6 ms·

As I read this, I got the sinking feeling that I'd read it all before. But then I realised, it's just another case of someone thinking that their specific solut

As I read this, I got the sinking feeling that I'd read it all before. But then I realised, it's just another case of someone thinking that their specific solution is best, solely on the basis that it worked for them, in their specific circumstances. But here's the thing: every group is different, has different needs, and will respond differently to different styles of communication. Some people (especially people not using their first language) can find working in public stressful; some people get very stressed by the intensity of 1:1s. It takes all types, and as a manager, understanding how to get the best out of everyone is part of the job. There is no single, correct way, and we know this because, if there was, then we wouldn't keep hearing about these interminable "solutions".

westurner 4y ago
Yes, but so is which is best for which situation still the question? Presuming that information asymmetry will hold over time is a bad assumption, regardless of cost of information security controls. Why have these new collaborative innovative services succeeded where NNTP and > > indented, text-wrapped email forwards for new onboards have not? Instead of Chat or IM, hopefully working on Issues with checkbox Tasks and Edges; and Pull Requests composed of Commits, Comments, and Code Reviews; with conditional Branch modification rules; will produce Products: deliverables of value to the customer, per the schema:Organization's Mission. What style of communication is appropriate for a team in which phase of development, regardless of communications channel?
- doctor_eval 4y ago
  > Why have these new collaborative innovative services succeeded where NNTP and > > indented, text-wrapped email forwards for new onboards have not? The new tools we have at our disposal are amazing. Of course they are better. But they are just tools. They don’t solve any problems relating to interpersonal communication any more than a hammer solves building a house. > What style of communication is appropriate for a team in which phase of development, regardless of communications channel? It’s the job of a manager to work that out. There is no formula. It’s not even possible to write one down. That’s the point.
  - westurner 4y ago
    Well, our societies value these communication businesses as among the most valuable corporations on Earth, so I think that there's probably some value in the tools that people suffer ads on to get for free. "Traits of good remote leaders" (2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24432088 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24432088 : "From Comfort Zone to Performance Management" (2009) https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C43&q=%E2%80%9CFrom+Comfort+Zone+to+Performance+Management%E2%80%9D+White+%282008%29&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3D38spZfy7PdsJ https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C43&q=%E2... : > "Table 4 – Correlation of Development Phases, Coping Stages and Comfort Zone transitions and the Performance Model" in "From Comfort Zone to Performance Management" White (2008) tabularly correlates the Tuckman group development phases (Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, Adjourning) with the Carnall coping cycle (Denial, Defense, Discarding, Adaptation, Internalization) and Comfort Zone Theory (First Performance Level, Transition Zone, Second Performance Level), and the White-Fairhurst TPR model (Transforming, Performing, Reforming). The ScholarlyArticle also suggests management styles for each stage (Commanding, Cooperative, Motivational, Directive, Collaborative); and suggests that team performance is described by chained power curves of re-progression through these stages.
vasco 4y ago
If you're stressed by typing in your team chat you don't trust your team and therefore there's a deeper issue already. I strongly believe you are wrong because all the examples you mention signal different team disfunctions. You need to understand everyone is different, yes, but your team should use public channels to communicate.
- doctor_eval 4y ago
  You strongly believe that I am wrong that there is no one single way? So, you are saying that yours is the only way? And that being flexible and working out what’s right for your team… is wrong?
  - vasco 4y ago
    Yes, if you have a team, the team should discuss work progress, discoveries and problems in a shared space that is accessible by other team members. If conversations about the work itself happen in silos because someone is not comfortable, you're doing it wrong because you're fixing the symptom instead of the cause.
    - doctor_eval 4y ago
      So how do you propose you “fix” the cause, which is some human being’s discomfort at working in a particular way? Do you force them? Sack them? Threaten them? Or just send them for reprogramming? Honestly, this is just cargo cult stuff.
      - nh23423fefe 4y ago
        It's not my job to fix someone else's dysfunction. It's their job to speak in public about work. Being uncomfortable isn't a veto. All your criticism is just framing. It presupposes pathological work practices are actually just personal quirks. If you can't type a question in a slack with 20 members you are basically useless.
        4y ago
rockostrich 4y ago
> Some people (especially people not using their first language) can find working in public stressful Which is fine coming in, but the culture should be one that reassures these folks that public forums in the company are safe regardless of their proficiency with the main language. Half of the people I work with speak English as a 2nd language (most are very proficient since they're mostly French-Canadian but there are plenty that make a bunch of grammar/spelling mistakes). That's never been the reason why folks try to use private channels to discuss work. The main reason I've seen is because people think it's more efficient to reach out directly to people. I've seen it a bunch with product managers and engineering managers that are new to the company and not used to a culture of trying to work out in the open.
- doctor_eval 4y ago
  If people find a particular way of working stressful then it doesn’t matter what causes the stress. It was just an example. Some people are on the ASD spectrum, some are extroverts, some introverts. Some might have other difficulties, big problems at home. But there is room in the world for more than one way of doing work. There are drawbacks to doing everything in public just as there are drawbacks to doing everything in private. If you care about getting the most out of the individuals in your team then finding the right balance is hard, and there is no one solution that will work in all cases.
- amrocha 4y ago
