Context Lists

[debbieg]

Let's say that you have 100 items on your Inventory lists ( Calls, PC, Action). When you are working in your office, you feasibly could make a call, finish a PC task, or work on an action item. Does this mean that you will need to review all 100 ( combo of paper lists and PC folders) each time you are ready to work on something to ensure that what's most important gets done? I can see where having the items sorted by context could be helpful when you are not in your office and the context could be a limiting factor. I'm not sure I see the advantage of having them sorted by context when the factor is not a limitation?

Secondly, do you combine Work and Life lists (calls, PC, Action, Projects) or keep them separate?

[MarinaMartin]

There are two purposes behind a context: limitation (I can only do X in/with Y) and batch processing (it's easier to make 3 calls in a row).

I think a context like "PC" is redundant for almost anyone who works on a computer. We spend more time on our PCs than off. In fact, "offline" is a better context to capture that handful of things we can do *without* a computer.

While not strict GTD, I divide my projects by priority (1-5). This ensures I at least consider doing the higher-priority tasks first, even if I don't actually do them. To achieve this I have each context divided into 5 sections (most important at the top, if I ever get around to it at the bottom) and I keep 5 Next Action lists, one for each priority level.

[Oogiem]

I'm not sure I see the advantage of having them sorted by context when the factor is not a limitation?

Secondly, do you combine Work and Life lists (calls, PC, Action, Projects) or keep them separate?

It saves you time you use when you change contexts. It's a lot easier to get in the mode of doing one type of thing and do a bunch of them rather than waste time jumping around from context to context. I live and wok at the same place. But I still find contexts very useful to provide structure and to prevent me from thrashing around. I am more efficient and get more done if I do all my Windows computer work at one time instead of doing a quick Windows task, then back to my mac for an internet task, then go outside to do something outside and so on.

Plus in my world sometimes it's really critical to stay in context. Example, today we had the ewes and lambs in, I was outside w/ help with the sheep caught. We vaccinated lambs and weaned ram lambs. Both tasks were in that context. We ran out of time so tomorrow we;ll get back into that context and coat the ewes, sort the fat ewes out into corrals and re-tag sheep that have lost their official ID tags.

I keep everything in a single system. It's all my life whether it's work or for fun.

[debbieg]

There are two purposes behind a context: limitation (I can only do X in/with Y) and batch processing (it's easier to make 3 calls in a row).

I think a context like "PC" is redundant for almost anyone who works on a computer. We spend more time on our PCs than off. In fact, "offline" is a better context to capture that handful of things we can do *without* a computer.

While not strict GTD, I divide my projects by priority (1-5). This ensures I at least consider doing the higher-priority tasks first, even if I don't actually do them. To achieve this I have each context divided into 5 sections (most important at the top, if I ever get around to it at the bottom) and I keep 5 Next Action lists, one for each priority level.

Does this mean that you never have more than 5 projects going at a time or that every project on your master list is prioritized with a 1-5 ranking?

[Roger]

Does this mean that you will need to review all 100 ( combo of paper lists and PC folders) each time you are ready to work on something to ensure that what's most important gets done?

Not really. In my experience, I review items until I reach one that I feel like doing, and then do it. Just how that decision is made is a bit of a black box in GTD, but it seems to work fine.


Secondly, do you combine Work and Life lists (calls, PC, Action, Projects) or keep them separate?

I mostly keep mine separate, but there's some overlap. In practice it generally seems to work out to being a separation by context anyway.


Cheers,
Roger

[MarinaMartin]

Does this mean that you never have more than 5 projects going at a time or that every project on your master list is prioritized with a 1-5 ranking?

My master list is prioritized with a 1-5 ranking. I have *way* more than 5 projects :)

[debbieg]

Not really. In my experience, I review items until I reach one that I feel like doing, and then do it. Just how that decision is made is a bit of a black box in GTD, but it seems to work fine.



I mostly keep mine separate, but there's some overlap. In practice it generally seems to work out to being a separation by context anyway.


Cheers,
Roger

I'm curious..what are some of your context lists? (action-work, action-personal, calls, errands, etc?????)

[Roger]

I run pretty flat when it comes to contexts:

-Home
-Work
-Out-and-About

pretty much covers it.

It's theoretically possible that I might be at Home or Work and not have telephony or computer access or whatnot, but it's slim enough to not really bother with.

Conversely, it's theoretically possible that I might want to make a call from my cellphone in some random location, but I only do that about once every couple months so again it's not really worth bothering with.

