Group chat as a daily chase
Do you recognize yourself? Maybe others feel this way because of you?
Group chat is like an ongoing meeting with random participants and no agenda. So says Jason Fried, the famous co-founder of 37signals, the author of bestsellers Getting Real and Rework. We in Alconost translated for you his article with an analysis of the pros and cons of group chats. A small spoiler: the minuses turned out to be several times larger.
In 2006, we launched Campfire - the first modern group chat SaaS model and at the same time a corporate messaging tool.
Since then, quite a lot of corporate chat and messaging tools have appeared: Hipchat, Flowdock, Slack and others. And we have implemented group chat and instant messaging ("ping", as we call them) in the updated Basecamp 3 platform.
')
As a company, we have been working with group and corporate chats longer than any other company currently operating. For many years, we have not only listened to the feedback from our customers, but have been intensively communicating in group chats daily for more than ten years - and now we know a great deal about what is good and bad in them. Since 2006, we, working in the company 37signals (later we changed the name to Basecamp), sent each other about 10 million lines.
We realized that the moderate use of group chat in some very specific situations is more than justified. And it is much less justified to use chat as the main, standard way of communication within an organization. Pinch chat is good. And the whole bag is already bad. When a company starts thinking all the time “one line at a time,” like in a chat, it ends up sadly.
In addition, we found that the way and style of communication significantly affects how people feel at work: exhausted, tortured and anxious - or calm, open and collected. This is not just a mood - it is a condition caused by the tools we use and the behavior that these tools encourage.
Taking these observations as a basis, I made a list of the positive and negative sides of using group chat in an organization. If you are already in the subject or are just planning to move along this path, I advise you to look through the list and think about these advantages and disadvantages in relation to your organization.
1. When you need to quickly clarify something. If you want to exchange a few words on a certain issue with several people, there is nothing better than a chat. Describe the idea in a nutshell, cast a picture - get a quick response and work on (and blow your legs out of the chat until you’ve pulled it back).
2. Urgent alert. Sometimes it is necessary to bring incredibly important information to others. The server fell, the deployment failed, or a problem emerged that most definitely requires the immediate attention of a specific group of people. There are many ways to notify employees immediately, and one of them is to do it using a chat room or a high-priority channel.
3. Entertainment. To entertain yourself at work is just as important as working at work. And here the chat is really good. The development of inner culture, the exchange of jokes, emoji, fun with sounds (in Campfire chats) and meme generators are suitable territory for a chat room or channel.
4. The sense of community. This is especially important for those who work remotely. If there is a chat room where you can just say “good morning”, let you know that you left for lunch - just to feel yourself a part of the team - this is an effective antidote to the oppressive feeling of loneliness.
1. Mental fatigue and exhaustion. Watching group chat all day is like being in a continuous meeting with random participants and without an agenda. And in many cases it is also several meetings at the same time! Constantly listening to what others are saying is tiresome. Constant chatter, talk without beginning and without end. You can not pay attention to the chat, but in the end you will be afraid to miss something important.
2. Habit of urgency. At its core, group chat and real-time chat refer to the current point in time. And in some cases it works fine. But chat teaches us to think that everything is worth discussing right away - almost without exception. In fact, it turns out that there is little that requires immediate attention. In addition, everything and everything devalues ​​any request that does not scream about its urgency. Before you even blink, everyone will get used to it, that the only way to do something is to immediately attract the attention of others and demand an answer right away. It's like constantly pulling others by the sleeve, forcing them to break away from work and deal with your question. To behave this way is unwise.
3. Fear of missing something or not saying something. If you do not give the chat time all the time, you can not have time to speak when something happens. Chat replicas appear quickly and run away, just like on a conveyor belt, so you just have to move away from the workplace - and you can’t have time to insert your word at the right moment. Because of this, you have to keep track of rooms and channels all day long - to see if there will be a conversation to which you need to connect.
