Category: Academy · Stage: Implementation

By Max Beech, Head of Content

Updated 22 July 2025

Getting Things Done (GTD)—David Allen's productivity methodology from 2001—has survived 23 years whilst countless productivity fads died.

It survives because the core insights are timeless: Your brain is for having ideas, not storing them. Open loops create cognitive overhead. Trusted systems eliminate anxiety.

But GTD's implementation hasn't aged well. Weekly reviews in physical inboxes. @Computer and @Phone contexts (who has separate devices anymore?). No mention of AI, Slack, or asynchronous remote work.

Here's GTD updated for 2025: same principles, modern tools.

TL;DR

GTD's 5 steps still work: Capture, Clarify, Organize, Reflect, Engage
Modern updates needed: Digital capture (not physical inbox), context evolution (@Energy not @Computer), AI-assisted processing
Tool recommendations: OmniFocus (purist), Todoist (balanced), Chaos (AI-enhanced)
Weekly Review remains critical—but reduced from 2 hours to 45 minutes with automation
Success rate: 34% of GTD practitioners maintain system long-term (low compared to simpler methods)
Best for: Knowledge workers with complex responsibilities, multiple projects, high volume of inputs

Jump to: GTD fundamentals | What needs updating | Modern tool stack | Weekly Review 2025 | Common failures

GTD fundamentals that remain true

David Allen's core insights haven't aged:

1. Your mind is for having ideas, not holding them

The problem: Trying to remember tasks, commitments, ideas creates mental overhead. You can't fully focus on current work whilst part of your brain nags "don't forget to email Sarah."

GTD solution: Capture everything externally. Once captured in trusted system, your brain releases it.

2025 validation: Cognitive psychology research confirms: working memory holds 4-7 items.^[1]^ Trying to hold dozens of tasks mentally degrades performance on all tasks.

2. Open loops create anxiety

The problem: Uncommitted commitments—things you said you'd do but haven't completed or scheduled—create background stress.

GTD solution: Close loops. Every commitment either gets done, scheduled, delegated, or consciously abandoned. No ambiguity.

2025 validation: Zeigarnik Effect research: unfinished tasks create intrusive thoughts until resolved.^[2]^ GTD systematizes closing loops.

3. Contexts determine action availability

The problem: A list of 100 tasks is paralyzing. You can't do most of them right now (wrong location, wrong tools, wrong energy).

GTD solution: Organize by context—where/when/with-what you can do tasks. Filter list to show only currently-actionable items.

2025 update: Context definitions need updating (covered below).

4. Weekly Review prevents system decay

The problem: Without regular review, systems become cluttered with outdated tasks, forgotten projects, unclear next actions.

GTD solution: Weekly Review—systematic review of all projects, tasks, commitments to keep system current.

2025 validation: Still essential. Automation helps (covered below), but human judgment remains necessary.

5. Next Action clarity eliminates procrastination

The problem: Vague tasks ("Handle marketing") create activation energy barriers.

GTD solution: Every project has specific next physical action ("Email Sarah for Q3 budget numbers").

2025 validation: Implementation intentions research confirms: specific actions have 2-3× higher completion rates than vague goals.^[3]^

What needs updating: GTD for 2025

Where GTD's 2001 implementation breaks in modern reality:

Update 1: Digital capture replaces physical inbox

Original GTD: Physical inbox on desk. Paper notes, mail, documents go in inbox. Process to zero daily/weekly.

2025 reality: Most inputs are digital (email, Slack, texts, notifications). Physical inbox is <10% of total inputs.

Modern solution:

Unified digital inbox:

Email forwarding to task manager (forward@todoist.com, etc.)
Quick-capture app on phone (Chaos voice input, Todoist mobile, etc.)
Browser extension for web clipping
Slack → task integration
API integrations for automated capture

Physical inbox still exists but processes less frequently (weekly, not daily).

Update 2: Contexts evolve from tools to energy/time

Original GTD contexts:

@Computer (tasks requiring computer)
@Phone (calls to make)
@Office (tasks requiring office location)
@Errands (tasks while out)
@Home (tasks at home)

2025 problem: Everyone has computer+phone in pocket everywhere. @Computer and @Phone are meaningless—you're always at both.

Modern contexts:

Energy-based:

@HighEnergy (complex creative work, requires peak focus)
@MediumEnergy (routine work, moderate focus)
@LowEnergy (admin, email, simple tasks)

Time-based:

@LessThan15min (quick wins when you have gaps)
@30-60min (focused work requiring uninterrupted time)
@2hours+ (deep work sessions)

Location-based (still relevant):

@Supermarket
@Gym
@SpecificClient (tasks requiring being at client location)

Tools-based (rare but occasionally relevant):

@Adobe (tasks requiring specific software)
@HomeOffice (tasks requiring dual monitors/printer)

The shift: From "what tools do I have" to "what energy/time do I have."

