Contexts Question- What are your Contexts? Posted in Gear by mistake as well

[Starfish]

However, lists with contexts are not working for Queen Sarah, which is why I suggested that perhaps the solution is to eliminate the contexts.

I'd like to clarify this point - I think it is more accurate to say (and it seems that Queen Sarah has said it as well) that the set of contexts that Queen Sarah has chosen are not effective -- due to the fact that the contexts are not mutually exclusive.

But...

It's far less important why it works than whether it works.

In this case, I'd have to wholeheartedly agree

By the way, there's some interesting reading at MarkTaw.com on this problem of contexts: What context to I put this next action in?

Matthew

 

[andersons]

OK, my problem is that it is very difficult to draw clear boundaries around different parts of my life. . .My contexts overlap, and they don't happen automatically;

The other part of the problem is deciding what context to put myself in. Most of the time it's not a matter of saying "I'm at the office, so let's look at the @office list." It's more like "I have the next four hours; I could do NAs from any of 6 or 7 context lists."

I have the same type of situation. I do research too, though I have recently been working from home. So I have a loooooong @Home list. But @Home includes other lists, so if I want to work from a shorter, more focused list, I can. @Home includes

@Computer:Research [requires big blocks of time and lots of effort and energy]
@Errands:Urgent [these show up on just about every @list for obvious reasons]
Computer-
CDplayer-
Phone-
Read-
Morning-
Evening-

I never look at the lists followed by minus signs, but theoretically I could if I wanted to see just those things.

I mainly work from the big @Home list. But when I devote a big chunk of time to research, I switch to @Computer:Research. So that context is mostly conceptual, barely physical. But I really need it.

I do have other contexts, but @Home and its subordinates is the one with all the fuzzy boundaries. I dislike these contexts because they are so ugly -- some are times of day, some are concepts, some are physical items like the computer. But these contexts have been great to work from, so I'm trying to accept the ugliness.

 

[TesTeq]

Contexts are meant for eliminating NAs.

I think contexts are meant for eliminating NAs that you are not able to do in a given situation. You do not have to browse the long list of items that are undoable because of the lack of the necessary resources.

For example you cannot buy PDA (in computer shop) when you're in your office (so you don't browse @errands list in your office) and you cannot browse the Internet when you have no connection available (so you don't browse @internet list in this situation).

 

[andersons]

when everything is doable

I think contexts are meant for eliminating NAs that you are not able to do in a given situation. You do not have to browse the long list of items that are undoable because of the lack of the necessary resources.

For example you cannot buy PDA (in computer shop) when you're in your office (so you don't browse @errands list in your office) and you cannot browse the Internet when you have no connection available (so you don't browse @internet list in this situation).

True. But how do you decide when to be in your office? Or when to do errands? If you have few context constraints imposed on you, everything IS potentially doable. You end up reviewing a bunch of different lists in order to decide, so having hard edges between different lists becomes less useful.

When I'm physically at home, I could go out to do errands at any time. With this freedom, it is less helpful to keep the errands off my @Home list since I have to review the @Errands list anyway in order to decide what to do next.

If you have to be in an office 9-5 working on specific projects and actions, it is easy to keep contexts clear and distinct and use them just as filters. When you're at the office, you don't worry about stuff to do at home and vice versa. But if you don't have to go to the office or could leave at any time, you're not constrained to that @Office list; you have many more options and have to choose. I could go to my office and do stuff that I can only do there. Or I could go out and do errands. Or I could stay home and do a hundred different things. Which to choose?

When this is the case, I often have to choose a context based on my NAs rather than the reverse. It is the disadvantage of having too much freedom.

My @Errands:Urgent is a hack to make me choose to do errands sometimes, without forcing me to review all my errands all the time. Once I have something sufficiently important/urgent to brave the traffic, I then consult the @Errands list for all errands I need to do. The urgent ones are on both lists, so @Errands is comprehensive for all errands. Using the urgent NAs as reminders helps me choose my context. I used to keep the urgent errands off my @Home list and confine them to @Errands list only, but I then had to review lots of non-urgent errands frequently just to ensure that no urgent ones fell through the cracks.

