The downside of real-time online communication

In recent months, real-time online communication has become increasingly popular with businesses and government agencies. Also known as instant messaging or chat, such tools also have garnered nicknames not fit to print in a family newspaper. Why the negativity? Simply put, such tools, if used improperly, facilitate if not encourage bad manners.

While instant messaging technology has been around for a couple of decades now — anyone remember AOL Instant Messenger? — its use has peaked recently with the advent of Slack, a product of Slack Technologies, and Microsoft’s Skype for Business (formerly Lync).

Slack has a popular free version which frankly is good enough for most small and even midsize businesses. Microsoft bundles its Skype for Business product with a number of its Office offerings, including Office 365. Microsoft is even nice enough to sometimes install Skype for Business without asking if you want to use it!

On the face of it, such tools are useful in improving communications, especially among a geographically diverse workforce. Since everyone is in front of their computer anyway, a simple, quick message is often more efficient than email or the phone.

The problem arises because now you are basically giving everyone in your organization an open invitation to disrupt you. Instant messages can be much more disruptive than a ringing phone or an email. This is because few conversations start with “Do you have a minute?” or something similar. Rather, the sender typically jumps directly into the topic at hand, whether it be a question or a passing on of information or even something as trivial as a joke.

This is akin to someone opening your office door and yelling in a question. No knocking, no peeking in to see if you may be on the phone or in a meeting, just straight-on barging in. If you are a member of a group, or “channel” in Slack-speak, it can be even worse. Some liken a group chat to be being in a room full of people who randomly shout out stream-of-consciousness thoughts.

The more oblivious users of this technology often send out multiple messages even when no reply has been given. Slack does not allow you to block offending users, but Skype for Business does.

Most instant messaging technologies contain a “do not disturb” feature, but this seems counter to the overall purpose. Skype for Business is much more flexible in managing alerts compared with Slack. Slack does, however, allow you to limit notifications only for direct messages and messages specifically targeted for you.

But these problems are not solved on the receiver side; they should be solved on the sender side. Just because you can get someone’s attention immediately does not mean you should. Use some decorum when employing such technologies and everyone will be much happier and more efficient. While an official policy might be overkill for an organization to employ, general guidelines should be established.

Besides, instant messaging is not always the best medium for communication. Even though Slack started out as an acronym for “Searchable Log of All Conversation and Knowledge,” its search capabilities are somewhat lacking. Traditional email clients such as Outlook provide much more functional search capabilities than instant messaging technologies.

Furthermore, email function and form are now so ubiquitous that it can serve as an acceptable record of events both in the normal course of business as well as in a courtroom. A chat log is still a long way away from serving as a proof of communication.

John Agsalud is an IT expert with more than 25 years of information technology experience in Hawaii and around the world. He can be reached at jagsalud@live.com.