The Asynchronous Myth: Why Some Development Teams Need Face Time to Succeed

The push for fully asynchronous development teams is hurting product quality.

Don't get me wrong - I hate unnecessary meetings as much as anyone.

But after helping hundreds of companies scale their engineering teams, I've noticed a dangerous pattern.

Teams are eliminating face-to-face interaction in the name of productivity, then wondering why their products aren't meeting user needs.

The Async Promise vs Reality

As a CTO, the promise of fully async teams is incredibly seductive. I get it - I fell for it too.

The benefits are so alluring.

Uninterrupted Deep Work 

Developers get 4-hour blocks of focus time. No context switching. No interruptions. Just pure, productive coding time.

Global Talent Access 

Time zones don't matter. Your team can be distributed across continents. Work happens 24/7. Problems get solved while you sleep.

Perfect Documentation 

Everything is written down. Requirements are crystal clear. Decisions are tracked. Knowledge transfer happens automatically through pull requests and documentation.

Lower Meeting Overhead 

No more meetings that could have been emails. No more developers sitting in planning sessions when they could be coding.

Scalable Communication 

As the team grows, communication scales naturally. Everything's searchable, referenceable, and transparent.

But here's what we see actually happens when teams go fully async:

Context Gets Lost in Translation 

That beautifully written specification? Half your team interpreted it differently. The crucial business context that explains why you're building this feature? Lost in a sea of Slack messages.

Problems Stay Hidden Longer 

Remember that architectural decision that seemed fine in writing but would obviously be problematic if someone had just spoken up? It just went into production.

Simple Issues Become Complex 

What could have been a 5-minute conversation turns into 2 days of back-and-forth messages. Questions that could have been resolved immediately take hours or days.

Product Understanding Suffers 

Engineers build exactly what's specified - not what users actually need. The gap between technical implementation and business value widens with every sprint.

Team Culture Erodes 

New team members struggle to integrate. Junior developers don't know who to ask for help. Senior developers become isolated knowledge silos.

Decision-Making Slows 

Without real-time discussion, simple decisions drag on. Every technical choice requires a thread of messages. Momentum stalls.

I see this pattern repeatedly at Full Scale when companies come to us after trying to go fully async: Their development velocity looks good on paper, but their product impact has plummeted.

Why Some Teams Can't Go Fully Async

I've identified two critical factors that determine whether a team can succeed with minimal face time:

The Courage Factor

Courage in software development isn't about being brave. It's about being honest.

True courage looks like:

• Admitting when you don't understand requirements

• Challenging architectural decisions that don't make sense

• Raising red flags before problems become disasters

• Asking "stupid" questions in front of the team

• Acknowledging when you're stuck

Without courage, async communication becomes dangerous.

Team members hide their confusion behind thumbs-up emojis.

They interpret requirements without asking clarifying questions.

They struggle silently instead of seeking help.

I've seen teams waste months building the wrong thing because no one had the courage to say, "I don't understand why we're doing this."

The Ownership Factor

Ownership goes beyond taking responsibility for assigned tasks. It's about caring deeply about outcomes.

Real ownership manifests as:

• Thinking through edge cases without being asked

• Raising concerns about long-term maintainability

• Suggesting alternative approaches to problems

• Following through on implications of changes

• Caring about user impact, not just code quality

Without ownership, async work becomes mechanical ticket-closing.

Developers build exactly what's specified - no more, no less - even when they see better solutions.

How These Factors Interact

Here's where it gets interesting: Courage and ownership reinforce each other.

When team members feel true ownership, they're more likely to speak up (courage).

When they feel safe speaking up, they're more likely to take ownership of outcomes.

But both qualities need nurturing.

They rarely develop through Slack messages and JIRA tickets alone.

This is why some face-to-face time remains crucial, especially for:

• Building psychological safety

• Demonstrating what good ownership looks like

• Creating space for "dumb" questions

• Showing that challenges are welcomed

• Developing trust between team members

The Six Reasons Face Time Still Matters

Even with courageous teams who take ownership, here's why some face-to-face time remains crucial:

Product Knowledge Text can't replace the power of storytelling about user problems. I've seen teams spend months building features that missed the mark because they never heard the customer's story firsthand.

True Understanding Body language matters. When I explain a complex requirement, I need to see if someone really understands or is just nodding along.

Problem Detection Some issues only surface when you ask probing questions in real-time. The best managers can sense when something's wrong by how their team responds.

Coordination Quick sync-ups prevent days of back-and-forth messages. Five minutes of face time can save hours of miscommunication.

Action Forcing Let's be honest - meetings create accountability. Sometimes that scheduled check-in is what drives decisions forward.

Team Bonding You can't build trust through text alone. The strongest teams I've built all had real human connections.

Finding the Right Balance

The solution isn't daily status meetings. Those are as wasteful as they are painful.

Instead, focus face time on:

• Collaborative problem-solving

• Product vision sharing

• Team relationship building

• Complex coordination

Keep it small (2-3 people for problem-solving, max 10 for larger discussions) and purposeful.

The Bottom Line

Your developers aren't code-producing machines that function best in isolation.

They're problem solvers who need context, connection, and collaboration to build great products.

The most successful teams I've built have found the sweet spot: Async for deep work and documentation, face time for understanding and alignment.

Great products aren't built through chat messages alone.

Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here!