Full Async

Overview

Full Async refers to a work style where communication is entirely asynchronous.

Meetings are non-existent, be it in-person or remote. While meetings are possible with prior arrangements, their frequency is less than once a month, and even monthly meetings may be too frequent. It is not uncommon to go through a whole year without a single meeting. Note that this applies only internally and not to external parties. Therefore, there may be individuals who frequently engage in synchronous communication externally. However, at least internally, communication is asynchronous.

The interpretation of notifications is free. While it's allowed to send notifications, such as mentions, the recipient is under no obligation to respond immediately. Forcing an immediate response would be considered harassment.

Concept

Here we delineate the components of Full Async.

• 1: 3T (Talk, Topic, Task)
• 2: De-Relation
• 3: Teal Organizations

Although these discussions can get complex, we will explain each one by one.

1: 3T (Talk, Topic, Task)

3T (Talk, Topic, Task) is a concept of perceiving communication in three stages: Talk, Topic, and Task.

Traditional communication holds "the correct answer is in everyone's head" and aligns that through conversation, which is synchronous and therefore not adopted in Full Async. Instead, all interactions are perceived through the lens of 3T.

Consider small talk during lunchtime. Traditionally, it's just chit-chat, and how one interprets or processes it is up to the individual. However, from the 3T perspective, this chit-chat is considered to consist of 'n' exchanges. A single exchange is called COIN (Cluster Of INformation). Communication is considered to be composed of units of COIN. Thus, for example, the structure might look as follows:

• Small talk during lunchtime
  • COIN-1 (Talk)
  • COIN-2 (Talk)
  • COIN-3 (Topic)
  • COIN-4 (Task)
  • ...

Let's delve into 3T next.

Talk is a divergent, aimless stage where information is simply gathered. Casual conversation falls under this category.

Topic is the stage where a "subject" is defined. Only information related to the "subject" is collected. Conversations irrelevant to the "subject" are moved to separate COINs. Links can demonstrate relationships if necessary.

Task is the stage where "what is to be done" is determined. However, management is not as strict as task management tools (which should be done within task management tools or project management). It involves lightly handling statuses like start, finish, cancel, decision-making parties, deadlines, schedules, and motivation progress information.

In essence, under Full Async, we create numerous COINs. We create COINs, read existing COINs, add writings, and discuss within them. COINs are fluid, starting from Talk and progressing towards Topics or Tasks.

Of course, the number of COINs is considerable. In a full-time project consisting of 5 people doing Full Async for a month, including small talk, the number of COINs easily exceeds hundreds, maybe thousands or even tens of thousands in well-adapted organizations.

2: De-Relation

De-Relation refers to an approach that doesn't assume the act of deepening relationships between people.

Here, let's introduce a symbolic phrase that represents De-Relation.

Focus on what is written, not who said it.

Synchronous communication persists primarily because we value the craft of building relationships. Creating and deepening connections is a primitive human desire, and cognitively, it's more efficient to deal with people we are acquainted with. However, this has the drawback of requiring considerable time for relationship-building communication. Moreover, favoritism towards familiar individuals can lead to politics. In the realm of work, at least, it's not wise.

Therefore, Full Async lets go of this very act of relationship-building. Instead of filtering by "who," look at "what" is presented, and if it's beneficial, utilize it. Naturally, in Full Async, since we don't engage in synchronous conversations, "what" is not stated but written. It becomes an act of reading what is written.

While the concept of De-Relation might be challenging to grasp, engineers among you might find it relatively easier to understand by envisioning generative AI. With generative AI, you don't approach it through the lens of "who," right? You look at "what" output is given and use what is necessary. It's similar. This approach is applied to human interactions as well. It may seem cold, but to premise asynchronous communication, the relationship-building aspect, which is a bottleneck, must be eliminated.

Here, a common question arises.

"Where can I satisfy this desire of mine to fulfill relationships?"

Let me answer. Satisfy it in your private life.

