1. The Three Constraints in Communication
    1. Introduction
    2. Background
    3. There are three kinds of restraints.
    4. Place restraints.
      1. Time Constraints
      2. Topic Constraints.
    5. Breaking through constraints
    6. How to break through the constraints of location
      1. How to break through the time constraint
      2. How to break through topic constraints
    7. Approaches with Tools: Flow, Stock, and Flock
      1. Flow type
      2. Stock type
      3. Flock type
    8. Q: Is it always better to break through the constraints?
    9. The idea of using different degrees of restraint breakthrough - Restraint switching
      1. What is Restraintship?
      2. Use different restraints
    10. The Seven Restraints
      1. 1: Break Through Place (Lo)
      2. 2: Breaking through time (Ti)
      3. 3: Breakthrough (To)
      4. 4: Break Through Place and Time (LoTi)
      5. 5: Breaking through location and topic (LoTo)
      6. 6: Breaking Through Time and Topic (TiTo)
      7. 7: Breaking through place, time, and topic (LiTiTo)
      8. Summary
    11. Strategies for Restraint Switching
    12. Major problems with flock-type tools and suggestions for dealing with them
      1. Hurdles in text input
      2. De-chatting
      3. Formatting
      4. Deadline problem
      5. Constraint adaptation
    13. Conclusion
    14. Reference
    15. 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:

Time Constraints

A constraint that you must be there at the same time.

Example:

Topic Constraints.

The constraint of having to be there at the same time.

Example:

Breaking through constraints

How to break through the constraints of location

Use a means of communication that can be done over long distances.

Example:

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

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:

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

Approaches with Tools: Flow, Stock, and Flock

There are several types of communication tools, such as chat and wiki.

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.

As for breaking through restraints, they are as follows

Weaknesses are as follows

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

As for breaking through the constraints, see below.

Weaknesses in using it for communication are as follows.

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.

Some examples for 2021/10 are listed below. Some examples in 2021/10, which are still in development and have not yet been unified.

As for breaking through restraints, here’s what you need to know

Weaknesses include

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:

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.

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

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

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.

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.

1 Cross-cultural understanding - the essential education for business people to understand the true intentions of others and themselves

4: Break Through Place and Time (LoTi)

LoTi means the following

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

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

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

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.

Summary

Legend: :runner: concrete examples, :o: things that are mainly suitable, :x: things that are mainly unsuitable

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.

Always try to Tight As Needed, as there are many inconveniences that may arise if you always stay in restraints.

Use “compulsion,” “indulgence,” “exemption,” etc. to make the distinction known.

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.

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

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

I hope this document will be helpful to readers who struggle with communication on a daily basis.

Reference

Update History

Back to the toppage.