-
The Three Constraints in Communication
- Introduction
- Background
- There are three kinds of restraints.
- Place restraints.
- Breaking through constraints
- How to break through the constraints of location
- Approaches with Tools: Flow, Stock, and Flock
- Q: Is it always better to break through the constraints?
- The idea of using different degrees of restraint breakthrough - Restraint switching
- The Seven Restraints
- Strategies for Restraint Switching
- Major problems with flock-type tools and suggestions for dealing with them
- Conclusion
- Reference
- Update History
The Three Constraints in Communication
Introduction
In this document, we will introduce three constraints in work-related communication. It will provide an overview of each, a deep dive into examples and limitations, and then present strategies (restraint switching) on how to break through them.
Background
It has never been considered that communication comes with constraints. However, with the development of technology, it has become possible to communicate beyond the constraints of time and place. It can be said that we are now able to break through the constraints of time and place.
Breaking through the constraints will become more and more important in the future. This is because we are in a VUCA era, where diversity must be taken into account, and remoteness is on the rise. Learning and change are constant, and productivity and stress-free are even more in demand. In order to meet the needs of these times, and of people today, we need to loosen the restraints of the past.
There are three kinds of restraints.
Place, Time, and Topic.
Place restraints.
The constraint that we must gather in the same place.
Example:
- Gather in a conference room
- Calling people to your seat and going to others’ seats.
Time Constraints
A constraint that you must be there at the same time.
Example:
- I’m going to attend a meeting that starts at 13:00.
- This means that I must be at the meeting at 13:00.
- Attend an event that takes place between 17:00 and 19:00.
Topic Constraints.
The constraint of having to be there at the same time.
Example:
- We are talking about A.
- In this case, we can’t talk about anything other than A.
- Strictly speaking, you can talk about something other than A, but you will either have to reject A because you want to continue with it, or you will have to stop talking about A and talk about that.
- In any case, you can only deal with one topic at a time.
Breaking through constraints
How to break through the constraints of location
Use a means of communication that can be done over long distances.
Example:
- Telephone
- Audio conference
- Video conferencing
It is important to note that real time is maintained. A letter, for example, is not a breakthrough in the constraints of location.
Such a means requires more or less technology. It cannot be achieved by human power alone. However, in today’s digital age, they are very common.
How to break through the time constraint
Use means of communication that do not have to be real-time.
For example
- Letters
- Chat
- Blog (send a blog post and ask people to write in the comments if they have any questions)
- In terms of communication, it is more of a “comment form” than a blog, but
These means are probably the most familiar, as is known from letters. The use of technology can reduce the time it takes to communicate. The shift from email to chat (Slack and Teams in business, Line in private, etc.) is fresh in our minds.
How to break through topic constraints
Use means that are topic-oriented.
Example:
- Wiki
The term “topic-oriented” refers to a form of “writing about a topic in a place where each topic is independent. The most familiar term is “page”.
With the introduction of topic orientation, each person can write at his or her own timing. For example, when person A is writing on page XXX at 13:00, person B can write on page YYY, and at 23:00, person C can add something about XXX.
Such a method requires not only skill but also a deep understanding of each person.
Examples of skills
- Input skills
- Typing sentences with a keyboard
- Topic literacy
- Be aware of what topic you are writing about, and write it on a page that already exists, or create a new page if it does not exist.
- Write in a messy way now, but organize it later, etc.
- Autonomy
- Decisions on matters with deadlines must be made within those deadlines.
- In other words, each of us is free to move freely, but we must keep moving to the extent that we do not break the deadline.
- For example, if you have a rule that says, “Discussions on page XXX must conclude by the 13th,” then the person conducting the discussion must be around to conclude it within 13 days.
Approaches with Tools: Flow, Stock, and Flock
There are several types of communication tools, such as chat and wiki.
- The most well known are flow and stock.
- These terms are said to come from economics, but they are not essential and difficult to understand, so I will not discuss them here.
- In recent years, there has been a flock type that combines the best of both types.
