Nov 20, 2025 Dec 3, 2025 2025-11-20

15 years ago, while on a trip to Thailand (one of my very first trips to Asia), I created a productivity framework called Assess-Decide-Do. It’s built on the idea that you’re always in one of three “realms”:

• Assess – exploring options, no pressure to decide yet
• Decide – committing to choices, allocating resources
• Do – executing and completing

The main metric is how smooth the interaction is from one realm to the other. Prioritizing flow over completion. Also, the framework is fractal in nature—each cycle can contain smaller, complete ADD cycles within it.

It was my response to the GTD hype running high at that time. I felt that churning tasks from a todo list couldn’t be our ultimate goal as human beings, while acknowledging that we still needed some structure, something that would allow us to function in a predictable way. Something that would honor our never-ending, changing nature, but still allow us to get stuff done.

I’ve been consistently refining and using this at various levels in my life. What follows is a recap of how this framework evolved (spoiler: it stayed pretty much the same), how it was implemented (spoiler: there’s an app for that), and how it’s adjusting to the age of TikTok and AI (spoiler: there’s a repo for that).

Without further ado, let’s go.

Software Implementation: The Evolution of ADD

The first iteration into actionable software was called iAdd. The name came from the ubiquitous “i” that every app had at that time and the framework initials. Oh, the naivety. Written in Objective-C, it was a fascinating exercise. I used it for several years before realizing it needed to evolve.

I then iterated on both the name and the UI, switching from Objective-C to Swift. The result: something called ZenTasktic. I was proud of that name for a couple of years. Then reality hit, and I realized this wasn’t what an app needs. It’s great for showcasing in conversation, but without a massive marketing budget to push the name across every media channel, it would never take off. (Needless to say, I didn’t have a massive marketing budget—or a marketing budget at all.)

So I did one more pivot: from ZenTasktic to addTaskManager. The new name might be a bit boring, but it’s simple, and it tells you exactly what the app does from second one. More importantly, it’s the cleanest visual implementation of the framework: each realm has its own screen, and moving tasks leverages the iPhone’s built-in swipes, so it feels like a task or project is literally traveling from one realm to the other—which supports my intention of emphasizing flow over task churning.

The addTaskManager iteration also validated the business model—it’s a subscription on top of a generous free tier. There’s a growing community of paying subscribers with consistently positive reviews. The software implementation is strong, and the foundation is solid.

Applicability In Other Life Areas

When I first developed this framework, I had hammer syndrome: everything looked like a nail waiting for my hammer. I postulated that ADD would work well in pretty much all life areas, from relationships to business. In general, this was true. In general. Here’s an honest assessment of what worked and what didn’t.

Health and Fitness

Around the same time, I became a runner, starting with marathons and progressing to ultra-marathons. Using ADD in my training and race selection worked surprisingly well. I would start a specific training routine while staying in Assess, observing my body’s adaptation, then move to Decide only when it felt naturally feasible—like signing up for longer and longer races—and then just Do, like finishing the actual thing.

Over the course of 10 years, I went from not being able to run 1 kilometer to finishing 220km ultra-marathons. Discipline, diet, the right social circle—all of this mattered, of course, but at the core was always my ADD framework shaping my approach. I’m not running competitively anymore, but I still apply ADD to my evolved fitness routine. For instance, I started swimming more, walking more, and visiting the Jjim Jil Bang (Korean spa) more often.

Overall: 8/10 framework fit.

Location Independence

This is by far the area with the most spectacular results. In the last 15 years, I became fully location independent, changing three countries in my fabulous fifties alone.

Here’s how I approached this. First, I would assess for a few months whether to live in a specific country. This included research about cost of living, social fabric, cultural differences, and more. Then, once the research stage was over, I would spread the assessment into real life by doing a two-week trial in that country. Living like a local, no tourist stuff, aggressive budgeting. Most importantly, not deciding on anything yet.

After this real-life assessment test, I would move to Decide, which meant allocating time and resources for the move—OR going back to Assess. And here’s the beauty of the framework. I successfully moved to and lived in Spain, Portugal, and Vietnam, but after an overall assessment of almost six months (back and forth), I decided not to move to Korea. I still love the country, but some things just weren’t for me. The decision to withdraw and choose Vietnam over Korea felt completely natural.

Overall: 10/10 framework fit.

Financial Resilience

This is on par with location independence, and it’s easy to understand why. I write extensively about financial resilience on this blog, so feel free to browse the category if you want to familiarize yourself with my approach.

In this field, an Assess cycle can last several months.

Usually I start with an MVP, like the Flippando game, and then gather real-world feedback. How many users, how much engagement on social media, how many inquiries from accelerators. In this specific case, the first two Assess cycles lasted about four months each. The first one was after winning the Glitch hackathon in Korea (which deserves its own blog post, I reckon), after which I decided to fully implement and publish the game. The second was after applying for a grant to port the game to Gno. The Do stage after each Decide cycle—actually making the game, working for the grant—lasted between six months and one year.

The last Assess cycle led to the decision to stop development, keep the game up for portfolio purposes, and move on. I currently focus full-time on addTaskManager—complete Do immersion.

Overall: 10/10 framework fit.

Relationships

And here’s where the framework hits differently. Relationships aren’t as predictable as implementing a coding project or evaluating a new country to live in. That’s mostly because there’s someone else involved—another real person with their own problems, goals, and expectations. That makes assessment exponentially more difficult.

Also, crucially, the last part in relationships isn’t Do—it’s Be. You don’t just Do stuff; you try your best to Be in a relationship. That made me understand that the framework can’t fit all human experiences. Relationships need a more holistic approach—sometimes just faith and commitment.

Overall: 5/10 framework fit.

AI Integration: Claude Megaprompt and MCP Server

Recently, I experimented with integrating my framework into LLMs—making the LLM ADD-aware, both in its operation and in relationship with the user. Understanding where in the framework someone is: assessing, deciding, or doing. The results have been remarkable. My first Reddit post generated over 53,000 views with a 91% upvote ratio, and the repository is actively watched and starred. If you’re interested, join the conversation, star the repo, or fork it.

I’m also developing an MCP server (Model Context Protocol—a way for AI to interact with external tools) for my app. The developments in this area are lightning-fast, and I’m assessing whether to continue pursuing this as the standard itself evolves rapidly.

Overall: 10/10 framework fit.

---

All in all, Assess-Decide-Do has proved to be one of the most useful discoveries for me—and I hope for many others as well. Sometimes, we’re lucky enough to get it right from the first time.