Live data from Hacker News

Slack Is Not Where 'Deep Work' Happens

blog.nuclino.com

41–50 of 227 posts

Re: Slack Is Not Where 'Deep Work' Happens

#41

Coincidentally, I was just listening a podcast episode with the creator of Level ( https://level.app/ ), which was built to fix exactly all these issues mentioned in the article. I agree 100% with this - the culture of ASAP and the FOMO that's created if you're not always on Slack, prevents one from doing deep, meaningful work. I'm really looking forward to trying out Level.

We're currently using Level now and it's definitely different from Slack. I think the biggest issue we have with it at this point is that it's still in active development.

It's also missing a lot of things that you take for granted with Slack. Things like auto-link expansion and third-party integrations of any kind.

Re: Slack Is Not Where 'Deep Work' Happens

#43
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the worst part of it (as the article mentions) is that it feels like you are doing something productive when you're using Slack, but the majority of time you're actually not. You're generating conversations, notifications, and in general producing tangible output that for me is subconsciously gratifying. That hooks me in to using the service even though consciously I know that I'm not getting real work done.

The benefit I've found is in cross-team communication. Specifically of the "I need to reach out to this team I don't know about their product" variety. A) If they interact with Slack, I can search previous answers B) It promotes a culture of openness. Huge benefit in some orgs! We talk about our projects, warts and all, in public channels. If all your org channels are private, you're definitely Doing It Wrong C) It's…

> Slack is asynchronous.

You are describing a proprietary, expensive, intrusive, demanding rewrite of SMTP.

Re: Slack Is Not Where 'Deep Work' Happens

#45
When I read these kind of pieces I wonder if people know that just because your company has Slack, that doesn't mean they expect you to read everything in it.

Company wide/support channels, your basically at liberty to completely ignore these. Some people crack the odd joke in here, camaraderie in a team is nice, but don't feel its compulsory. I mute them, though they're are great places to be able to search!

The channel for your immediate team/specific projects, your not obliged to monitor this but it'd probably be helpful for the team if you checked in twice a day or so, you might be able to guide or unblock a teammate with knowledge they don't know you have.

And direct messages. Again, its up to your to triage these, if its unimportant just mark unread and come back later.

The important point of slack is that communication is open, which brings network effects, I cant count the number of times I've stumbled on information that's been directly helpful to me. However, just like any other open information portal, most of it isn't directed at you, so don't worry about it.

Re: Slack Is Not Where 'Deep Work' Happens

#46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zulip does save you from drowning in messages! Instead of going through all the messages, one just have to go through Topics and consume messages only from topics they are interested in. This is so much efficient compared to a chat system without topics :)

Slack also has channels.

Topics are not the same as channels. In Zulip each conversation in a channel would have a topic. A channel would be a collection of topics. You can ignore the topics you are not interested in and focus on topics that are relevant. So for catching up all you need to do is go through the topics in a channel instead of going through all the messages.

https://imgur.com/UMBuOuh

Re: Slack Is Not Where 'Deep Work' Happens

#47

For myself, Slack is such a time waster that I'm at the point where I only check on it periodically. I tell coworkers that if there's an emergency that needs to be tended to right away, just text, call, or talk to me in person. If there's something that can wait, email is better. After 2+ years of using Slack on several different teams, I have yet to see any enhanced group communications. I do however see massive amo…

Ugh. I have an anecdote in which I was brought in by a great niche technical contracting firm, as a developer who was also supposed to repair a client relationship, after a previous developer quit. I learned that the problem on client site was not quite what was expected (they already knew the client's manager didn't want contractors). It turned out that a significant part the problem on the ground was simply that the contracting company's on-site manager was bombarding the contractors with instant messages they were required to monitor. There were a few other things (including no onboarding/documentation for client's unique SCM and build environment, some strong personal styles, and a factor that was doing the opposite of what it was supposed to do), but the frustrating message interruptions alone might've made the morale difference that led to the person quitting.

In lieu of Slack, one lightweight pattern that often works is something like:

* Email for things you should see, possibly urgently (ideally with simple filters/actions, for when/how to alert/expose different messages, which the individual can tune over time, to their needs).

* Lightweight chat (maybe IRC/XMPP/etc.) for things you don't have to see (such as questions you don't want to interrupt anyone over, but they can answer if they're available enough to look at chat; and perhaps watercooler chatter for personalizing everyone, especially when you have remote workers). Be careful that this doesn't turn into fear-of-missing-out compulsion or an operational must-see -- emphasize that turning it into must-see is counter to the goal of the medium, becoming a burden for people.

* Agreed-upon simple in-repo/wiki/other for capturing information that people need to see in the future. Try to make this lightweight enough that it's not a burden to capture this information in a way that's accessible/usable to people when they need it.

The organization can evolve this over time, but the above is not a bad start.

A possible side benefit of rolling a lightweight solution on your own is that you don't need to trust a third-party with your company-confidential data (nor inside 'analytics' of your people and company), nor deal with possible goal misalignment with the third-party. (Of course, you can decide any third-party is worthwhile, and sys-admin is usually not what you want to be spending time on in most startups, but you have many options.)

Re: Slack Is Not Where 'Deep Work' Happens

#49
post #22

For myself, Slack is such a time waster that I'm at the point where I only check on it periodically. I tell coworkers that if there's an emergency that needs to be tended to right away, just text, call, or talk to me in person. If there's something that can wait, email is better. After 2+ years of using Slack on several different teams, I have yet to see any enhanced group communications. I do however see massive amo…

My experience exactly. The most common observation with Slack is how people praise it as the next big thing in productivity. But this is always during the honeymoon phase, after a few months of working with Slack it usually quickly wears off.

I find it has utility in the fact that it's a searchable record of technical conversations I have had with my colleagues where I can go to recover details I might not remember from a month ago. Then again email also does this just fine, and doesn't cost as much.
Post reply on HN