Also, if I decide to stay home and do those errands later when the traffic subsides, I can easily filter the @Errands:Urgent NAs out of my @Home list if I don't want to see the NAs suddenly rendered "undoable" by my decision.

I agree that my hack is ugly and I don't like that; I like clean context lists with hard edges better. But this hack has been working well for me, probably because I hate going out to do errands. Seeing an urgent one on my main list helps me decide.

 

[Skiptomylue11]

I agree with you, Skiptomylue11. However, lists with contexts are not working for Queen Sarah, which is why I suggested that perhaps the solution is to eliminate the contexts.

It's far less important why it works than whether it works.

I agree, the bottom line is whether or not the system works for you. If the single list system works for Sarah and she's productive, then its a success, regardless of how different it is to GTD.

 

[TesTeq]

Intuition based on your higher level goals.

True. But how do you decide when to be in your office? Or when to do errands? If you have few context constraints imposed on you, everything IS potentially doable.

I am afraid that pure GTD answer is:

Use your intuition (based on your higher level goals) to decide what to do in a given context and to decide if the context change is needed.

So the clear vision of your life and your future is required but I doubt if it is achievable for most of the people.

 

[kewms]

Honestly? I find that "picking which context to be in" just isn't that difficult. I only have to do it at all if I run into a roadblock (external or internal) on my major project for the day (chosen either in the morning or at the Weekly Review). Then, I either pick my next most important project to work on--easy to do since the complete list for the week is less than a dozen --or simply go with whichever list is longer and/or whichever suits my mood. (Sunny day = @Errands, rainy day = @Read/Review. )

If context picking is causing undue stress, you might look and see how well your contexts match what you're actually doing, or you might consider that maybe there's a problem with some other part of your system. If any context has more than about a dozen NAs, for instance, it might be time to decide that some of them belong on a Someday/Maybe list.

Katherine

 

[pageta]

Honestly? I find that "picking which context to be in" just isn't that difficult. I only have to do it at all if I run into a roadblock (external or internal) on my major project for the day (chosen either in the morning or at the Weekly Review). Then, I either pick my next most important project to work on--easy to do since the complete list for the week is less than a dozen --or simply go with whichever list is longer and/or whichever suits my mood. (Sunny day = @Errands, rainy day = @Read/Review. )

If context picking is causing undue stress, you might look and see how well your contexts match what you're actually doing, or you might consider that maybe there's a problem with some other part of your system. If any context has more than about a dozen NAs, for instance, it might be time to decide that some of them belong on a Someday/Maybe list.

Katherine

Katherine, you are too funny! Especially the sunny day/rainy day part!

For me, that is so true. The weather, what mood I'm in, how well my toddler is behaving...all of those things help me decide which context I would be most effective in. I'm a WAHM, and I have a list of things to do outside (when my toddler just needs to go throw some rocks), I have a list of errands I must do (when my toddler needs more of a change of scenery than just going outside), I have a list of errands I can do if I have the energy (aka if my toddler is still behaving), and somedays I think I should have a list of things I can do while I'm watching my toddler and things I need to do while someone else is watching him (haven't done that yet because I'm afraid the latter list would be too long so I just work on a moment by moment basis). But the even deeper value of GTD is having everything written down so that when it seems the only thing I can do is just spend time with my toddler, I can do that without guilt, without worrying that I'm not doing something that I should be. I can make INFORMED decisions.

I hate to say it, but even with a toddler, I've gotten more done since I've been doing GTD than I ever did before I became a mother.

Yes, I can do anything I want at any given moment, but having contexts make it so much easier to choose. Is the weather nice? Well, let's go outside. It's raining today? Daddy can buy milk on the way home - we'll buy groceries tomorrow. Any change of plans is so much easier because I know what I'm choosing not to do.

Short lists - definitely! I have to know what context I want to work in next when I look at the list, and if the list is too long, I can't read the whole thing before making a decision (because I can't get through it without being interrupted and having to start over again). Short lists are definitely the way to go.