4. The tendency to think on the line at a time, and not by thinking at a time. In most cases, what is worth discussing in detail is worth discussing for a long time and in detail. One line at a time appears in the chat, so you also have to formulate a thought - one line at a time. But since someone can connect to a conversation at any time, not allowing you to uncover a thought, very quickly people become annoyed at trying to express their own opinions. In addition, incomplete thoughts and a series of short answers make it difficult to fully consider the topic and make important decisions, especially in a group. Imagine that you are in a meeting where everyone speaks one line at a time, and while you are trying to formulate a thought, the rest continue to interrupt you. Is it possible in such conditions to speak normally, without having the infinity of time?
5. Implied consent. "We talked about it in the chat, so everyone who needs to know about it is already in the know." Well, you know how it happens: they talk about some kind of work in a chat, and no one objects. As a result, the participants in the conversation think that everyone has read the discussion and agreed - except for the fact that someone was not there, and someone did not agree. As a result, decisions are made without the consent of those who were not in the chat at the time of the discussion. This problem is related to many of the points listed above: there is little that really requires discussion right now.
6. Reflex behavior. To discuss a question in the chat is like playing for a while: there is a short amount of time for which you need to have time to answer before the original replica disappears in the abyss of scrolling. Therefore, often people just scream - just to be heard. The same phenomenon can be observed on Twitter. Speeding up the conversation leads to the fragmentation of replicas and subjects of conversation, which is no different from the behavior of talking heads on TV, which have only 3 minutes to express their point of view before the end of the fragment.
7. Cluttering up conversations and avoiding the topic. Several people began to talk about something - and they are doing great. But then someone drops in and leaves a one-line comment that takes the conversation to another direction - and often this is only to the detriment. Then someone else appears and also inserts his five kopecks. Those who started the conversation, begin to lose the thread of the conversation. As a result, the discussion initiated by several people ends with a conversation of half a dozen people, and everything happens too quickly. The very way of communication contributes to the manifestation of this flaw: at any moment anyone can suddenly join the conversation, without having the opportunity to understand the background. Chat conversations can start promisingly, but they are less likely to bear fruit.
8. Accountability and repetition. Conversations, which should take a few minutes, often last more than 20 minutes in group chat rooms. A conversation in a group of people is very difficult to complete, especially when someone else can drop in at any moment and quickly insert his five kopecks. And when it already seems that the discussion is over, suddenly everything can start over again - and it often turns out that this is the same thing, just in other words. Time and again comes from chat rooms around the world: "We have already talked about this!"
9. Information overload all in a row and immediately. A few days ago, I spoke with one guy, and he enthusiastically said that sales data was dropped into a popular chat room as soon as it happened. I asked how often this happens. He replied: "Dozens of times a day." I said: “It turns out that an indicator of unread messages appears dozens of times in the room during the day”? “Yes ...” he replied. “Is it bad?” - “Do you think everyone needs to know that the sale happened right now ? Maybe it’s better to do a sales summary once a day so as not to interfere with the rest, increasing the unread message counter to all employees a dozen times a day? ”My interlocutor did not even think about it, but now he has begun to see. Be careful: sharing information is quite interesting, but you need to remember to think that you are taking away the attention of others. Is it worth it to constantly distract from the work of colleagues (you know how many people like to look through unread messages), just to tell about something that can easily wait?
10. Chat constantly reminds that you are lagging behind. Group chat leaves you feeling like you are chasing something all day. And, even worse, group chat often causes “fear of returning”: when you leave for a while and then return to dozens (and even hundreds) of unread messages. You need to read all this, right? If you do not, you can skip something important ... probably. You decide not to read at your own risk — or you do read, and then you have to try to put together overlapping discussions that may relate to something you haven't seen yet. Finally, you upload ... and then you notice that new messages have appeared. It is like doing two things at once: doing what is in your duties, and at the same time constantly watching to not miss anything in the chat (most likely, there is nothing important, but this can only be understood after the fact).
