3 ms·
When I read these kind of pieces I wonder if people know that just because your company has Slack, that doesn't mean they expect you to read everything in it.
by jackpeterfletch 7y ago
When I read these kind of pieces I wonder if people know that just because your company has Slack, that doesn't mean they expect you to read everything in it.
Company wide/support channels, your basically at liberty to completely ignore these. Some people crack the odd joke in here, camaraderie in a team is nice, but don't feel its compulsory. I mute them, though they're are great places to be able to search!
The channel for your immediate team/specific projects, your not obliged to monitor this but it'd probably be helpful for the team if you checked in twice a day or so, you might be able to guide or unblock a teammate with knowledge they don't know you have.
And direct messages. Again, its up to your to triage these, if its unimportant just mark unread and come back later.
The important point of slack is that communication is open, which brings network effects, I cant count the number of times I've stumbled on information that's been directly helpful to me. However, just like any other open information portal, most of it isn't directed at you, so don't worry about it.
- matchbok 7y agoBut, the whole "checking in on a channel" thing is exactly the problem. It creates a nonsense or a "missing out" feeling for the team. It is too synchronous.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- jackpeterfletch 7y agoSo, I think the crux here, is that the below, in my opinion, is a purely perceived pressure. You shoulden't feel pressured to read everything in Slack. > Reduced pressure to read everything. Let’s face it, it’s not practical or necessary to keep up with every conversation. The aggregated timeline in Level lets you subscribe to channels and sip from the firehose of conversations without pressuring you to “catch up” on all unreads.
- wool_gather 7y agoThe fear of missing something is real. I have seen decisions taken in Slack by two or three of the four or five people who should have been involved. I'm not saying this is caused by Slack -- the problem is absolutely with the people who thought it was okay to act on such a decision. But I do think it's facilitated; the people involved seem to subconsciously think that because they're discussing in a public channel where the other people are "present" -- even though they're not active -- that everyone's informed. Whereas if they'd just had a hallway face-to-face, someone would have said, "Hey, we really need to check with Laura and Ed about this too".
- gamma3 7y agoThey should cc you so you get a notification. Or talk to you on person. They shouldn't assume everyone will read every message. If it's important, they should make sure you definitely saw it. If you ever feel like you missed and important decision, go and politely tell them to always get you involved.