- This is a term coined by the author.
Let’s take a look at an overview of each type, examples, the ability to break through the constraint, and its limitations.
Flow type
This is a form of communication that mimics “real time communication in reality” such as email and chat. Historically, email came first, and then chat emerged. In particular, chats used in business are called business chats, and Slack and Teams are widely used.
In 2021/10, chat will be the mainstream flow type.
- Slack and Teams will be the two strongest.
- Line is also used in small and casual organizations, but I won’t cover it here.
- Discord is also not discussed here.
- The basic concept is as follows
- Aggregation …… There is a concept of a room (channel), where people and relevant topics are gathered (Channel, Team).
- Public …… There are rooms that are open to everyone and rooms that are open only to those involved (Public and Private)
- Confidential …… Allows one-on-one confidential communication (Direct Message, aka DM)
- Reply …… Anyone can post messages freely and also hang replies (Thread)
- Reactions …… Messages can be stamped (Reaction, Emoji)
- Storage …… Past messages can be read back and searched.
As for breaking through restraints, they are as follows
- Location constraints can be broken through.
- Can be accessed from various locations with various devices.
- Time constraints can be broken through.
- If you send a message, the other person can reply to it at their own timing.
- You can view past exchanges.
- Topic constraints can be broken a little.
- It is not impossible to break through if it is in the form of a room or thread.
Weaknesses are as follows
- Inability to have in-depth discussions
- Conversations are sequential (one-dimensional time series), so the more you exchange, the more you lose control.
- Topics are effectively limited to the “one thread that is currently active,” which is still very restrictive.
- Information gaps occur.
- Since most of the discussion takes place in closed spaces such as DMs and Private Channels, information cannot be conveyed to those who are not there.
- There are subtleties such as airs, reservations, and respect.
- In the flow model, everyone is sharing a single thread in a sequential world.
- In other words, it is a bottleneck.
- For example, “I have 8 things to say, so I’ll write them all” is not usually possible.
Stock type
This refers to a form that specializes in “ease of writing,” “topic orientation (≒ pages),” and “accumulation and refinement of information,” like Wiki. It has a long history (in ICT), and the concept of Wiki has existed for more than 20 years, and is still developing. It has not developed much as a means of communication, and its main use is probably the accumulation and refinement of information by volunteers (Wikipedia, game strategy wikis, etc.) or as a means of sharing information within a company (more casual and agile than files).
Here are some examples from 2021/10
- Wikipedia
- Web encyclopedia
- The wiki engine in use is Mediawiki
-
@WIKI (at-wiki)
- Mainly for game information, anime information, and other summary sites
-
Pukiwiki
- A domestic wiki engine.
- I’m sure many readers will recognize it.
-
GROWI
- Markdown-based wiki engine
- It is a wiki specifically designed to be used comfortably by software engineers (there are many others)
As for breaking through the constraints, see below.
- Theoretically, it is possible to break through, but it is tough to complete a job with only a wiki
- Theoretically, it is possible to break through the constraints, but it is difficult to complete the work in the Wiki alone.
- There are times when I end up doing the former (because I don’t have the background).
- (Even if you are well versed, you can’t finish only the latter.
- (Even if you are well versed in the latter, the latter cannot be the only way to complete your work) Only in the world of “no tight deadlines” and “no need for strong human relationships (strong ties)” such as the Internet and communities
Weaknesses in using it for communication are as follows.
- Cannot be used for confidential communication
- Since Wiki is an open forum where “all concerned parties can read and write”, it is not possible to do things like DM or Private Channel.
- This leads to the following problems
- 1: You can’t write things that you want or need to inform only certain people
- 2: There is a high psychological (or interpersonal) hurdle to writing in a public forum.
- No notification
- Since there is no mechanism to notify that a message has been received, it is not possible to initiate a real-time exchange.
- Requires more literacy than flow type
- In the flow type, it is easy to specify the target (person or place) and just post.
- On the other hand, in the stock type
- You always have to be aware of which page and where to write.