11. When "25" means "1". If there is one unread letter in the mailbox, there will be a “1” in the inbox: it may be a complete thought that is tens of lines long and more, but it is still “1” - 1 unit of information that needs to be digested. Now compare this to the number of lines required to report the same in a chat. Because chat is usually sent one line at a time — even if the lines are long — it multiplies the unread message counter. A conversation that in an email would be marked “1” or “2” in a chat turns into 25, 40 or even 100 unread messages. Add here the answers of other people who appear while someone is talking. Group chat generates large numbers, and the more they are, the more you miss. And this vicious circle cannot be broken: it constantly demands attention.
12. Not read ... what? When conversations are represented by icons with numbers next to the general name of a category, room or channel, then to find out what’s new there and whether it deserves attention, you need to stop by and look. The number does not indicate what the conversation is about - you just know that there is something new there. Because of this, it is difficult to understand what is behind the number of unread messages, and to find out what is being discussed, you need to go into an already started conversation. As a result, you often get involved in a conversation that you don’t need right now. Compare this with the much more specific headers of the letters and the sane list of participants - it is much easier to decide whether to take up this letter now or better to postpone it, or even not to pay attention.
13. Kaleidoscopic context change and constantly incomplete attention. In most teams, the chat window is kept open at the side of the screen or on the second monitor — all day. Work in such conditions encourages constantly keep the chat in the field of attention. The problem is that the chat window is a black hole that draws attention, constantly distracts the eye and makes it difficult to concentrate. Playing a "beater" with indicators of unread messages of a dozen chat rooms (or channels) leads to a kaleidoscopic change of context, which reduces the length of time periods in which you can concentrate at work. In addition, just as muscles memorize repetitive actions (this is called muscle memory), our brain learns to jump quickly between conversations and maintain “residual attention” all day, which is why it is difficult to get the previous one out before a new conversation. As a result, there are difficulties in order to fully immerse yourself in the context of the discussion to which you are going to join. Read more about this in the wonderful article in The Economist .
14. The inability to revise and refer to the replica later. Have you ever tried to find an important conversation in a chat or on a channel? Perhaps there is a piece of conversation, but how do you know if this is all? What if the same thing, but with a completely different result, was discussed a week earlier - or 230 screens higher? The endless conversation pipeline turns everything into a series of disconnected replicas, and it becomes impossible to see the big picture and discussion completely. Where is the beginning? Where is the end? How to understand who read part of the discussion, who completely, and who did not read at all?
15. Lack of context. When everything is discussed in the same place, and the only time separator is time, then such discussions lack context. It is very difficult to say that a particular conversation is about a particular document, because the document itself ultimately lies somewhere else, and the conversation turns out to be separated from the original source material. If you later look at the document, it will be unclear if it was discussed, because the discussion is going on in a completely different place. This is a subtle, but extremely important moment.
16. Presence, assumptions and expectations. Many chat platforms in front of a person show a small green dot that says that a person is online (available) - this is called presence, and this thing is worse than one would expect. The employee is pressed by the need to stay in the chat. And if you are not "green", then you are not at work. When you leave the chat, you kind of show that you are not part of a group, so you have to keep the chat open all day. And that means constantly struggling with distractions, trying to do the actual work for which you were hired. It's just a modern version of the outdated principle, according to which, if you are present, then you are working. Yes, of course, you can put the "do not disturb" icon, but in order to not really bother you, you need to exit the application.
17. Conversation with people in different time zones. Chats are often considered an important tool for remote work - and this is really an important tool for remote workers, but if you have to communicate with people in different time zones, it does not justify itself. Since the chat is always “now”, and everyone in the team has their own “now” (you have 9:00, I have 11:00, she has 15:00, he has 20:00), then Real time can be very wrong time. If teams are scattered around the world and even in just a few time zones, asynchronous communication is much better.
Wow! Should you have something to offer as a worthy replacement for regular group chat as the main way to communicate? Yes, in most cases - there is. And only because we ourselves had been using the chat for the 37signals (Basecamp) team for ten years. I saw how people are distracted because of group chat, they are constantly nervous and can not reach mutual understanding - all this can significantly harm people and organizations.
