The CTO Chooses the Messaging Tool to Cut Through Chaos
If you're still using Microsoft Teams or Google Chat you're not doing it right.
I'm sitting in a CEO's office, watching her team scramble through their morning standup. The product manager shares their screen, toggling between email threads, Teams channels, and shared documents. "Just give me a second," they say, "I know I saw that update somewhere." The development team sits patiently, their cameras off, probably context-switching to other tasks while they wait.
It's 2024, yet this scene still plays out in companies worldwide: time wasted in empty searches for relayed information, longer meetings, and more disconnect than connection with teams.
I spend my days coaching technology leaders, and I've noticed an uncanny pattern: companies using Microsoft Teams or Google Chat consistently struggle with friction in their daily communications. It's like watching someone try to run through knee-deep water – they're moving, but every step requires extra effort.
The CEO turns to me after the meeting, frustration evident in her voice. "Is this normal?" she asks. "It feels like we spend more time looking for information than acting on it." I've heard this question so many times that I have to resist the urge to jump straight into my solution.
What dawned on me through countless such observations is that while CTOs often inherit communication tools from their companies, accepting this inheritance without question is a form of negligence. The cost of poor communication far outweighs the effort of change.
Beyond Just Chatting
Modern communication platforms aren't just about messaging - they're about creating an infrastructure for information flow. When implemented properly, they
reduce context-switching
centralize information sharing
enable quick decision-making
Enables quick decision-making. Think about that for a minute.
Consider your company's communication like you would your application's architecture. You wouldn't run critical systems on infrastructure you know is suboptimal, so why accept suboptimal communication infrastructure?
The Numbers Tell a Story
Recent research paints an interesting picture of modern communication tools' impact on organizational efficiency. Studies of companies using Slack report significant improvements in productivity, with teams claiming faster project completion and more streamlined collaboration. While these studies should be taken with a grain of salt - many being self-reported or commissioned by the platforms themselves - the consistent pattern of improved efficiency is hard to ignore.
Technical teams, in particular, report substantial returns on their investment, primarily through
reduced meeting time
fewer emails
faster task completion
But these benefits aren't automatic. They depend heavily on proper implementation and organizational buy-in.
The most successful companies don't just deploy new communication tools; they fundamentally rethink how information flows through their organization.
Effective communication platforms fundamentally transform how teams work together. Channel-based messaging ensures information reaches the right people, while real-time communication accelerates decision-making across the organization. Through seamless file sharing and deep integrations, teams collaborate naturally, creating a transparent environment where conversations and decisions are accessible to all team members.
However, like any powerful tool, proper implementation is crucial. Without clear guidelines, teams can struggle with notification fatigue or become overwhelmed by too many channels. Success lies in choosing the right tool and thoughtfully designing how it will be used.
Making the Right Choice
When evaluating communication tools, each platform brings its own strengths to the table. Slack excels through its extensive integration with business applications, offering a user-friendly interface that teams adopt naturally. Its rich feature set for team collaboration sets it apart, making it more than just another messaging tool.
Microsoft Teams is an attractive add-on in organizations heavily invested in the Microsoft ecosystem. But it’s not a Slack alternative or comparison by any means of the communication category. I would argue that it is poison to a remote company culture. With its high friction messaging, buggy cross-platform implementation, and ridiculous video call schizophrenia, it’s a tool that excels in the case of nobody wanting to use it.
Google Chat takes a different approach, focusing on simplicity and integration with Google Workspace. It has a clean interface and powerful search capabilities but it doesn’t do channels, but rather groups. Has someone told their product people that there’s a difference between a communication channel and a grouping of people?
Hey CTO, don’t fall for the “it’s a free tool that comes with our enterprise suite of choice.” What is the price your C-Suite puts on low-friction, free-flowing communication? What is the cost of the heavy cognitive load of dissecting 10 MB email threads?
Your Mandate as CTO
If you’ve read any of my newsletters, you know that the CTO role extends far beyond managing code and architecture. You're responsible for identifying and addressing your organization's communication needs, carefully evaluating potential solutions, and driving their adoption throughout the company.
This includes ensuring new tools integrate seamlessly with existing systems and continuously monitoring their effectiveness. Your oversight of communication infrastructure is as crucial as your technical infrastructure management.
The Path Forward
The journey to improved communication starts with a thorough audit of your current state:
examine where messages get lost
identify friction points in information flow
ask your teams to avoid siloed assumptions while researching what is best
document the limitations of your current tools
This groundwork helps build a compelling case for change.
When evaluating options, look beyond feature lists to consider how each platform might integrate with your existing workflows. Factor in your team's size, complexity, and communication patterns. Remember that the best tool on paper isn't always the best tool in practice.
Implementation requires careful planning. Create clear guidelines that help teams understand how to use the tool and communicate effectively within it. Define your channel strategy thoughtfully, and ensure your integrations support rather than complicate your workflows.
Most importantly, lead by example. Your communication patterns set the tone for the entire organization. Model the behavior you want to see, champion proper tool usage, and regularly gather feedback to understand what's working and what isn't.
The Reality Check
The truth is, no tool will solve all communication problems. But the right tool, properly implemented, can significantly reduce friction in daily operations. Your role as CTO isn't just to maintain technology - it's to create an environment where information flows as freely as ideas.
I see it in every company I coach: those with streamlined communication tools move faster, adapt better, and generally maintain higher team morale. The difference isn't in the technology itself - it's in the intentional approach to how information flows through the organization.
Are you ready to take up your communication mandate?
Would love to hear from you. Reply to this email, hit me up in a LinkedIn DM, or drop your thoughts if you are already in the 7CTOs Slack Community.
Leading by example is critical! If you want people to ask questions in public channels, you must do so. If you want folks to feel comfortable leaving channels when they are not needed, you need to do that too. If you want your team to create shortcuts or slackbots, you have to give them time to do so or approve commercial alternatives.
One thing I didn't hear from you that I'd love to was concrete examples of high-performing patterns you have seen.