If youāre going to have a call with someone, ask them when would be convenient, and make an agenda before you talk.
I default to sending people a link to my calendly. (And sometimesāespecially if there are major timezone clashesāI also say that the person is welcome to suggest times earlier/ālater than the times in my calendly.) This gives them a lot of room to choose whatever time is best for them, and seems less time-consuming for both me and the other person than exchanging some scheduling messages.
In cases where people reach out to me rather than the other way around, I also prefer using a calendly link (so I send mine if they didnāt send theirs first).
I guess itās possible some people would find being sent a calendly link off-putting for some reason, but I havenāt seen indications of that so far.
Two actions I plan to take as a result of this post
When seeking input, make more of an effort to figure out what I most need help on and explicitly flag that, rather than just making a more generalised request for input.
I think I used to be good at this, but have recently slipped for some reason, so this post was a helpful prompt to get back on track.
When following up with people, briefly explain how peopleās input was useful.
I think I do consistently follow-up, express gratitude, and tell people that their input was useful. But I donāt think Iād really thought about how it could be good to tell them how their input was useful, and consequently I think I havenāt done that enough.
One thing Iād slightly push back on
Try to make the conversation concise, and to avoid going over the time allocated. I really appreciate when people do this when Iām talking to them, because it means I can focus on thinking through the ideas rather than also making sure that weāre sticking to the agenda and get to everything.
I think it makes sense for this to be the default way one approaches conversations in which one is seeking advice. But I think a decent portion of advice-givers would either be ok with or actually prefer a more loose /ā lengthy /ā free-wheeling /ā non-regimented conversation.
There have been a few times when Iāve arranged to talk to someone I perceived as very busy and important, and so Iāve tried to be very conscious of their time and give them opportunities to wrap things up, but they repeatedly opted to keep talking for a surprisingly long time. And they seemed genuinely happy with this, and I ended up getting a lot of extra value out of that extra time.
So I think itās probably good to be open to signs that oneās conversation partner is ok with or prefers a longer conversation, even if one shouldnāt assume they are.
I guess itās possible some people would find being sent a calendly link off-putting for some reason, but I havenāt seen indications of that so far.
I actually find it extremely annoying, though I donāt know why and I donāt particularly endorse this reaction. There have been cases where people have sent me calendlies with zero slots available, or failed to show up for a call I scheduled using it, but I donāt think this is the reason. I have actually missed at least one call that should have taken place just because I found calendly so irrationally aversive.
Huh, this is great to know. Personally, Iām the opposite, I find it annoying when people ask to meet and donāt include a calendly link or similar, I am slightly annoyed by the time it takes to write a reply email and generate a calendar invite, and the often greater overall back-and-forth and attention drain from having the issue linger.
Curious how anti-Calendly people feel about the āinclude a calendly link + ask people to send timeslots if they preferā strategy.
My feelings are both that itās a great app and yet sometimes Iām irritated when the other person sends me theirs.
If I introspect on the times when I feel the irritation, I notice I feel like they are shirking some work. Previously we were working together to have a meeting, but now Iām doing the work to have a meeting with the other person, where itās my job and not theirs to make it happen.
I think I expect some of of the following asymmetries in responsibility to happen with a much higher frequency than with old-fashioned-coordination:
I will book a time, then in a few days they will tell me actually the time doesnāt work for them and I should pick again (this is a world where I had made plans around the meeting time and they hadnāt)
I will book a time, and just before the meeting they will email to say they hadnāt realised when Iād booked it and actually they canāt make it and need to reschedule, and they will feel this is calendlyās fault far more than theirs
I will book a time, and they wonāt show up or will show up late and feel that they donāt hold much responsibility for this, thinking of it as a ātechnical failureā on behalf of calendly.
All of these are quite irritating and feel like Iām the one holding my schedule open for them, right up until it turns out they canāt make it.
I think I might be happier if there was an explicit and expected part of the process where the other person confirms they are aware of the meeting and will show up, either by emailing to say āIāll see you at <time>!ā or if they have to click āgoingā to the calendar invitation and I would get a notification saying āThey confirmedā, and only then was it āofficially happeningā.
Having written this out, I may start pinging people for confirmation after filling out their calendlys...
Thanks for writing these out. I donāt remember people having cancelled calendly times on me, so I assume it hasnāt happened at a higher rate than other types of meetings. Really useful to know that thatās typically the case, since it understandably puts people off them.
I donāt want to claim it happens regularly, but enough that itās become salient to me that I may spend all this time planning for and around the meeting and then have it be wasted effort, such that thereās some consistent irritation cost to me interacting with calendlys.
