Workplace Collaboration: A Guide to Choosing Appropriate Channels

Pros

• Is well suited to discussion of confidential matters

• Is relatively easy to schedule

• Allows people to get to know one another, helping to build trust

Cons

• Makes it challenging to consider others’ perspectives

Pros

• Allows for consideration of diverse perspectives

• Allows for information to be disseminated efficiently and at least somewhat precisely

• Provides opportunities to build consensus and develop culture

Cons

• Makes it easy to waste time (e.g., due to poor preparation, topics irrelevant to some participants)

• Can be difficult to schedule if many people are involved

• May offer individuals limited opportunities to be heard

• May favor dominant personalities over reserved ones

Pros

• Allows for timely response to emergent issues

Cons

• Preempts the use of time as previously planned; if overused, discourages advance planning

• Elicits quick thinking rather than reflection and creativity

Pros

• Respects participants’ time

• Allows for preparation, potentially fostering productive and efficient collaboration

Cons

• Is likely to be postponed or canceled if emergent issues or competing events arise

• May contribute to complicated schedules through double-booking, transitions from one event to another

Pros

• Allows for timely response to emergent issues

Cons

• May interrupt important activity

• Does not facilitate exchange if group is large

• Does not typically yield a record of exchange

• Does not typically allow for reflective thinking

Pros

• Conveys non-verbal cues better than other mediated channels

Cons

• May employ technology that is neither widely available nor user-friendly

Pros

• Retains a record of communications automatically

• Is well suited to non-urgent issues

• Flattens the organizational hierarchy and allows for communication across organizational lines

• Allows for information to be disseminated efficiently and precisely

Cons

• May not be read promptly and fully, especially if long—particularly problematic if a group is involved

• Is particularly susceptible to overuse, making it more difficult to notice and locate relevant information

• Can prove to be inefficient if clarifications are required

• Can be shared with unintended recipients

Pros

• Retains a record of communications automatically

• May allow for timely response to emergent issues even if there are competing factors (e.g., a previously scheduled meeting)

• Is well suited to questions that can be answered briefly

Cons

• May interrupt important activity

• May encourage miscommunication due to brevity and iteration

• Yields records that cannot easily be searched

• Can foster tension between work and private life

Pros

• Conveys information about a person’s availability

• Retains a record of communications automatically

• May allow for timely response to emergent issues even if there are competing factors (e.g., a previously scheduled meeting)

Cons

• May interrupt important activity

• May encourage miscommunication due to brevity and iteration

• May make private communications public if screen is being shared

Pros

• Retains a record of communications automatically

• Allows for information to be disseminated efficiently and precisely

Cons

• Is ill suited to collaboration around emergent issues

• Requires clear protocols, especially if more than one person has writing capabilities