 

[kewms]

Katherine, you are too funny! Especially the sunny day/rainy day part!

I don't have a toddler, but I do have a convertible and a pretty flexible schedule. Especially in the spring, I sometimes find myself actively seeking excuses to run errands.

Katherine

 

[jac]

fao QueenSarah - contexts with clear boundaries

You say that your contexts don't have clear boundaries and admit this is causing you difficulties.

Yet you also state that your contexts work for you.

You need to decide which is it?

Also, your "Contexts" are not all contexts and appear to be a mixture of various levels of Next Actions, Lists, Projects and Areas of Focus. Remember that Contexts are a method of organising Next Actions only. No wonder you feel the edges are poorly defined!!!:-

@Contact - not only is this not a Context but you are leaving yourself wide open to poorly defined Next Actions. You need to decide at the front end whether you are going to call (@call), e-mail (@computer or @office or @desk perhaps) or talk in person @agenda.

@Errands - this is fine - a true context!

@House - again a context (I assume you list things you do in your house here?)

@Job #1 - not a context - where do you do this job? If you work from home then perhaps this is @Office or @Desk??? I would suggest that your list of jobs should actually be on your 20,000ft list of Areas of Focus which each one having a number of Projects on your @Projects list?

@Buy? - this is just a list - it doesn't belong on your Next Actions list at all. You might want to review it every week (as part of your Weekly Review) to see if you can move any of these onto your @Errands list. If you must keep it here why not remove the "@" symbol to make it clear it is not a next action

@Read/Listen/View - ok as long as you carry your reading material around with you. Otherwise the Context should be the place where the material exists eg @Library or maybe @Computer?

@Online - fine

@Computer - fine

@Not this Week - not a context at all but a list of Someday/Maybe Projects. Maybe you should remove the "@" symbol to differentiate.

@GTA work - I don't understand this - is it a Next Action list or a log of work done???

@Learn/research - again I would suggest this is an Area of Focus and not a Next Action List

Finally I see no mention of a Projects list.

To summarise, I could see you having the following:-

An Areas of Focus list including Learn/Research, your 2 degree courses and your 3 part-time jobs. It may include other things such as Socialise, Personal Finance etc. However, it is just a trigger list to review occasionally (maybe every week) and it neither a context or a list of Next Actions

A Project list containing tasks that will take more than one action to complete. It may/should include Projects relating to your Areas of Focus. It is the things you are working on right now. It is neither a context or a list of Next Actions. You need to review it weekly to ensure each project has a Next Action (and that the Project is still ongoing).

A Someday/Maybe list containing projects that you aren't currently working on but that you might want to do in the future. You could incldue your Buy list here. Again review weekly.

And finally your Next Action lists sorted by Context. These are the @computer, @desk, @agenda, @errands lists. They needn't be organised by work, job, degree courtse or anything else (the weekly review ties these altogether).

Hope this clarifies for you - I think your underlying problem is that you are tring to apply contexts too widely rather than just to Next Actions.

 

[andersons]

Using intuition is practical only when the number of choices is limited. Those with few meetings, few changing inputs, and no imposed work hours have to limit more choices more broadly before using intuition for specific NAs is going to work.

Prioritizing based on high-level goals, as TesTeq pointed out, is the crucial first broad stroke to limit NAs. If you don't prioritize goals and projects, it will be hopeless to choose among the many possible NAs.

Another way to broadly limit NA choices is to schedule times upfront for important things. It looks like people with flexible schedules often set up some structure for their time. Katherine described Julie Morgenstern's "time maps" in another post. (Thanks for that book recommendation, by the way.) I too have done something similar which works very well, scheduling blocks of time to work on my most important projects. I have hesitated to block out my time too strictly, but I will check out the book. It sounds like a useful adjunct to GTD strategies for those who have lots of discretionary time.

Useful context lists can help, too. Contexts don't have to be purely physical places with hard edges. They do not have to require physical resources like a computer. Contexts should be any list of actions that is useful in a given circumstance.

