COMMENTS: 41
Maybe E-mail Isn't Such a Great Idea, After All
Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Economy headlines via email.
"I don't even have an e-mail account," he says. "When I tell that to the executives I work with, first they look at me with surprise, and then they look at me with envy."
Dr. Siegel, a psychologist and president of Impact Group, management consultants in Los Angeles, is on a bit of a crusade. He wants there to be less e-mail in the world. So he's helping his business clients organize activities such as a "no e-mail Friday" in order to increase productivity.
That's right: increase productivity.
"E-mail is not a communication device, it's a broadcasting device," says Siegel. "It will actually truncate communication. And in the truest sense of the word, it has become a psychological dependency. We have convinced ourselves that we can't live without it."
E-mail takes up more and more of our time at work, according to Radicati Group, a Palo Alto, Calif., research and consulting firm. E-mails sent by a company's workers are projected to increase 27 percent this year, to an average of 47 a day -- up from 37 a day in 2006. And that's not the upper ranks of a company, where even more e-mails can accumulate.
The question then becomes "Do we really want our company to be spending so much of its time doing something that ultimately isn't productive?"
But how can we live without it?
Take, for example, my full-time job at National Public Radio. I get e-mails nonstop all day long: e-mails about stories, e-mails from human resources, e-mails about people looking for lost Blackberrys or books that they left in a recording booth, e-mails purportedly from high-ranking folks in Nigeria who want to give me lots of money, e-mail about ... You get the picture.
I can almost hear Siegel smiling on the phone as I recite this litany. He's obviously heard this before. "And how many of those e-mails are you really glad you got?"
Truthfully? Not all of them, for sure.
That's his point exactly. Siegel says people need to consider how much e-mail adds "to the value of their days." Most of the executives he works with say they spend two to three hours a day on e-mail (about 150 to 250 messages) and on average only 16 to 19 percent of those messages met the value-added criterion.
Siegel is also blunt about another use for e-mail.
"E-mail has become the 21st century's 'cover your butt' technique of choice," he says. "It's also become the interpersonal coward's device of choice."
People will send e-mail as a way to avoid dealing with an issue, by pointedly not dealing with it in a quick, prompt manner, he says. If you have a problem that needs to be solved quickly, e-mail is almost always the worst way to approach that solution.
And the problem has grown worse as more and more businesses expect employees to use personal digital assistants such as Blackberrys and Treos. Once upon a time, we only had to worry about e-mail when we were at our desks. Now it follows us around, virtually tugging at our sleeves, demanding that we pay attention.
When Siegel works with business executives, he tries to give them strategies to tame the digital beast and get more value from their work.
Thus "No e-mail Fridays" were born. But it was not a painless birth for many who tried it. In a recent piece in The Wall Street Journal, Nancy Flynn, executive director of the ePolicy Institute, a Columbus, Ohio, training and consulting firm, supported the idea of no e-mail one day a week. But she included a warning: "When you try to take e-mail away from some users, they're going to panic."
Panic? I would expect riots.
Ever seen people with their Blackberrys? It's like watching Pavlov's dog. The moment the stimulus is given (an e-mail arrives), the response is provoked: "Must answer now!"
Siegel agrees that it's not easy. But the benefit, he says, is -- yes -- increased productivity once you get over those initial panic attacks.
Siegel says once people can't rely on e-mail, problems are solved more quickly. An e-mail string that might bounce back and forth in six to 12 messages over a day or two sometimes can be solved with a 10-minute face-to-face meeting. And that face-to-face thing actually improves relationships.
Siegel offers other ideas. One executive he worked with started blocking all messages on which he was cc'd. After a while, people realized that if they wanted this executive to help solve an issue, they would have to talk to him in person.
Siegel knows that e-mail is a part of our working world now, and there's no turning back. But he also believes that it's time we grabbed the e-mail bull by its horns and wrestle it into submission. E-mail should not dictate how we operate at work, or even at home, he says.
"E-mail is a tool with clear and viable uses and benefits," Siegel concludes. "Communication isn't one of them. Businesses and individuals need to set guidelines when it should be used and when it shouldn't be used. And we'll all be better off once we do it."
