How to prioritize contexts when multiple are “available”

I

ivanjay205

Registered
A lot of people struggle with 90 percent of their work being in a laptop context. While that is somewhat true for me it is manageable and not a problem.

What is a problem is when I am in my office and my office context, laptop, and calls are all “available”. I can work on any of those. So how do I decide / prioritize which to do? I find myself defaulting to laptop a lot and calls and in office tasks sit just because I focus on laptop ones.
 
ivanjay205 said:
A lot of people struggle with 90 percent of their work being in a laptop context. While that is somewhat true for me it is manageable and not a problem.

What is a problem is when I am in my office and my office context, laptop, and calls are all “available”. I can work on any of those. So how do I decide / prioritize which to do? I find myself defaulting to laptop a lot and calls and in office tasks sit just because I focus on laptop ones.
Click to expand...
@ivanjay205

The 'only' way to know what one is not doing is see what the possibilities are in a current context and do what seems most important . . . if unclear . . . go with the shortest to 'best' decrease any less favorable effects from 'should have been doing such-&-such . . . something else' ?

While perhaps also bearing in mind that 'Opportunity Management' is the GTD purpose-&-essence of Context(s) ?

As you see GTD fit. . . .
 
Last edited:
ivanjay205 said:
A lot of people struggle with 90 percent of their work being in a laptop context. While that is somewhat true for me it is manageable and not a problem.

What is a problem is when I am in my office and my office context, laptop, and calls are all “available”. I can work on any of those. So how do I decide / prioritize which to do? I find myself defaulting to laptop a lot and calls and in office tasks sit just because I focus on laptop ones.
Click to expand...
When I review sufficiently, I understand what is effective to act upon right now, regardless of context. I make myself available in that significantly effective context to complete that next action.

Review your system until you know it cold. You know what has your attention so well that it isn't a question of which item to do. It is a question of why am I not doing this very effective thing?

When you have't reviewed sufficiently, you are in a way always trying to complete a weekly review and not completing it. So keep doing it until you understand your work well enough to do a better next thing.

Clayton

When you don't know what you are trying to accomplish, any path will do because when you don't know your destination, getting there is guess work.
 
schmeggahead said:
When I review sufficiently, I understand what is effective to act upon right now, regardless of context. I make myself available in that significantly effective context to complete that next action.

Review your system until you know it cold. You know what has your attention so well that it isn't a question of which item to do. It is a question of why am I not doing this very effective thing?

When you have't reviewed sufficiently, you are in a way always trying to complete a weekly review and not completing it. So keep doing it until you understand your work well enough to do a better next thing.

Clayton

When you don't know what you are trying to accomplish, any path will do because when you don't know your destination, getting there is guess work.
Click to expand...
@schmeggahead

Indeed . . . the more one 'hangs-out' reviewing one's contexts list the more actionable the contexts come . . . as the good David Allen has expressed: "the only way out is through"

GTD is much, much more about increasing Mind Like Water than counterproductive dopamine stimulation ?
 
If your GTD system is clean and current, you really won’t run into prioritization dilemmas.

You might find these short videos helpful:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PKHvueWIXSA&list=PLRH9fEmS3ZFvT5w20LERfJFTZggVqfK3D&index=29
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JQfYK4T9jEo&list=PLRH9fEmS3ZFvT5w20LERfJFTZggVqfK3D&index=1

And regarding the “laptop” issue - consider adding a “RESEARCH” context. Most of us end up doing research ad-hoc and in a pretty chaotic way, spending way more time on it than necessary. A dedicated context can make a big difference.
 
I would get in the habit of checking both contexts in the am. At least then you won't miss a call or text you want to make. It would keep it top of mind daily. Any day specific NA would be on your calendar so you wouldn't miss a call you had to make. As an aside I have culled my contexts to as few as possible. I haven't made the leap to combine those two yet. But I get your dilemma. I'm "retired" so I have fewer contexts but see them merging soon. I wouldn't recommend that normally.
 