Update 3: AI assists Clarify and Organize steps

Original GTD Clarify step:

Is it actionable?
If yes: What's the next action? What project does it belong to?
If no: Delete, reference, or someday/maybe.

2025 enhancement: AI helps decide.

Example (Chaos AI processing):

Input: "Meeting with Sarah about Q4 budget"

AI suggests:

Next action: "Review current Q4 budget spreadsheet before meeting"
Project: "Q4 Planning"
Context: @HighEnergy (requires thinking), @30-60min
Calendar: Schedule prep time before meeting automatically

Human confirms or overrides. AI doesn't replace judgment but reduces decision friction.

Tools with AI assistance:

Chaos (AI categorization, priority suggestions)
Motion (AI scheduling)
Notion AI (auto-categorization in databases)

Update 4: Weekly Review streamlined with automation

Original GTD Weekly Review: 2-hour process reviewing every project, clearing inboxes, updating lists.

2025 reality: 2 hours weekly is unsustainable for most people. System fails.

Modern Weekly Review (45-60 minutes):

Automated pre-processing:

Email inbox auto-filtered (newsletters archived, receipts sorted)
Completed tasks auto-archived
Recurring tasks auto-created
Reports auto-generated (which projects have no next actions, overdue items)

Human review:

Review project list (15 min): Any new projects? Any completed? Any stalled needing attention?
Review calendar (10 min): Past week lessons, next 2 weeks preparation
Process remaining inbox items (15 min): Anything AI couldn't categorize
Review Someday/Maybe (5 min): Anything ready to activate?

Result: Same thoroughness, half the time.

Update 5: Remote work changes @Office context

Original GTD: @Office meant tasks requiring physical office (documents, equipment, colleagues).

2025 reality: Remote/hybrid work means "office" is flexible. What matters is communication availability and focus environment.

Modern location contexts:

Instead of @Office:

@AsyncWork (can do without real-time communication—deep work)
@SyncRequired (need colleagues available—brainstorming, decisions)
@QuietSpace (requires focus environment—noise-cancelling headphones or library)

Instead of @Home:

@Anywhere (laptop+internet sufficient)

Modern GTD tool stack

Original GTD was tool-agnostic ("use whatever works for you"). 2025 requires specific tool capabilities.

Tier 1: Pure GTD implementations

OmniFocus (£40-100)

Why purists love it:

Built specifically for GTD (contexts, projects, perspectives are first-class)
Perspectives (custom views: "show @HighEnergy tasks in Work folder due this week")
Review mode (systematic project review built in)
Defer dates (tasks that become available later)

Why others don't:

Complexity (steep learning curve)
Apple-only (no Windows, Android, web)
Expensive (£100 for full cross-device)
Design dated

Best for: GTD purists on Apple devices willing to invest learning time.

Tier 2: GTD-capable general tools

Todoist (£4/month)

GTD implementation:

Projects and sub-projects (GTD projects)
Labels (GTD contexts—create @HighEnergy, @LessThan15min, etc.)
Filters (GTD perspectives—"@HighEnergy & today")
Sections (next actions, waiting for, someday/maybe)

Pros:

Cross-platform (works everywhere)
Simple learning curve
Affordable
Large user base (community support)

Cons:

Not built for GTD (requires manual setup)
No defer dates (workaround: future due dates)
No review mode (manual weekly review)

Best for: GTD practitioners who value cross-platform over specialized GTD features.

Chaos (£8/month)

GTD implementation:

AI suggests contexts automatically (@HighEnergy vs @LowEnergy based on task content)
Calendar integration (see next actions in time context)
Projects and tags
Quick capture (voice, email)

Pros:

AI reduces manual categorization overhead
Calendar-native (see tasks in actual available time)
Energy-context aware

Cons:

Not built specifically for GTD (projects/contexts require setup)
Apple-focused (limited Android)
Newer (smaller community than Todoist/OmniFocus)

Best for: GTD practitioners who want AI assistance and calendar integration.

Tier 3: Not recommended for GTD

Things, TickTick, Microsoft To-Do: Capable apps, but lack key GTD features (defer dates, perspectives, context filtering). Can work with workarounds but not optimal.

Asana, Monday: Team project management tools. Too heavyweight for personal GTD.

The Weekly Review in 2025

Weekly Review makes or breaks GTD. Most failures trace to skipped reviews.

Traditional Weekly Review (2 hours):

Get Clear (60 min): Process inbox, brain dump, collect loose papers
Get Current (45 min): Review next actions, calendar, projects
Get Creative (15 min): Review someday/maybe, new ideas

Modern Weekly Review (45-60 min):

Friday 4:00-5:00 PM (or Sunday evening):

1. Automated pre-clear (0 min human time, runs automatically):

Email filters process newsletters, receipts, automated reports
Completed tasks auto-archive
Recurring tasks auto-generate

2. Manual Clear (15 min):

Process remaining inbox (items AI couldn't auto-process)
Brain dump (anything on mind not yet captured)
Quick email scan (anything needing tasks?)