Stay up to date with the latest Economy headlines via email
Comments are closed-
Posted by: masumane on Oct 18, 2007 2:34 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But sometimes on has to send out an email. Following
email rules is a good habit when sending email.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» www.votenic.com
Posted by: votenic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Oct 18, 2007 2:33 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you need information from someone, but they keep ignoring your phone messages or putting you off, you can send an e-mail to them, cc your manager, their manager, etc. to add a little fire to it. I'm not saying it gets results all of the time, but at least it covers you, and puts the ball officially in their court...It can provide the little guy a bit of protection in the hostile corporate environment.
The ones I can do without are all the shotgun emails about Eskimo History Month, bigwig propaganda, etc...
I see nothing wrong with using e-mail as a communication device; dealing with the excesses is a small price to pay. This just sounds like more Big Brother trying to control people's behavior and access to resources.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: But...
Posted by: Phenix
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bttl on Oct 18, 2007 3:46 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And then there are cell-phones, the new "can't live without it" item-talk about a Pavlovian response when a call comes through. I DON"T have a cell phone and don't plan on getting one either; e-mail is enough of a time drain...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I do
Posted by: photon's feather
Comments are closed-
Posted by: socialpsych on Oct 18, 2007 4:00 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's no coincidence
Posted by: Shey
» RE: It's no coincidence
Posted by: LMNOP
» Socrates Made the Same Argument
Posted by: pdxstudent
Comments are closed-
Posted by: laragan on Oct 18, 2007 4:30 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Shey on Oct 18, 2007 4:50 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Spam is not a problem with any decent security system. And as for the Pavlovian response to both email and cell phones .... at least in your personal life .... turn off the cell, that's what your voice mail is for. Same thing with a blackberry or any text messaging system. Just because you own one doesn't mean you have to be a slave to it. It's up to us to decide whether we use communication technology, or allow it to use us.
I'd be lost without my personal email, but I use it, it doesn't dictate to me when or how. Even my land line answering machine is always on. Not even an unlisted number protects you from telemarketers. And anyone who doesn't understand that I screen my calls is not someone I want to talk to anyhow.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: deborama on Oct 18, 2007 4:50 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why should I stop what I'm doing because this is a convenient time for you to talk to me? The incessant ringing of the phone at work bugs me a lot more than any flood of emails, which I am totally free to ignore until I'm at a good time to stop and read them.
Sure, face-to-face may be best for some things, but for most communications it's not necessary and a complete waste of money. It's high time we realized we don't need to assemble bodies in rooms to get things done. We all drive way too much and for what? When most of what we do could easily be accomplished remotely, saving the planet in the mean time.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I vastly prefer email to phone calls
Posted by: phatkhat
» RE: I vastly prefer email to phone calls
Posted by: rcusol
» RE: I vastly prefer email to phone calls
Posted by: jmooney
Comments are closed-
Posted by: R.I.P. on Oct 18, 2007 5:21 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Telephones
Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Telephones
Posted by: VZEQICVA
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SufiLizard on Oct 18, 2007 5:33 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If I pass someone in the hall and they ask me for some information, there's about a 50/50 chance I'll forget about it by the time I get back to my office. If they e-mail me, I have it right there in writing and it is just sitting there in my inbox until I take care of it and can delete or file the e-mail.
Sometimes I can't get in touch with somebody in person, or on the phone. With e-mail I can tell them what I need to tell them, or ask them what I need to ask them without both of us happening to have a free minute at the exact same time.
E-mail isn't appropriate for everything. It's not a replacement for face-to-face contact or in-person meetings. But the author's premise that e-mail is not a communication tool I think is absolutely false.
Sometimes things NEED to be hashed out in person. Sometimes a phone conversation is the best option. But sometimes e-mail actually is the best way to handle an important communication.
The key is understanding the strengths and weaknesses of each communication channel and know how to appropriately use the tools at your disposal.
E-mail's just not a bad thing. But SPAM is. I think better filters or even challenge-response systems are essential.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hagwind on Oct 18, 2007 5:50 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The overreaction is sort of interesting. If a friend suggests to me that maybe I shouldn't drink alcohol when I'm stressed-out and I react with a belligerent "Are you calling me an alcoholic?" -- well, maybe I do have a problem. At the very least, my defensiveness needs a little looking into.
