«Traditional approaching to» decision-making, project planning and problem solving,
generally assume a given range of possibilities from which the best possible one is to be chosen.

As Simon (1997) pointed out long ago,
rationality is bounded: we never have the full information needed to make optimal choices.
But Simon’s alternative strategy of “satisficing” is flawed too: a choice that is satisfactory now, may not appear so good anymore when new information comes in. In practice,
people follow a strategy of “bettering”: choosing what seems best from the available options now, but being ready to switch to something better when new information arrives.

the constant bombardment with new information means that previous plans, decisions and relevant data are often forgotten or neglected.

Insofar that they look at the wider picture, however, they tend to remain within the optimization paradigm:

1. Formulate clear objectives or priorities (optimization criteria)
   
2. order the different tasks according to
   
   1. how much they contribute to the priorities
      
   2. how much time, effort or other resources you need to invest in them.
      

Conclusion:
focus on the tasks that contribute maximally to the chosen objectives while requiring minimal resources.

For knowledge work both priorities and resources are in general ill defined and constantly changing.
The reason is that information, unlike material resources, is not a conserved quantity:
it can appear (be discovered or communicated) or disappear (become outdated) at any moment.

applying an optimization strategy to knowledge work may produce
rather than reduce stress,
as people worry about what priorities to accord to different alternatives,
and then feel guilty or disoriented when they have not managed to follow their own prescriptions because of unforeseen changes.

We wish to view GTD and its proposed theoretical foundation as a first step towards a
concrete praxeology, i.e. a theory of practical action, with specific application to knowledge
work.

Given that the amount of attention that we can devote to our work is finite, a growing
amount of information clamoring for our attention must at a certain moment produce an overload,
where a number of (potentially important) items simply can no longer be processed.

facilitate this unavoidable process of selectively ignoring demands while remaining
maximally in control of the situation.

The main principle is to get everything that is nagging you out of your mind and into a trusted external memory (file system), so that you can stay focused on what you actually have to do now,

The proposes the following possible strategies:

1. Do work as it shows up
   
2. Do predefined work
   
3. Define your work
   

• 50,000+ feet: Life
  
• 40,000 feet: Three- to five-year vision
  
• 30,000 feet: One- or two-year goals
  
• 20,000 feet: Areas of responsibility
  
• 10,000 feet: Current projects
  
• Runway: Current actions
  

cognition is necessarily situated and embodied
a cognitive system, such as the human mind, is always interacting with its environmental situation via its bodily sensors that perceive, and effectors that produce actions.

The complexity of the real world is dealt with not by manipulating an
abstract internal representation, but by manipulating the world itself, i.e. by performing actions
and monitoring their results via perceptions. This interaction is controlled via

• perceptions trigger actions;
  
• actions produce changes in the environmental situation;
  
• these changes are again perceived,
  
• these perceptions trigger new actions to—if necessary—correct or extend the effects of
  

the previous actions.

Both cognition and action therefore are situated: they are determined much more by the concrete external situation than by internal reasoning or planning

This shifts most of the burden of memory and reasoning from the brain to the environment: instead of having to conceive, predict and remember the potential results of an action, the action is simply executed so that its actual results can be read off from the environmental situation.

Effective actions leave their mark on the environment. Insofar that this mark is made in a stable
medium,

it functions like an objective registration of what has
happened, storing the information for later inspection by the brain. In that way, the brain can
“offload” information and store it in an external memory that is more reliable and less energy
consuming than its own working memory.

we may say that the mind extends into the
physical environment

or that cognition is distributed across the brain
and various material supports

taking notes. The markings on the paper change as the results of our actions (writing).
On the other hand, they remain safely stored while we do not interact with the paper. When
perceived (read), they trigger thoughts and corresponding new actions, such as adding a related
item to the list of already registered items.

An activity is stigmergic if the action by an agent leaves a mark

stigmergy

in the environment
that stimulates an agent (the same or another one) to perform further work

This
subsequent action will leave another mark which in turn will stimulate yet another action. Thus,
different actions indirectly trigger each other, via the traces they leave in the environment.