To put it bluntly, it means don't mix work and personal life. Extreme as it sounds, it's akin to wanting to fulfill a sexual desire through work. It's harassment. The same principle applies. While it's fine to satisfy primitive desires in a bindful (involving the constraint of another party) manner, fulfilling it at work is bizarre in itself. We aren't beasts. We're humans. Humans are supposed to be rational. To be even more severe, those trying to fulfill relationship desires at work are similar to apes trying to satisfy sexual instincts through work.

3: Teal Organizations

A Teal Organization is an organizational paradigm proposed by Frederic Laloux.

Skipping the details of this concept, when we think of "organizations" today, we almost always envision hierarchical ones. This is called an Orange organization in the same theory. While not as extreme as crime syndicates (Red organizations) or religious groups (Amber organizations), they still harbor the bottleneck of hierarchy. It's probably the same in your company. There's a boss, subordinates, your own department, and it's likely difficult to overstep your bounds. Many organizations are engrossed in competitions to climb upward.

Full Async cannot exist in Orange organizations. They are worlds of unequal time distribution, where those of lower ranks must spend 1,000 minutes for a mere 10 minutes of those in higher ranks. Additionally, higher-ranking individuals become reactive machines due to their constant exposure to "short-time decision-making," considerably limiting what they can achieve. Naturally, they neither engage in nor can engage in asynchronous communication. Reflect on the high-ranking individuals in your organization or those around you. Do you think they can adopt Full Async? The fundamental impediment of Full Async lies in organizational paradigms, particularly the hierarchical structure.

So, what organizational structure should be adopted instead of a hierarchical one?

While the answer isn't solidified, the promising option at this point is a Teal Organization. In simple terms, a Teal Organization is a network-type organization. I have organized it into 3Ps.

• Party
  • A small group of one to a dozen individuals, complete enough to accomplish specific tasks
  • Employees belong and work in one or multiple parties dynamically
• Protocol
  • Constitutions and laws to enforce governance over the entire party
  • Must be documented and openly accessible even to external parties
• Peace
  • Must not pursue profit as the primary capitalist objective
  • Holds a truly peaceful mission, becoming earnest for it, and profits result from that pursuit

Think of a party as a node. A company consists of a network structure made of nodes. However, control is necessary for overall optimization, which is effectuated through protocols. Of course, there are chief and lead roles similar to CxOs in existing terms. Moreover, since capitalist profit-centric ideologies can lead to hierarchical, exploitative models, it's necessary to assert through Peace that this isn't the primary focus.

Conclusion

To realize Full Async, a "new model" that eradicates the root causes of traditional synchronous communication is essential. Specifically, the following three points were discussed.

• Viewing communication as conducted via COIN (unit of exchange)
• Abandoning the very act of fulfilling relationships
• Moving away from hierarchical organizations to adopt network-type organizations

By 2025, there are no definitive success stories. In other words, Full Async is an advanced concept. As a Knowledge Architect, I aim to craft this vision by the time I retire.

Advantages

The benefits of Full Async are as follows:

By eliminating bottlenecks of traditional paradigms like meetings, relationship-building activities, and hierarchical organizations, transformation and optimal placement become more feasible, resulting in a diverse, employee-first organization that can sustainably continue its operations.

Disadvantages

The downside of Full Async is its difficulty in both understanding and adopting.

Simply put, adopting Full Async is similar to becoming hearing-impaired.

It involves executing everyday tasks under such assumptions. Readers working in diverse companies might have experiences working with hearing-impaired colleagues, likely noticing a struggle to perform at usual levels. It's simple; adapting to a hearing-impaired's style, completing tasks entirely asynchronously without speaking, would suffice but likely was not achieved. The reason is it's simply challenging. Even the hearing-impaired, who supposedly are experts, might lack the skills to work asynchronously.

Boldly put, humanity has yet to explore asynchronous work styles profoundly. Understanding how challenging it is to comprehend should be evident now. Despite attempting clear explanations in this article, it still involved complicated concepts like COIN, De-Relation, and Teal Organizations...

The hurdles don't stop here. Even if understood and Full Async is achieved organizationally, maintaining it is arduous because of strong opposition.