But now that Iāve put in to words some of my concerns, I think Iāll generally like interacting with calendly more now, as Iāll notice when Iām feeling this particular worry and more pro-actively deal with it. As I said, I think itās a great tool and Iām glad it exists.
I think I might be happier if there was an explicit and expected part of the process where the other person confirms they are aware of the meeting and will show up, either by emailing to say āIāll see you at <time>!ā or if they have to click āgoingā to the calendar invitation and I would get a notification saying āThey confirmedā, and only then was it āofficially happeningā.
Yeah, even as an unabashed Calendly-lover I think these things would definitely be improvements. Iāve thought before that it seems weird that the person whose calendly it is is set to āgoingā by default, which means the person who booked the time will by default only know that the other person received an email, not that they saw it or plan to be there.
For this reason, when people book a slot with me, I try to always send a message like āIāll see you at <time>!ā But I think itād be better to have a stronger norm around this, and/āor have the person not be set to āgoingā until they actively click āgoingā.
(It also looks like your comment has gotten a downvote, which seems surprising to me. My small plug for calendly has turned into a much larger and spicier thread than expected.)
Donāt feel great about that, for the same reasons as beforeāit prioritizes your comfort and schedule over mine, which is kind of rude if youāre asking me for a favour.
But like other people, I donāt necessarily endorse these feelings, and theyāre not super strong. Itās fine for people to keep sending me calendly links.
I find it off-putting though I donāt endorse my reaction and overall think the time savings mean Iām personally net better off when other people use it.
I think for me, itās about taking something that used to be a normal human interaction and automating it instead. Feels unfriendly somehow. Maybe thatās a status thing?
Very similar here. I wouldnāt quite say unfriendly/āstatus thing, but like a social interaction with a friend got sucked into commercialized business mode (ācapitalism ate your friendships!āādefinitely not my endorsed reaction, but feels kind of true).
I would also like to come out of the woodwork as someone who finds Calendly vaguely annoying, for reasons that are entirely opaque to me.
(Although itās also unambiguously more convenient for me when people send me Calendly linksāand, given the choice, I think Iād mostly like people to keep doing this.)
Yeah, I think roughly that sort of message is what Iāll use from now on, as a result of the (rather unexpected!) data this thread has provided. It still seems to me that Calendly (at least given my flexible schedule) will very likely tend to save both parties time and effectively give them more choice over timings, but Iāll provide some particular option alongside the link from now on.
I think this would also help in cases where the person Iām talking to would feel itās easier to make a decision if one or two options are singled out for them (e.g. Lukas, based on his comment).
I find calendly particularly annoying when my interlocutor doesnāt seem to make any effort to consider my schedule. For example, if theyāre asking me for a favour or some feedback, I say okay, and then instead of asking whenās good for me they say āGreat! Hereās my calendly!ā
These comments are all useful data for me, but I also find them somewhat confusing. Are you referring to cases where the personās calendly is quite full, so youāre forced into a narrow range of options?
My calendly is usually quite empty, as my schedule is quite flexible. So Iād hope this comes across to people as being very considerate of their schedule, since they can choose from a very wide range of times and dates.
Or maybe you find it annoying either way, and itās more like getting sent a calendly link just feelsless considerate of your schedule than being explicitly asked whenās good for you?
I think itās a bit of both. Iām particularly annoyed if someone asks me for a favour and then send a calendly with only a couple slots, or slots that donāt make sense in my time zone. Iām very very annoyed if I say āHowās Monday at 8?ā and they say, āI think that should be fine, can you check my Calendly?ā
But overall I think itās a status thing. Instead of starting from my preferences, Iām put in the position of picking which of their preferences is the least inconvenient for me. Itās perfectly functional, but I donāt get to be the star.
Iām particularly annoyed if someone asks me for a favour and then send a calendly with only a couple slots, or slots that donāt make sense in my time zone. Iām very very annoyed if I say āHowās Monday at 8?ā and they say, āI think that should be fine, can you check my Calendly?ā
Yeah, I think Iād find both of those annoying as well, and the second especiallyāthe second just seems an entirely unnecessary use of calendly anyway, and does seem to fairly strongly signal āYour time is worth less than mineā.
Instead of starting from my preferences, Iām put in the position of picking which of their preferences is the least inconvenient for me. Itās perfectly functional, but I donāt get to be the star.
