Get AI summaries of any video or article — Sign up free
Notion Office Hours: Planning for Next Year đź“… thumbnail

Notion Office Hours: Planning for Next Year đź“…

Notion·
5 min read

Based on Notion's video on YouTube. If you like this content, support the original creators by watching, liking and subscribing to their content.

TL;DR

Start with a yearly review that connects values, commitments, goals, milestones, projects, and daily journal entries so reflection can roll forward into planning.

Briefing

Planning for next year starts with a structured yearly review—then turns reflection into actionable projects through connected databases, rollups, and recurring review rituals. The core message is that outcomes matter less than the process: using Notion to look back honestly (including what didn’t happen) creates better forecasting for what to attempt next, especially when uncertainty makes full-year plans unreliable.

A central part of the workflow is a “review dashboard” that pulls together multiple databases into one place: a North Star/values area for visible anchors, commitments for recurring intentions, and a goals database filtered to the year being reviewed. From there, the system zooms in and out across time—year → quarter → month → week → daily journal—because each layer is connected. Goals are tracked with completion and progress (often target vs. current), while milestones sit under goals via relations. Projects act as the operational layer: they’re the buckets of work that carry tasks and milestones toward a goal, making it easier to see what was actually done, what stalled, and why.

The review isn’t treated as a judgment exercise. Instead, it becomes a diagnostic tool. When a goal like “launch a coaching program” doesn’t complete, the dashboard helps identify missing inputs such as unclear dates, insufficient milestone breakdown, or missing “why this matters” and obstacle planning. The result is a practical lesson: goals get postponed when intention and decomposition aren’t explicit enough.

The session also emphasizes repurposing data into planning. Content produced during the year is filtered and counted (including social posts and YouTube/blog output), then used to inform future priorities. A “word of the year” and reflection prompts—sourced from Susannah Conway’s “Unravel Your Year”—are embedded into the yearly database so the same questions can be answered consistently each cycle. Daily journal entries roll up into weekly and monthly views, letting highs, lows, wins, gratitude, and challenges inform next-quarter decisions.

For forward planning, the approach favors quarters and a 12-week rhythm over a rigid full-year plan. The system uses templates and pre-filtered “new quarter/new month” pages so planning begins with the right context and automatically surfaces relevant projects. Projects are managed through an “energy” lens (inspired by Scott Belski’s “Making Ideas Happen”), distinguishing the attention a project demands from the brain effort required for deep work. Weekly review becomes the operational heartbeat: priorities are reevaluated every week, tasks are sorted by project energy, and clutter is reduced by filtering out idle items.

Finally, the workflow is presented as iterative and personal—messy in places, improved over time, and designed to match how one’s brain works. The takeaway is not to copy a perfect setup, but to treat planning itself as a learnable system: reflect deeply, break work into milestones and projects, review on a cadence, and anchor decisions to values and commitments when uncertainty shifts the plan.

Cornell Notes

The planning system centers on a yearly review that feeds directly into next-year execution. Reflection is organized through connected Notion databases—values/anchors, commitments, goals, milestones, projects, and a daily journal—so the user can zoom from year to quarter to week while keeping context. The review uses prompts (notably from Susannah Conway’s “Unravel Your Year”) to identify what went well, what surprised, what challenged, and what to forecast for the next cycle. Goals are treated as high-level intentions, while projects and milestones provide the operational “rubber meets the road” breakdown. Planning is then run on a 12-week/quarter cadence with weekly reviews that re-rank priorities using an “energy” and “brain effort” framework.

How does the yearly review turn into better planning instead of just producing a retrospective?

The workflow connects reflection outputs to the planning inputs. Goals are reviewed with completion/progress and linked milestones; when something didn’t happen, the dashboard surfaces likely causes such as missing dates, unclear next steps, or missing “why this matters” and obstacle planning. Those gaps become specific fixes for the next cycle’s goal and milestone setup. Daily journal entries also roll up into weekly/monthly snapshots, so patterns in wins, challenges, and emotions inform what gets prioritized next.

