Choosing the channel
Two things decide it: what was promised, and what can carry it. A call-back becomes phone; a person's own work becomes task; a written commitment usually stays on the channel the conversation was on. any defers the choice until the row comes due. sms is the one to check before promising it, because outbound SMS depends on a provider that carries SMS.
What the channel actually decides#
Not the wording, and not the urgency. The channel decides who executes — which drain picks the row up, and therefore which gates it goes through, which allowance it spends, and what the customer experiences when it fires. Choosing phone for something you meant to email means a person's phone rings.
| The promise | Channel | Why |
|---|---|---|
| "I'll ring you back" | phone | The commitment was a call; anything else breaks it |
| "I'll email the details" | email | Executed through the mailbox and autonomy that own the thread |
| "I'll message you" on a WhatsApp thread | whatsapp | Continuity matters more than medium here — the person expects the same thread |
| "I'll send the quotation" | task | Nothing drains this: producing a document is a person's work |
| "I'll get back to you" | any | The promise was about content, not about a medium |
| "I'll text you" | sms | Only where a provider carries outbound SMS — see below |
How a call decides it#
follow_up_channel makes the choice from what was said. A call-back goes on phone. A person's own work — "send the quotation", "review the recording" — goes on task. And "no follow-up needed" schedules nothing at all, which is a real outcome rather than a failure to book.
That split is the useful part. Without it, every promise made on a call would land on the phone channel and the drain would ring people to tell them a document was coming, instead of somebody sending the document. When the classification is wrong, the row is editable — but check the reason first, because a task row that looks misfiled is often a promise that really was about work rather than about contact.
any, and when it earns its keep#
any means the commitment was about getting back to somebody, and the medium is open. It is the honest choice when the promise genuinely did not name one, and it lets the row be executed on whatever fits the relationship when the time comes — the thread that is already open, the address the person actually answers on.
It is the wrong choice when you know the answer. any on a commitment that was plainly a call-back loses information that was in the original conversation, and the reason field then has to carry it, which is a worse place for it.
Before you promise SMS#
Outbound SMS is provider-dependent. Inbound handling, STOP and suppression exist, but sending depends on a configured provider that carries SMS — and the live carrier does not. On that account the Phone screen says so plainly rather than presenting a thread that cannot send, and an sms follow-up scheduled there is a commitment nothing can keep.
Changing a channel after the fact#
Open the row and read the reason before changing anything.
Result You find out whether the channel is wrong or the reason is — the second is more common.
Change the channel on the existing row rather than cancelling and re-creating it.
Result The row keeps its due time, its history and its place on the person's record, and you do not trip the duplicate rule.
If you are moving something onto
phone, check the due time is still sensible.Result The phone channel closes anything more than 24 hours late instead of ringing it, so an old row moved to
phonemay be closed rather than dialled.
Questions#
If I pick any, what does Connect actually use?
Whatever fits the relationship when the row comes due — typically the thread or address the person is already being talked to on. That is the point of any: the decision is made with information you did not have when the promise was made.
Can one follow-up cover two channels?
No. One row, one channel. Two commitments — ring them, and send the document — are two rows, which is also how they end up in front of the right person: one for the drain, one for a human.
Does the channel decide who approves it?
Indirectly. Execution runs through the channel's ordinary gates, so the autonomy rule that governs that channel is the one that decides whether the action goes out or waits for a person.