Something to doWorking with others
Pick the right channel for the message
A micro habit for sending each message where it's most likely to land the way you meant it
Why it’s worth your time
A lot of messages go wrong not because of what they say but because of where they're sent. Chat is too thin for anything tense or tangled, and a call leaves no record of what was decided. A few seconds matching the message to the channel can save the long, crossed threads that follow when you don't.
How to choose between chat, email, and a call
You’ll come away with a quick check you can run before any message that matters.
We’ll turn this into a checklist you can tick off.
- Name what kind of message it is before you send it.
Quick and clear, a decision or commitment, or something with feelings or confusion in it. Most messages are obviously the first kind; this check is for the ones that aren't.
- Send quick things in chat.
Short questions, heads-ups, logistics. If it would take more than a couple of lines to explain, it probably isn't a chat message.
- Put decisions in writing people can find.
Email, the project doc, a pinned message: somewhere it can be searched and pointed back to. A decision made in a busy chat is often lost by the next morning.
- Take tense or tangled things to a call, then write down the outcome.
Anything where tone could be misread, someone might be upset, or it hasn't landed after two tries. Talk it through, then send a line confirming what you agreed.
You“This is easier to talk through than type. Have you got ten minutes for a quick call?” - Ask the people you work with most what works for them.
Some colleagues dislike unscheduled calls; others never read long emails. Knowing their preference is as useful as knowing the rule, and it's worth telling them yours.
Good moments for this: before any message that matterswhen a thread passes three roundswith a new colleague or manager
We’ll turn this into a checklist you can tick off.
Keep going with Truest
Small actions add up. Truest helps you find the next thing worth doing, make the space to do it, and keep a record of your progress. It’s a private place to work on your career, and it’s yours, not your employer’s.
- It actually happensDo it now, and you’ve invested in your career today.
- How you work, written downTruest turns how you work into a page of your own.
- It’s yours to keepEach thing you do is saved to your private record, there when your next review or job search comes around.
Anything else we can help you with this week?
Making it work for you
Every workplace is different. Here’s what to think about before you start, and what might get in the way.
Things to think about
It's natural to move a tense conversation to a call. It's just as worth doing when something isn't landing after two tries, even if nobody's upset.
What might make this harder
Ask first, in chat, whether they've got ten minutes, or send a short voice note. The point is tone, not the phone.
Questions people ask
When should I use email, chat, or a call at work?
Chat for quick, simple things, email or a shared doc for decisions people will need to find, and a call for anything emotional, tense, or confusing. Follow a call with a line in writing.
How do I avoid being misunderstood over text at work?
Keep chat for simple things, and move anything with feelings or complexity to a call. Tone is easy to misread in a short message, especially when people are busy.
Should decisions be made in chat?
They can be discussed there, but record them somewhere searchable, like email or a project doc. Decisions buried in a busy chat are easy to lose.
What is media richness theory?
An idea from organizational researchers Richard Daft and Robert Lengel: channels differ in how much they can carry, like tone and quick back-and-forth, so richer channels suit ambiguous messages and leaner ones suit simple, clear ones.
Why this works, and where it comes from
Habit picks most channels: whatever's open, whatever's fastest to send. Usually that's fine. Trouble starts when a message needs more than its channel can carry. A tricky bit of feedback in chat loses the warmth that would have softened it. A tangled question by email turns into six replies that each answer something slightly different.
In the 1980s, the researchers Richard Daft and Robert Lengel described this as media richness. Channels differ in how much they carry, from a face-to-face conversation, with tone, expression and instant back-and-forth, down to a short written note, and they argued that ambiguous messages need rich channels while simple ones don't. The rule of thumb here adds something their idea didn't focus on. Decisions belong in writing, not because writing is richer, but because it lasts.
It helps to picture the other end. Your chat arrives in the middle of someone's afternoon, without your tone of voice, and gets read in whatever mood they happen to be in. It's easy to read a brief message as colder than it was meant. A few seconds spent choosing the channel is a small courtesy to that person, and the thread that doesn't spiral is a kindness to you both.
Sometimes the right channel is none of these, yet. If you're angry, waiting an hour before sending anything anywhere usually beats choosing well. A serious concern about someone's conduct is different again: it has a proper route through your manager or HR, and that route matters far more than the medium.
Other simple things to consider
More in Working with others
See allRead this alongside your role page
Tell Truest what you’re dealing with
We read every one, and we write guides for the things that come up most. Leave your email if you’d like to hear when we do.
Written by Truest, based on Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design (Richard L. Daft and Robert H. Lengel). Last updated September 25, 2026. We sell a career membership; where that’s relevant above, we say so.