4 ms·

My number one tip for employees is a simple one: above all else, be responsive. If your company has an instant messenger app, your response time should be in se

My number one tip for employees is a simple one: above all else, be responsive. If your company has an instant messenger app, your response time should be in seconds, not minutes. If you're going on a small errand or putting together a snack in the kitchen, it is to your benefit as much as everyone else's to update your status. A simple 'be right back' goes a long ways. When managers can't get ahold of people working from home is when they start to ask questions, run VPN reports, and reign things in. In reading the comments below, this seems to be wildly unpopular. I can understand where they're coming from. Being available may be very appreciated by others, but it really hurts when you're deeply involved in something. I manage this by marking myself as busy when I know I'm about to dive deep into something, but you can't always see it coming, and I can understand the resistance to this approach.

yowlingcat 7y ago
You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Use the right tool (sync vs async) communication for the right job. Establishing timelines and check-in points, communicating if and when things get off track, and delivering autonomously is how you mitigate this. Much like in real life. How lost do you have to be to conflate results with responsiveness?
bitexploder 7y ago
This destroys deep work. If you are paid for deep work you have to balance responsiveness with getting your work done. Don’t be unavailable, use status messages wisely, and set up an SLA that makes sense for deep work. “Seconds” is not reasonable IMO. Depends on your role, I suppose.
- znpy 7y ago
  > This destroys deep work yes, but not everybody has to do deep work all the time. for example, part of my job is to be available to colleagues for consultation. it might be something to which i can quickly respond "ticket or gtfo" or "busy right now, could you ask me again in 10-15 minutes?". But it could also require me immediate action (some production environment is failing). As a company culture it is important to empower people to tell "not now", to educate people to only tell "not now" if you actually can't right now, and to train yourself to write "not now" without losing focus.
Chyzwar 7y ago
I disagree. Respond when you have time not when the micro-manager ask about trivia. Managers should be looking on results of someone work not what you type or when. This is one of the things that piss me in the tech industry, Incompetent managers using tools like the end of year feedback, number of hours spent in office or culture fit to decide if someone is perfoming well.
switch007 7y ago
I'm glad my manager doesn't expect a response in seconds. Some colleagues do initially, but they learn eventually. If he did, I'd tactfully explain why it's a bad thing
musicale 7y ago
>reign things in managers who think they are kings are kind of the problem
mike22 7y ago
This shouldn’t be done even in the office. Can’t tell you how many times I get interrupted by any member of my team in the office for trivialities or even useful things that can also wait. We have some fires but that’s only about 10% of my interruptions.
Igelau 7y ago
This is a learning experience for those neurotic control freaks too.
wvenable 7y ago
I keep my mobile phone on me (and smartwatch) while in the house so I can do other things as a break (wash dishes) but still be responsive if necessary. I don't send anyone "be right back" messages -- I will set my IM status to unavailable if I intend to be unavailable.
aantix 7y ago
Yeah, not going to do this. As if everyone isn’t anxious enough.
discordance 7y ago
Counter to this, I would suggest scheduling in focus time in your calendar and block incoming calendar requests/IMs etc. That way you can be responsive in scheduled times, and unresponsive in focus time.
- bosie 7y ago
  I am not sure how this is supposed to work. Should your team members check the calendar before they ping you? and if they get annoyed by your lack of responsiveness you point them to the calendar?
  - jmccorm 7y ago
    You change your status. Others would then know (or should know) your status before reaching out to you.
  - discordance 7y ago
    Blocking time in your calendar will stop incoming meeting invites, and then at those times my IM status is set to DND. This idea that people at work should always be available is not a good standard that we've set ourselves up in. If you're in support or some job then yeah, this model won't work for you. If you're coding then it makes a big difference.
biomcgary 7y ago
I manage a remote team and the first training session I give is on the importance of asynchronous communication. Synchronous communication should be scheduled in advance or for dire emergencies (at least for projects/roles that required extended periods of focus).
101404 7y ago
On the contrary. Don't be distracted all the time starring at the IM icon. When working, ignore the icon until you are done. Talk it through with managers in case they don't know how focused work works. If there is really something super urgent, they can call you. If your managers mistrust you so much that they feel the need to check up on you like a child, switch company quickly.
ereyes01 7y ago
The medium of in-person communication is very different from the tools of remote communication. You're trying to force in-person protocols and expectations in a situation that isn't well suited to this medium. This just adds to stress and friction in your team. Have a look at Gitlab's remote working guide for lots more insight on how they address this situation: https://about.gitlab.com/company/culture/all-remote/guide/ https://about.gitlab.com/company/culture/all-remote/guide/
29athrowaway 7y ago
If you need micromanagement, you have other problems. Perhaps you are reinforcing poor behaviors that make people feel dependent on micromanagement.

