Your Remote Team Isn’t Ready for Async (Yet)
Async isn’t always the answer. Sometimes, meetings have a place.
Working remotely gives you a lot of freedom. I definitely don’t miss the days of being stuck in traffic or forced into unwanted social interactions.
However, part of that freedom can vanish without a clear communication strategy. In remote environments (especially in fast-scaling companies) context gaps become more frequent. When that happens, it’s tempting to fall into the trap of never-ending meetings as a substitute for traditional office communication.
Working remotely != Working asynchronously
While many people assume these two concepts are the same, you can absolutely be in a remote synchronous work setup.
Have you ever gone to the office at your remote-first company to “socialize,” only to find yourself stuck in a phone booth all day on Zoom calls? That’s what I’m talking about.
But here’s a more important question:
Are all teams ready to work remotely?
Some big voices on social media say things like:
“You should delete all recurring meetings.”
“You shouldn’t have meetings at all.”
Honestly, I’m also not a big fan of sitting through long meetings where no one’s really listening and we struggle to reach a conclusion.
But does that mean all teams should be async, all the time?
In my experience: Probably not.
While most companies can benefit from a solid async strategy, some teams simply work better in a hybrid setup.
When async works well
A common problem I’ve seen:
A startup grows from 10–50 to 200+ employees and thinks it can keep the same communication style.
Casual coffee chats or tapping someone on the shoulder to discuss code might have worked at a smaller scale. But as the company grows, that starts creating confusion and misalignment.
To avoid that, it’s crucial to centralize knowledge in accessible, up-to-date formats:
Documentation (Confluence, Postman collections…)
(Controversial, maybe) A solid test suite
Well-written tickets
Async requires reading, async requires writing
Ok, we all hate meetings. But if we’re not meeting, something has to replace that alignment.
That something usually comes down to writing clearly and reading thoroughly.
Easy on paper. But have you ever written something and the only response was the sound of crickets? I got you covered, been there.
In my experience, exclusive async communication doesn’t always work. Here’s when it often tends to fail:
Immature teams (new hires, teams composed of mostly junior folks)
Fully remote teams who miss small social rituals. In a previous team, we aimed for 80% async, but some people really missed the daily standup to kick off their day. Isolation is real, and regular touchpoints can help people feel more connected.
Companies without a clear vision or strategy. If a company lacks alignment from the top, async won’t fix that. Although, to be honest, meetings probably won’t fix that either.
They key? Understand your team
As with most things in life, the virtues are in the middle.
I don’t think all companies should be 100% remote. (And not all meetings are a waste of time)
But I’m also skeptical of those who say the only way to collaborate is by being in the office every day. (*cough* That’s micromanagement *cough*)
The answer, then?
It’s often not that exciting: Not all teams are ready for 100% async. Or they may not be ready all the time.
Yes, it’s important to be mindful of everyone’s time (like sending a timely Slack to avoid all those “should have been an email” situations). But it’s even more important to listen to what your team actually needs.
Despite what many LinkedIn gurus might say, there’s no better indicator of what works than your own team.