If my schedule is somewhat flexible, but I have a few appointments or deadlines throughout the week, it is easy to choose my context and choose NAs, as Katherine described. However, when my schedule is 100% flexible, wide open, no constraints at all, it is much harder to make choices. This is the specific situation I'm talking about, one with few constraints. If you have a toddler to care for, you have a lot of constraints! I'm not suggesting any of this will apply to you. I'm sure it won't.

The weather doesn't help me choose, either. It hardly ever rains here. Nothing but sunny days for 6 months straight.

I am not currently having any problems choosing my context or my NAs. But I once did, and others have posted similar questions to this forum. Queen Sarah's situation sounded similar, so I shared my experience in case it could be helpful for her situation. Mine is a specific situation, and I'm sure that my specific approach won't apply to other situations. Special-case solutions rarely generalize, but they are great for those special cases.

How about the following as a summary of recommendations only for people with lots of discretionary time and trouble choosing among many alternatives?

Situation: Some people have lots of discretionary time with few or no constraints or changing inputs.
Problem: They may find it hard to choose among their many possible NAs on various context lists.
Solution: It's a lot easier to choose from a few things than from many. Make some big choices up front:

1) Review your high-level goals and make sure you're clear about the most important outcomes you want to achieve. (TesTeq)
2) Schedule out blocks of time to work toward your most important goals. (kewms)
3) Tweak your context lists to be more helpful. If it's helpful to have a list of things only related to one important project, then use that list. Don't worry about not having hard edges; that's OK; your situation doesn't have hard edges.
​

Additions, criticism, discussion?

 

[kewms]

How about the following as a summary of recommendations only for people with lots of discretionary time and trouble choosing among many alternatives?

Situation: Some people have lots of discretionary time with few or no constraints or changing inputs.
Problem: They may find it hard to choose among their many possible NAs on various context lists.
Solution: It's a lot easier to choose from a few things than from many. Make some big choices up front:

1) Review your high-level goals and make sure you're clear about the most important outcomes you want to achieve. (TesTeq)
2) Schedule out blocks of time to work toward your most important goals. (kewms)
3) Tweak your context lists to be more helpful. If it's helpful to have a list of things only related to one important project, then use that list. Don't worry about not having hard edges; that's OK; your situation doesn't have hard edges.
​

Additions, criticism, discussion?

I would add: be very sure that your NA list really does include immediately doable items with clear beginnings and endings. Anything vague can easily turn into a three hour window shopping trip or a three hour meander across the Internet. Often, the three hour surfing session will be completely justifiable -- there really is lots of useful information out there -- but that doesn't mean it's the most important thing you could be doing right now.

I've also found that upfront planning is especially important for self-directed people. I'm currently working toward a major deadline on November 21. That's more than two months away! I have plenty of time! Except if I don't work now, I'll find myself trying to do two months worth of work in about two weeks. Oops! And, since the major deadline is two months away, it's especially important to clearly define the very next thing I need to do *this week.*

Katherine

 

[pageta]

You say that your contexts don't have clear boundaries and admit this is causing you difficulties.

Yet you also state that your contexts work for you.

You need to decide which is it?

@Job #1 - not a context - where do you do this job? If you work from home then perhaps this is @Office or @Desk??? I would suggest that your list of jobs should actually be on your 20,000ft list of Areas of Focus which each one having a number of Projects on your @Projects list?

@Buy? - this is just a list - it doesn't belong on your Next Actions list at all. You might want to review it every week (as part of your Weekly Review) to see if you can move any of these onto your @Errands list. If you must keep it here why not remove the "@" symbol to make it clear it is not a next action

@Read/Listen/View - ok as long as you carry your reading material around with you. Otherwise the Context should be the place where the material exists eg @Library or maybe @Computer?

@GTA work - I don't understand this - is it a Next Action list or a log of work done???