- The reader also needs to know what’s on what page, or try to figure it out if they don’t know.
- Just like at home or at work, we need to clean (organize).
- If left unchecked, it will become too messy and unorganized.
Flock type
The flock type is a combination of the flow type and the stock type. Flock” is a word coined by the author, who simply named it “flock” from “flow” and “stock.
The flock type has the following features.
- Semi-real time …… Not as good as the flow type, but can be exchanged in real time to some extent.
- Or, it can be covered by a mechanism that does not require real-time communication.
- Topic-oriented …… Supports topic orientation.
- Make (or let) topics about A take place in “the area named A”.
- Rough rank …… Support rough rank (Rough + Frank)
- Encourage rough (messy) writing and frank (frank opinions using a casual tone and style, such as a memorandum) writing.
- For example, support the following
- Just click the new button, write, and it’s already created.
- Assume a 1000 or 10000 page level of creation from the beginning.
- Create the feeling that you can write in Rough Rank, and that you can write in it.
- Of course, the tool needs to be capable enough to be used for rough rank.
Some examples for 2021/10 are listed below. Some examples in 2021/10, which are still in development and have not yet been unified.
- GitHub Issues …… Issue base
- Example: Issues - microsoft/vscode
- It is a feature of GitHub, and anyone can create issues, add comments, add emoticons, etc.
- Originally, it was used for BTS (Bug Tracking System), to report, discuss and manage bugs.
- However, since it is a general-purpose tool, it can also be used for communication.
- OSSs around the world (on GitHub) are communicating daily on Issues.
- GitHub itself has taken notice of this high level of versatility and is providing it as GitHub Discussions.
-
Scrapbox …… network of pages and simultaneous editing
- The most powerful flocking tool I know.
- It is difficult to explain in a few words, but it has the following
- Powerful features for a latecomer
- Intrinsically easy notation and bullet-based syntax
- Specializes in linking pages to pages
- Powerful suggestions and search, list view and filtering
- Powerful store with auto-save, auto-backup, history, export, etc.
- n people can edit the same page at the same time
- Flock-focused philosophy and the potential to achieve it
- Always unfinished
- No categorization
- No hierarchy
- Don’t use tags
- Give up on the whole overview etc.
- Editing must be done manually
- Filter by the viewer
- Eliminate elements that stimulate the desire for approval (for example, no “like” function) etc.
- Powerful features for a latecomer
- Because of these factors, it is possible to “use as communication”, which could not be achieved with the stock type.
- Example
- Using Scrapbox with family
- Scrapbox community for public communication.
- Example
-
OneNote and Box Notes- A flock of tools along the same lines as Scrapbox.
- The functions and UI are still too weak to be used as a flocking tool.
- I don’t think it was ever intended to be used as a flocking tool in the first place.
As for breaking through restraints, here’s what you need to know
- All of them can be broken through.
- You can break through the constraints of a particular topic.
- The existence of units such as issues and pages
- A “very easy to use UI/UX” for new and additions
- The potential to handle hundreds or thousands of topics, with plenty of searching and filtering.
Weaknesses include
- GitHub Issues
- It doesn’t scale.
- Doesn’t scale means that the more information you have, the more you can’t manage it.
- In my opinion, you can get by with a few hundred issues, but if you have more than a thousand, you’re overcapacity.
- It is impossible to communicate confidentially.
- Requires more literacy than the stock type
- It is not possible to express the relationship between issues, resulting in duplicate management and increased oversight
- The same material is spread across different issues
- Unaware of the existence of related Issues A and B, etc.
- It doesn’t scale.
- Scrapbox
- No notifications
- Cannot communicate confidentially
- High hurdle for first-time learners
- Because of its uniqueness (it is a “new” concept that is completely different from conventional systems)
- It is not so difficult that even college students who are not familiar with IT can use it (apparently. (The author himself has not observed this yet.
Q: Is it always better to break through the constraints?
Ans: It seems not so.
For example, Satya Nadella, CEO of Microsoft, describes the paradox of hybrid work.
