i,i5GettingQThingsQDone 6 (accessed on / Govember" 2004*6

2.