gtdstudente
Registered
@fooddude
Nice @Contexts:
As such, which are done Only/Usually:
1. When home ?
2. When 'away' from home ?
Thank you very much
What if @Computer wasn't a context?
- Thread starter cfoley
- Start date
Nice @Contexts:
As such, which are done Only/Usually:
1. When home ?
2. When 'away' from home ?
Thank you very much
I do the @Home list when I'm at home and have the mental capacity (energy) at that time. For example, I can't do @Errands when I'm home. And even though I don't go to a "work" site per se. I don't do at work things when I'm not at "work". Keeps me balanced.
gtdstudente
Registered
Oogiem
0
I LOVE varied and numerous contexts. Since I work in a 12WY approach and since I make active all projects that can be done in that 12 week year and since mine are tied to seasons because I am first and foremost a farmer many contexts are helpful. I currently have 47 contexts. I was a 1 context per task person for years then I realized that there are some tasks that can be sliced and diced different ways. So while I have my "primary"contexts there are ancillary ones like one for each current beta test customer of AnimalTrakker. It's easier in my system to find everything related to AT-003 or AT-012 (meaning specific AnimalTrakker Customers) even if it crosses the definition of the tool, location or condition needed to perform the task because I can verify I am keeping up with all their requirements and requests. I have ways to see specific contexts but also contexts that give me a big picture of my varied and numerous actions.
Oogiem
0
I still have many contexts that are based on the Primary tool I need. Not the only tool but he one that I will need most to work on that action. So I don't find it to be micromanaging but rather liberating. I can pick a tool I wm in the mood to work in and get a lot done EVEN IF I need to dabble in something else for a tiny bit of the action.
I just have the @phone and @computer contexts for technology. @ phone I put only things i can do at the phone. ie: call and text. @computer is for computer work that yes I can still do on my phone. But I don't want to hide a computer next action in the @phone context.
jonkan
Registered
My @computer is currently split into these:
@focus: For actions that take significant time and/or energy.
@quick: Everything else that doesn't fit into the above, eg. handling certain emails, submitting expenses, scheduling meetings etc.
@review: Things to read, watch or otherwise consume. Perfect for sitting in the couch with an iPad.
Non computer contexts are pretty standard.
@home
@office
@school
@errands - headings (Things feature) for the main destinations
@agendas - headings (Things feature) for the commonly used people/meetings
waiting
@focus: For actions that take significant time and/or energy.
@quick: Everything else that doesn't fit into the above, eg. handling certain emails, submitting expenses, scheduling meetings etc.
@review: Things to read, watch or otherwise consume. Perfect for sitting in the couch with an iPad.
Non computer contexts are pretty standard.
@home
@office
@school
@errands - headings (Things feature) for the main destinations
@agendas - headings (Things feature) for the commonly used people/meetings
waiting
gtdstudente
Registered
FocusGuy
Registered
I am making a new test with Things 3 and I find it just astonishing. Much better than omnifocus 4 in the way it treats time and project. It does nearly the same than what I do with OF but in lighter, easier and faster. I love the finding feature, headings, checklist and shortcuts, the todays view and the tonight feature for postponing stuff out of the plate until tonight. I think I am back to things. Very interesting your contexts. This period with Omnifocus updated my system and let me time to understand that simplicity is the most valuable asset. Just hope it will be able to manage my activities witch are more peaceful these time...
Last edited:
I can definitely relate to your experience of rethinking contexts. Early on in my GTD journey, I followed the context suggestions from the book quite strictly and even added a personal twist by tagging tasks with energy levels (high, medium, low) based on how I felt I needed to approach them. Over time, though, I realized from a Lean perspective that this effort to tag was a waste during the clarifying phase.
As my GTD system matured using Outlook desktop client, Todoist, and OneNote, alongside my use of the 12 Week Year methodology, I made a significant shift that goes against the book but works well for me. I’ve retained key contexts in Outlook, but purely for a visual overview. The category colors give me an at-a-glance understanding of how my calendar is structured (@12WY tactic, @call, @meeting, @errands, @family, @sharpen the saw). My 12 Week Year tactics automatically populate my calendar during my weekly review, with color-coded events and the tactic name embedded in the calendar event.
For tasks that don’t need to go into the calendar, I’ve simplified Todoist. I assign a due date, which pulls those tasks into my morning review of the “Today’s view.”
For Waiting For (@WF) items, I place them into their respective projects in Todoist’s board view—automated using API calls between Outlook and Todoist. I prefer seeing @WFs within each project rather than all lumped into one bucket, though I can always use the @WF label view if needed. I also use the first section of Todoist’s board view for each project’s Next Action (NA).
In response to your thoughts, I believe it’s important to experiment with contexts and refine them based on what helps you be more effective. For me, simplifying and focusing on visual cues has been key. I haven’t abandoned contexts entirely, but I’ve repurposed them in a more practical way. I no longer work from a “menu” of what I could do today based on lists. Instead, I approach it more like an athlete, focusing on “what training type and intervals” I need to execute today. This analogy of training for sport mirrors how I approach work and life—it helps cut out the unnecessary clutter.
As my GTD system matured using Outlook desktop client, Todoist, and OneNote, alongside my use of the 12 Week Year methodology, I made a significant shift that goes against the book but works well for me. I’ve retained key contexts in Outlook, but purely for a visual overview. The category colors give me an at-a-glance understanding of how my calendar is structured (@12WY tactic, @call, @meeting, @errands, @family, @sharpen the saw). My 12 Week Year tactics automatically populate my calendar during my weekly review, with color-coded events and the tactic name embedded in the calendar event.
For tasks that don’t need to go into the calendar, I’ve simplified Todoist. I assign a due date, which pulls those tasks into my morning review of the “Today’s view.”
For Waiting For (@WF) items, I place them into their respective projects in Todoist’s board view—automated using API calls between Outlook and Todoist. I prefer seeing @WFs within each project rather than all lumped into one bucket, though I can always use the @WF label view if needed. I also use the first section of Todoist’s board view for each project’s Next Action (NA).
In response to your thoughts, I believe it’s important to experiment with contexts and refine them based on what helps you be more effective. For me, simplifying and focusing on visual cues has been key. I haven’t abandoned contexts entirely, but I’ve repurposed them in a more practical way. I no longer work from a “menu” of what I could do today based on lists. Instead, I approach it more like an athlete, focusing on “what training type and intervals” I need to execute today. This analogy of training for sport mirrors how I approach work and life—it helps cut out the unnecessary clutter.