According to him, remote work (a way of working that breaks through more traditional constraints) increases productivity, but remote work alone is not enough and office work (a traditional way of working with more constraints) is also desired to some extent.
Similar views have been expressed by other companies such as Google, which is probably why the term “hybrid work” was coined in the first place.
However, it remains to be seen whether such a solution (hybrid is necessary) is optimal. It may be that we simply don’t know how to get the equivalent of what we get from office work without breaking through the restraints. In fact, the much-talked-about restraint-breaking Scrapbox came not from Microsoft or Google, but from a small venture called Nota, Inc..
The idea of using different degrees of restraint breakthrough - Restraint switching
In this day and age, there are not many cases where only one particular way of doing things will work. Rather, it is natural to have multiple ways of doing things and change them depending on the situation.
Example:
- In How to Create Psychological Safety: How ‘Psychological Flexibility’ Turns a Team into a Team that Overcomes Difficulties, we find
- There are four leadership styles that can be used depending on who you are working with.
- In Cross-Cultural Understanding - The Essential Education for Business People to Understand the True Intentions of Others and Yourself, it is stated that
- “He said, “The right answer (stance on communication) changes depending on the culture that the other person (assumes).”
The same is true for restraint breakthrough.
What is Restraintship?
Restraintship refers to which of the three types of restraints one can break through.
It is a term coined by the author.
Specifically, the following seven types exist.
- Lo …… Breaking through Location
- Ti …… Breaks through Time
- To …… Break through Topic
- LoTi …… Break through Location, Time
- LoTo …… Break through Location, Topic
- TiTo …… Break through time, topic
- LiTiTo …… Breaks through location, time, and topic
Use different restraints
As we have already seen, it is not advisable to always use only one particular restraint. It is more flexible to use different ones depending on the situation.
In order to use different restraints, you need to understand each restraint. Of course, simply understanding them does not mean that you will be able to use them immediately, but it does require maintenance and practice, and they may or may not be suitable for different people or organizations.
The Seven Restraints
The following is a summary of each of the seven restraints, including examples and characteristics.
1: Break Through Place (Lo)
Lo stands for
- Breaks through the place
- Does not break through time and topic
This is the case, for example, in telephone, audio, and video conferencing. In principle, chatting is also possible, but it often relies on audio or video because it is not real-time. “If you’re a businessperson, you’ve probably heard (or used) the cliché, “Can I talk to you for a minute?
Lo is best suited for one-on-one interactions, creating a sense of intimacy, denouncing and questioning. On the other hand, Lo is weak for interactions between three or more people, and for information-based activities (information sharing and discussion).
Lo is fundamentally viable. It can be started with a minimum level of literacy and environment. Even if you don’t, it would be rare for you not to know about or be able to use e-mail or the telephone.
The effectiveness of Lo depends on the number and autonomy of the team members. It is effective when the team members are small and autonomous. This is because the so-called “A-Un breathing” can be used. On the other hand, if the team is not small and autonomous, it will not be very effective. A common phenomenon is the “SPOF key person”. This is a situation where a good leader or manager (key person) is in charge of a team of n people, and the key person often calls all the members together and interviews them one by one. The key person will often call all the members together and interview them one by one. Then, the n-2 people who are not talking to the key person will have nothing to do. So the key man alone is running the show. It is also the easiest way for the key person to do it, so the other n-1 people have no choice but to endure “long periods of unattended restraint.
2: Breaking through time (Ti)
Ti stands for
- Breaks through time
- Place and topic do not break through.
This is the case, for example, with bulletin boards, whiteboards, letters on desks, and circulars at work.
Ti is best suited for information sharing, especially communication. On the other hand, it is not suitable for communication that requires real time and responsiveness (repeated communication), or for communicating and sharing information with a large volume of information.
Ti can be used only when there is a flow line between members. **In the case of Ti, the location is still constrained (i.e., you are at work), which means that there is a line of flow called the office. There is an island, a desk, a message board, a locker, and so on. If you post a message in such a flow line, it will almost certainly be seen. You don’t have to tell them verbally, you can tell them just by leaving them there.