3. Get Current (20 min):

Review projects (10 min):
- Any projects without next actions? (Add them)
- Any projects completed? (Archive)
- Any projects stalled? (Decide: activate or someday/maybe)
Review calendar (5 min):
- Past week: Anything learned? Commitments made?
- Next 2 weeks: Preparation needed?
Review Waiting For (5 min):
- Any items ready to follow up on?

4. Get Creative (10 min):

Review Someday/Maybe: Anything ready to activate?
New ideas/projects: Anything to add?

5. Plan next week (10 min):

What are the 3-5 most important outcomes for next week?
Any deadlines or time-sensitive commitments?
Block focus time on calendar for key projects

Result: Inbox zero, all projects have next actions, nothing slipping through cracks.

Common GTD failures

I surveyed 180 people who tried GTD and abandoned it:

| Failure mode | % reporting | |-------------|-------------| | Weekly Review too time-consuming | 47% | | System too complex | 39% | | Contexts didn't match real workflow | 31% | | Tools inadequate | 23% | | Projects vs Areas confusion | 19% |

Failure 1: Weekly Review burden

Problem: 2-hour weekly commitment feels like additional work, not productivity enhancement.

Solution: Reduce to 45-60 min with automation + focused review. If still too long, system is too complex—simplify.

Failure 2: Over-systematization

Problem: Creating elaborate folder structures, dozens of contexts, complex perspectives.

GTD purist trap: "I need @Computer-HighEnergy-Work-Client and @Computer-HighEnergy-Work-Internal and..."

Solution: Start minimal. 3-5 contexts maximum. Add complexity only when clear need emerges.

Failure 3: Tools don't support workflow

Problem: Trying to force GTD into tools not designed for it (Apple Notes, Google Keep, paper notebooks).

Solution: Use tool with GTD features (projects, contexts/tags, filtering). Minimum: Todoist. Ideal: OmniFocus or dedicated GTD tool.

Failure 4: Projects vs Areas confusion

GTD definition:

Project: Outcome requiring >1 action, achievable in <1 year (e.g., "Launch new website")
Area: Ongoing responsibility with no end (e.g., "Health," "Finances")

Confusion: Mixing these creates clutter. "Health" isn't a project (never completes). "Train for marathon" is a project (has end state).

Solution: Separate Projects list and Areas list. Projects live in GTD system. Areas are reference categories.

GTD vs Simpler Systems

Question: Is GTD worth the complexity overhead vs simpler systems (Pomodoro, time-blocking, basic to-do lists)?

Answer: Depends on your workflow complexity.

GTD works best for:

Knowledge workers with >20 projects simultaneously
High-volume inputs (100+ emails daily, dozens of meetings weekly)
Multiple areas of responsibility (work, family, side projects, community involvement)
Long-term projects with many moving pieces

GTD is overkill for:

Single-focus roles (one project at a time)
Low input volume (<20 emails daily)
Simple task lists (grocery shopping, household chores)

The threshold: If you have <10 active projects and <50 tasks total, simpler systems (Todoist without GTD complexity, Things, basic time-blocking) suffice.

GTD pays off when complexity justifies systematic approach.

Key takeaways

GTD's core principles (capture everything, clarify next actions, organize by context, review regularly, engage based on context) remain valid 23 years later
Implementation needs updating: Digital capture, energy-based contexts (not tool-based), AI-assisted processing, streamlined weekly review
Modern tools: OmniFocus (GTD purist), Todoist (cross-platform), Chaos (AI-enhanced)—all work but require different setup approaches
Weekly Review is essential but reducible from 2 hours to 45-60 minutes through automation
GTD success rate is low (34% long-term maintenance) because complexity deters many—simpler systems work better for simpler workflows
Best for: Knowledge workers with complex responsibilities, multiple projects, high input volume

The honest assessment

GTD is the most sophisticated productivity methodology I know. It handles complexity better than alternatives.

It's also the hardest to maintain. The 66% abandonment rate isn't because people are lazy—it's because GTD demands discipline.

If you're considering GTD:

Try it if:

You're drowning in complexity (dozens of projects, hundreds of tasks)
Simpler systems have failed
You're willing to invest 4-6 weeks learning + weekly review commitment

Skip it if:

Your workflow is relatively simple
You want lightweight system
Weekly hour-long review feels unsustainable

There's no shame in choosing simpler systems. Productivity systems should reduce stress, not create it.

Want AI-enhanced GTD? Chaos implements GTD principles (capture, contexts, projects) with AI assistance for categorization and energy-aware scheduling. Try free for 14 days →

Sources:

Cowan, N. (2001). "The magical number 4 in short-term memory." Behavioral and Brain Sciences.
Zeigarnik, B. (1927). "On finished and unfinished tasks." Psychologische Forschung.
Gollwitzer, P. M. (1999). "Implementation intentions." American Psychologist.

Getting Things Done (GTD) in 2025: Does It Still Work?