5 ms·

> A call is more distracting than a chat message. I highly disagree. A call has a definite start and end. Async chats leave an open thread in your mind that ne

> A call is more distracting than a chat message. I highly disagree. A call has a definite start and end. Async chats leave an open thread in your mind that needs to be constantly polled and interrupt flow much more than a call.

simonmysun 2y ago
I believe the author means "quick call"s. They are not against scheduled calls.
- jstimpfle 2y ago
  Below a certain threshold, "quick calls" are the best thing to do. Some of the most inspiring discussions come from someone bringing up an issue they have right there and then. Good discussions often start from something that doesn't seem so important, that doesn't have a clear outline from the start. If there isn't the possibility to start a discussion instantly once in a little while, there is a good chance it won't ever happen.
  - meowface 2y ago
    >Good discussions often start from something that doesn't seem so important, that doesn't have a clear outline from the start. Yes, but I've never once had a "can we hop on a quick call?" turn into that. Almost every single one of those that I've encountered could've been settled in a handful of chat messages. The things you describe happen to me during unplanned asides in meetings, long-term general chat channels, or impromptu in-person chatting. My impression has been that the people who want a quick 1-on-1 call just don't like typing.
    - prmoustache 2y ago
      > My impression has been that the people who want a quick 1-on-1 call just don't like typing. Yes, similar to my ex (can't get rid of her completely, shared custody of the kids) who always insist on sending voice messages. She just don't want to type and keep sending voice message after I told her several times I hated that because it made looking for past information super difficult. By the way, wasn't there a slack like app that was working kind of a walkie-talkie kind of system within a team?
    - jstimpfle 2y ago
      You're right that it happens much less with calls vs in the office where there is the important signal of physical presence. Personally I only get very few "can we have a quick call" at all. But I feel like it's a culture thing, people shouldn't worry about making a quick call proactively, once in a while. And maybe acceptance will change that remote workers should e.g. have a remote camera always-on. I'm not entirely decided but tend to think it would be a good thing. Maybe it would be more accepted if a person that is being looked at would get an instant signal about it.
  - nottorp 2y ago
    Pray tell, why can't you do this discussion async in writing?
    - jstimpfle 2y ago
      Not engaging enough. I write a couple lines, expect a couple lines some 1 to 180 minutes later that might miss half the point, etc. Totally different dynamic. Having to cache in the previous state of the discussion whenever I receive a reply is exhausting. So some things are just not brought up. And whenever it's actually an interactive synchronous live-chat, why not just hop on a call then?
      - nottorp 2y ago
        Cache? It’s a text chat, it has history?
        jstimpfle 2y ago
        Are you implying that 1) everything from the chat is immediately present in the brain when taking up the discussion at a later point, as well as 2) Last time you left the chat, all the the relevant context was well encoded as chat text in the first place?
        nottorp 2y ago
        I thought writing things down, even in a chat, helps a lot with both points? All this time I've been writing wrong...
        jstimpfle 2y ago
        It's certainly better to have chat text than to not have it, but whether it can make up for the huge cost of asynchronicity is another question (each delay breaks your flow, requiring you to cache-out, cache-in...)
    - quectophoton 2y ago
  - creesch 2y ago
    > Below a certain threshold, "quick calls" are the best thing to do. Sure, but give the person you asking for a quick call the context to decide if they also think it is a quick call. All the article basically is asking for is to provide enough context when contacting people.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
dopylitty 2y ago
In my experience calls rarely have a definite end. "Quick" calls often turn into 30 minutes or an hour of the colleague talking about things unrelated to the issue they wanted to discuss originally. In the office I've had people sit at a desk next to me and just talk at me for more than an hour about themselves. Trying to politely end these kinds of conversations just results in a brief blip in their monologue before they go back to it. I've even had to get up and walk away after someone wouldn't stop talking at me. For whatever reason there are many people who are incapable of thinking about how they're using other peoples' time. The only defense is asynchronous media like chats or emails where you aren't forced by social politeness into continuing to be disrupted.
creesch 2y ago
> A call has a definite start and end Oef, you clearly had not to deal with the "quick" calls I had to deal with at a previous organization. If I had not set boundaries, these would easily drag on for who knows how long. Besides, chat messages I can respond to in my own time when I have had proper time to look into whatever they need from me. If they need documentation I can look it up, have them read it and maybe then ask targeted questions. Just to give a simple example. Which is also why "no hello" is important. It isn't that most people mind being greeted, just accompany it directly with the right context. Which can be as easy as "Hi creesch, if you have some time I wanted to ask about X".