The effectiveness of Ti varies greatly from team to team. To put it bluntly, people who don’t look at the postings don’t get them, and people who do look at them but forget about them (or don’t take appropriate measures such as taking notes or managing tasks) don’t really get them. Ti, for better or worse, depends on the personality of the individual.
3: Breakthrough (To)
To means the following.
- To break through the topic
- No breakthrough in place and time.
For example, this is the case for individual work in training, voting time in meetings and events, etc.
To can be hard to understand intuitively, but think of a scene in a library where n people are studying on their own. That is also a To. In other words, To is same place, same time, but doing different things and not interfering with each other. Also, people can interfere loosely if they need to, such as by whispering.
To is best suited for ensuring individual work in collaborative work (including meetings). On the other hand, it is not suitable for decisions and collaboration that go beyond the individual.
To is effective only when the premise that To can be done (To rules) is shared in the place. If there are no To rules, people will try to communicate in real time and in both directions. This is especially true in Japan, where people are hierarchical (don’t disobey your boss. Without To rules, people will try to communicate in real time and in a two-way manner. Especially in Japan, where people are hierarchical (don’t go against your boss, for example, don’t do something different in front of your boss) and consensus-oriented (proceed only after getting consensus from everyone), To rules rarely occur spontaneously.
The effectiveness of To’s depends on the knowledge and experience of the team. For example, if you had a style where everyone came to the same office and at the same time, but did not have verbal conversations unless it was really necessary, would you agree to this? Would you agree to this? Would you think it would get the job done? If you don’t have the knowledge and experience, you would probably say no. If you do have the knowledge and experience, you would probably say yes. On the other hand, if you have, you can say yes. In short, To is something that defies the principles of communication (real-time and two-way) and is not something that comes naturally. To is a skill. To is a skill** and must be trained to be used.
4: Break Through Place and Time (LoTi)
LoTi means the following
- Break through place and time
- The topic does not break through.
For example, this is the case for email and chat. In general, flow type is equivalent to this. However, when real-time communication takes place, it becomes Lo (because it is also time-bound).
LoTi is suitable for all kinds of information exchange. On the other hand, LoTi is not suitable for situations that require real time, information volume, and information density.
LoTi only works when the tools for LoTi are in place. For example, in workplaces where Teams and LINE are not installed, people cannot use chat and have to work hard using e-mail.
The effectiveness of LoTi depends on personal qualities: how people behave when covering the real-time, information volume, and information density that LoTi is not good at - this depends on their qualities. There are two types of people: one is the “Tighter” type, who will try to cover up the LoTi by increasing the constraints such as Lo, and the other is the “Slacker” type, who will try to cover up the LoTi without changing the constraint level, such as how to use the LoTi tool, how to operate it, or how to write the text. Those who are diplomatic and dynamic use the former more, while those who are introverted and think more emphasize the latter. In short, if you have a lot of Tighters, LoTi will be used sparingly or roughly, while if you have a lot of Slackers, LoTi will be used more often and with more ingenuity.
5: Breaking through location and topic (LoTo)
LoTo means the following
- Breaks through location and topic
- It does not break through time.
As far as the author knows, there is no general approach equivalent to LoTo.
One approach I propose is Teeting. This is a coined word from Text + Meeting, and it is a form of meeting in which “all participants” can “freely edit the area where n agenda items are written” during the “time limit. In other words, you can join from anywhere, you can write on any topic, but you have to keep the meeting time (and try to come to a conclusion on all topics within the time limit).
6: Breaking Through Time and Topic (TiTo)
TiTo stands for
- Break through time and topic
- It does not break through location.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no general approach that corresponds to TiTo.
To the best of my knowledge, there is no general equivalent to TiTo. If I had to guess, I’d say it would be something like the style shown on the right – all team members gather in one place, such as a conference room, and communicate using flock-type tools. The way they spend their time and the topics they choose (what to write on which topics) are completely free. I don’t know what the point of restricting the location is, but there may be some merit in reducing the sense of loneliness by being able to feel the presence of other team members, and in inspiring people by learning how other team members spend their time (e.g., “You can work even if you take so much time off? There may be some benefits.