  On the opposite spectrum there's the experience I had at a Japanese company as a fluent but not native person. All communication happened in public, and I was made fun of whenever I had to ask clarifying questions. The entire team would see this and got the impression that I was hard to work with since asking questions can be seen as rude in Japanese, and the Japanese staff would understand things the first time around. So you know, both cases happen.
  - rockostrich 4y ago
    I think you just proved my point? I said it's a culture thing and you gave an example of terrible work culture.
doctor_eval 4y ago
I’m just going to add that it looks like this is some kind of Slack hasslebot dystopia. They want all conversations in public so they can data mine them? From the home page, > Teamplify | Hey @anna.austin, we haven't seen updates for PROJ-716 since Thursday, July 19. Could you please add a comment there summarizing your progress as of today.
- bombcar 4y ago
  Chat clients as TPS devices. Wonderful.
  - arbitrage 4y ago
    Just file your TPS report. It's not like anyone reads them, anyway.
  - dijonman2 4y ago
    Slack is super annoying when used this way. I miss IRC.
- stebunovd 4y ago
  The notifications you're referring to are based on team rules that the team establishes for itself and not on Slack data mining - https://teamplify.com/whats-new/4987/smart-daily-standup/ https://teamplify.com/whats-new/4987/smart-daily-standup/
dheera 4y ago
Yep. I would find it incredibly distracting to have to wade through piles and piles of discussions about things that I trust other team members to handle, just to search for something that's actually relevant to something I should be involved in.
datazzz 4y ago
I worked at a company that insisted on no direct messaging and no private team channels. It was stressful and counterproductive, in fact in the short time I was there (I left) I counted 3 different chat services people were using to discuss work topics that were outside the company. No one wants to perform their job on a stage all day everyday. Unless you're actually a performer, I suppose. It was also nearly impossible to keep up with everything and nothing indicated what I really needed to focus on. Also worked at a company that encouraged people into public channels for inter-team communication and into team channels for anything useful to your team, but didn't have obnoxious rules around it. Also allowed private team channels. Worked perfectly, everyone felt comfortable talking to just their team in the private channels, and everyone searched Slack for old technical answers all the time because they were actually there, which is about as close to proof it worked as you can get. Also there should be a buddy for all new hires and you should get a month or 3 of DMs with them because asking every dumb new-person question in public is tough for introverts.
opmelogy 4y ago
I'm curious what sorts of groups/contexts working together wouldn't benefit from this. I'm having a hard time coming up with examples. If we're assuming that group activity means people that are all working on the same product, I can't see an argument for DM's and private conversations.
- kredd 4y ago
  In one of my previous workplaces, my coworker and I used to exchange very… NSFW language while debugging certain bugs. It was all in good spirit and humour, everyone knew that’s how we communicate with each other, and it helped to alleviate the tensions for us. Obviously we would also give out statements in public channels to explain what we’ve done and so, but in a more public-friendly way. It’s like having drinks at a bar solo, talking to people next to you (a bit more reserved, avoiding specific topics) vs. having drinks with a close friend. I don’t mind if someone listens to my private conversations with my friend, but the direct audience is different.
  - opmelogy 4y ago
    Ah gotcha. In this case it's not actually that you are hiding away and doing all your work via DM. You're just using it for smaller discussions and then circle back with the larger team to share info. That totally makes sense. I was thinking that the OP for this comment thread was claiming that there are situations where public comments/knowledge sharing isn't needed for teams, which makes no sense to me.
    - speeder 4y ago
      I had a situation where some stuff isn't done in the public channel out of politeness. For example: While working with text written by non-native speaker, had to explain often to some members of the team t hat the text was just awful and needed a complete rewrite. But I didn't want to type this in public so that the "culprit" wouldn't feel like I was out to get him or something. At least in my culture, it is extremely rude to berate people in public, so I extended this to also considering rude to "blame" people in public when explaining why work is late.
MetaWhirledPeas 4y ago
> There is no single correct way, and we know this because, if there was, then we wouldn't keep hearing about these interminable "solutions". Yes, this is very true, and it varies not only by person but by situation. But most people have a default that they respond best to. - Some prefer IM - Some prefer email and will respond to a group discussion with an email (sigh) - Some prefer direct phone calls and will completely ignore your IMs - Some prefer group chat - Some prefer more formal group chats (MS Teams calls these "channels") - Some want you to walk right up to them and start talking The truth is you probably need a mishmash: - There's a time and place for group emails, most notably when you need to include an outsider, or if you want a better paper trail of the conversation - If your team is accepting of it, some form of group chat really is super effective at greasing the wheels, but I find it's inappropriate for lengthy, detailed conversations. Then it truly does become noise. - Direct IMs, direct emails, phone calls, and foot traffic are all extremely easy to abuse and should always be used judiciously. None of these should be the default unless you know this is someone's preference; it's just rude. The other side of the coin is that if a team member chooses not to be adaptable they are limiting their own ability to contribute. If you want to be a finicky communicator don't be surprised if you get the dull work or get overlooked when promotions come around.
toss1 4y ago
>>every group is different, has different needs, and will respond differently to different styles of communication YUP!! Especially when some parts of the group are working with Controlled Unclassified Information (even more so for classified); it's a legal requirement that people access it only on a need-to-know basis. Even without that, companies that rely on trade secret protection (Apple, SpaceX come to mind) must also compartmentalize their information both to prevent leaks and to protect it's legal status as a secret (you must treat a secret as exactly that, or risk it being declared public domain)

