> This is inferior to the pop-in for the interrupter, but superior for the interruptee
I don't see how either of those are true for phone calls.
1. It's ideal for the interrupter: they get to decide when they want your time. They want it now.
2. It's annoying for the interruptee, because you only have two options. Either you can pick up the phone now and force a hard context switch away what you were doing, or you can reject the call and spend more time later listening through voicemails. And unless you have voicemail transcriptions, you're at the complete mercy of the interrupter again.
Compare that to asynchronous text-based communication, where the interrupter can't forcefully take your time from you. They can only message you, and you can decide when to read it. Reading the message doesn't cede control of your time to them, and you can adjust the actual time of the call to accommodate whatever you're working on.
I don't see how either of those are true for phone calls.
1. It's ideal for the interrupter: they get to decide when they want your time. They want it now.
2. It's annoying for the interruptee, because you only have two options. Either you can pick up the phone now and force a hard context switch away what you were doing, or you can reject the call and spend more time later listening through voicemails. And unless you have voicemail transcriptions, you're at the complete mercy of the interrupter again.
Compare that to asynchronous text-based communication, where the interrupter can't forcefully take your time from you. They can only message you, and you can decide when to read it. Reading the message doesn't cede control of your time to them, and you can adjust the actual time of the call to accommodate whatever you're working on.