Interesting. I guess Iād assumed people would instead see it more like me offering them a massive menu that they can pick from with ease and at their convenience. (Well, not really like that, but something more like that than like them having to work around me in a way that puts me first.)
Iāve found it difficult to find a clear takeaway from this discussion. I think relevant points are here:
Making each other feel respected
Finding a time that actually works well for both (i.e. not overly inconvenient times)
Saving time scheduling meetings
Some of the suggestions emphasize #1 at the expense of #3 (and possibly #2). E.g., if I send my Calendly and make concrete suggestions, that removes the time-saving aspects because I have to check my calendar and thereās a risk of double-booking (or I have to hold the slots if I want to prevent that).
My current guess is that the following works best: Send the Calendly link, click it yourself briefly to ensure it has a reasonable amount of options in the recipientās time zone available, and tell the recipient āfeel free to just suggest whichever times work best for you.ā
Not sure that works for those who are most skeptical/āunhappy about Calendly.
For me itās the feeling of too many options, that some options may be less convenient for the other person than they initially would think, and that I have to try to understand this interface (IT aversion) instead of replying normally (even just clicking on the link feels annoying).
I think that for many , itās primarily the act of sending a calendly link that is off-putting (for social, potentially status-related, reasons), rather than the experience of interacting with the software. My hunch is that people donāt have the same aversion to, e.g. Doodle, which is more symmetric (itās not that one person sends their preferences to the other, but everyone lists their preferences). (But you may be different.)
I personally have this tech aversion to Calendly and Doodle specifically, but not to other, similar tools that I find more user-friendly, such as When2Meet. The main reason is that I would much prefer a āweek viewā rather than having to click on each date to reveal the available slots. That said, Calendly is still my most preferred option for scheduling meetings.
Huh, I deeply love Calendly and use it for basically everything in my social life. So Iāve found this thread super interesting to see so many different perspectives on it, and how to minimise annoyance to those people. Thanks for starting the thread! (And this is making me paranoid about how many of my friends I piss off by using Calendly...)
Thinking a bit about why I love Calendly so much, a big draw for me is that scheduling takes quite a lot of mental energy from me. Especially suggesting specific times, or saying I canāt make specific times someone else suggested. I think it often feels like Iām being difficult or inconvenient, which I find super aversive, especially if both of us are fairly busy. And Calendly cuts all of that out, which makes me much more willing to organise things!
I think this post is great.
One thing Iād add
I default to sending people a link to my calendly. (And sometimesāespecially if there are major timezone clashesāI also say that the person is welcome to suggest times earlier/ālater than the times in my calendly.) This gives them a lot of room to choose whatever time is best for them, and seems less time-consuming for both me and the other person than exchanging some scheduling messages.
In cases where people reach out to me rather than the other way around, I also prefer using a calendly link (so I send mine if they didnāt send theirs first).
I guess itās possible some people would find being sent a calendly link off-putting for some reason, but I havenāt seen indications of that so far.
Two actions I plan to take as a result of this post
When seeking input, make more of an effort to figure out what I most need help on and explicitly flag that, rather than just making a more generalised request for input.
I think I used to be good at this, but have recently slipped for some reason, so this post was a helpful prompt to get back on track.
When following up with people, briefly explain how peopleās input was useful.
I think I do consistently follow-up, express gratitude, and tell people that their input was useful. But I donāt think Iād really thought about how it could be good to tell them how their input was useful, and consequently I think I havenāt done that enough.
One thing Iād slightly push back on
I think it makes sense for this to be the default way one approaches conversations in which one is seeking advice. But I think a decent portion of advice-givers would either be ok with or actually prefer a more loose /ā lengthy /ā free-wheeling /ā non-regimented conversation.
There have been a few times when Iāve arranged to talk to someone I perceived as very busy and important, and so Iāve tried to be very conscious of their time and give them opportunities to wrap things up, but they repeatedly opted to keep talking for a surprisingly long time. And they seemed genuinely happy with this, and I ended up getting a lot of extra value out of that extra time.
So I think itās probably good to be open to signs that oneās conversation partner is ok with or prefers a longer conversation, even if one shouldnāt assume they are.
I actually find it extremely annoying, though I donāt know why and I donāt particularly endorse this reaction. There have been cases where people have sent me calendlies with zero slots available, or failed to show up for a call I scheduled using it, but I donāt think this is the reason. I have actually missed at least one call that should have taken place just because I found calendly so irrationally aversive.
Huh, this is great to know. Personally, Iām the opposite, I find it annoying when people ask to meet and donāt include a calendly link or similar, I am slightly annoyed by the time it takes to write a reply email and generate a calendar invite, and the often greater overall back-and-forth and attention drain from having the issue linger.