I'm self-employed and work at home. I use e-mail to communicate with clients, to get questions answered, to answer other people's questions, etc., etc. I say I couldn't live without it, though I probably could (at least for short periods). I say I don't know how I managed before I had it (but I did -- we all did, and not all that long ago). Nevertheless, I can see ways in which e-mail has changed the way I communicate, and not always for the better. For instance, I fall into the habit of expecting people to respond ASAP to my requests, like within the hour. If they haven't responded within 24 hours, I'm convinced they're dead. The truth of the matter is often that (1) I left my request to the last minute, and/or (2) my correspondent is under no obligation to drop everything in order to answer my question.
When I'm in procrastination mode, I check e-mail every hour, even when I'm not expecting anything important. Because I'm self-employed and have deadlines to meet, my work gets done, but it may take six or seven hours instead of five. So, yeah, I think e-mail can decrease productivity -- which is not to say that it can't also increase productivity. It affects the way we communicate with each other, and those changes bear some looking at.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Whoa there!
Posted by: DaBear
» RE: Whoa there!
Posted by: hagwind
Comments are closed-
Posted by: chaoslegs on Oct 18, 2007 6:49 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Sometimes e-mail helps
Posted by: rcusol
» RE: Sometimes e-mail helps
Posted by: DaBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Oct 18, 2007 7:21 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: KeeperofStars on Oct 18, 2007 7:39 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, let them give it up while the rest of us use it to our advantage.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: No Email for Execs Starting NOW
Posted by: DaBear
» RE: No Email for Execs Starting NOW
Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: No Email for Execs Starting NOW
Posted by: VZEQICVA
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leftymathprof on Oct 18, 2007 7:49 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Smiggsy on Oct 18, 2007 8:52 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By golly I don't even know anybody who posts a comment from a bar of soap.......who the f@ck are you posters?. Trash collecting - Its just like spam.
Why do i care what you all think about these stories, dammit you shouldn't even be reading this (why did i even bother to do this.........why?......)
btw this is a joke people...lol & the irony!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: anothername on Oct 18, 2007 9:03 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
E-mail has caused changes to the U.S. Postal Service. Is this good or bad? The USPS serves everybody everywhere, which is not feasible with e-mail, yet. There are a few other alternatives to the USPS and there have been problems with service delivery that e-mail has made less irritating. Still, we have the question of what do we do with the USPS in an era of e-mail.
Individual time spent on e-mail is only part of the cost. IT staff in large companies must regularly guard against cyber attacks related to e-mail, down to every laptop. IT staff also regularly work to reduced server space needed by undeleted e-mail. What is the cost to productivity of these non-revenue generating staff members?
How do we assess whether an e-mail has been received, shunted to junk mail by a router, or just been buried? A small business owner having to sort through mail, phone messages, electronic mail, and all the other tasks can have productivity decreased by e-mail. However, some people's businesses are based entirely on e-mail and that makes their work possible.
It seems as though e-mail was built up by assorted management as the next big thing. Now that it has become that Big Thing, it is a problem that needs managed. Unfortunately, managing the monster is much less fun, much less exciting, and much harder than creating it.
In some situations, picking up the telephone is not an alternative to e-mail. There is one foundation-funded news site on the Internet with which I deal sometimes that has no way to contact the editors except through e-mail. Even then, the editors do not respond. I do not know if they are ignoring readers concerned about accuracy and quality of news content, or if they just never received the e-mail. There is also the question of how e-mail has changed Congress. It’s much easier for a congressional office, or even a local school member’s office, to be flooded with pre-scripted e-mails. Does this improve democracy or merely allow a few people to use e-mail to dominate opinions expressed?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» How many emails to your congressman does it take to change a lightbulb?
Posted by: Coleman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DaBear on Oct 18, 2007 9:28 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By an large the article is typical of the bad writing that is rampant these days---make a headline, byline claim open with a lead that matches then undo it in the middle then reassemble it, as a ragged disclaimer by the end. Thesis 101, people: you either make a claim and prove it or disprove it, don't go into a whole disclaimer bullshit about the real problem is mis-use of email when you're trying to wail about email as the enemy. You don't get to have it both ways, no more wiggling journalists. Course, maybe it's because of email..... The real analysis of the situation was posed better by most of the commentors: email mis-used is shite. Execs eschewing email make a good point, but they're really hiding behind their own shite, which email brings to the surface for all to see and well, we can't have aristocrats being called out on their own shite now can we?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» And maybe "decreasing productivity" isn't a bad thing?