simonmysun 2y ago

I believe the author means "quick call"s. They are not against scheduled calls.

jstimpfle 2y ago
Below a certain threshold, "quick calls" are the best thing to do. Some of the most inspiring discussions come from someone bringing up an issue they have right there and then. Good discussions often start from something that doesn't seem so important, that doesn't have a clear outline from the start. If there isn't the possibility to start a discussion instantly once in a little while, there is a good chance it won't ever happen.
- meowface 2y ago
  >Good discussions often start from something that doesn't seem so important, that doesn't have a clear outline from the start. Yes, but I've never once had a "can we hop on a quick call?" turn into that. Almost every single one of those that I've encountered could've been settled in a handful of chat messages. The things you describe happen to me during unplanned asides in meetings, long-term general chat channels, or impromptu in-person chatting. My impression has been that the people who want a quick 1-on-1 call just don't like typing.
  - prmoustache 2y ago
    > My impression has been that the people who want a quick 1-on-1 call just don't like typing. Yes, similar to my ex (can't get rid of her completely, shared custody of the kids) who always insist on sending voice messages. She just don't want to type and keep sending voice message after I told her several times I hated that because it made looking for past information super difficult. By the way, wasn't there a slack like app that was working kind of a walkie-talkie kind of system within a team?
  - jstimpfle 2y ago
    You're right that it happens much less with calls vs in the office where there is the important signal of physical presence. Personally I only get very few "can we have a quick call" at all. But I feel like it's a culture thing, people shouldn't worry about making a quick call proactively, once in a while. And maybe acceptance will change that remote workers should e.g. have a remote camera always-on. I'm not entirely decided but tend to think it would be a good thing. Maybe it would be more accepted if a person that is being looked at would get an instant signal about it.
- nottorp 2y ago
  Pray tell, why can't you do this discussion async in writing?
  - jstimpfle 2y ago
    Not engaging enough. I write a couple lines, expect a couple lines some 1 to 180 minutes later that might miss half the point, etc. Totally different dynamic. Having to cache in the previous state of the discussion whenever I receive a reply is exhausting. So some things are just not brought up. And whenever it's actually an interactive synchronous live-chat, why not just hop on a call then?
    - nottorp 2y ago
      Cache? It’s a text chat, it has history?
      - jstimpfle 2y ago
        Are you implying that 1) everything from the chat is immediately present in the brain when taking up the discussion at a later point, as well as 2) Last time you left the chat, all the the relevant context was well encoded as chat text in the first place?
        nottorp 2y ago
        I thought writing things down, even in a chat, helps a lot with both points? All this time I've been writing wrong...
        jstimpfle 2y ago
        It's certainly better to have chat text than to not have it, but whether it can make up for the huge cost of asynchronicity is another question (each delay breaks your flow, requiring you to cache-out, cache-in...)
  - quectophoton 2y ago
- creesch 2y ago
  > Below a certain threshold, "quick calls" are the best thing to do. Sure, but give the person you asking for a quick call the context to decide if they also think it is a quick call. All the article basically is asking for is to provide enough context when contacting people.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

dopylitty 2y ago

In my experience calls rarely have a definite end. "Quick" calls often turn into 30 minutes or an hour of the colleague talking about things unrelated to the issue they wanted to discuss originally. In the office I've had people sit at a desk next to me and just talk at me for more than an hour about themselves. Trying to politely end these kinds of conversations just results in a brief blip in their monologue before they go back to it. I've even had to get up and walk away after someone wouldn't stop talking at me. For whatever reason there are many people who are incapable of thinking about how they're using other peoples' time. The only defense is asynchronous media like chats or emails where you aren't forced by social politeness into continuing to be disrupted.

creesch 2y ago

> A call has a definite start and end Oef, you clearly had not to deal with the "quick" calls I had to deal with at a previous organization. If I had not set boundaries, these would easily drag on for who knows how long. Besides, chat messages I can respond to in my own time when I have had proper time to look into whatever they need from me. If they need documentation I can look it up, have them read it and maybe then ask targeted questions. Just to give a simple example. Which is also why "no hello" is important. It isn't that most people mind being greeted, just accompany it directly with the right context. Which can be as easy as "Hi creesch, if you have some time I wanted to ask about X".