I believe that attention is one of our most valuable resources . And if something controls my attention, it controls something that I can do . I also think that in order to do the job perfectly, you need to give her all your attention. Therefore, when something like a heap of group chats and some expectations in their connection systematically steals this resource from me, this something becomes my potential enemy. “Right now” is a resource that is worth saving, not spending.
However, I still think that group chat is an important communication tool. I just do not consider it universal - it has a special scope, and in it group chat is much more useful than as a standard communication tool. When used properly in certain situations, in the right context and at the right time, it reveals its potential. You just need to limit it and understand when it should not be used, as well as to observe the behavior and mood of colleagues, otherwise everything will go to ashes and there will be no benefit.
And, frankly, this kind of problems are inherent not only in group chat. However, in the case of a group chat, its very essence (the simultaneous presence of many people, unfinished thoughts on the line at a time, the fear of missing something, the ability to easily join the conversation, which leads to an excessive number of participants, constantly flashing notifications, etc.) usually exacerbates unforeseen negative effects. You can not separate the cause from the investigation.
More interestingly, tete-a-tete direct messaging is very similar to email - and is often used asynchronously. You leave a message for someone and you can be sure that the addressee will see it as soon as he returns. And in the conditions of group chat there is never confidence in this, because others can continue the conversation and your words will be lost. You can fight this: there are @ mentions, you can put a bookmark and all that - but these are only crutches that try to hide the fatal lack of “conveyor” communication when the tape of messages moves at different speeds depending on the number of participants. Good group communication is predictable, and group chat is something unpredictable.
As Osmo Wiio said, communication can only be successful by chance — usually it fails . That is why I believe that it is very important to really think about the influence of chat as the main way to communicate in an organization.
In an ideal world, Basecamp teams will follow the rule of thumb: “communication is mostly asynchronous, occasionally in real time”. Admittedly, to achieve this ideal will have to work. We still rely too much on chat; I would like us to try hard and reduce its use.
First of all, communication right now should be the exception, not the rule. This allows you to devote the necessary time and attention to what you really need to discuss now, and everything else in this case can be thoroughly and thoughtfully discussed in asynchronous mode, without haste.
For example, on the Basecamp 3 platform (obviously, we use it for all our projects, work and communication throughout the company) we have Campfire built-in chat for periodic communication in real time. At the same time, asynchronous exchange of important messages takes place on boards and in the branches of comments that are attached to each object of the Basecamp platform (these are task lists, individual tasks, documents, announcements, quick polls, etc.). Comment lines also allow you to save the context of the conversation, since the discussions related to the task (or document, file, announcement ...) are permanently tied to this task (or document, file, announcement ...). This approach makes it easy to return to any conversation about something you are working on, in full confidence that you have all the context and discussion at once.
Here are some general tips on how you can divide operational and asynchronous communication in your organization (without having to use Basecamp):
, . , , , . , .
-, , . . , , , — .
, , , , , , , . , . , - . .
: , , , , , - -. . — . , , , , . , , , , , . , .
, , , , , , . , .
About the translator
The article is translated in Alconost.
Alconost is engaged in the localization of applications, games and websites in 68 languages. Language translators, linguistic testing, cloud platform with API, continuous localization, 24/7 project managers, any formats of string resources, translation of technical texts .
We also make advertising and training videos - for websites selling, image, advertising, training, teasers, expliners, trailers for Google Play and the App Store.
Read more: https://alconost.com
Group chat is like an ongoing meeting with random participants and no agenda. So says Jason Fried, the famous co-founder of 37signals, the author of bestsellers Getting Real and Rework. We in Alconost translated for you his article with an analysis of the pros and cons of group chats. A small spoiler: the minuses turned out to be several times larger.
In 2006, we launched Campfire - the first modern group chat SaaS model and at the same time a corporate messaging tool.
Since then, quite a lot of corporate chat and messaging tools have appeared: Hipchat, Flowdock, Slack and others. And we have implemented group chat and instant messaging ("ping", as we call them) in the updated Basecamp 3 platform.
