I completely agree with your points as someone who prefers async comms! What would you recommend saying to folks who ask to hop on a call? Is there anything to say besides acquiesce, or come up with an excuse for why we can’t?
This is a massive pet peeve of mine, especially in fast-paced startup environments where time is literally money.
I find that not only are these folks avoiding the work of concise written communication, they are also hoping to lean on me to do the actual problem-solving. All too often they open these calls with “So what are your thoughts?”
Exactly. If you wanted my thoughts, you should have said so and I would be happy to share some high-level reactions, probably async. But if you insisted on a call under the premise of sharing information, and now we’re here…you should tell me your thoughts and lead the conversation. Don’t ask for a call then refuse to drive. To be extra clear, it’s alright to ask “what are your thoughts?” but not cool to lead with that first thing. That’s putting the burden of thinking on the other person.
Totally. It’s one thing to solicit my opinion unprompted. But if it’s a response to MY request, it feels like one of those improv skits where you have to answer every question with another question.
thanks for this Wes. What do you think of a quick loom video instead of a message, so you can add more context and personal touch, without requesting others to be on a meeting?
I love Loom. It allows you to create a message that's shareable, can be sped up and repeated, and it has a transcription option. Plus, by recording, there's more awareness of how long a video is and some pressure to be more succinct. Sometimes I'll record something once for 12 minutes, arrive at my point, and re-do in a 4-minute message that's much clearer. Helps me AND helps my team.
I re-record like this too! I always feel like I’m cheating when I do it because my recipient isn’t seeing my shitty long meandering first version. Like “wow they won’t ever know the suffering of what they would have had to sit through.”
Other reasons people use the “hop on a call” tactic that I’ve experienced. They don’t want documentation on the topic because it might reveal incompetence, dishonesty, or both.
Second, people who are extroverts process info through interactions.
I think we also have to consider that neurodivergent people process differently.
Great point Daylene. I'm an introvert, and I like processing information by talking about it out loud so I can relate. To be clear, I'm not against thinking out loud. The use case I wrote about was about getting a question in Slack that you could reasonably answer in writing. If it's complex and wouldn't make sense to be answered in writing, I'm all for hopping on a call.
I think the important thing here is to clearly define the difference between "processing information" that is about someone figuring something out, and "clear communication" which is you're giving information that is helpful, documented, repeatable, and shareable.
If someone needs to process, think out loud, or brainstorm, then call it that. "I think I'm stuck and I need to brainstorm. Anyone have a few minutes to help me figure this out?"
Also, ChatGPT is available to talk things through with. I have friends who record voice memos and upload transcripts to ChatGPT to help them clarify their ideas, sort out information, and get some interactivity as they build out a written doc.
I was surprised that this article didn't mention anything about non verbal communication. Depending on the context you're in, it can actually be way quicker to hop on a call and prevent a whole bunch of miscommunication which can take a lot more time and energy to resolve. But, like most things in life, it's contextual.
The point of the article isn't about identifying when to do asynchronous vs synchronous or verbal vs written communication, because I believe that topic has been covered many times before elsewhere.
Of course there are a bunch of great reasons to hop on calls, with non-verbal cues being one of them. I also mention other reasons you might want to chat live: "when you have an actual topic to discuss, when you’re sharing information that would be better done with the lever of your tone of voice, you want the person’s real-time reaction, etc."
The part that I don't think we talk about enough, is my assertion that many people default too quickly and thoughtlessly to doing calls that don't need to be calls. If you believe it would be better to a call, definitely do a call.
Different personalities prefer different forms of communication. Me? Unless it's a customer service need of mine, hopping on a call (salespeople) when email will do is like jumping into an icy lake for me. No desire. Writing is still communication. Yet, as I dislike hopping on a call, they dislike writing (and it shows!).
Great point re: preferences. My POV is we need to be good enough at both writing and speaking so it doesn't limit our ability to make an impact. It's totally normal to have a preference, and when we have more tools in our toolbox, we can choose the appropriate one for the situation, while taking into account our and our recipient's preferences.
Absolutely. To communicate effectively and efficiently, that's a must. I mentioned preference because I dislike the "let's hop on a call" suggestion when I prefer tighter communication, less emotional involvement and the whole "control" thing it can become.
Wes, I just sent this to like 400 people. I am SUCH a fan of your writing, and I fell over my keyboard over how good this post is. Thank you for the work you're doing
I’ve started to put my communication preferences in my email signature: First-contact preference: Teams | Email checked 3x daily | Call/text if urgent. IMO, this kind of honor-system transparency can both avoid time-wasting and account for varying personality types. I’ve known brilliant engineers who are halting speakers but great at emails; likewise, I’ve known brilliant salespeople who can keep me entertained for hours but write emails like 11-year-olds.
I think that by simply sharing your own and/or asking for a person’s preferences allows people the opportunity to communicate how they prefer but the grace to allow exceptions for those who may have a different communication toolbox.
