Discuss all things Remember The Milk.


GTD Implementation: Large Number of Projects

tim.roy says:
I am evaluating RTM as my new GTD tool as I want to move out of OmniFocus and keep my tasks online.

However, I have something like 75 projects, some of which are subordinate to each other: ie. client: big company: develop web strategy. Looking over the RTM model, it is not practical to have 75 list tabs, one for each project.

How are people with large numbers of project managing this?

It seems that using tags: one for context and one for project, is the most logical approach. Or is it better to make lists for each context and then use tags for projects only?

This looks powerful, but setup seems to be key.

Posted at 6:08pm on August 7, 2008
apgordon says:
At my office we have different teams: research, policy, development, etc. Would having one smart list for @work (where all tasks could reside) and then other SmartLists for .research, .policy, .development -- would that kind of system work for you at all?

If you can thin of ways to sort of group projects together, you could make a tag like .bigcompany and then have the projects within that be '..projectname'.

We tag tasks based on who it's been assigned to, for instance "+Bob" means it's bob's tasks. Then we can make a smartlist for all tasks bob (or go a step further and do Bob, Hillary and Mike if say they are all on the same team)

Maybe this will help get you started. I'm sure others have better ideas and will chime in. Best of luck, let me know if I can help with anything else.
Posted 10 years ago
tim.roy says:
So, I did a set up with contexts as lists. However, I don't think I like the idea of just using tags for projects.

I did a quick count and think I can probably tighten this up a bit and have something like 50 projects. Does that sounds like too many lists? That would be like 5 full rows of list tabs...

Thinking while I type, it may be more logical to use list groupings like client, work, home, leads, etc. as lists and then use tags within the lists to identify specific clients, projects, etc. I would also use tags for contexts such as @waiting for, @calls, @email.

Make more sense?
Posted 10 years ago
apgordon says:
Breaking it up into client, work, home, leads sounds like a good step. Remember that you can have more that one tag in a list. So, for instance, you can make a smart list for: 'tag: .bills AND tag: .cleaning AND .wife AND tag: .kids' Maybe call this smart list "Home" as it contains tasks that all have to do with home.

Maybe this can be applied to you and making your large amounts of projects more manageable? I hope I've been clear -- if not just let me know.
Posted 10 years ago
tim.roy says:
I have been playing with this a bit more ad spent some time talking with my brother who also uses the program. It seems the key decision point in setting up a system is how your lists are defined. Lists can be projects and then use contexts as tags or lists can be contexts and projects are the tags.

This has some impact for me with regard to setting up a sync with my blackberry. Only the lists come over, not the tags.

Any suggestions based on experience?
Posted 10 years ago
apgordon says:
Hey Tim.
I unfortunately have no experience with blackberry (or any mobile device with internet). I'm sure the forums here can help you out with whatever though.

You are right - it all depends on how your (smart) lists are defined as that determines how your tasks are displayed and sorted. And the best thing about tagging things is that you can do it however makes sense to you. There are some popular conventions that have sort of been adopted by a lot of people, but you can always break the 'rules' and whatever you want.

I found this screencast helpful.
One of the things I've found helpful is to just have all my tasks in one List (gray background) and then sort and organize them how I want with SmartLists (blue background).

Hope this helps. Hit me back if you have any questions I can field.
Posted 10 years ago
This topic has now been closed automatically due to a lack of responses in the past 90 days.