7: Breaking through place, time, and topic (LiTiTo)
LiTiTo means the following
- Breaking through place, time, and topic
- In other words, it breaks through all three constraints.
As far as I know, there are no general initiatives that are equivalent to LoTo.
If I had to guess, I would say that the way Nota works is a good reference. The company’s Scrapbox development team works almost exclusively with Scrapbox. The only exceptions are instructions and requests, for which they use Slack. The only exception is instructions and requests, for which they use Slack, but discussions are not held in Slack but in Scrapbox. In other words, Slack (rather than a flow-type tool) is just a calling bell to invite people to Scrapbox.
-
Scrapbox As A TaskManagement - stakiran institute
- A light discussion of the details and conditions for the above work style (author’s site)
-
slack for instructions and requests, scrapbox for discussions and consultations from Day2 Questions and Chat Corner - Nota TechConf
Summary
Legend: concrete examples, things that are mainly suitable, things that are mainly unsuitable
- Breaking Through Location (Lo)
- Calling
- One-on-one interaction, creating a sense of intimacy, denouncing and chastising
- Information-based communication in general (communication, sharing, discussion)
- Breaking Through Time (Ti)
- Bulletin board in the workplace
- Contact
- Communication and exchange of information-intensive matters in general
- Breakthrough topics (To)
- Personal work time
- Concentration on personal level
- General communication
- Breaking through location and time (LoTi)
- Flow-type tools (email, chat, etc.)
- Reporting and communication in general
- Real-time communication, communication about information-intensive matters
-
Real-time exchanges, exchanges about information-intensive matters Breakthrough locations, topics (LoTo)
- Real-time communication, communication about information-intensive matters
- High-density communication
- Other
- Time, breaking through the topic (TiTo)
- None (if I had to guess, I’d say “we’re all here, and we’re all using flock-type tools”)
- Focus on individual level with inspiration from members
- other than that
- Breaking through place, time, and topic (LiTiTo)
- None (if anything, Nota’s style)
- Long term dense interactions without constraints
- Communication in teams that are not small or have deadlines
Strategies for Restraint Switching
How should we go about doing restraint switching? Let’s take a quick look at some strategies that can be used universally.
Let’s start with Default Slack.
- Default Slack
- Assume you will break through as much as possible.
- E.g., full remote is the rule.
- Instead of “I can’t break through,” think about how you can break through.
- Try if you can
- It’s a new challenge, a new skill, and you won’t get it unless you try
Always try to Tight As Needed, as there are many inconveniences that may arise if you always stay in restraints.
- Tight As Needed
- Tighten the restraints as needed.
- Specifically, when there is an A that is inconvenient to leave unbroken, incorporate the minimum necessary restraint to resolve the A.
- Example: Since there is a lack of chit-chat, make 20 minutes before regular time every day a chit-chat time.
- A common practice is to have chats while communicating about work (≒ meetings).
- This is a half-hearted way to do both.
- If you want the latter, make time only for the latter.
Use “compulsion,” “indulgence,” “exemption,” etc. to make the distinction known.
- 1: Compulsion
- Make them obey means
- Restraint switching assumes that everyone is doing the same restraint.
- Therefore, when a team decides to do this kind of switching, all members are expected to follow.
- Members who do not comply must be made to comply.
- For example, don’t allow IT illiterate employees who don’t use or don’t see the tools.
- 2: Letting go
- You don’t have to follow the rules, but you can do it yourself**.
- There is no need to restrain employees who can produce results without restraint and who do not drag down the team.
- Instead, they need to act autonomously.
- If they are not autonomous, they must be obeyed (even if they don’t like it).
- 3: Exemption
- For example, let’s say there is a person A who says, “I really have a hard time chatting every day before the regular time.