In Full Async, the following opposing forces might arise:

• Those handling tasks that cannot be completed asynchronously. Termed as Syncer. Syncers perform synchronous work but are required to do Full Async for everything else. However, their synchronous work sways their sensibilities towards synchronous factions, inclining them to focus on easing or abolishing Full Async.
• Those who can't satisfy the desire for relationships privately. Termed as Beast. Convincing a Beast on De-Relation is akin to persuading men in a male-dominated society about gender equality, challenging some minorities would resonate with; it's a formidable, towering hurdle.

Leaving these two significant forces unchecked, Full Async's maintenance cannot be ensured. The next organizational restructuring might see it all wiped out.

Implementation

Implementing Full Async necessitates incorporating COIN and 3T, De-Relation, and Teal Organizations as discussed in the concepts section. The remainder of this article will introduce the required means for implementation.

• Multiple communication tools, for instance, QWINCS
• Virtual offices, especially ones enabling Daily Park in a lightweight manner
• Task management
• SSoT documentation

Let's briefly explore these one by one.

Multiple communication tools, for instance, QWINCS

In Full Async, asynchronous communication requires dedicated tools. Chat alone isn't sufficient. I previously wrote about QWINCS, which includes other elements like Q&A, Wiki, Issues (Ticket), Note, and Sticky boards (digital whiteboards) apart from Chat.

All employees must master using them. Meaning, introducing them company-wide with freedom of use for all employees without permission is necessary. For instance, regarding Issues, there must be an Issue space (like a repository on GitHub) where any employee can freely read, write, discuss, or vote.

As a side note, this approach is under exploration as Plurality.

Virtual offices, especially lightweight ones that enable Daily Park

In Full Async, physical gathering isn't an option, but some mechanism to attract attention is necessary. Virtual offices can substitute, especially by using the previously introduced light-weight virtual office to create a daily-workspace where everyone congregates and writes. It naturally becomes a gathering point, allowing the continuation of spreading announcements or consultations asynchronously by simply writing in that space.

Task management

It's the most crucial element in Full Async. Practicing Full Async implies that individual tasks are managed individually.

Suppose you have 30 tasks. Some are Must, others Should or Want. Can you proceed with all without issue and in a balanced manner? Probably 98% would answer "no." Even engineers.

The reason being managing 30 tasks while considering personal status (Context) and condition (Condition) sustainably is impossible. Task management enables it, but this area lacks proper systematic establishment or enlightenment. I myself had to systematically establish it.

• Japanese version: タスク管理を噛み砕く
• English version: Breaking Down Task Management

Nevertheless, my perspective posits that "instrumentalization is essential." Regardless of understanding task management systems, it's meaningless without implementation. Having observed numerous individuals as a Knowledge Architect and task management expert, my impression is that modern people generally lack task management talent. Even businessmen thriving on soft skills. Urgent is the development of software aiding task management.

SSoT documentation

The core of a Teal Organization lies in the 3Ps, with one element being Protocol. Protocol, as described, constitutes documented constitutions, laws, and rules of an organization, openly accessible to external parties. This extent of openness is mandatory. Explicit examples are The GitLab Handbook and Holacracy Constitution v5.0.

Beyond just this, in Full Async, "rely on this document in such situations" is enforced thoroughly. The source is not "everyone's head" or the "head of someone authoritative" but “documented externally.” This is referred to as a trusted single source of truth.

SSoT usually pertains to data sources in engineering, but in Full Async applies to documentation. Documentation should always be the SSoT, considering to that extent. This comprehensive approach enables us to work document-driven and thus realize Full Async.

Conclusion

An introduction to Full Async, a model of executing work and establishing organizations using solely asynchronous communication. Still an uncharted advanced concept, the journey is intricate.

Thus, the impact upon realization is immeasurable. Envision a world free from paradigms like meetings, relationship-processes, and hierarchical organizations. It's by no means a fantasy; it's a realistically reachable world. This article demonstrated its reachability.

Should anyone sincerely aspire for realization, please rely on me. Hire me. As a Knowledge Architect, I am here to assist. See you next time.