When your contexts overlap, whether it’s temporary or permanent, you need to consider all the relevant lists and invoke other factors, like time and energy available and priority. That’s pretty clear in the GTD book. Finiding a workflow that does this for you may be something as simple as viewing all three lists at once (easy with some digital list managers) or require a highly customized approach. That said,when you consistently neglect one context in favor of another, that may suggest that some contexts are repelling you; if so, it’s a different problem.
 
mcogilvie said:
When your contexts overlap, whether it’s temporary or permanent, you need to consider all the relevant lists and invoke other factors, like time and energy available and priority.
Click to expand...
Overlapping contexts. Hmmmm.

I remember David Allen & Meg Edwards talking about hard edges. When having more than one reference system, make sure it clearly fits in one or not (Meg's example was a separate client reference file - you either are a client or you are not). David talks about the hard landscape and needing to have clean edges around what is actionable and what is not.

Overlapping contexts seems like a complexity that can create confusion or cause unexpected neglect of certain higher value actions.
If fuzzy contexts works for you, that's fine.
Clayton.

Everything but what I'm working on right now, is a Someday/Maybe.
 
schmeggahead said:
Overlapping contexts. Hmmmm.

I remember David Allen & Meg Edwards talking about hard edges. When having more than one reference system, make sure it clearly fits in one or not (Meg's example was a separate client reference file - you either are a client or you are not). David talks about the hard landscape and needing to have clean edges around what is actionable and what is not.

Overlapping contexts seems like a complexity that can create confusion or cause unexpected neglect of certain higher value actions.
If fuzzy contexts works for you, that's fine.
Clayton.

Everything but what I'm working on right now, is a Someday/Maybe.
Click to expand...
Perhaps my choice of words was less than optimal. You’re at work. You have a phone and a computer. What do you do? You’re at home on the weekend. You have a computer and household next actions. What do you do? What I meant by overlapping is that locations like home and work contain multiple contexts, some the same. I can tell the difference between a house and a computer, at least so far- there’s no ambiguity, but there is choice. However, I know some people assign multiple contexts to a next action. I don’t do that, but I don’t see anything wrong with it either.
 
TesTeq said:
@mcogilvie I think that the opposite approach is better: only one context assigned to NA, but combined smartlists – for example, @home and @computer.
Click to expand...
If you’re using tags for contexts, and you have a tag hierarchy, then I think either way can work. However, I agree with you that assigning one tag to each next action brings more clarity and speed, at least for me. At this level of detail, people may be constrained by their tools and mental habits. Having a next action on two paper lists at once seems like a bad idea to me, but I don't doubt somebody is doing it.
 
mcogilvie said:
When your contexts overlap, whether it’s temporary or permanent, you need to consider all the relevant lists and invoke other factors, like time and energy available and priority. That’s pretty clear in the GTD book. Finiding a workflow that does this for you may be something as simple as viewing all three lists at once (easy with some digital list managers) or require a highly customized approach. That said,when you consistently neglect one context in favor of another, that may suggest that some contexts are repelling you; if so, it’s a different problem.
Click to expand...
Perhaps in sync with your good post:

'IDEALLY' . . . if one has the intrinsic capacity execute in any particular Context . . . then 'choosing' from the inventory would seeming 'only' be limited by energy-duration and time-constraint relative to one's completion choice . . . baring as you eloquently expressed "it's a different problem" ?
 
schmeggahead said:
Overlapping contexts. Hmmmm.

I remember David Allen & Meg Edwards talking about hard edges. When having more than one reference system, make sure it clearly fits in one or not (Meg's example was a separate client reference file - you either are a client or you are not). David talks about the hard landscape and needing to have clean edges around what is actionable and what is not.

Overlapping contexts seems like a complexity that can create confusion or cause unexpected neglect of certain higher value actions.
If fuzzy contexts works for you, that's fine.
Clayton.

