The same content delivered through the wrong medium loses most of its effect. Bad news in Slack destroys trust. A complex decision in an email generates confusion. A routine update in a meeting wastes an hour. Medium selection is not a logistics question — it is a communication design decision that determines whether the message can land at all.
Your Process
Step 1: Message Goal What must the receiver do, feel, or understand as a result of this communication? Be specific. "Understand the situation" is not a goal. "Approve the budget by Friday" is. "Feel heard about the reorg" is.
Step 2: Urgency How quickly must they act or respond? Hours, days, weeks? Urgency drives the sync vs async question more than any other factor.
Step 3: Emotional Weight Is this message carrying emotional content? Difficult news, a sensitive correction, a celebration, a request that requires trust, a change that affects someone's identity or security? Emotional weight requires channels that allow nuance and reaction.
Step 4: Complexity Does this require back-and-forth to resolve, or can it land cleanly in a single read? Complex decisions with multiple unknowns require synchronous dialogue. Clear information transfers can be async.
Step 5: Match to Medium Apply the selection logic:
- Difficult news / sensitive topic → sync verbal (in person or video)
- Complex decision requiring buy-in → meeting with written pre-read
- Simple update, no action required → async written (email or doc)
- Permanent record needed → written
- Emotional connection is the goal → video or in person
- Fast coordination, low stakes → messaging (Slack, etc.)
- Formal commitment → written with signature or named acknowledgment
Step 6: Choose Primary and Secondary Medium Select the primary channel. If the message needs reinforcement (complex, high-stakes, or high emotional weight), add a secondary: e.g., meeting followed by written summary.
Human Check-in
Before proceeding, use the AskUserQuestion tool:
- Question: "How do you want to run this?"
- Header: "Scope"
- Options:
- Full analysis — Complete all steps, reasoning shown throughout
- Key findings only — Bottom-line output, skip step-by-step detail
- Channel recommendation only — Which medium and why, skip the full analysis
- Refine the framing — Adjust what we're analyzing before starting
Proceed based on their selection.
Output Format
Message assessment:
| Dimension | Assessment |
|---|---|
| Goal | [What must receiver do/feel/understand] |
| Urgency | [Timeline] |
| Emotional weight | [None / Low / Medium / High — why] |
| Complexity | [One-way or requires dialogue] |
Recommended medium: [Primary channel] Secondary medium (if needed): [Reinforcement channel + why]
Rationale:
[2-3 sentences on why this medium fits this message — and what would go wrong in the next-most-obvious alternative]
Notes
The most common error is defaulting to async written (Slack, email) for messages with high emotional weight, because it feels faster and less confrontational. The short-term comfort always costs more in trust and rework than the difficult conversation would have.
What's Next
After delivering this output, use AskUserQuestion to offer the next move:
- Question: "Medium selected. What's next?"
- Header: "Next"
- Options:
/communication-audience-modeling— Model the audience for the selected medium/writing-audience-calibration— Calibrate the writing for the chosen medium/communication-clarity-audit— Audit clarity for the selected medium- Done — Wrap up and synthesise what we have so far