[jeffbr13]

I found it helps to set boundaries and in one instance make it clear that I do not appreciate being called out of the blue. I feel almost everyone understands that a texting before a call is polite these days. Clarification was only required once for a colleague who tried dialling me into a meeting I wasn’t party to, just to ask me some questions that could have been an IM. They were actually a little younger, and so I think it was more a case of realising your impact on other people (who may be in or trying to achieve flow) if you interrupt them because it seems urgent to you. Like the article notes, the open plan office engendered interruptions too easily because it was convenient rather than urgent.

As a millennial I suppose I fall in between the two camps. When I was younger, social anxiety about taking up people’s valuable time with my silly questions made a phone call seem like a terrible burden to subject someone to, but with age and (remote work) experience, I’ve realised that conversations are indeed much higher bandwidth and often appreciated more than a letter or thread of back-and-forth clarifications. If I _had_ to stereotype by generation (sorry GP) I could say voice and video seem easier than reading and writing for boomers and Gen-Zs, but even that doesn’t sound right. It’s probably just a communication style thing. There’s a reason many of us struggle to read a book when we can watch some TV instead. As humans we communicate with our voice, face, and body. The main benefit of text is asynchronicity. The challenge is how to thread the needle of asynchronicity in an increasingly post-literate world.

[BlargMcLarg]

>There’s a reason many of us struggle to read a book when we can watch some TV instead.

Most people don't watch TV to obtain information, yet at the same time, videos can convey information better than a book would thanks to audio and video. Quality audio and video material far surpass books when they augment the original text-only format. Shoddy video material is still preferred over shoddy writing for reasons beyond conveying information.

And that's the real issue. People are using bad writing and asynchronous communication skills as a cop-out to push more, not realizing their other communication skills are just as poor. Sure, the guy waving his warms during a presentation feels more humane, but how much does it really add one week after? You're stuck only with the notes he left, the notes you made (probably none) and your own memory probably muddied along the way. It's the same for meetings or any kind of call. Taking notes takes far longer if you ask the one conveying information to slow down so you can keep up. Most people are awful at communication in any form, and half of the problem comes from them trying to blame the medium or believing they are better using a different medium or it's flat-out the medium's fault. Newsflash: it's probably you, not the medium.

It's most astounding this has to be told to developers of all people. The field moves fast, new information is thrown out at rapid pace, the work is mostly mentally straining and you're expected to know a lot. Surely, that alone would make enough people question whether fast-paced, transient communication is a great fit. Writing is easier to point at people and say "this doesn't make sense" without the answer being another call.