')
As a company, we have been working with group and corporate chats longer than any other company currently operating. For many years, we have not only listened to the feedback from our customers, but have been intensively communicating in group chats daily for more than ten years - and now we know a great deal about what is good and bad in them. Since 2006, we, working in the company 37signals (later we changed the name to Basecamp), sent each other about 10 million lines.
We realized that the moderate use of group chat in some very specific situations is more than justified. And it is much less justified to use chat as the main, standard way of communication within an organization. Pinch chat is good. And the whole bag is already bad. When a company starts thinking all the time “one line at a time,” like in a chat, it ends up sadly.
In addition, we found that the way and style of communication significantly affects how people feel at work: exhausted, tortured and anxious - or calm, open and collected. This is not just a mood - it is a condition caused by the tools we use and the behavior that these tools encourage.
Taking these observations as a basis, I made a list of the positive and negative sides of using group chat in an organization. If you are already in the subject or are just planning to move along this path, I advise you to look through the list and think about these advantages and disadvantages in relation to your organization.
pros
Why group chat is good:
1. When you need to quickly clarify something. If you want to exchange a few words on a certain issue with several people, there is nothing better than a chat. Describe the idea in a nutshell, cast a picture - get a quick response and work on (and blow your legs out of the chat until you’ve pulled it back).
2. Urgent alert. Sometimes it is necessary to bring incredibly important information to others. The server fell, the deployment failed, or a problem emerged that most definitely requires the immediate attention of a specific group of people. There are many ways to notify employees immediately, and one of them is to do it using a chat room or a high-priority channel.
3. Entertainment. To entertain yourself at work is just as important as working at work. And here the chat is really good. The development of inner culture, the exchange of jokes, emoji, fun with sounds (in Campfire chats) and meme generators are suitable territory for a chat room or channel.
4. The sense of community. This is especially important for those who work remotely. If there is a chat room where you can just say “good morning”, let you know that you left for lunch - just to feel yourself a part of the team - this is an effective antidote to the oppressive feeling of loneliness.
Minuses
If group chat becomes the main way to communicate in a group or organization, it leads to the following consequences:
1. Mental fatigue and exhaustion. Watching group chat all day is like being in a continuous meeting with random participants and without an agenda. And in many cases it is also several meetings at the same time! Constantly listening to what others are saying is tiresome. Constant chatter, talk without beginning and without end. You can not pay attention to the chat, but in the end you will be afraid to miss something important.
2. Habit of urgency. At its core, group chat and real-time chat refer to the current point in time. And in some cases it works fine. But chat teaches us to think that everything is worth discussing right away - almost without exception. In fact, it turns out that there is little that requires immediate attention. In addition, everything and everything devalues ​​any request that does not scream about its urgency. Before you even blink, everyone will get used to it, that the only way to do something is to immediately attract the attention of others and demand an answer right away. It's like constantly pulling others by the sleeve, forcing them to break away from work and deal with your question. To behave this way is unwise.
3. Fear of missing something or not saying something. If you do not give the chat time all the time, you can not have time to speak when something happens. Chat replicas appear quickly and run away, just like on a conveyor belt, so you just have to move away from the workplace - and you can’t have time to insert your word at the right moment. Because of this, you have to keep track of rooms and channels all day long - to see if there will be a conversation to which you need to connect.
4. The tendency to think on the line at a time, and not by thinking at a time. In most cases, what is worth discussing in detail is worth discussing for a long time and in detail. One line at a time appears in the chat, so you also have to formulate a thought - one line at a time. But since someone can connect to a conversation at any time, not allowing you to uncover a thought, very quickly people become annoyed at trying to express their own opinions. In addition, incomplete thoughts and a series of short answers make it difficult to fully consider the topic and make important decisions, especially in a group. Imagine that you are in a meeting where everyone speaks one line at a time, and while you are trying to formulate a thought, the rest continue to interrupt you. Is it possible in such conditions to speak normally, without having the infinity of time?
