Guide · 19 August 2026
Assignments do not get lost because people are careless. They get lost because the way they are handed out names no owner, no deadline and no moment to report back. Here is what actually breaks — and seven rules that fix follow-through without rolling out a heavyweight system.
Written for a work group of 5–15 people: a department, a branch office, contractors, a project team.
Four reasons. All four are about the form of the request, not about the people.
“Folks, we need that report” is addressed to everyone and therefore to no one. When several people could take it on, each of them assumes someone else will — that is not laziness but a well-known effect: the more people see a task, the less likely any one of them acts.
“By the end of the week”, “when you get a chance”, “ASAP” are not deadlines. There is no moment at which such a request becomes overdue, so there is no moment at which a reminder is due either.
No one is obliged to say “done”. The work counts as finished when the person who asked happens to find out — or never finds out and discovers the gap in a meeting.
Forty messages later the request has scrolled away. Nobody will go looking for it: it is easier to hand the same job to whoever is online right now — so the work happens twice, or not at all.
Every rule is about the form of the request, not about discipline. You can change the form today; discipline you cannot.
“Could someone handle this” is the most common shape of an assignment that never happens. Name the person. If the work is shared, split it: not “put the deck together” but “Marat — the sales slides, Dilnoza — the financials”. One person, one responsibility, one status.
Joint work without a split is fine too, but then every participant reports individually rather than the senior one reporting for all.
“By the end of the week” reads differently to everyone: Friday 6 p.m. to one person, Sunday night to another. Write “by 22 Aug, 18:00”. An exact time buys three things at once: shared understanding, a point from which the task is overdue, and the ability to remind in advance.
If the assignee sets the date rather than you (“when can you do it?”), still insist on an actual date and record it exactly like an assigned one.
When one person answers for five, you are monitoring their memory rather than everyone else’s work. The rule is simple: whoever did the work marks it done, and the assignment closes only once everyone has, not when the first person reports.
The side effect is worth more than the control itself: once the group sees progress name by name, falling behind becomes visible without anyone saying a word.
A reminder after the deadline is a post-mortem. A useful one arrives early: a day before, three hours before, an hour before. And it goes privately to whoever has not finished — a public “reminder for everyone” punishes the people who already delivered and stops working by the third time.
The group should hear about an overdue task exactly once. A daily “still not done” in the group chat gets tuned out faster than it can take effect.
“Done” is a claim by the assignee, not a fact. Until the person who asked accepts the work, the assignment is not closed. Sign-off takes seconds and removes the most common argument: “but I did it” versus “that is not what I asked for”.
Sending work back for rework should not spawn a new assignment: same history, same person, same subject — otherwise the trail is lost and the statistics lie.
A weekly report, a monthly reconciliation, opening the shift every morning — that is a schedule, not an assignment. Creating them by hand means forgetting one eventually, at the worst possible moment. A recurring assignment should appear on its own, and its absence should be noticeable.
If you have to reconstruct the state of the work from the conversation, you are not tracking, you are investigating. An assignment needs one card that updates, not ten messages about it. Open it and see: what, who, by when, and who has already reported.
Three questions every assignment must answer. If even one answer is missing, you have not assigned anything — you have expressed a wish.
A practical test: reread the message as if you were not the author. If it is unclear who exactly has to do something and at what point it counts as done, rewrite it before sending.
The rules above work on paper too — you can follow them by hand. The bot exists so that keeping them does not depend on willpower.
The mechanics are covered on the home page; how this differs from other Telegram task bots and trackers is broken down in the comparison with alternatives.
Do not migrate the old ones. Start with the next assignment: name the person, set a real due date and agree that marking it done is mandatory. Within a week you will see which assignments used to simply vanish.
For a group of 5–15 people a full tracker is usually overkill: it gets set up, the work still happens in the chat, and the system drifts away from reality. It is more practical to leave the work where it already happens and add tracking on top of the conversation.
Tracking annoys people when it is manual and public: “any update?” in the group chat. A private reminder before the deadline and a status everyone can see remove the need to ask at all.
Silence is already a signal once an assignment has a deadline and a mandatory report. First a private reminder before the deadline, then a single public notice that it is overdue. Daily nagging in the group chat does not work — people stop seeing it.
No. The assignee’s mark is a claim; what closes the assignment is your sign-off. Checking takes seconds and costs far less than discovering the wrong result a week later.
Easier to try than to read about
Add DeloPulse to a work group and assign a task to two colleagues with a deadline. The difference shows up on the very first card. Free, no sign-up.
Add the bot to a group