To summarise, I could see you having the following:-

An Areas of Focus list including Learn/Research, your 2 degree courses and your 3 part-time jobs. It may include other things such as Socialise, Personal Finance etc. However, it is just a trigger list to review occasionally (maybe every week) and it neither a context or a list of Next Actions

A Project list containing tasks that will take more than one action to complete. It may/should include Projects relating to your Areas of Focus. It is the things you are working on right now. It is neither a context or a list of Next Actions. You need to review it weekly to ensure each project has a Next Action (and that the Project is still ongoing).

A Someday/Maybe list containing projects that you aren't currently working on but that you might want to do in the future. You could incldue your Buy list here. Again review weekly.

And finally your Next Action lists sorted by Context. These are the @computer, @desk, @agenda, @errands lists. They needn't be organised by work, job, degree courtse or anything else (the weekly review ties these altogether).

Hope this clarifies for you - I think your underlying problem is that you are tring to apply contexts too widely rather than just to Next Actions.

Okay, some thoughts here. Contexts don't have to be absolute.
@Learn/Research could be at the library, at home when no one else is around, or at the park on a sunny day. The point is that you have quiet time to think.
@GTA is a job, and if it is all done in one place and you only need one list, it is the same as @home or @office.
@Read/Listen/View could also be perfectly fine. Sorry, but I'm not going to have an @Movie Theatre next action list. It goes more along the lines of mood - when you're in a receptive mode rather than a generative mode (creativity vs. observation).
@Buy - I have this one. Actually mine is "errands" but I will put specific items I need that I could get any number of places. I always have my errands list out when I go to town, so if I need toothpaste and am at a place that carries it, whether it be Walgreens, Target or the grocery store, I can pick it up.

Bottom line, contexts do not have to be physical in all instances. It's a great general rule to go buy, but doesn't necessarily have to be absolute.

 

[andersons]

I've also found that upfront planning is especially important for self-directed people. I'm currently working toward a major deadline on November 21. That's more than two months away! I have plenty of time! Except if I don't work now, I'll find myself trying to do two months worth of work in about two weeks. Oops! And, since the major deadline is two months away, it's especially important to clearly define the very next thing I need to do *this week.*

Yes, upfront planning! I have found this too. Do you use the "time maps" you described in your other post to do this?

 

[Brent]

Using intuition is practical only when the number of choices is limited.

I disagree. Please back this up.

 

[kewms]

How do I plan? Big topic...

Twice a year, I sit down and figure out revenue goals, other business goals, and personal goals. This process includes looking at how I did against my goals for the last six months, and figuring out what I need to do in the next six months. There is very little project planning involved here, except I will run through my list of client projects to see how much of my revenue goal is already booked, how much is out there in the form of outstanding proposals, and how much is fantasy requiring more marketing on my part. I like to do this between Christmas and New Years in the winter, and during Fourth of July week in the summer.

Whenever I propose a major project, I'll have a pretty good idea how long it will take, both in clock time (billable hours) and calendar time (completion date). Once I actually win the contract, I create a project in my system, usually treating the major milestones as subprojects. (I use mindmaps, but a hierarchical outline would be functionally equivalent.) I'll also plan at least the first few actions for the first major subproject. If much time has elapsed between proposal and contract, I'll need to double check to make sure other commitments haven't intruded to push the completion date back.

Monthly, I review the list of major projects for the month, move things to or from Someday/Maybe as needed, and if needed check how I'm doing against my higher level goals. I try to do this the first weekend of the month. This is also when I review where I am on larger projects that take more than a month to complete.

Weekly, usually on the weekend, I do a more or less standard GTD Weekly Review, which includes looking at my calendar, blocking out time to work on the things I need to work on, moving things to Someday/Maybe when I run out of time slots, and so forth.

My time map is a more or less static document that I use to guide my weekly planning. It reminds me that I will *always* need to feed the cats in the morning, that I need to block out personal time for exercise, food, etc., and that it's completely useless to schedule phone call time in the morning (EST) because the west coast is still asleep. Essentially, the time map documents my "natural" schedule so that I can work around it in my task-oriented weekly planning.

