Research wrangling

One potential problem with a project like this is that it will be easy to run madly off in all directions and not have any focus or accountability to the research. To counter that, I’m employing a simple microproject protocol that I call Target Tracking. Here's how it works...

• For any specific work to be done, it needs to be in service of an existing microproject, called a “target”.
• A target begins with a greenlight post which contains:
  • title: Target “TARGETNAME” is greenlit
  • TARGETNAME is a word or short phrase unique to this microproject
  • one or more specific, measurable goals
  • a rationale for why the work is needed
  • a set of completion conditions that dictate when/how the target has been met or missed
• Labnotes and target reports will be tagged with the tagname
• A complete history of a given target can be reviewed just by tapping the unique TAGNAME button at the bottom of any post related to it
• Those target reports should be posted at these stages:
  • greenlit
  • revised (the goals or success conditions have been modified)
  • met/missed (a final report summarizing findings, declaring a conclusion status, and recommending any new targets to be greenlit)
  • abandoned (circumstances change and the target is no longer useful)

By requiring these targets and hooking everything together with the TARGETNAME tag, everything stays accountable. It also leaves a clear record of the path taken, decisions made, reasons, etc, so that anybody can examine the history and either challenge my decisions, or even branch off into their own research path if they wish.

It's not perfect, but for a one man operation, this strikes a good balance between the three “ities” that often plague research teams: accountability, flexibility, and productivity.