Stigmergy was initially
conceived

to explain the activity of social insects, such as termites and ants.
This collaborative activity, such as nest building, is apparently complex, intelligent and goal-
directed. Yet, the individual insects are intrinsically very dumb,

opportunities for action created by the presence of specific objects or situations are called affordances

cybernetic
notion of feedback control

error-controlled regulation.

A goal-directed agent, such as an ant or a human, tries to achieve its
goals by eliminating any difference between its present situation (perception) and its desired
situation (goal).

goal here should not be understood as a completely specified objective or end-
state, but merely as an (explicit or implicit) preference for certain situations over others.

Although some actions may be counterproductive (in that they
increase the distance to the goal), the overall process tends to zoom in efficiently on the goal
because of negative feedback: every new action tends to correct the errors created or left over by
the previous action.

External disturbances are dealt with in the same way: whatever caused the
deviation or error, the system’s reaction is to try to maximally reduce it, until there is no deviation
left. In that way, the system remains in control of the situation, by efficiently counteracting any
movement away from its desired course of action. In feedback control, there is no need for
planning or for complex reasoning. This makes the mechanism very robust, and able to deal with
the most complex circumstances

This cybernetic notion of control is at the basis of the psychological state of flow

Flow is the pleasurable state that people experience when
they are absorbed in an activity that demands their full attention, but such that they feel in control,
i.e. able to effectively move towards their goal, however far away this goal still may be.

To experience flow, challenges should match skills, i.e. the task should be neither too difficult,
which would produce stress and anxiety, nor too easy, which would produce boredom. During
flow, people tend to forget their worries and even their notion of time, focusing completely on the
task at hand.

the feelings of stress, anxiety, and information overload

that
are often experienced during knowledge work may be avoided by restoring a sense of control.

Given the limitations of the brain, this is best achieved when the intrinsically difficult functions of
information processing, memory, and the triggering of actions are as much as possible delegated
to the environment

we should choose or arrange the
external situation in such a way that it can reliably store information, stimulate new actions, and
provide feedback about the effectiveness of previous actions.

1. the traditional idea of mind as inherent in the brain; 2)
   

the “extended mind”

which encompasses the brain together with any
external memories that are used to support information processing.

In the traditional perspective,
external memory is part of the environment. In the cybernetic or distributed cognition
perspective, however, it is part of the agent, since it is completely controlled by the agent.

part of the environment that is not under control—i.e. which does not perform merely as the agent
expects—intervenes in the agent’s activity via what we have called affordances and disturbances.

The affordances and disturbances of Fig. 2 are simply the
“stuff” collected in the In-basket of Fig. 1. The feedback in Fig. 2 makes explicit the fact that the
monitoring of performed actions generally suggest further actions to be added to the In-basket.

The first basic message of GTD is that you should as much as possible get everything out of your
mind and into a trusted external memory,

not only won’t you forget important or simply interesting tasks, plans, references or
ideas, but you will feel much less stressed by the need to remember all that “stuff”.

limitations of both working and long-term memory are such that you cannot rely on them to recall
all the important facts when they are needed.

The next basic message of GTD is that you should register information as much as possible in an
“actionable” form, i.e. in a way that stimulates you to act when you review your external
memory.

Reviewing your external memory means re-entering it into your brain so that
its underlying patterns can be recognized by your long-term memory. If the meaning of those
patterns is not clear, the brain will need to further process them, by combining them with various
other related patterns, in the hope that some new pattern will emerge in which everything fits.
This pattern may then suggest a specific action.

While such interpretation processes are necessary
in complex or novel situations, they demand a lot of additional effort, without any guarantee of
success. Therefore, to work efficiently, such processes should as much as possible be avoided, or
at least be performed independently of the actions that eventually need to be executed.

GTD recommends performing this reflection before the pattern is registered in the external
memory. In that case, reviewing the external memory will avoid remaining vagueness and
ambiguity, and the procrastination that this typically engenders. Instead, the reviewed item should
directly suggest the action to be taken, maintaining the flow of activity without interruption for
further reflection.

GTD makes
items more actionable by classifying them in a number of discrete categories, each demanding a
specific type of action (Next action → perform, Project → plan, Someday/maybe →
reconsider…), so that there is no doubt in your mind about what the next step is.

the decision to perform an action should
depend first of all on the situation,

This is considered more important than ordering to-dos
by priority, project, or planning.