westurner 4y ago

Yes, but so is which is best for which situation still the question? Presuming that information asymmetry will hold over time is a bad assumption, regardless of cost of information security controls. Why have these new collaborative innovative services succeeded where NNTP and > > indented, text-wrapped email forwards for new onboards have not? Instead of Chat or IM, hopefully working on Issues with checkbox Tasks and Edges; and Pull Requests composed of Commits, Comments, and Code Reviews; with conditional Branch modification rules; will produce Products: deliverables of value to the customer, per the schema:Organization's Mission. What style of communication is appropriate for a team in which phase of development, regardless of communications channel?

doctor_eval 4y ago
> Why have these new collaborative innovative services succeeded where NNTP and > > indented, text-wrapped email forwards for new onboards have not? The new tools we have at our disposal are amazing. Of course they are better. But they are just tools. They don’t solve any problems relating to interpersonal communication any more than a hammer solves building a house. > What style of communication is appropriate for a team in which phase of development, regardless of communications channel? It’s the job of a manager to work that out. There is no formula. It’s not even possible to write one down. That’s the point.
- westurner 4y ago
  Well, our societies value these communication businesses as among the most valuable corporations on Earth, so I think that there's probably some value in the tools that people suffer ads on to get for free. "Traits of good remote leaders" (2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24432088 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24432088 : "From Comfort Zone to Performance Management" (2009) https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C43&q=%E2%80%9CFrom+Comfort+Zone+to+Performance+Management%E2%80%9D+White+%282008%29&btnG=#d=gs_qabs&u=%23p%3D38spZfy7PdsJ https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C43&q=%E2... : > "Table 4 – Correlation of Development Phases, Coping Stages and Comfort Zone transitions and the Performance Model" in "From Comfort Zone to Performance Management" White (2008) tabularly correlates the Tuckman group development phases (Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, Adjourning) with the Carnall coping cycle (Denial, Defense, Discarding, Adaptation, Internalization) and Comfort Zone Theory (First Performance Level, Transition Zone, Second Performance Level), and the White-Fairhurst TPR model (Transforming, Performing, Reforming). The ScholarlyArticle also suggests management styles for each stage (Commanding, Cooperative, Motivational, Directive, Collaborative); and suggests that team performance is described by chained power curves of re-progression through these stages.