Curious how anti-Calendly people feel about the āinclude a calendly link + ask people to send timeslots if they preferā strategy.
My feelings are both that itās a great app and yet sometimes Iām irritated when the other person sends me theirs.
If I introspect on the times when I feel the irritation, I notice I feel like they are shirking some work. Previously we were working together to have a meeting, but now Iām doing the work to have a meeting with the other person, where itās my job and not theirs to make it happen.
I think I expect some of of the following asymmetries in responsibility to happen with a much higher frequency than with old-fashioned-coordination:
I will book a time, then in a few days they will tell me actually the time doesnāt work for them and I should pick again (this is a world where I had made plans around the meeting time and they hadnāt)
I will book a time, and just before the meeting they will email to say they hadnāt realised when Iād booked it and actually they canāt make it and need to reschedule, and they will feel this is calendlyās fault far more than theirs
I will book a time, and they wonāt show up or will show up late and feel that they donāt hold much responsibility for this, thinking of it as a ātechnical failureā on behalf of calendly.
All of these are quite irritating and feel like Iām the one holding my schedule open for them, right up until it turns out they canāt make it.
I think I might be happier if there was an explicit and expected part of the process where the other person confirms they are aware of the meeting and will show up, either by emailing to say āIāll see you at <time>!ā or if they have to click āgoingā to the calendar invitation and I would get a notification saying āThey confirmedā, and only then was it āofficially happeningā.
Having written this out, I may start pinging people for confirmation after filling out their calendlys...
Thanks for writing these out. I donāt remember people having cancelled calendly times on me, so I assume it hasnāt happened at a higher rate than other types of meetings. Really useful to know that thatās typically the case, since it understandably puts people off them.
Youāre welcome :)
I donāt want to claim it happens regularly, but enough that itās become salient to me that I may spend all this time planning for and around the meeting and then have it be wasted effort, such that thereās some consistent irritation cost to me interacting with calendlys.
But now that Iāve put in to words some of my concerns, I think Iāll generally like interacting with calendly more now, as Iāll notice when Iām feeling this particular worry and more pro-actively deal with it. As I said, I think itās a great tool and Iām glad it exists.
Oh, actually that makes me feel better too!
Yeah, even as an unabashed Calendly-lover I think these things would definitely be improvements. Iāve thought before that it seems weird that the person whose calendly it is is set to āgoingā by default, which means the person who booked the time will by default only know that the other person received an email, not that they saw it or plan to be there.
For this reason, when people book a slot with me, I try to always send a message like āIāll see you at <time>!ā But I think itād be better to have a stronger norm around this, and/āor have the person not be set to āgoingā until they actively click āgoingā.
(It also looks like your comment has gotten a downvote, which seems surprising to me. My small plug for calendly has turned into a much larger and spicier thread than expected.)
Donāt feel great about that, for the same reasons as beforeāit prioritizes your comfort and schedule over mine, which is kind of rude if youāre asking me for a favour.
But like other people, I donāt necessarily endorse these feelings, and theyāre not super strong. Itās fine for people to keep sending me calendly links.
I find it off-putting though I donāt endorse my reaction and overall think the time savings mean Iām personally net better off when other people use it.
I think for me, itās about taking something that used to be a normal human interaction and automating it instead. Feels unfriendly somehow. Maybe thatās a status thing?
Very similar here. I wouldnāt quite say unfriendly/āstatus thing, but like a social interaction with a friend got sucked into commercialized business mode (ācapitalism ate your friendships!āādefinitely not my endorsed reaction, but feels kind of true).
I would also like to come out of the woodwork as someone who finds Calendly vaguely annoying, for reasons that are entirely opaque to me.
(Although itās also unambiguously more convenient for me when people send me Calendly linksāand, given the choice, I think Iād mostly like people to keep doing this.)
Maybe one option would be to both send the Calendly and write a more standard email? E.g.:
āWhen would suit you? How about Tuesday 3pm or Wednesday 4pm? Alternatively, you could check my Calendly, if you prefer.ā
Maybe some find that overly roundabout.
Yeah, I think roughly that sort of message is what Iāll use from now on, as a result of the (rather unexpected!) data this thread has provided. It still seems to me that Calendly (at least given my flexible schedule) will very likely tend to save both parties time and effectively give them more choice over timings, but Iāll provide some particular option alongside the link from now on.
I think this would also help in cases where the person Iām talking to would feel itās easier to make a decision if one or two options are singled out for them (e.g. Lukas, based on his comment).
