At GitLab we work async by default. But we also learned that video calls are great for bonding and solving complex problems. We don't use video calls for presentations or status updates. The exception is functional group updates that are recorded for the people the can't attend and that spend a lot of time on questions.

Asynchronous communication is like eventual consistency.

It seems pragmatic until you actually struggle to get everyone to be on the same page at the same time, then you spend a lot of time figuring out how to be consistent.

I agree the video calls are probably over the top - but asynchronous communication != synchronous communication.

Recently I had a bad experience at a fully remote company that decided to fix its remote communication issues with, wait for it...meetings! I went from short daily in person meetings with a longer retro to hour long (or longer) video calls every day during my lunch break hours, since they were on Pacific Time. The last standup I joined was two hours long and involved yelling.

Needless to say, I became a lot more fond of Amazon's pre-meeting written notes after that.

Same goes for getting rid of most meetings, period. Realtime audio/video synchrony is just not that useful many times, whether remote or in-person. Asynchrony is just generally better by default in a wide range of common situations.

It’s particularly bad when you combine it with timewasting predetermined Agile meetings and distraction-oriented open plan offices.

Employers who want happy, productive, collaborative workers: Stop disrupting people with useless meetings and denying them large chunks of private, quiet time to work however they see fit. Stop embedding them in open plan spaces.

You know, treat them like an adult, with basic human dignity, who wants to be respected and trusted that they will succeed with their own judgment for how to effectively communicate and manage their work schedule.

I completely agree that the most effective way for remote teams to communicate is via asynchronous video messaging instead of real-time video conferencing. Some of the difficulties I've experienced coordinating meetings with remote colleagues include:

- Difficulty scheduling a time that fits for all participants. Some team-members are inevitably stuck with a non-ideal timeframe. Often times it's the same employee suffering each meeting, which leads to resentment.

- Interruptions during productive hours. See the Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule (http://www.paulgraham.com/makersschedule.html) - reacting to interruptions can be disastrous.

- Frustration from choppy/laggy video that results in loss of important parts of updates and valuable information.

I'm actually building an app called Tape to address these kinds of issues and to improve communication and collaboration across teams by integrating into existing workflows not against them. If any of you guys are interested in learning more or trying out our product, I'd love to connect: https://trytape.typeform.com/to/pKe6X5

It's easy to go overboard with them, but if video calls are the price for going remote, I'll gladly pay.

> For the love of all that is sane, please top trying to push nonstop video calls onto remote employees.

Nonstop video calls are dumb, but people should try to be on video when there are scheduled meetings. It really helps to see other people when having a discussion.

what's the right amount? 2 group calls per week, each under 1h?

pair programming is more effective IN PERSON