The principle is that an action is performed most efficiently in the presence of the mental and
physical resources, triggers, and affordances that facilitate performing it.

switching (mental or physical) context costs time and energy, so it is better to
minimize it.

This is why disruptions are to be avoided. Frequent interruptions, e.g. by incoming email
messages or phone calls, significantly reduce a worker’s productivity, presumably because the
mind finds it difficult to reacquire its focus after having to shift its attention

The principle of staying within the same context also appears in the “two minute rule” of GTD: if
it takes less than two minutes to perform an action, do it immediately rather than file it for later
processing.

considering an item in order to decide which type of action it requires already
sets up a mental context around that item. A short action will be performed most easily within
that context.

GTD does not emphasize
explicitly defined priorities, milestones, or deadlines, i.e. formalized planning schemes and
objectives.

These may be necessary for large-scale but well-defined projects,

However, they tend to be counterproductive for
everyday tasks and duties,

setting up a plan demands quite a lot of mental
effort, involving the kind of abstract symbol manipulations for which our brain is not very well
suited. For simple, routine activities, starting the job with just a few reminders of what should be
done will get you to the desired result more quickly.

our quickly evolving information society we are bombarded with new constraints,
challenges and opportunities (what we have called affordances and disturbances),

priorities and plans constantly need to adapt. What seemed to be a good idea two months ago may
well appear outdated today. As a result, you cannot look ahead in any detail for more than a few
months. Applying GTD

means being ready for any opportunity that arises, but without forgetting
earlier commitments.

cybernetic paradigm, which notes that error-
controlled regulation or feedback (reacting after the event) is more basic and dependable than
anticipatory regulation or feedforward (acting on the basis of plans or predictions)

The reason is that predictions can never be fully
reliable: there are always unforeseen events that disturb the most carefully laid out plans.

Feedback control, on the other hand, is specifically intended to cope with disturbances.

Planning, of course, is still useful—and necessary in those cases where problems may be
foreseen, such as catastrophes, that are too large to be counteracted after the event. But the
planning mode advocated by Allen

is loose and flexible, emphasizing a clear sense
of overall purpose coupled with a spontaneous “brainstorming” approach where different ideas on
how to approach the goals are written down in an external memory, and then organized according
to their intuitive relationships, rather than an imposed, formal structure.

This “natural” planning
method fits in much better with the way our brain works,

plans must always remain
subordinated to the situation: whenever something unexpected happens, control switches back to
the feedback mode, and any plans will have to be adapted or improvised from scratch.

Requiring
the achievement of a priori fixed objectives, deadlines, milestones and deliverables is absolutely
counterproductive to innovation, as it forces practitioners to restrict their goals to safe and
predictable outcomes, while ignoring unexpected opportunities.

Again in contrast to more traditional management methods, GTD starts from the bottom (concrete
issues you have to deal with) rather than from the top (high-level goals and values).

modern work and life are so complex that if you start from abstract, idealistic goals and try
to work your way down to their concrete implementation, you will simply be overwhelmed by the
number of possibilities you have to take into account.

This is likely to result in a scheme that is

either unworkably ambitious, or rigidly limited.

first tackle the concrete
issues that presently demand your attention, until you feel more or less in control. Only then
should you start considering long-term implications of what you are doing, at increasingly more
abstract levels. If this long-term extrapolation appears unsatisfactory, it may be time to redefine
your higher priorities and change course, safe in the knowledge that at least the short-term
problems are under control.

Long-
term planning requires the kind of abstract symbol manipulation that is intrinsically very
demanding on the brain. Moreover, given the lack of sensory feedback, the plans that are laid out
in this way are likely to remain vague, abstract and unrealistic.

Making them more concrete will
run into all the contingencies and unforeseen perturbations that make detailed plans intrinsically
undependable.

any unsolved present issues will remain nagging, creating a
sense of anxiety and lack of control, that makes it difficult for the mind to focus on something
faraway.

When daily activities are running smoothly and on course, it becomes easier to
extrapolate this course towards an increasingly distant future, thus getting a sense of where long-
term priorities are best laid.