- In this case, it is better to exempt Ms. A as an exception than to make her comply with the rule.
- However, if exemptions are used too often, restraint switching will no longer be possible.
- Someone else will have to bear the burden of the exemption.
- The more the burden, the more the restraint switching will break down (there will be loose ends).
- Somewhere along the line, it will stop working and the only option will be to “tighten the restraints and get by.
Major problems with flock-type tools and suggestions for dealing with them
With flock-type tools (≒Scrapbox), the world of breaking through restraints has expanded greatly. In particular, the ability to break through the constraints of the topic is significant. However, there are still many problems.
I’d like to introduce some of them, along with my ideas on how to deal with them.
Hurdles in text input
Currently, typing (stepping on the flick input) is the main way to input text, but there are many people who cannot do this well enough. As far as I can tell, businesspeople in their 40s or older are suffering from the triple hurdle mentioned above: they are not trained in typing due to the fact that they are always talking face-to-face, and they are not young enough to learn how to type. –In addition, because they are not young, they do not have a good learning curve. In addition, there are many cases of new employees who have never touched a PC before and are complete beginners at typing. Let’s call this disparity the typing disparity.
In order to promote restraint breakthrough, this typing gap must be narrowed. In the best organizations, small organizations, or organizations that are accustomed to writing on a regular basis, it may be enough to “gather only those who can input text,” but in the majority of organizations, this is not the case.
I think the key to narrowing this gap lies in voice input. In my view, the key is as follows.
- How to make voice input easy to use.
- It’s too much work to use a voice input tool, manually modify the input, and then copy and paste it into a chat room or wiki.
- Care of the input (speech-recognized) text
- Ease of formatting …… How easy is it to format?
- Confidentiality …… As already mentioned, people don’t like to be public.
- Timed deletion …… Many people don’t like text because it stays forever.
In short, there are two points: lowering the hurdle of use, and reproducing or replacing the subtleties of oral communication.
I think this is feasible. At least the technical elements are already in place. Voice recognition, which is probably the biggest concern, has already reached the realm of practical use, as shown by Yukio Noguchi and Kazuyo Katsuma are using it in their work.
De-chatting
Chatting is still necessary because flocking is not real-time. As mentioned above, in the case of Nota, Slack is used for instructions and requests. However, there is a problem here as well.
The problem is that people who are not accustomed to the flock type use the chat side a lot. This is a familiar phenomenon, as people who are not used to email still use verbal communication, and people who are not used to chat still use email. Let’s call this the Old Bind.
In order to facilitate the breakthrough of the binding, we need to prevent the Old Bind. For example, we need to make flock-type tools capable of real-time communication, or develop new tools that are at least capable of real-time communication. In short, the problem is that the chat tool has the ability to communicate and work. This is why old people still rely on it. If this is the case, then we should make it impossible to rely on them.
What exactly should we do? I haven’t come up with much of a plan yet, but if we are going to de-chat with Scrapbox, for example, it might look something like this
- Create a new chat service X
- Features of X
- Only DM (Direct Message) is supported.
- However, only the “URL of the Scrapbox page” can be sent.
- You can’t write messages.
If you use such an X, members will always go through Scrapbox (a flock-type tool). This is a good way to prevent people from easily communicating on chat. Incidentally, if you want to communicate confidentially, you can write in Scrapbox, “Please call me because I have a confidential matter to discuss.
(*1) In Problems of Chat Communication and Psychological Safety Issues #EOF2019, it is stated that such a closure “will only be replaced by another means” (p26 ). It also states that it is important how to direct people to public places and make public places easier to use.
Formatting
In Scrapbox, there are only “pages that can be freely edited by all members”. Even though it is freely editable, it is still necessary to be considerate of all members. For example, if you want to change the position of a sentence written by person A, how can you do it if you have modified it without permission? What should I do if I want to change the position of A’s text, or if I want to deal with B’s noisy, overly verbose writing? Or how can we deal with the fact that each page is written in a different way, making it difficult to read?