Daily, I process my paper and electronic inboxes and print out a sheet with my current Next Actions, sorted by context. (As I've mentioned elsewhere, if the list takes more than one page, there's too much on it. These NAs are already screened to focus on current projects, as determined during the weekly review.) If I'm feeling overwhelmed or disorganized, I'll use a highlighter to mark the top 5-10 items. Otherwise, I just use this sheet as is. I scribble notes on it as I go, then throw the whole thing in my inbox to review the next morning. (Or evening, if I have time at the end of the day.)

Hope this helps,

Katherine

 

[andersons]

How do I plan? Big topic...
Hope this helps

Interesting, thank you. Great to read an example of how to do high-level ("30,000'") planning, which is not much elaborated in GTD.

I've already been structuring my time somewhat, and your description of time maps inspires me to do look into that more.

 

[andersons]

I disagree. Please back this up.

Regarding my statement Using intuition is practical only when the number of choices is limited, okay, here's my reasoning.

Say you have a completely unordered list of 100 actions you want to do and could be doing right now in this context. Now intuitively pick the most important one you want to do right now.

If you're thinking 100 actions is ridiculous, it's too many, you've just proved my point. Who routinely picks "intuitively" among that many choices?

At worst, you'll be overwhelmed and paralyzed with indecision (some people are indecisive). At best, you'll have a big task. It can probably be done, but it's not practical.

(By the way, it's not impossible to have 100 possible next actions. I have that many on my @Home list right now; people here keep chastising me that it's too long.)

If someone pops on the forum and asks this question, they'll be told, "Your list shouldn't be that long. Move stuff you can't do this week to a Someday/Maybe list."

Well, that is just one way of limiting the choices you have to make "intuitively" by making some gross prioritizations upfront. Someday/Maybe IS prioritizing in advance.

Prioritizing goals and projects in advance ("I'll do these this week; everything else can wait") is even more powerful than prioritizing NAs because you can eliminate all a project's actions as choices if you defer the project. Higher-level prioritizing is a powerful way to reduce the load on your intuition during the week (see Katherine's post above for a great example).

Context lists can also reduce list size and therefore make intuitive choices easier by eliminating obviously undoable ones. However, as Queen Sarah's example shows, they do not reduce action choices for everyone.

Just choosing to be in your office from 9-5 is an upfront prioritization that limits action choices.

There are different ways to cut down the list of possibilities. Your job alone may do most of it for you. My point was that one way or another (or all of the above), you have to reduce a list of potential actions to a number you can comfortably choose from on the fly. That number may vary between different people, but each person certainly has his own limit of how many NAs to choose from comfortably.

(And yes, I appear to be contradicting myself by saying a list can't be too long, yet mine has 100 items. But my list is prioritized. The most important items are on the first PDA screenful. If it were not nicely prioritized for me, it would be impossible to work from. The stuff at the bottom is realistically Someday/Maybe, but I don't see any point in moving actions off my list only to have to move them back soon. It doesn't bother me having them there, at least not right now, so I just leave them rather than doing the extra work to move them back and forth between different time-frame lists.)

 

[Brent]

Say you have a completely unordered list of 100 actions you want to do and could be doing right now in this context. Now intuitively pick the most important one you want to do right now.

If you're thinking 100 actions is ridiculous, it's too many, you've just proved my point. Who routinely picks "intuitively" among that many choices?

At worst, you'll be overwhelmed and paralyzed with indecision (some people are indecisive). At best, you'll have a big task. It can probably be done, but it's not practical.

I have no problems doing this. And I've had well more than 100 actions defined in the past. It may take me a little time to pick the most important one, but it's not impractical.

It may be impractical for some people, but I don't think it's fair to say that it's universally impractical.

How many people find this impractical?

 

[Desultory]

It's impractical for me. If I see more than a few things (like *five*) on the list for a given context, I feel overwhelmed. There's so much to do!

I waste enough time as it is, the less I spend allowing myself to pick and choose the better. I think one of the reasons paper is working for me is that I can pull one sheet for the context I'm in--and that's what I work on next. All the choosing happened when I put the sheet into the context folder. All the prioritizing happened when I chose which sheets to put into the folders for the day.

Anyway, that's my theory right now.