5. Implied consent. "We talked about it in the chat, so everyone who needs to know about it is already in the know." Well, you know how it happens: they talk about some kind of work in a chat, and no one objects. As a result, the participants in the conversation think that everyone has read the discussion and agreed - except for the fact that someone was not there, and someone did not agree. As a result, decisions are made without the consent of those who were not in the chat at the time of the discussion. This problem is related to many of the points listed above: there is little that really requires discussion right now.
6. Reflex behavior. To discuss a question in the chat is like playing for a while: there is a short amount of time for which you need to have time to answer before the original replica disappears in the abyss of scrolling. Therefore, often people just scream - just to be heard. The same phenomenon can be observed on Twitter. Speeding up the conversation leads to the fragmentation of replicas and subjects of conversation, which is no different from the behavior of talking heads on TV, which have only 3 minutes to express their point of view before the end of the fragment.
7. Cluttering up conversations and avoiding the topic. Several people began to talk about something - and they are doing great. But then someone drops in and leaves a one-line comment that takes the conversation to another direction - and often this is only to the detriment. Then someone else appears and also inserts his five kopecks. Those who started the conversation, begin to lose the thread of the conversation. As a result, the discussion initiated by several people ends with a conversation of half a dozen people, and everything happens too quickly. The very way of communication contributes to the manifestation of this flaw: at any moment anyone can suddenly join the conversation, without having the opportunity to understand the background. Chat conversations can start promisingly, but they are less likely to bear fruit.
8. Accountability and repetition. Conversations, which should take a few minutes, often last more than 20 minutes in group chat rooms. A conversation in a group of people is very difficult to complete, especially when someone else can drop in at any moment and quickly insert his five kopecks. And when it already seems that the discussion is over, suddenly everything can start over again - and it often turns out that this is the same thing, just in other words. Time and again comes from chat rooms around the world: "We have already talked about this!"
9. Information overload all in a row and immediately. A few days ago, I spoke with one guy, and he enthusiastically said that sales data was dropped into a popular chat room as soon as it happened. I asked how often this happens. He replied: "Dozens of times a day." I said: “It turns out that an indicator of unread messages appears dozens of times in the room during the day”? “Yes ...” he replied. “Is it bad?” - “Do you think everyone needs to know that the sale happened right now ? Maybe it’s better to do a sales summary once a day so as not to interfere with the rest, increasing the unread message counter to all employees a dozen times a day? ”My interlocutor did not even think about it, but now he has begun to see. Be careful: sharing information is quite interesting, but you need to remember to think that you are taking away the attention of others. Is it worth it to constantly distract from the work of colleagues (you know how many people like to look through unread messages), just to tell about something that can easily wait?
10. Chat constantly reminds that you are lagging behind. Group chat leaves you feeling like you are chasing something all day. And, even worse, group chat often causes “fear of returning”: when you leave for a while and then return to dozens (and even hundreds) of unread messages. You need to read all this, right? If you do not, you can skip something important ... probably. You decide not to read at your own risk — or you do read, and then you have to try to put together overlapping discussions that may relate to something you haven't seen yet. Finally, you upload ... and then you notice that new messages have appeared. It is like doing two things at once: doing what is in your duties, and at the same time constantly watching to not miss anything in the chat (most likely, there is nothing important, but this can only be understood after the fact).
11. When "25" means "1". If there is one unread letter in the mailbox, there will be a “1” in the inbox: it may be a complete thought that is tens of lines long and more, but it is still “1” - 1 unit of information that needs to be digested. Now compare this to the number of lines required to report the same in a chat. Because chat is usually sent one line at a time — even if the lines are long — it multiplies the unread message counter. A conversation that in an email would be marked “1” or “2” in a chat turns into 25, 40 or even 100 unread messages. Add here the answers of other people who appear while someone is talking. Group chat generates large numbers, and the more they are, the more you miss. And this vicious circle cannot be broken: it constantly demands attention.
