Most organizations treat communication as a byproduct of existence. I treat it as a flow of information that needs to be managed. A protocol.

Synchronous communication is "stateful." It requires two or more people to align their mental state, location, and time simultaneously.

The "asynchronous protocol" is an attempt to structure the share of information without the need of a simultaneous presence. Digging in the architectural choice to prioritize autonomy over the illusion of "availability."

The laziness of real-time

Synchronous communication is often an act of intellectual laziness. When someone asks to "hop on a quick call," they are frequently offloading the burden of clarity from the sender to the receiver. They expect a real-time conversation to compensate for their own lack of preparation.

In this context, the "urgent" notification is an act of trespassing one's attention.

When we ask for an immediate response, we are stating that our inability to plan justifies the destruction of someone else's focus. Therefore, to be "always on" is, somehow, to be a slave to the interruptions of others.

How can we be in control of our own time while accepting a system that defaults to "real time"?

Information as a persistent state

In the article Honesty as a prerequisite for system integrity, I wrote that truth is stateless. It exists on its own, independent from people's memory. Asynchronous communication is the application of this principle to the way we share information.

We must treat information as permanent data, not as ephemeral messages.

In that sense, documenting is the first action to take. When information is centralized we eliminate the risk of one-man-know-it-all and create the capital of the organization. Searchable, versioned, accessible 24/7, centralized. It's about risk mitigation, transparency and scalability.

This is also about auditability and traceability. Without a persistent record, a decision or an action is just a rumor that loses its integrity over time. Prone to cognitive dissonance.

The protocol rules

To reclaim sovereignty, we must move from "chat" (or "calls") to "protocol."

1. The asynchronous clarity rule

Write as if the recipient cannot ask a follow-up question for 24 hours. This forces the sender to provide complete context, desired outcomes, and necessary credentials upfront. Documentation must exist and be centralized. You can reference it too.

As the saying goes: "If you cannot explain the task without a live conversation, you haven't understood the task well enough to delegate it".

2. Implementation over interaction

Use "If/Then" logic in status updates.

- Do X
+ If `X` fails, then execute `Y`. Troubleshooting or rollback documentation is at `Z`.

This is decoupled execution. It allows the recipient to move forward without waiting for permission or presence.

The courage of silence

Experience Design (XD) in communication is about protecting cognitive resources. When a system is asynchronous, absence is no longer a risk. You can disconnect to focus on a complex task, knowing that the "protocol" is working in your absence.

In this world, a notification isn't an intrusive noise anymore. It's an asynchronous data point to be processed properly.

In this protocol, notifications I receive are not intrusive and noisy. They are mostly alerts I choose to receive.

Asynchronicity is a discipline. It requires the courage to be silent and the precision to be understood.