I find calendly particularly annoying when my interlocutor doesnāt seem to make any effort to consider my schedule. For example, if theyāre asking me for a favour or some feedback, I say okay, and then instead of asking whenās good for me they say āGreat! Hereās my calendly!ā
It mostly seems like a status/ādeference thing.
These comments are all useful data for me, but I also find them somewhat confusing. Are you referring to cases where the personās calendly is quite full, so youāre forced into a narrow range of options?
My calendly is usually quite empty, as my schedule is quite flexible. So Iād hope this comes across to people as being very considerate of their schedule, since they can choose from a very wide range of times and dates.
Or maybe you find it annoying either way, and itās more like getting sent a calendly link just feels less considerate of your schedule than being explicitly asked whenās good for you?
I think itās a bit of both. Iām particularly annoyed if someone asks me for a favour and then send a calendly with only a couple slots, or slots that donāt make sense in my time zone. Iām very very annoyed if I say āHowās Monday at 8?ā and they say, āI think that should be fine, can you check my Calendly?ā
But overall I think itās a status thing. Instead of starting from my preferences, Iām put in the position of picking which of their preferences is the least inconvenient for me. Itās perfectly functional, but I donāt get to be the star.
Yeah, I think Iād find both of those annoying as well, and the second especiallyāthe second just seems an entirely unnecessary use of calendly anyway, and does seem to fairly strongly signal āYour time is worth less than mineā.
Interesting. I guess Iād assumed people would instead see it more like me offering them a massive menu that they can pick from with ease and at their convenience. (Well, not really like that, but something more like that than like them having to work around me in a way that puts me first.)
Stefan wrote in another comment:
Do you think that that option would alleviate this feeling for you?
Most likely! I guess weāll just have to test it and see!
Iāve found it difficult to find a clear takeaway from this discussion. I think relevant points are here:
Making each other feel respected
Finding a time that actually works well for both (i.e. not overly inconvenient times)
Saving time scheduling meetings
Some of the suggestions emphasize #1 at the expense of #3 (and possibly #2). E.g., if I send my Calendly and make concrete suggestions, that removes the time-saving aspects because I have to check my calendar and thereās a risk of double-booking (or I have to hold the slots if I want to prevent that).
My current guess is that the following works best: Send the Calendly link, click it yourself briefly to ensure it has a reasonable amount of options in the recipientās time zone available, and tell the recipient āfeel free to just suggest whichever times work best for you.ā
Not sure that works for those who are most skeptical/āunhappy about Calendly.
That wouldnāt change my feelings, no.
Just learned about this, havenāt tried yet, but it claims to solve the problem mentioned here: https://āāsavvycal.com/āā
Yes that looks betterāsimilar to Outlookās inbuilt calendar invite system.
Update: Iāve tried it and switched away from Calendly. Iām very happy with it so far.
I have the same!
For me itās the feeling of too many options, that some options may be less convenient for the other person than they initially would think, and that I have to try to understand this interface (IT aversion) instead of replying normally (even just clicking on the link feels annoying).
I think that for many , itās primarily the act of sending a calendly link that is off-putting (for social, potentially status-related, reasons), rather than the experience of interacting with the software. My hunch is that people donāt have the same aversion to, e.g. Doodle, which is more symmetric (itās not that one person sends their preferences to the other, but everyone lists their preferences). (But you may be different.)
FWIW, I do have this kind of tech aversion. Not to calendly, which I use a lot, but to other similar (and similarly easy to use) interfaces.
I personally have this tech aversion to Calendly and Doodle specifically, but not to other, similar tools that I find more user-friendly, such as When2Meet. The main reason is that I would much prefer a āweek viewā rather than having to click on each date to reveal the available slots. That said, Calendly is still my most preferred option for scheduling meetings.
Would you be fine with Claireās suggestion? This one:
Sure!
Huh, I deeply love Calendly and use it for basically everything in my social life. So Iāve found this thread super interesting to see so many different perspectives on it, and how to minimise annoyance to those people. Thanks for starting the thread! (And this is making me paranoid about how many of my friends I piss off by using Calendly...)
Thinking a bit about why I love Calendly so much, a big draw for me is that scheduling takes quite a lot of mental energy from me. Especially suggesting specific times, or saying I canāt make specific times someone else suggested. I think it often feels like Iām being difficult or inconvenient, which I find super aversive, especially if both of us are fairly busy. And Calendly cuts all of that out, which makes me much more willing to organise things!