12. Not read ... what? When conversations are represented by icons with numbers next to the general name of a category, room or channel, then to find out what’s new there and whether it deserves attention, you need to stop by and look. The number does not indicate what the conversation is about - you just know that there is something new there. Because of this, it is difficult to understand what is behind the number of unread messages, and to find out what is being discussed, you need to go into an already started conversation. As a result, you often get involved in a conversation that you don’t need right now. Compare this with the much more specific headers of the letters and the sane list of participants - it is much easier to decide whether to take up this letter now or better to postpone it, or even not to pay attention.
13. Kaleidoscopic context change and constantly incomplete attention. In most teams, the chat window is kept open at the side of the screen or on the second monitor — all day. Work in such conditions encourages constantly keep the chat in the field of attention. The problem is that the chat window is a black hole that draws attention, constantly distracts the eye and makes it difficult to concentrate. Playing a "beater" with indicators of unread messages of a dozen chat rooms (or channels) leads to a kaleidoscopic change of context, which reduces the length of time periods in which you can concentrate at work. In addition, just as muscles memorize repetitive actions (this is called muscle memory), our brain learns to jump quickly between conversations and maintain “residual attention” all day, which is why it is difficult to get the previous one out before a new conversation. As a result, there are difficulties in order to fully immerse yourself in the context of the discussion to which you are going to join. Read more about this in the wonderful article in The Economist .
14. The inability to revise and refer to the replica later. Have you ever tried to find an important conversation in a chat or on a channel? Perhaps there is a piece of conversation, but how do you know if this is all? What if the same thing, but with a completely different result, was discussed a week earlier - or 230 screens higher? The endless conversation pipeline turns everything into a series of disconnected replicas, and it becomes impossible to see the big picture and discussion completely. Where is the beginning? Where is the end? How to understand who read part of the discussion, who completely, and who did not read at all?
15. Lack of context. When everything is discussed in the same place, and the only time separator is time, then such discussions lack context. It is very difficult to say that a particular conversation is about a particular document, because the document itself ultimately lies somewhere else, and the conversation turns out to be separated from the original source material. If you later look at the document, it will be unclear if it was discussed, because the discussion is going on in a completely different place. This is a subtle, but extremely important moment.
16. Presence, assumptions and expectations. Many chat platforms in front of a person show a small green dot that says that a person is online (available) - this is called presence, and this thing is worse than one would expect. The employee is pressed by the need to stay in the chat. And if you are not "green", then you are not at work. When you leave the chat, you kind of show that you are not part of a group, so you have to keep the chat open all day. And that means constantly struggling with distractions, trying to do the actual work for which you were hired. It's just a modern version of the outdated principle, according to which, if you are present, then you are working. Yes, of course, you can put the "do not disturb" icon, but in order to not really bother you, you need to exit the application.
17. Conversation with people in different time zones. Chats are often considered an important tool for remote work - and this is really an important tool for remote workers, but if you have to communicate with people in different time zones, it does not justify itself. Since the chat is always “now”, and everyone in the team has their own “now” (you have 9:00, I have 11:00, she has 15:00, he has 20:00), then Real time can be very wrong time. If teams are scattered around the world and even in just a few time zones, asynchronous communication is much better.
Wow! Should you have something to offer as a worthy replacement for regular group chat as the main way to communicate? Yes, in most cases - there is. And only because we ourselves had been using the chat for the 37signals (Basecamp) team for ten years. I saw how people are distracted because of group chat, they are constantly nervous and can not reach mutual understanding - all this can significantly harm people and organizations.
“Right now” is a resource that is worth saving, not spending.
I believe that attention is one of our most valuable resources . And if something controls my attention, it controls something that I can do . I also think that in order to do the job perfectly, you need to give her all your attention. Therefore, when something like a heap of group chats and some expectations in their connection systematically steals this resource from me, this something becomes my potential enemy. “Right now” is a resource that is worth saving, not spending.