Posted by: hagwind
Comments are closed-
Posted by: BlueTigress on Oct 18, 2007 9:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The exec who blocked all "cc" email does have a point. Me, personally, I never cc'd anyone unless I thought they needed to know about the content. If I wanted their help, I would ask.
Some emails take the place of paper memos and should be handled accordingly. Glance at them and file.
Subject lines should be informative. That way you can read it and decide if you need to look at it now or it can wait. No every email needs to be dealt with immediately.
A little common sense all the way around would help.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Oct 18, 2007 10:02 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ross Perot, conservative right-wing Ross Perot, proposed a national referendum system. Slightly more than 20 states have a referendum system. Without participatory democracy we are not going to have democracy. We must take our own fate into our own hands. Our representatives no longer represent us.
I say that where democracy is concerned, it is not possible to have too much of it. It is not possible to be radical.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: InsertNameHere on Oct 18, 2007 10:07 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That said, there is a fair amount of email that is useless. Sometimes you end up involved in an email 'conversation' because you were CC'd on an email that people respond back and forth on, but don't seem to be know when they should use reply, or reply to all.
There are other people that send email whenever they have a thought. These people are annoying. There is also an unwritten rule that I have known to hold true in life. That is: the further up the managerial ladder that the email originates, the shorter and more curt the content. Lower ranked employees tend to write longer emails with larger explanations, upper management tend to respond to such emails with: ' Can we follow up on this? Please advise' .
I'm a bit of a stickler for form, so I always use salutations and end with an appropriate complementary closing.Typically I follow standard business letter writing form. I do this even for short emails and replies. It's just good form. I only ever get informal if the person is an associate of equal rank who is a good friend. I also check for spelling and grammar using that long-forgotten tool; proof-reading. Often I will write a long email and upon proof-reading will find a more clear and concise way to express my message. It doesn't take long and it doesn't hurt to think about what you actually want to say. Especially when responding to an email that angers you.
It's amazing how much potential embarrassment you can spare yourself by actually checking to see what you wrote. Not that senior executives follow this rule, but it depends on the person. It's a shame how one of the most important tools in business, the ability to communicate well regardless of medium, has slipped so far. If your spelling and grammar are so poor that the meaning of your message is lost, then you are a liability to your company.
Then there are the Blackberry people. I realize it's hard to compose a well written email on a PDA, but there really should be standards. Send a quick, concise message and wait until you can follow up at your PC.
One rule I follow strictly is that my work email is for work only. You can never expect privacy on a company intranet, so keep it business related. Don't bad mouth other people over email because it is easily seen by I.T., and with today's email clients, it's all to easy to send out your smart remark about a co-worker or a superior company wide or to become a victim of the auto-fill to: field. I shouldn't even have to mention forwarding dirty jokes, why risk your job?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pdxstudent on Oct 21, 2007 8:19 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: masumane on Oct 18, 2007 2:34 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But sometimes on has to send out an email. Following
email rules is a good habit when sending email.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» www.votenic.com
Posted by: votenic
Comments are closed-
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Oct 18, 2007 2:33 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If you need information from someone, but they keep ignoring your phone messages or putting you off, you can send an e-mail to them, cc your manager, their manager, etc. to add a little fire to it. I'm not saying it gets results all of the time, but at least it covers you, and puts the ball officially in their court...It can provide the little guy a bit of protection in the hostile corporate environment.
The ones I can do without are all the shotgun emails about Eskimo History Month, bigwig propaganda, etc...
I see nothing wrong with using e-mail as a communication device; dealing with the excesses is a small price to pay. This just sounds like more Big Brother trying to control people's behavior and access to resources.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: But...
Posted by: Phenix
Comments are closed-
Posted by: bttl on Oct 18, 2007 3:46 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And then there are cell-phones, the new "can't live without it" item-talk about a Pavlovian response when a call comes through. I DON"T have a cell phone and don't plan on getting one either; e-mail is enough of a time drain...