Everything but what I'm working on right now, is a Someday/Maybe.
Click to expand...
"Overlapping Contexts" Intrinsically-&-Extrinsically

Worthy Intrinsic Awareness relative to Overall Reserves [Rest-&-Sleep] Considerations ? :

Intrinsic Internals:
Attention [Focus, Preoccupation, ect.]
Phantasms [Memory-&-Imagination]

Intrinsic Externals/Extremities:
Feet Location
Hand Occupation/Usage
Hearing
Scenting
Seeing
Taste [Hydration-&-Nutrients]

As you see GTD fit. . . .
 
fooddude said:
What do you mean by this? All context lists are in your one trusted system. With the very next action on the appropriate context list.
Click to expand...
@fooddude

Some Context List distribution examples could be:

@Home Context List 'only' in Home

@Office Context List 'only' in Office

@Car Context List 'only' in Car


Potential Advantage(s):
Only Attentively Seeing When Useful, i.e., decreases other Contexts Needlessly Undermining Current Context, might help to decrease distraction temptations, etc.

Potential Disadvantage(s):
Seemingly, unless Digital Format is Available, Unable to 'Preview Prepare' prior to Context being Actionable, etc. . . . 'Only' able to Review [and immediate add 'without' Capturing] Context List When Context List is actionable


Everyone's needs can be very different


What to do . . . whatever most increases Mind Like Water and avoid/eliminate whatever decreases Mind Like Water . . . GTD's tip of the spear ?
 
Last edited:
mcogilvie said:
If you’re using tags for contexts, and you have a tag hierarchy, then I think either way can work.
Click to expand...
It works with contexts as lists in list groups.

I have a list group called Home that contains 3 lists: @Office (my home office), @Home (that I prefix action names with their specific location) and an @OutDoors list. When I look at the group Home, it is a single list. Each list can be viewed individually.
I also have an Agendas group with @Agendas list (prefixed with the person) and specific people lists that I interact with on a regular bases.

This has helped me with choosing what to do.

mcogilvie said:
Perhaps my choice of words was less than optimal.
Click to expand...
Appreciate the clarity. I get it now.

In my work life, I have been accused quite frequently of starting in the middle instead of the beginning of the topic. I partially addressed this by consistently repeating my first statement to a person because they were finishing their current thoughts and not yet focused on me (not relevant in a written context).
The other times it happened, I misjudged where the other person was on the subject which led me to assume they were aware of things I was aware of or the basis for what I was thinking or knew things that I didn't.

In this case, I was not in sync with your descriptions. Maybe a tool missing from my toolbox is asking a question before going on a long description based upon faulty understanding. Perhaps a better approach would have been to ask for an example of overlapping contexts.

Appreciate the conversation and perspective.
Clayton.

The level set is necessary because since last we spoke on a topic, we are no longer on the same page due to each of our unique experiences.
 
schmeggahead said:
When I review sufficiently, I understand what is effective to act upon right now, regardless of context. I make myself available in that significantly effective context to complete that next action.

Review your system until you know it cold. You know what has your attention so well that it isn't a question of which item to do. It is a question of why am I not doing this very effective thing?

When you have't reviewed sufficiently, you are in a way always trying to complete a weekly review and not completing it. So keep doing it until you understand your work well enough to do a better next thing.

Clayton

When you don't know what you are trying to accomplish, any path will do because when you don't know your destination, getting there is guess work.
Click to expand...
@mcogilvie @schmeggahead

If aligned with your discussion, happy you bought the concept of "Overlapping Contexts" . . . which seems to simply be a reality of life

@Walking for Clearing Head, Physical Health [Cardo, Muscles, Respiratory, Sleep, Strength, etc. ], Meditating, Thinking, Talking, etc

@Errands walking for ambulatory transportation vs. bike, car, etc. ?

Thank you very much

As you see GTD fit. . . .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top