vasco 4y ago

If you're stressed by typing in your team chat you don't trust your team and therefore there's a deeper issue already. I strongly believe you are wrong because all the examples you mention signal different team disfunctions. You need to understand everyone is different, yes, but your team should use public channels to communicate.

doctor_eval 4y ago
You strongly believe that I am wrong that there is no one single way? So, you are saying that yours is the only way? And that being flexible and working out what’s right for your team… is wrong?
- vasco 4y ago
  Yes, if you have a team, the team should discuss work progress, discoveries and problems in a shared space that is accessible by other team members. If conversations about the work itself happen in silos because someone is not comfortable, you're doing it wrong because you're fixing the symptom instead of the cause.
  - doctor_eval 4y ago
    So how do you propose you “fix” the cause, which is some human being’s discomfort at working in a particular way? Do you force them? Sack them? Threaten them? Or just send them for reprogramming? Honestly, this is just cargo cult stuff.
    - nh23423fefe 4y ago
      It's not my job to fix someone else's dysfunction. It's their job to speak in public about work. Being uncomfortable isn't a veto. All your criticism is just framing. It presupposes pathological work practices are actually just personal quirks. If you can't type a question in a slack with 20 members you are basically useless.
      - 4y ago

rockostrich 4y ago

> Some people (especially people not using their first language) can find working in public stressful Which is fine coming in, but the culture should be one that reassures these folks that public forums in the company are safe regardless of their proficiency with the main language. Half of the people I work with speak English as a 2nd language (most are very proficient since they're mostly French-Canadian but there are plenty that make a bunch of grammar/spelling mistakes). That's never been the reason why folks try to use private channels to discuss work. The main reason I've seen is because people think it's more efficient to reach out directly to people. I've seen it a bunch with product managers and engineering managers that are new to the company and not used to a culture of trying to work out in the open.

doctor_eval 4y ago
If people find a particular way of working stressful then it doesn’t matter what causes the stress. It was just an example. Some people are on the ASD spectrum, some are extroverts, some introverts. Some might have other difficulties, big problems at home. But there is room in the world for more than one way of doing work. There are drawbacks to doing everything in public just as there are drawbacks to doing everything in private. If you care about getting the most out of the individuals in your team then finding the right balance is hard, and there is no one solution that will work in all cases.
amrocha 4y ago
On the opposite spectrum there's the experience I had at a Japanese company as a fluent but not native person. All communication happened in public, and I was made fun of whenever I had to ask clarifying questions. The entire team would see this and got the impression that I was hard to work with since asking questions can be seen as rude in Japanese, and the Japanese staff would understand things the first time around. So you know, both cases happen.
- rockostrich 4y ago
  I think you just proved my point? I said it's a culture thing and you gave an example of terrible work culture.

doctor_eval 4y ago

I’m just going to add that it looks like this is some kind of Slack hasslebot dystopia. They want all conversations in public so they can data mine them? From the home page, > Teamplify | Hey @anna.austin, we haven't seen updates for PROJ-716 since Thursday, July 19. Could you please add a comment there summarizing your progress as of today.

bombcar 4y ago
Chat clients as TPS devices. Wonderful.
- arbitrage 4y ago
  Just file your TPS report. It's not like anyone reads them, anyway.
- dijonman2 4y ago
  Slack is super annoying when used this way. I miss IRC.
stebunovd 4y ago
The notifications you're referring to are based on team rules that the team establishes for itself and not on Slack data mining - https://teamplify.com/whats-new/4987/smart-daily-standup/ https://teamplify.com/whats-new/4987/smart-daily-standup/

dheera 4y ago

Yep. I would find it incredibly distracting to have to wade through piles and piles of discussions about things that I trust other team members to handle, just to search for something that's actually relevant to something I should be involved in.