Ultimately, it’s a matter of teamwork and individual filter literacy (the ability to be willing to independently and autonomously select the information you see).
A well known way to confront this problem is to “set a format” and “follow it together. Let’s call this Formatting. For example, books and articles are easy to read because they have a uniform format. Of course, having a format means adhering to the format, and there are costs associated with adherence (costs of writing and organizing). The important thing is to make trade-offs. It is not the end of the world once a decision has been made, but always needs to be adjusted according to the situation. Formatting is a dynamic thing.
So, who should promote this formatting, and how should they do it? What tools, functions, and methodologies should be available? The author has yet to come up with a coherent answer.
Deadline problem
One of the reasons why we can’t get rid of restrictive meetings is “to meet the deadline”. To be more precise, in order to meet the deadline, it is necessary to concentrate on the issue through real-time communication, but so far the only way to do this is face-to-face verbal communication.
Even if we can break through the restraints, this deadline problem itself will not disappear. We need to think of a way to solve the deadline problem without breaking through the restraints.
What I propose is a form of restructuring that breaks through location and topic (LoTo): Teeting. As I have already mentioned, Teeting is a word coined from Text + Meeting, and is a kind of written conference. On a flock-type tool, all participants can edit freely within a time limit, but come to a conclusion. Of course, this cannot be done without any arrangement, so some kind of methodology needs to be developed and implemented as a mechanism.
Constraint adaptation
It is still hypothetical, but people adapt to the restraints they are currently under (especially in the long term). This is called constraint adaptation.
This is called restraint adaptation. The shift to remote work with Corona is still fresh in our minds, but in other words, it was the impact of the pandemic that finally allowed us to move to remote work (i.e. Lo and LoTi). In other words, the impact of the pandemic was enough for people to finally move to remote work (i.e. Lo and LoTi). In other words, the impact of the pandemic has finally allowed people to move to remote work (Lo or LoTi). It is very difficult to resist the constraint.
Incidentally, the opposite pattern is also possible. For example, for those of us who are used to working remotely all day long without saying a word due to LiTiTo, LoTi and Lo are quite painful. It is impossible to come to work and have a meeting in hybrid work (*1).
The problem arises when multiple adaptation levels are mixed together. In extreme cases, those who are used to LiTiTo will say, “No need for meetings, just write everything down,” while those who are used to Lo will say, “Let’s just talk. Let’s talk with our voices. Turn on the video. It’s impossible to understand each other. Most of the time, the Lo side (the side with the most restraints), the side with the most power, wins.
How can we do restraint switching for those who have adapted to restraint? How do we switch restraints for those who have adapted to restraints, and how do we prevent them from doing so? This is a difficult question.
1 One of the most difficult issues is that of loneliness. For example, it is hard to resist the constraint adaptation, but if the decrease in loneliness due to the direct encounter with the person makes the person happy, the person may dare to resist. This complicates the discussion because it appears that the person is not restraint-adapted.
2 It is not uncommon for multiple levels of adaptation to be mixed. For example, let’s say that Mr. A works for a company that is under severe restraints. He is single, and in his personal life, he interacts with many people and communities through LiTiTo. In this case, Mr. A is often constrained by LiTiTo. On the other hand, there are cases where the company has lax restraints and the private life is tough, and therefore, she is restrained to the tough side and the company is hard.
Conclusion
In this document, we have dealt with the following
- There are three types of restraints in work communication.
- The degree of restraint is called restraint-ship.
- It is important to use restraint in different ways depending on the situation (restraint switching).
- Means side
- Three approaches: flow, stock, and flock
- Seven types of restraints
- Problems faced by the flock type and suggestions for dealing with them
I hope this document will be helpful to readers who struggle with communication on a daily basis.
Reference
- The hybrid work paradox
- Using different stances
- Examples of voice input applications
- Chat Communication Issues and Psychological Safety Challenges #EOF2019
- Scrapbox developer.
Update History
- 2021/10/20 Translated by DeepL.
- 2021/10/13 v0.0.1
- First Edition
- 2021/10/09 Start of writing