What’s the practical difference between goals, milestones, and projects in this system?

Goals are the high-level outcomes or initiatives (e.g., launching or relaunching something). Milestones are the measurable markers that indicate progress toward the goal—often structured as yes/no or target/current properties. Projects are the action-oriented buckets that contain tasks and next steps needed to achieve milestones. In the example given, “launch productize offers” can be the goal, while “productize offers” as a project holds the work items (tasks, collaborations, next actions) that drive the milestones.

Why does the system prefer quarters/12-week planning over a full-year plan?

The approach assumes uncertainty makes long-range plans brittle. Instead of locking everything for 12 months, it plans in 90-day blocks (12-week year) and updates as new information arrives. Quarters become the “big rocks” layer, while months and weeks handle feasibility and day-to-day execution. This also aligns with the human brain’s ability to process planning at a manageable horizon.

How does “energy” change weekly execution?

Energy is used to rank what deserves attention right now. Projects get an energy level (e.g., extreme/high/idle), and tasks inherit or relate to their parent project’s energy. Weekly review then filters and sorts tasks so the user focuses on the top priorities (like “win the day” tasks) and hides idle clutter. The system also distinguishes energy (priority/attention required) from brain effort (deep work intensity), helping schedule the right kind of work at the right time.

What role do embedded reflection prompts and templates play?

Reflection prompts are baked into the yearly database so the same questions can be answered consistently each cycle (e.g., what went well, what surprised, what challenged, what to forecast). Templates also standardize daily tracking (flow state, win the day, feelings, gratitude, wins/challenges/improvements) and planning pages (new quarter/new month). This reduces setup friction and makes review-to-planning transitions faster.

How does the system reduce overwhelm when there are many active items?

It relies on dashboards at each time scale (year/quarter/month/week) and uses filters and toggles to show only what’s relevant. Projects can be archived or broken down when they become ongoing responsibilities. The user also uses recurring item templates for weekly planning and filters tasks by project energy/status so only active, high-priority work appears during execution.

Review Questions

  1. When a goal didn’t complete, what specific missing elements does the system treat as likely causes (and how would you correct them next cycle)?
  2. How do energy and brain effort differ, and how does that distinction affect what gets scheduled in a week?
  3. What connected layers (year → quarter → month → week → daily journal) must be in place for rollups and forecasting to work?

Key Points

  1. 1

    Start with a yearly review that connects values, commitments, goals, milestones, projects, and daily journal entries so reflection can roll forward into planning.

  2. 2

    Treat goals as high-level intentions, while milestones and projects provide the operational breakdown needed to actually execute work.

  3. 3

    Use time-based zooming (year/quarter/month/week) through relations and rollups so the same data can be viewed at different planning horizons.

  4. 4

    Plan in 12-week/quarter cycles rather than rigid full-year plans to stay realistic under uncertainty.

  5. 5

    Run weekly reviews as the priority-recalibration step, filtering tasks by project energy to reduce clutter and focus on the “win the day.”

  6. 6

    Embed consistent reflection prompts (e.g., from Susannah Conway’s “Unravel Your Year”) into the yearly workflow to make forecasting repeatable.

  7. 7

    Design the system to match personal brain preferences—templates, dashboards, and even “messy” iterations are part of building a workable planning muscle.

Highlights

A goal that stalls often lacks decomposition: unclear dates, missing next steps, and missing “why this matters” make postponement more likely—so the review becomes a troubleshooting tool.
Projects are the action layer that supports goals; milestones are the progress markers under goals, and tasks live under projects.
Weekly execution is driven by an “energy” filter: tasks inherit priority from project energy, letting the user hide idle clutter and focus on what matters now.
Instead of full-year planning, the workflow uses quarters/12-week blocks to adapt as new information and opportunities appear.
Daily journal data rolls up into weekly and monthly dashboards, turning personal highs/lows and challenges into planning inputs.

Topics