For something like an ad-hoc context ("Whilst on vacation in the Swiss Alps") I'd just lump that into a project and unfold it on-scene.


Cheers,
Roger

[bishblaize]

I run pretty flat when it comes to contexts:

-Home
-Work
-Out-and-About


Straight after a weekly review, how many next actions are you looking at in those?

[Roger]

After a quick count right now, looks like I'm at about 20 for Work; I expect Home is pretty similar, and Out-and-About is maybe 2 or 3.

This is right before my Review, though, so on balance it might swell to 30 or 40, potentially. Or it might not.


Cheers,
Roger

[Chulkova]

Mine is similar to Roger's.

@Agenda
@Work
@Homework
@Waiting

Sometimes i add @car.

And:

Projects
Next week/month
Ideas

I scan quickly through the list @work when at work and choose the most important task. Actually I would like to choose the most important but usually take a pleasant one. I'm a procrastinator :) Then do it untill some point when there's no time left, some logical finish, interruption or to the end.

[njones4213]

Context is only the first of four things you use to pair down actions.

After you have chose your context say @office, then you look at a couple of other things.

Time Available There is no point in looking at things you know will take several hours if you only have a few minutes.

Energy Physical/Mental Energy is another thing to exclude possible actions. If you didn't get much sleep last night and don't function well without a good night's rest, put aside more Mental tasks and work on Automatic work.

Priority This is really the final step in limiting your actions since this is something within your locus of control. You can't control how much time you have or how you feel, but you can control what is important.

Those four limiting factors, Context, Time, Energy, and priority can quickly take a list of a hundred actions and reduce it to 5 or 10.

It does take a little more time on the front end, but honestly not as much as one might think. Time is the hardest for me as I always misjudge how long things will take. But energy is easy, do I groan when I think about it or not.

[jrdouce]

I find the simpler, the better. I was never better at GTD than back in the paper days - it wasn't even called GTD then. I'm committed to getting back now and I have more success keeping it simple.

I have 1 @Work context (and 1 @Work Projects) since, apart from meetings, I'm at a desk with everything I need. When I work from home, I just bring up my @Work list, no difference. Actions in that list start with a verb, Call ..., Complete ..., Contact ...

I have more personal lists, @Contact, @Errands, @Home, @Computer. I prefer @Contact for a personal list, since I have there are several contact methods. If it has to be a phone call, then the action in the @Contact list is "Call ..."

I try to avoid priorities, except on my @WorkProjects list, since I may spend several days designing, coding, testing 1 project. It doesn't make sense to interrupt work to add a specific @Work task for a task I'm already working on. I will add specific @Work tasks at the end of the day, or for things for which I am waiting.

[Myriam]

hi,

I work from home, so in the beginning I had home and work stuff mixed in the same lists, but that didn't work out.

So now I have 1 major list for work related stuff, and 1 for home related stuff. Both are in the same excel file (in different tabs). I access the work one mostly ont my pc, but the home one gets printed (about once every two weeks) and hangs in the kitchen visible for all family members.

In the excel I have a column called "context", it allows me to filter if I want to or to view everything in one list.

The context that I use are:
1. For work related stuff (i am a consultant):
* @study
* @conception (this is something that works well for me when I am on a train, this often means developing a training idea by scribbling on a page)
* @development (working out the ideas I conceived)
* @admin (forms etc...)
* @phone
* @mail
* @research (the "I should look into..." stuff)
* @author (writing articles, reports, ...)

2. For home related stuff
* @phone
* @mail
* @chores
* @research
* @brainstorm (mostly for the things I need to think about together with my husband)
* @XXX (with XXX the city where our family vacation house is)

greetings,
Myriam

[debbieg]

I find the simpler, the better. I was never better at GTD than back in the paper days - it wasn't even called GTD then. I'm committed to getting back now and I have more success keeping it simple.

I have 1 @Work context (and 1 @Work Projects) since, apart from meetings, I'm at a desk with everything I need. When I work from home, I just bring up my @Work list, no difference. Actions in that list start with a verb, Call ..., Complete ..., Contact ...

I have more personal lists, @Contact, @Errands, @Home, @Computer. I prefer @Contact for a personal list, since I have there are several contact methods. If it has to be a phone call, then the action in the @Contact list is "Call ..."

I try to avoid priorities, except on my @WorkProjects list, since I may spend several days designing, coding, testing 1 project. It doesn't make sense to interrupt work to add a specific @Work task for a task I'm already working on. I will add specific @Work tasks at the end of the day, or for things for which I am waiting.