Bang on! This would be my single-most favorite article so far in Jan’25. I believe in this and am guilty of not following it every time too. Haha!
Reading this article just replayed a conversation I had with my product manager just 12hrs ago about setting up a meeting because the contents of Slack message wasn’t clear. However, I reached out to the PIC on my own to understand the concern to eventually avoid a call. I’ve been there and done that!
I’ve seen people preferring a call even when it “looks” like a time critical topic to close. I’m guilty of this too. Async comms come with an inherent property of being not time constrained.
I’m a big proponent of having minimum meeting time for my ICs and myself. I’m asked more often than not: “Hey! How come your calendar is always empty being an EM?” And the answer is simple: “Create and maintain boundaries!” I try to avoid calls if I’m not needed or if it can happen offline, most of the times.
I’ll be sharing this article across my org of 250+ folks. Even if a few read it and learn from it, I’ve successfully saved 250+ manhours a month at least.
Excuse #5: “But I want to say something possibly confidential / controversial / insulting / inane that I don’t want traced back to me. And I’ve convinced myself that controlling the channel is the same thing as controlling the audience.”
- I have also seen many a Slack DM or thread explode with a conversation that would have been much more cogent in a call where at least vocal non-verbals would have aided communication.
- Something you left aside that is _massively_ important: one of the worst aspects of a "live" adhoc convo is that rarely do participants consider taking notes so that the conclusions become actionable. However: the same thing happens with Slack. If decisions are being made, they MUST be captured in a wiki or other documentation. Next time the question comes up, the answer will be a link.
Love this. I'm very much someone who processes as I speak, so my solution to this is sending a voice note to ChatGPT and getting it to clean it up and format as a Slack message that I then edit.
Can’t like this enough. It was stuff like this that made me realize I would not be successful at making the transition from academia (precision/clarity=valued highly) to business (blahbittyblahblahblah, let’s spend 8 hours/day on calls, the person who can use the most buzzwords wins!). Ugh.
Wes, This makes sense! Applying this to my personal and professional life. Question: How about consensus building? Is this possible in written messages? Should we use polls?
I completely agree with your points as someone who prefers async comms! What would you recommend saying to folks who ask to hop on a call? Is there anything to say besides acquiesce, or come up with an excuse for why we can’t?
^This. Maybe just respond with the link to this newsletter. ;)
This is a massive pet peeve of mine, especially in fast-paced startup environments where time is literally money.
I find that not only are these folks avoiding the work of concise written communication, they are also hoping to lean on me to do the actual problem-solving. All too often they open these calls with “So what are your thoughts?”
Exactly. If you wanted my thoughts, you should have said so and I would be happy to share some high-level reactions, probably async. But if you insisted on a call under the premise of sharing information, and now we’re here…you should tell me your thoughts and lead the conversation. Don’t ask for a call then refuse to drive. To be extra clear, it’s alright to ask “what are your thoughts?” but not cool to lead with that first thing. That’s putting the burden of thinking on the other person.
Totally. It’s one thing to solicit my opinion unprompted. But if it’s a response to MY request, it feels like one of those improv skits where you have to answer every question with another question.
thanks for this Wes. What do you think of a quick loom video instead of a message, so you can add more context and personal touch, without requesting others to be on a meeting?
Hey Mandy, I'm a huge fan of Loom videos and voice memos. I used it a ton with my team and still do.
I love Loom. It allows you to create a message that's shareable, can be sped up and repeated, and it has a transcription option. Plus, by recording, there's more awareness of how long a video is and some pressure to be more succinct. Sometimes I'll record something once for 12 minutes, arrive at my point, and re-do in a 4-minute message that's much clearer. Helps me AND helps my team.
I re-record like this too! I always feel like I’m cheating when I do it because my recipient isn’t seeing my shitty long meandering first version. Like “wow they won’t ever know the suffering of what they would have had to sit through.”
Which is the point of your post — distill your thinking by doing the work! Saved everyone 12 minutes of rambling :D
Other reasons people use the “hop on a call” tactic that I’ve experienced. They don’t want documentation on the topic because it might reveal incompetence, dishonesty, or both.
Second, people who are extroverts process info through interactions.
I think we also have to consider that neurodivergent people process differently.
Great point Daylene. I'm an introvert, and I like processing information by talking about it out loud so I can relate. To be clear, I'm not against thinking out loud. The use case I wrote about was about getting a question in Slack that you could reasonably answer in writing. If it's complex and wouldn't make sense to be answered in writing, I'm all for hopping on a call.
I think the important thing here is to clearly define the difference between "processing information" that is about someone figuring something out, and "clear communication" which is you're giving information that is helpful, documented, repeatable, and shareable.