datazzz 4y ago

I worked at a company that insisted on no direct messaging and no private team channels. It was stressful and counterproductive, in fact in the short time I was there (I left) I counted 3 different chat services people were using to discuss work topics that were outside the company. No one wants to perform their job on a stage all day everyday. Unless you're actually a performer, I suppose. It was also nearly impossible to keep up with everything and nothing indicated what I really needed to focus on. Also worked at a company that encouraged people into public channels for inter-team communication and into team channels for anything useful to your team, but didn't have obnoxious rules around it. Also allowed private team channels. Worked perfectly, everyone felt comfortable talking to just their team in the private channels, and everyone searched Slack for old technical answers all the time because they were actually there, which is about as close to proof it worked as you can get. Also there should be a buddy for all new hires and you should get a month or 3 of DMs with them because asking every dumb new-person question in public is tough for introverts.

opmelogy 4y ago

I'm curious what sorts of groups/contexts working together wouldn't benefit from this. I'm having a hard time coming up with examples. If we're assuming that group activity means people that are all working on the same product, I can't see an argument for DM's and private conversations.

kredd 4y ago
In one of my previous workplaces, my coworker and I used to exchange very… NSFW language while debugging certain bugs. It was all in good spirit and humour, everyone knew that’s how we communicate with each other, and it helped to alleviate the tensions for us. Obviously we would also give out statements in public channels to explain what we’ve done and so, but in a more public-friendly way. It’s like having drinks at a bar solo, talking to people next to you (a bit more reserved, avoiding specific topics) vs. having drinks with a close friend. I don’t mind if someone listens to my private conversations with my friend, but the direct audience is different.
- opmelogy 4y ago
  Ah gotcha. In this case it's not actually that you are hiding away and doing all your work via DM. You're just using it for smaller discussions and then circle back with the larger team to share info. That totally makes sense. I was thinking that the OP for this comment thread was claiming that there are situations where public comments/knowledge sharing isn't needed for teams, which makes no sense to me.
  - speeder 4y ago
    I had a situation where some stuff isn't done in the public channel out of politeness. For example: While working with text written by non-native speaker, had to explain often to some members of the team t hat the text was just awful and needed a complete rewrite. But I didn't want to type this in public so that the "culprit" wouldn't feel like I was out to get him or something. At least in my culture, it is extremely rude to berate people in public, so I extended this to also considering rude to "blame" people in public when explaining why work is late.

MetaWhirledPeas 4y ago

> There is no single correct way, and we know this because, if there was, then we wouldn't keep hearing about these interminable "solutions". Yes, this is very true, and it varies not only by person but by situation. But most people have a default that they respond best to. - Some prefer IM - Some prefer email and will respond to a group discussion with an email (sigh) - Some prefer direct phone calls and will completely ignore your IMs - Some prefer group chat - Some prefer more formal group chats (MS Teams calls these "channels") - Some want you to walk right up to them and start talking The truth is you probably need a mishmash: - There's a time and place for group emails, most notably when you need to include an outsider, or if you want a better paper trail of the conversation - If your team is accepting of it, some form of group chat really is super effective at greasing the wheels, but I find it's inappropriate for lengthy, detailed conversations. Then it truly does become noise. - Direct IMs, direct emails, phone calls, and foot traffic are all extremely easy to abuse and should always be used judiciously. None of these should be the default unless you know this is someone's preference; it's just rude. The other side of the coin is that if a team member chooses not to be adaptable they are limiting their own ability to contribute. If you want to be a finicky communicator don't be surprised if you get the dull work or get overlooked when promotions come around.

toss1 4y ago

>>every group is different, has different needs, and will respond differently to different styles of communication YUP!! Especially when some parts of the group are working with Controlled Unclassified Information (even more so for classified); it's a legal requirement that people access it only on a need-to-know basis. Even without that, companies that rely on trade secret protection (Apple, SpaceX come to mind) must also compartmentalize their information both to prevent leaks and to protect it's legal status as a secret (you must treat a secret as exactly that, or risk it being declared public domain)