Ping Author Andrew Brodsky on Digital Communication Manners in 2025 (Full Q&A)

Does replying with “OK” make you sound hostile? Does the thumbs-up emoji make you look old-fashioned? Does replying to emails immediately make you seem highly available or high-strung?

It feels like the rules for online communication are always changing. So, University of Texas at Austin management professor Andrew Brodsky, Ph.D. — who holds degrees from Wharton and Harvard Business School — is clearing the digital air with Ping: The Secrets of Successful Virtual Communication. He spoke with b. about text-message read receipts, AI-written emails and more.

b.: What did you set out to accomplish by writing Ping? 

Brodsky: I’ve been studying virtual communication for over a decade because I saw more and more of our interactions were occurring via technology. And, as a result, being able to understand how to optimize those interactions became vital for improving both organizational outcomes and employee well-being. 

I decided to write my book Ping at this current time because tons of articles and books have come out on the pros and cons of remote versus hybrid versus in-person work. And all of this emphasis on work location was missing a key point: Regardless of whether you work from home or in an office, we are all virtual communicators.

Whether you are a fast-food cashier whose manager sends you shift requests via text messaging or a corporate executive whose day is filled with emails and video meetings, we all need how to understand this technology to be effective and thrive at work. My goal is to help everyone be able to achieve that. 

b.: Will you explain to readers what the acronym “PING” stands for?

Brodsky: For me, the best books are ones that have clearly memorable takeaways, because otherwise it’s easy to forget to leverage the lessons you learned from it in practice.

The “P” stands for perspective taking. When we communicate from behind a screen, it’s easy to get stuck in our own head as we tend to forget about the person we’re interacting with since they aren’t standing in front of us. Consequently, ensuring that you engage in perspective taking can help make sure that your messages accomplish their goals and don’t backfire.

The “I” stands for initiative, as many things that occur in in-person interactions, like engaging in small talk to help build trust, don’t occur as naturally in virtual interactions. As a result, it’s vital to make sure you take the initative to add those behaviors back in.

The “N” stands for nonverbal, as it’s vital to understand the implications of the many nonverbal behaviors that we transmit virtually, such as how quickly we respond to messages and what time of day we respond, often without even realizing we are doing so.

And lastly, the “G” stands for goals because when it comes to choosing the best mode of interaction or the best approach, there isn’t a singular “best” choice, as it depends on your goals. For instance, relationships tend to be better strengthened with video calls that have cameras on, whereas turning your camera off can reduce fatigue and burnout. Therefore, it’s important to make sure you first identify your goal, rather than just choosing whatever technology or approach you usually use. Otherwise, you are likely to worsen your outcomes both in your job and personal life. 

b.: You write about how, on a video call, showing off a pet and having plants and books behind us can help form connections — even spilling coffee could make someone more likable or relatable. What have you done, accidentally or purposefully, that helped?

Brodsky: I have a very clear memory of a video meeting I was in with eight members of a research team in which I was the most junior member at the time. A bird must have flown by the window because my 14-pound dachshund mix puppy decided it was time to let everyone know not to mess with our house. She was barking so ferociously the sound drowned out everyone on the call. 

Rather than just apologize profusely, which would have made me seem even lower power, I called her over to introduce her to the others in the meeting. When I held her up, the most senior member in the meeting cracked a joke that, from [my dog’s] bark, she thought my dog was over 100 pounds. Then everyone in the meeting started talking about their pets, and one person without a pet similarly held up their toddler, which made everyone smile. 

This whole endeavor wasted five minutes of productivity, but everyone got to know each other a little better, and we all felt we could trust each other more. This goodwill paid off in dividends over time and was worth far more than those five minutes of lost productivity.

b.: How do we avoid getting bogged down by constant interruptions?

Brodsky: Some people respond to emails and instant messages as soon as they come in. Others suggest that you should check messages only once a day to avoid interruptions. Research indicates that the best approach is somewhere in between.

Specifically, it is best to “chunk” your virtual communication into about two to four confined periods throughout your workday [like] at the beginning of the workday, after lunch, and half an hour before signing off… As an added benefit of this approach, it gives me more freedom to not feel the need to constantly check email.

b.: If someone takes issue with your response time, how would you react?

Brodsky: In general, research shows that our communication partners don’t expect a response as quickly as we assume they do, which is referred to as the “urgency bias.” However, if someone does take issue with your response time, you can have a conversation with them in which you can set expectations and give them a way to contact you in case of an urgent situation.

For instance, you might agree to respond to emails within 24 hours, but if there is an urgent request, the person could text your personal cell and you can get back to them as soon as possible. You can also prevent the other person from feeling like their message is being ignored by sending a relatively quick response, something along the lines of “Thanks for sending this along. I’ll take a closer look and give you my thoughts by Wednesday.” This way, the other person isn’t left wondering when — and if — they’ll receive a response. 

When it comes to someone who isn’t being communicative enough, the approach is actually the same. Have a conversation with the other person that goes something like, “Hey, I’m not sure if you had a chance to see those messages I sent last week, but I really need answers from you before I can proceed. Is there a better way for me to get in touch with you or note when I need responses from you in the future?” By having this conversation in real time, as opposed to sending yet another message that may or may not receive a response, you can keep the tone friendlier and more collaborative.

You can also help manage expectations in advance of issues arising by preempting any questions or delayed responses by including in your own messages when you expect a response.

b.: Do you recommend having separate phones for work and home?

Brodsky: With current smartphones, it’s fairly straightforward to treat the subaccounts — your personal and work accounts — as separate. For example, you can have your personal emails set to provide an audible notification noise, while your work emails do not. Similarly, you can have a work phone number and a personal phone number routed to the same phone.

With all that said, for some people, it’s easier to have two separate phones to allow for greater separation. 

In either case, research indicates that you should be very mindful about how you set boundaries for yourself with your work devices. On one hand, smartphones and communication technologies have offered employees the freedom to work from anywhere at any time. But they also reduce freedom because you can now both figuratively and literally have your work attached to you 24/7. 

So being mindful of ensuring you set boundaries to make sure you have time to decompress and recover from work isn’t just necessary for your well-being. It can also improve your work performance. Ending up burned out is neither good for you nor your company. 

b.: What do you think of implementing the “Read” receipt on text messages?

Brodsky: I recommend avoiding using the “Read” receipt … because while it’s useful for letting you know your message was received, research has found that it can harm the other person’s trust and strength of your relationship. For instance, the other person is likely to see the read receipt and think you don’t trust them enough to respond without oversight.

b.: How do you think age factors into remote work and virtual communication? Are older workers at a disadvantage? 

Brodsky: There is no doubt that different age groups are generally more comfortable with some virtual communication modes compared to others. That said, there isn’t one “best” mode to communicate over. It’s the people who can readily switch between one mode and another, depending on the situation, who tend to be the most effective.

And with respect to that point, we all have the ability to gain new skills. Self-efficacy and a willingness to learn are far more important than age when it comes to successful virtual interactions.

b.: How do you feel about people using AI to make their emails sound friendlier or more professional?

Brodsky: AI can be useful for improving speed [but] can also backfire in many cases.

In utilizing AI to write messages for you, you run the risk that the other person will recognize you didn’t craft the message yourself. This may be because the AI-generated language sounds nothing like your normal writing style or leaves out knowledge you have from prior interactions. Research shows it will significantly reduce how much the recipient trusts you.

To this point, there is a reason why handmade items [like] hand-blown glass are considered to be so much better than machine-made ones, and the same logic applies to our communication. Simply, they seem better and more effortful.

Ping is available now.

This article first appeared in the b. Newsletter. Subscribe now!