If someone needs to process, think out loud, or brainstorm, then call it that. "I think I'm stuck and I need to brainstorm. Anyone have a few minutes to help me figure this out?"
Also, ChatGPT is available to talk things through with. I have friends who record voice memos and upload transcripts to ChatGPT to help them clarify their ideas, sort out information, and get some interactivity as they build out a written doc.
I was surprised that this article didn't mention anything about non verbal communication. Depending on the context you're in, it can actually be way quicker to hop on a call and prevent a whole bunch of miscommunication which can take a lot more time and energy to resolve. But, like most things in life, it's contextual.
The point of the article isn't about identifying when to do asynchronous vs synchronous or verbal vs written communication, because I believe that topic has been covered many times before elsewhere.
Of course there are a bunch of great reasons to hop on calls, with non-verbal cues being one of them. I also mention other reasons you might want to chat live: "when you have an actual topic to discuss, when you’re sharing information that would be better done with the lever of your tone of voice, you want the person’s real-time reaction, etc."
The part that I don't think we talk about enough, is my assertion that many people default too quickly and thoughtlessly to doing calls that don't need to be calls. If you believe it would be better to a call, definitely do a call.
Good point.
Different personalities prefer different forms of communication. Me? Unless it's a customer service need of mine, hopping on a call (salespeople) when email will do is like jumping into an icy lake for me. No desire. Writing is still communication. Yet, as I dislike hopping on a call, they dislike writing (and it shows!).
Great point re: preferences. My POV is we need to be good enough at both writing and speaking so it doesn't limit our ability to make an impact. It's totally normal to have a preference, and when we have more tools in our toolbox, we can choose the appropriate one for the situation, while taking into account our and our recipient's preferences.
Absolutely. To communicate effectively and efficiently, that's a must. I mentioned preference because I dislike the "let's hop on a call" suggestion when I prefer tighter communication, less emotional involvement and the whole "control" thing it can become.
Wes, I just sent this to like 400 people. I am SUCH a fan of your writing, and I fell over my keyboard over how good this post is. Thank you for the work you're doing
This means a lot, Matt. Thank you!
Bingo!
Well said! You’ve perfectly captured what I often think whenever I receive those "hop on a call" requests. Thank you for expressing it so clearly.
I’ve started to put my communication preferences in my email signature: First-contact preference: Teams | Email checked 3x daily | Call/text if urgent. IMO, this kind of honor-system transparency can both avoid time-wasting and account for varying personality types. I’ve known brilliant engineers who are halting speakers but great at emails; likewise, I’ve known brilliant salespeople who can keep me entertained for hours but write emails like 11-year-olds.
I think that by simply sharing your own and/or asking for a person’s preferences allows people the opportunity to communicate how they prefer but the grace to allow exceptions for those who may have a different communication toolbox.
Bang on! This would be my single-most favorite article so far in Jan’25. I believe in this and am guilty of not following it every time too. Haha!
Reading this article just replayed a conversation I had with my product manager just 12hrs ago about setting up a meeting because the contents of Slack message wasn’t clear. However, I reached out to the PIC on my own to understand the concern to eventually avoid a call. I’ve been there and done that!
I’ve seen people preferring a call even when it “looks” like a time critical topic to close. I’m guilty of this too. Async comms come with an inherent property of being not time constrained.
I’m a big proponent of having minimum meeting time for my ICs and myself. I’m asked more often than not: “Hey! How come your calendar is always empty being an EM?” And the answer is simple: “Create and maintain boundaries!” I try to avoid calls if I’m not needed or if it can happen offline, most of the times.
I’ll be sharing this article across my org of 250+ folks. Even if a few read it and learn from it, I’ve successfully saved 250+ manhours a month at least.
Thanks Wes for this article!!
Excuse #5: “But I want to say something possibly confidential / controversial / insulting / inane that I don’t want traced back to me. And I’ve convinced myself that controlling the channel is the same thing as controlling the audience.”
A couple of thoughts.
- I have also seen many a Slack DM or thread explode with a conversation that would have been much more cogent in a call where at least vocal non-verbals would have aided communication.
- Something you left aside that is _massively_ important: one of the worst aspects of a "live" adhoc convo is that rarely do participants consider taking notes so that the conclusions become actionable. However: the same thing happens with Slack. If decisions are being made, they MUST be captured in a wiki or other documentation. Next time the question comes up, the answer will be a link.
Love this. I'm very much someone who processes as I speak, so my solution to this is sending a voice note to ChatGPT and getting it to clean it up and format as a Slack message that I then edit.
Can’t like this enough. It was stuff like this that made me realize I would not be successful at making the transition from academia (precision/clarity=valued highly) to business (blahbittyblahblahblah, let’s spend 8 hours/day on calls, the person who can use the most buzzwords wins!). Ugh.
Wes, This makes sense! Applying this to my personal and professional life. Question: How about consensus building? Is this possible in written messages? Should we use polls?