[version_five]

It's too bad this didnt lead to a discussion, I'd be curious to know what different people think.

I like Calendly a lot, it saves a lot of time, certainly more than some more polite scheduling method.

But asking others to find time in your calendar definitely has a power dynamic aspect to it, even if it shouldn't. It's the same as someone asking you to find time in a shared calendar at work (even though that in principle is worse, because the requester could have done the same in that case).

Maybe the solution is a more widely used calendar standard, where you can ask people to share their availability and find a time yourself.

Bottom line, if I was doing any kind of jockeying for power and someone sent me their calendly, I'd ignore it. On a day to day basis, it's easier, but you're showing your lower status vs the requester, even if that's as stupid as it sounds.

[bandyaboot]

I was recently in the job market and there were a few instances where a recruiter would reach out to me, ask if some job opening sounded interesting to me, then ultimately send me their calendly link to book a meeting. It was a little off-putting at first, but that was ultimately resolved with a “get over yourself” internal dialogue moment.

[version_five]

Yeah in that situation, I like to think it really is more efficient and it makes sense to give up preconceptions about etiquette. It seems to me (and I know it's silly) it's fine to use it for more impersonal stuff, but more touchy for scheduling amongst notional peers or people of similar standing, where it sort of automatically signals the requestor is more important than the time picker.

One thing to add, I've actually asked for people to send me a calendly before, I think that's a good social compromise for everyone- it let's me feel like I initiated the transaction, and overall we still get to schedule efficiently.

[musicale]

> it sort of automatically signals the requestor is more important than the time picker

This is precisely the problem with Calendly and why I'd never recommend it.

[chexx]

This is a stretch. How does scheduling a meeting turn into an emotional battle?

[gopher_space]

Ask this again once you've worked for someone who wants to be a manager more than they want to manage people.

[jeffinpdx]

I like that. Ask them for their scheduling link.

[jeffinpdx]

Do you think this would have landed better if the recruiter would have first asked you for YOUR availability before sending their link? Or was it just the act of sending a link of any type that required a click on your part?

[saganus]

I actually find Calendly useful for recruitment interactions.

Even though it might seem like the recruiter's time is more important, to me it feels the opposite.

When recruiters ask for my availability, I need to reserve that availability until they get back to me. Often they ask for 3 to 4 slots of time, which depending on the week, might be hard to find, and then those slots are blocked.

When they send me a Calendly link, I can pick whatever slot works best for me and I then only that slot is blocked for me.

I recently went through an Amazon interview round and I had to send them my availability three times because none of the slots I sent worked for their interviewers, which really wasn't ideal and feels like their time was much more important than mine.

For regular meetings though, unless it's my manager or a higher up, I do agree that it feels like whoever sends the Calendly link is in control.

[bandyaboot]

Yeah I do think that would have helped.

[atonse]

I don’t use calendly but do feel the current “organic” way is broken (manually eyeball and type out times)

I did like the last approach the most though. Have something like calendly spit out your available times and you paste it into your email message.

They can click on what may work for them. This way it feels like you’ve done some work.

The other thing maybe could be that calendly can generate out your availability in a sentence form that can be pasted in. “I’ve got availability from 10-3 tomorrow, or 10-11 Wednesday” etc.

The point is that you still suggest times in the message but aren’t writing it all out yourself. Keeps it a bit more personal.

[jeffinpdx]

Yeah, I feel like the sender should do the extra work of embedding the times in an email. I like your idea of a script that's auto-generated.

[ShakataGaNai]

But what happens when a person is busy and only has 30mn here and there? A huge blob of text for available times? What about when they get scheduled for a meeting 5 minutes after they send out that auto-generated blob? You could very well pick a time, set it aside, create calendar invites, etc... just to find out they _aren't_ actually available at that time.

[jeffinpdx]

It's a good point. There is a feature which allows the sender to "reserve times" in a one-off meeting. That way, they don't get booked before you have an opportunity to select a time.

[pixl97]

>if I was doing any kind of jockeying for power and someone sent me their calendly, I'd ignore it

In general when someone in a lessor power position tries that, I fill in a bunch of empty times with filler meetings and let them pick from the smaller number of choices given to them.

[jeffinpdx]

Hey, there. I wrote the post. I agree: From my experience people "jockeying for power" tend to get the most irritated by a scheduling link getting dropped on them without some sort of niceties surrounding it.