Without planning, the danger is that you would just wander from one thing to the next, without
clear goal or direction.

GTD teaches you to couple a sense of overall purpose
with a concrete list of Next actions,

Each time you have performed one of these tasks, you can mark it off, thus
getting the concrete feedback signal and satisfaction that you are moving forward, and be ready to
perform or define a subsequent “next action”.

if your GTD task management system is set up well,
doing your work becomes stress-free, seemingly effortless, and a source of continual satisfaction.

if every individual in the organization
becomes more efficient, the group as a whole profits. More specifically, GTD is intended to make
individual work more dependable, by reducing the risk that commitments are neglected.

If you
are less likely to forget or postpone the promises you made to your co-workers, your co-workers
will have more trust in your contributions. If all people in an organization become similarly more
reliable in performing the tasks they have committed to, the organization as a whole will function
much more efficiently, profiting from increased trust, synergy and social capital, while being less

vulnerable to friction, conflict and confusion.

addition to these spontaneous organizational “side-effects” of GTD, we can
envisage more direct contributions to organizational efficiency,

extending

to collaborative work.

build further upon
the paradigm of stigmergy, which was initially proposed to describe the collaborative
organization of social insects.

The advantage of externalizing information into the environment is
not only that it supports individual information processing, but also that it facilitates sharing
between different individuals.

classic example of insect stigmergy

the creation of a network of pheromone trails by ants. When an ant finds food,
it will leave a trail of pheromones (smell molecules) on its way back to the nest. An ant setting
out from the nest looking for food will preferentially walk along such a pheromone-marked path.

If it too finds food, it will come back along the same route leaving more pheromone. The larger
the food source, the more ants will thus come back from it while adding pheromone, and thus the
stronger the trace will become. The stronger the trail, the more ants will follow it to find food.

Once the food is exhausted, no more pheromone will be added and the trail will quickly
evaporate.

They need neither to individually
remember locations, nor to communicate them to other ants: the pheromone network performs the
function of both a shared external memory and an indirect communication medium that triggers
productive action.

Modern computer and network technology makes it easy to create a shared reference
system, where all bits of information that are potentially useful for one of the members of an
organization are stored for all to be consulted.

Another already
existing tool is a shared calendar, where members of a working group can mark meetings,
presentations, or other events that are relevant to more than one individual.

More complex workflow systems can support the process of delegating tasks to co-
workers. However, these tools typically assume a rigid scheme that specifies exactly who does
what when.

counter to the philosophy of adaptability, opportunism and
self-organization that characterizes GTD and stigmergy.

creates a “job ticket” with a short description of the type of problem. These tickets are
added to a shared pool of tasks to be performed. When one of the technicians has finished a task,
he or she will immediately consult the pool and select the task that best falls within his or her
domain of expertise as a “next action”.

Note
that items that individually may fall in one category (e.g. trash) may collectively fall in another
(e.g. Reference): what is irrelevant for one person in the organization may be relevant for
someone else.

The most important items are the ones that are actionable. Here the additional decision
needs to be made who will perform the action. In a truly flexible, stigmergic system that decision
is ideally made by the individual who commits to the action, not by a boss who delegates the
action to a subordinate without knowing precisely whether that subordinate is available,
competent or willing to perform it.

Normally, the individuals themselves are the ones best able to judge whether
they are ready to perform a task. However, such freedom entails the risks that certain important
tasks are never executed, or that certain individuals do not perform their fair share of the
workload. To avoid this, items could be entered into the shared work pool with a number of
points attached to them,

an estimate of the importance of the task for
the organization.

The system would moreover stimulate an efficient and flexible division of labor, since
employees would tend to select those available tasks for which they have most skills and the most
appropriate situation.

certain tasks still have not been performed after an extended period, in
spite of the points they offer, this may be a signal for the management that the task is either not
that interesting and therefore should better be withdrawn, or—if it is deemed really important—
that the task is more difficult than expected and therefore deserves more points.

the task pool could start to function like an internal job market whose “invisible hand”
efficiently matches supply (of worker’s efforts) and demand (tasks in the pool that require effort).