The problem is that the answer to this is heavily dependent on what it is, especially because "got a sec" doesn't meaningfully time box the activity. I need something more to know whether this is something I can engage in immediately.
That is what “busy” statuses are for, most good IM solutions support this. If I message someone while they are set that way I accept they will ignore me until a later time. Even if not set to busy, I and accept a non-immediate response. For me in a professional context IM has become short-form email, with the advantage very-low priority cruft¹, and external comms², are not mixed in with local conversations.
[1] HR updates & other periodicals, mailing lists, unsolicited junk, alerts that I'm 2nd-or-plus-line contact for, ...
[2] which for me are not usually a priority as I'm not supposed to be client facing, if I'm contacted directly instead of the client using a proper support channel they'll get a slower response than via the proper channel³⁴, anything else encourages the incorrect behaviour!
[3] officially, direct comms like that are not covered by any SLA even if the same request via proper channels would get the “grade A, class 1, priority 0, emergency, all hands to their stations” treatment
[4] unless, of course, I'm expecting their contact as part of an ongoing issue I've been drafted in to deal with
It's 2022, chat app statuses are more sophisticated than just "online/offline" indicators. It will tell you if I'm busy, if I'm in a call, if I'm presenting, if I've been AFK, etc. If I'm online and none of those statuses are true, I can probably engage now.
"If I want to leave a message for someone with a response accepted at their convenience, then I send an email. If I reach out via chat, it's because I expect a realtime exchange. Again, because the little green dot appears next to user's name does not mean they are not deep in the tall grass and readily available to chat."
Saying "hello" before asking a question doesn't somehow increase the chances that I will be more available. You can ask what you need in the first message, and if I can't respond despite my chat status, I will get to it when I can, at which point we can have the realtime discussion. You don't get a realtime exchange by saying "hello" and then waiting for an answer.
"To me, chat is just like walking up to someone at the cubicle to have a conversation."
Except it's not. There is a distinct difference in the mode of communication here. You wouldn't walk up to someone's desk, hand them a letter, and then leave, but that's exactly what you can do with a chat. While chat is more real-time than email, it is still a written record and it's slower than an actual conversation; as a result, it comes with its own set of pros and cons that facilitate things differently.
"If I walk up to someone and notice they are deep in it, I don't bother them. Chat doesn't allow for that kind of signaling, so a "got a sec?" isn't a wast of time as it allows for them to not reply indicating "no" without stopping to type "no"."
Again, it does signal that, with status icons. And even if my status is green but I happen to still be busy for some reason, a chat notification is a chat notification. Saying "hello" is as much an intrusion as saying "hello, I have this problem with <x>, can you help me?" -- except if you just say "hello", then I have to respond and then wait more time for a second intrusive notification to find out what you need.
>And even if my status is green but I happen to still be busy for some reason, a chat notification is a chat notification. Saying "hello" is as much an intrusion as saying "hello, I have this problem with <x>, can you help me?" -- except if you just say "hello", then I have to respond and then wait more time for a second intrusive notification to find out what you need.
Yup, that's the key. The cost per distracting notification is _vastly_ higher than the cost per word read, so chat notifications should be crafted to minimise individual notifications more than words.
This is not a reasonable expectation, and is why people ignore your attempts to initiate a real-time exchange.
I don’t make that assumption. My company is distributed across the globe. Some teams are offset by 12.5 hours. For someone not collocated, chat (via Slack) is closer to email except more focused.
I expect people to response to chats “at their earliest convenience”. If they are in different time zones, we try to pack as much into each response to maximize the communications. If they are collocated, once we start a conversation it usually continues in realtime.