Does this mean that you would not have all your calls in one place? It sounds like you would have call listed on your @work list and calls listed for personal on @ contact, yes? So you are looking at two call lists when you have time to make a call?

[jrdouce]

Does this mean that you would not have all your calls in one place? It sounds like you would have call listed on your @work list and calls listed for personal on @ contact, yes? So you are looking at two call lists when you have time to make a call?

That is correct. To paraphrase a previously entry, "a context should represent a limit, or restriction as to when, or how you can complete an action". My biggest restriction is, am I working or not, which tethers me to my desk. I can't say I ever find myself in a situation where I can only make a call/email, especially when at work.

I've got several projects in play, most of which do involve contact with others; asking questions or delivering information in return. I may complete some code and be running it in test so I'll check my @Work list and see things like "Call George re: index strategy" or "Modify calculation for FTE field in table X"; Or, I could decide I have a few minutes to knock out a personal task.

That is when I will review my @Contact list to make a call or send a few emails.

I've been of the the GTD wagon for several years and am trying to get back up to speed. So far, this approach works for me, in my current life style.

[debbieg]

That is correct. To paraphrase a previously entry, "a context should represent a limit, or restriction as to when, or how you can complete an action". My biggest restriction is, am I working or not, which tethers me to my desk. I can't say I ever find myself in a situation where I can only make a call/email, especially when at work.

I've got several projects in play, most of which do involve contact with others; asking questions or delivering information in return. I may complete some code and be running it in test so I'll check my @Work list and see things like "Call George re: index strategy" or "Modify calculation for FTE field in table X"; Or, I could decide I have a few minutes to knock out a personal task.

That is when I will review my @Contact list to make a call or send a few emails.

I've been of the the GTD wagon for several years and am trying to get back up to speed. So far, this approach works for me, in my current life style.

We are both in the same place. I, too am trying to jump start GTD again. For reasons similar to yours, I was just thinking about setting up my contexts as: @ job search, @consulting, @home, and @sailboat. You mentioned reviewing @contact list. Are your calls listed on your context list or all calls/emails on @contact list? Not sure how the new lists will work, but will experiment this next week.

[graphicdetails]

Many of these contexts that you folks are listing are not contexts in the GTD sense.

Contexts are physical locations.

@research, @development, @conception, etc, would be NAs or projects.

Same goes for @job search, which would definitely be a project.

[jrdouce]

You mentioned reviewing @contact list. Are your calls listed on your context list or all calls/emails on @contact list?

Because calling is only 1 of many ways to communicate, I lean towards "Contact" as an action, unless I specifically need to call or email or see the person in question. For work, I have actions like "@Contact Bob re: FTE formula", or "@Email Geoff test results", lumped in my @Work list with any other tasks I have to do when at work.

Same for my personal @Contact list. It keeps it simple and seems to be working. I'm still struggling to find a good Web\Android task manager. Remember the Milk requires way too many click to do, or see, anything.

[jrdouce]

Contexts are physical locations.

Mostly they are locations, but that is primarily because access to resources required to complete an action is often tied to a location. In the link below, DA suggests several contexts with which to start. Most are locations, but Calls and Agendas are on the list.

"Context is also the first criterion that limits your options and keeps you from being reminded of things you simply can’t do"

http://www.gtdtimes.com/2010/09/17/david-allen-on-why-sorting-your-lists-by-contexts-even-matters/#more-4191
- Agendas
- Anywhere
- Calls
- Computer
- Errands
- Home
- Office
- Waiting For
- and lists for Projects and Someday Maybe

The implementation of GTD (IMHO) involves organizing tasks by context, the contexts you use are whatever works for you.

[graphicdetails]

Yes, but Calls and Agendas are still based on a location.

There really is no relation in any sense of GTD to have a context titled @Job Search. That would be a project, not a context, imo.

For instance: You may find yourself with an extra few minutes and decide to go into your "context" @Job Search to work on a next action. You find your next action is "Lookup Monster.com for updated listings". But yet you are not near your computer. So your next action can not be completed because your context is not based on any type of location to actually get it done.

Even based on this definition...
"Context is also the first criterion that limits your options and keeps you from being reminded of things you simply can’t do"
...there is nothing in the context "@Job Search" to limit your options or give you any indication at all if you can do anything in that context at any given time.

[Myriam]

Many of these contexts that you folks are listing are not contexts in the GTD sense.

Contexts are physical locations.