However, I still think that group chat is an important communication tool. I just do not consider it universal - it has a special scope, and in it group chat is much more useful than as a standard communication tool. When used properly in certain situations, in the right context and at the right time, it reveals its potential. You just need to limit it and understand when it should not be used, as well as to observe the behavior and mood of colleagues, otherwise everything will go to ashes and there will be no benefit.
And, frankly, this kind of problems are inherent not only in group chat. However, in the case of a group chat, its very essence (the simultaneous presence of many people, unfinished thoughts on the line at a time, the fear of missing something, the ability to easily join the conversation, which leads to an excessive number of participants, constantly flashing notifications, etc.) usually exacerbates unforeseen negative effects. You can not separate the cause from the investigation.
More interestingly, tete-a-tete direct messaging is very similar to email - and is often used asynchronously. You leave a message for someone and you can be sure that the addressee will see it as soon as he returns. And in the conditions of group chat there is never confidence in this, because others can continue the conversation and your words will be lost. You can fight this: there are @ mentions, you can put a bookmark and all that - but these are only crutches that try to hide the fatal lack of “conveyor” communication when the tape of messages moves at different speeds depending on the number of participants. Good group communication is predictable, and group chat is something unpredictable.
As Osmo Wiio said, communication can only be successful by chance — usually it fails . That is why I believe that it is very important to really think about the influence of chat as the main way to communicate in an organization.
What to do
Communication - asynchronous, occasionally - in real time
In an ideal world, Basecamp teams will follow the rule of thumb: “communication is mostly asynchronous, occasionally in real time”. Admittedly, to achieve this ideal will have to work. We still rely too much on chat; I would like us to try hard and reduce its use.
First of all, communication right now should be the exception, not the rule. This allows you to devote the necessary time and attention to what you really need to discuss now, and everything else in this case can be thoroughly and thoughtfully discussed in asynchronous mode, without haste.
For example, on the Basecamp 3 platform (obviously, we use it for all our projects, work and communication throughout the company) we have Campfire built-in chat for periodic communication in real time. At the same time, asynchronous exchange of important messages takes place on boards and in the branches of comments that are attached to each object of the Basecamp platform (these are task lists, individual tasks, documents, announcements, quick polls, etc.). Comment lines also allow you to save the context of the conversation, since the discussions related to the task (or document, file, announcement ...) are permanently tied to this task (or document, file, announcement ...). This approach makes it easy to return to any conversation about something you are working on, in full confidence that you have all the context and discussion at once.
Here are some general tips on how you can divide operational and asynchronous communication in your organization (without having to use Basecamp):
- Stop expecting everyone to hang out all the time. Do not expect that the chat window should be open to everyone all day. Let the chat be something where you can purposefully jump in - and immediately emerge, and not hang out all day.
- If the question is important - temper ardor. If this is an important conversation, it should not occur in the chat. Chat should deal with quick, fleeting questions. Important topics take time and focus - they should be separated from the rest of the chatter.
- — . : , , — . ( Basecamp, ).
- . . — , . — . — , : « » « ».
- : — . , ( )? , : , , — .
- -: . , . , -: 3 , . 6 7 , . : , .
- , . , ? , ? - « » — . - , - .
- — . , , - , , , - — .
- , . , , . , - , . — 15 , 30 , 7 . . , , . , — ? , : - , 15 , . - , ?
- , «» — . — . , , : «» — , — , , , — . - «», , , .
, . , , , . , .
-, , . . , , , — .
, , , , , , , . , . , - . .
: , , , , , - -. . — . , , , , . , , , , , . , .
, , , , , , . , .
About the translator
The article is translated in Alconost.
Alconost is engaged in the localization of applications, games and websites in 68 languages. Language translators, linguistic testing, cloud platform with API, continuous localization, 24/7 project managers, any formats of string resources, translation of technical texts .
We also make advertising and training videos - for websites selling, image, advertising, training, teasers, expliners, trailers for Google Play and the App Store.
Read more: https://alconost.com
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/329422/
All Articles