yowlingcat 7y ago

You couldn't be more wrong if you tried. Use the right tool (sync vs async) communication for the right job. Establishing timelines and check-in points, communicating if and when things get off track, and delivering autonomously is how you mitigate this. Much like in real life. How lost do you have to be to conflate results with responsiveness?

bitexploder 7y ago

This destroys deep work. If you are paid for deep work you have to balance responsiveness with getting your work done. Don’t be unavailable, use status messages wisely, and set up an SLA that makes sense for deep work. “Seconds” is not reasonable IMO. Depends on your role, I suppose.

znpy 7y ago
> This destroys deep work yes, but not everybody has to do deep work all the time. for example, part of my job is to be available to colleagues for consultation. it might be something to which i can quickly respond "ticket or gtfo" or "busy right now, could you ask me again in 10-15 minutes?". But it could also require me immediate action (some production environment is failing). As a company culture it is important to empower people to tell "not now", to educate people to only tell "not now" if you actually can't right now, and to train yourself to write "not now" without losing focus.

Chyzwar 7y ago

I disagree. Respond when you have time not when the micro-manager ask about trivia. Managers should be looking on results of someone work not what you type or when. This is one of the things that piss me in the tech industry, Incompetent managers using tools like the end of year feedback, number of hours spent in office or culture fit to decide if someone is perfoming well.

switch007 7y ago

I'm glad my manager doesn't expect a response in seconds. Some colleagues do initially, but they learn eventually. If he did, I'd tactfully explain why it's a bad thing

musicale 7y ago

>reign things in managers who think they are kings are kind of the problem

mike22 7y ago

This shouldn’t be done even in the office. Can’t tell you how many times I get interrupted by any member of my team in the office for trivialities or even useful things that can also wait. We have some fires but that’s only about 10% of my interruptions.

Igelau 7y ago

This is a learning experience for those neurotic control freaks too.

wvenable 7y ago

I keep my mobile phone on me (and smartwatch) while in the house so I can do other things as a break (wash dishes) but still be responsive if necessary. I don't send anyone "be right back" messages -- I will set my IM status to unavailable if I intend to be unavailable.

aantix 7y ago

Yeah, not going to do this. As if everyone isn’t anxious enough.

discordance 7y ago

Counter to this, I would suggest scheduling in focus time in your calendar and block incoming calendar requests/IMs etc. That way you can be responsive in scheduled times, and unresponsive in focus time.

bosie 7y ago
I am not sure how this is supposed to work. Should your team members check the calendar before they ping you? and if they get annoyed by your lack of responsiveness you point them to the calendar?
- jmccorm 7y ago
  You change your status. Others would then know (or should know) your status before reaching out to you.
- discordance 7y ago
  Blocking time in your calendar will stop incoming meeting invites, and then at those times my IM status is set to DND. This idea that people at work should always be available is not a good standard that we've set ourselves up in. If you're in support or some job then yeah, this model won't work for you. If you're coding then it makes a big difference.

biomcgary 7y ago

I manage a remote team and the first training session I give is on the importance of asynchronous communication. Synchronous communication should be scheduled in advance or for dire emergencies (at least for projects/roles that required extended periods of focus).

101404 7y ago

On the contrary. Don't be distracted all the time starring at the IM icon. When working, ignore the icon until you are done. Talk it through with managers in case they don't know how focused work works. If there is really something super urgent, they can call you. If your managers mistrust you so much that they feel the need to check up on you like a child, switch company quickly.

ereyes01 7y ago

The medium of in-person communication is very different from the tools of remote communication. You're trying to force in-person protocols and expectations in a situation that isn't well suited to this medium. This just adds to stress and friction in your team. Have a look at Gitlab's remote working guide for lots more insight on how they address this situation: https://about.gitlab.com/company/culture/all-remote/guide/ https://about.gitlab.com/company/culture/all-remote/guide/

29athrowaway 7y ago

If you need micromanagement, you have other problems. Perhaps you are reinforcing poor behaviors that make people feel dependent on micromanagement.