@research, @development, @conception, etc, would be NAs or projects.

Same goes for @job search, which would definitely be a project.

I use @research, @development, @conception to make distinctions between types of work. Almost all my work is done @computer, so it would make no sense to use that as a context.
- When I'm in a "research"-mood (no thinking, just looking up), I just knock off different things I have to "look into". Could be the train hours for some location I need to go to, or information on how to grow a certain type of plant in the garden, or deeper research needed to prepare a specific training module...
- When I'm doing "conception" (just raw thinking), I know I will just sit down, let my thoughts flow, and write/type down some first ideas for some things, for example a new training module, a speech I need to give, etc..., so to me it means rough conception (mostly this type of NA's take me about 15 minutes)
- when i'm doing "development" (fine tuning) it means that from those raw versions, I work further to polish, develop and finish it (speech/training/presentation) (this type of NA's take me longer to work on)

So, I'm pretty sure I'm not mixing up contexts with NA's and projects... one project "develop training module xyz" could have in it for example the following NA's:
- look up info on the internet abouw xyz (@research)
- get out training material I used during last training on that topic (@research)
- make new time line for training (@conception)
- work on powerpoint presentation (@develop)
...

By the way: @calls is not a location either... yet it is a typical example of a context often used...

Myriam

[Myriam]

... I start to notice more and more that a lot of people use contexts that are very individual, and have a certain meaning only to them, which is great.

What i'm calling @research is also containing really "silly" NA's like "look for good picture in my archive to add to my resume". I do know that the word "research" probably means something really different to a lot of people, but the word works fine for me...

So maybe this @job search doesn't look like a real contaxt at first sight, but if it has a specific meaning to the user, then it might work (for all we know @job search could mean "when I have a meeting with my job searching coach").

Myriam

[Oogiem]

Many of these contexts that you folks are listing are not contexts in the GTD sense.

Contexts are physical locations.

Not necessarily, contexts are the necessary conditions to proceed. That might be location but might be something else. In the past I have had a context of @inside braindead It's partly location but also more attributes.

Biggest aha moment for me was that I need to feel free to create, use and delete contexts on the fly. Contexts are a fluid list, The ones I have now may not be appropriate in the dead of winter and also not appropriate in mid summer.

Contexts by definition must be very personal. Only you know what makes sense for your personal mix of types of actions.

[jrdouce]

Yes, but Calls and Agendas are still based on a location.

There really is no relation in any sense of GTD to have a context titled @Job Search. That would be a project, not a context, imo..

I agree that "Job Search" is a project, not a context which would require actions like "Call x" and "Revise current job description" on other lists. However; Calls requires a phone, not a place. My personal @Contact list can be done anywhere I have my smart phone, which is everywhere. Work calls and emails could be done anywhere, but I normally only follow up on work contacts at work, so contacts are location sensitive in that setting.

It really comes down to what works for each individual.

[graphicdetails]

By the way: @calls is not a location either... yet it is a typical example of a context often used...


Unless you are walking outside and hollering into the sky, then @Calls is certainly based on a location......by a phone. @Calls (or @Phone) is used because people have so many phones in different locations, it's based off ANY location with a phone. The same with @Computer. People have computers in many places, hence it is more logical to base it off the tool itself. Actually, as defined in the "great book" (see page 49), a context is based on a specific location or a specific tool.

Myriam, by your very explanation, all of your contexts listed are actually based at the computer. So essentially, it is based on a location, @Computer. It just seems you are able to do everything in one location, however, so you are breaking stuff down instead by stages of completion - @Research, @Development, and @Conception. If that works for you, great.

Exerpt from page 49 of the great book....
Context: A few actions can be done anywhere (like drafting ideas about a project with pen and paper), but most require a specific location (at home, at your office) or having some productivity tool at hand, such as a phone or computer. These are the first factors that limit your choices about what you can do in the moment.

This concept did not change with Making It All Work. It's the fundamental concept behind GTD.

[jrdouce]

Exerpt from page 49 of the great book....
Context: ...most require a specific location (at home, at your office) or having some productivity tool at hand, such as a phone or computer. These are the first factors that limit your choices about what you can do in the moment.

I think we're really all on the same page (49, apparently). We're just emphasizing different parts of DA's text. To me the key to a context is "...factors that limit your choices about what you can do in the moment". I can't deny that "most require a specific location...or having some productivity tool"; but "most" is not "all". If physical locations represent all the "factors that limit your choices", then you're all set. That didn't work for me, I had to adapt.