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» I do
Posted by: photon's feather
Comments are closed-
Posted by: socialpsych on Oct 18, 2007 4:00 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: It's no coincidence
Posted by: Shey
» RE: It's no coincidence
Posted by: LMNOP
» Socrates Made the Same Argument
Posted by: pdxstudent
Comments are closed-
Posted by: laragan on Oct 18, 2007 4:30 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Shey on Oct 18, 2007 4:50 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Spam is not a problem with any decent security system. And as for the Pavlovian response to both email and cell phones .... at least in your personal life .... turn off the cell, that's what your voice mail is for. Same thing with a blackberry or any text messaging system. Just because you own one doesn't mean you have to be a slave to it. It's up to us to decide whether we use communication technology, or allow it to use us.
I'd be lost without my personal email, but I use it, it doesn't dictate to me when or how. Even my land line answering machine is always on. Not even an unlisted number protects you from telemarketers. And anyone who doesn't understand that I screen my calls is not someone I want to talk to anyhow.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: deborama on Oct 18, 2007 4:50 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why should I stop what I'm doing because this is a convenient time for you to talk to me? The incessant ringing of the phone at work bugs me a lot more than any flood of emails, which I am totally free to ignore until I'm at a good time to stop and read them.
Sure, face-to-face may be best for some things, but for most communications it's not necessary and a complete waste of money. It's high time we realized we don't need to assemble bodies in rooms to get things done. We all drive way too much and for what? When most of what we do could easily be accomplished remotely, saving the planet in the mean time.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: I vastly prefer email to phone calls
Posted by: phatkhat
» RE: I vastly prefer email to phone calls
Posted by: rcusol
» RE: I vastly prefer email to phone calls
Posted by: jmooney
Comments are closed-
Posted by: R.I.P. on Oct 18, 2007 5:21 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Telephones
Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: Telephones
Posted by: VZEQICVA
Comments are closed-
Posted by: SufiLizard on Oct 18, 2007 5:33 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If I pass someone in the hall and they ask me for some information, there's about a 50/50 chance I'll forget about it by the time I get back to my office. If they e-mail me, I have it right there in writing and it is just sitting there in my inbox until I take care of it and can delete or file the e-mail.
Sometimes I can't get in touch with somebody in person, or on the phone. With e-mail I can tell them what I need to tell them, or ask them what I need to ask them without both of us happening to have a free minute at the exact same time.
E-mail isn't appropriate for everything. It's not a replacement for face-to-face contact or in-person meetings. But the author's premise that e-mail is not a communication tool I think is absolutely false.
Sometimes things NEED to be hashed out in person. Sometimes a phone conversation is the best option. But sometimes e-mail actually is the best way to handle an important communication.
The key is understanding the strengths and weaknesses of each communication channel and know how to appropriately use the tools at your disposal.
E-mail's just not a bad thing. But SPAM is. I think better filters or even challenge-response systems are essential.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: hagwind on Oct 18, 2007 5:50 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The overreaction is sort of interesting. If a friend suggests to me that maybe I shouldn't drink alcohol when I'm stressed-out and I react with a belligerent "Are you calling me an alcoholic?" -- well, maybe I do have a problem. At the very least, my defensiveness needs a little looking into.
I'm self-employed and work at home. I use e-mail to communicate with clients, to get questions answered, to answer other people's questions, etc., etc. I say I couldn't live without it, though I probably could (at least for short periods). I say I don't know how I managed before I had it (but I did -- we all did, and not all that long ago). Nevertheless, I can see ways in which e-mail has changed the way I communicate, and not always for the better. For instance, I fall into the habit of expecting people to respond ASAP to my requests, like within the hour. If they haven't responded within 24 hours, I'm convinced they're dead. The truth of the matter is often that (1) I left my request to the last minute, and/or (2) my correspondent is under no obligation to drop everything in order to answer my question.
When I'm in procrastination mode, I check e-mail every hour, even when I'm not expecting anything important. Because I'm self-employed and have deadlines to meet, my work gets done, but it may take six or seven hours instead of five. So, yeah, I think e-mail can decrease productivity -- which is not to say that it can't also increase productivity. It affects the way we communicate with each other, and those changes bear some looking at.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Whoa there!
Posted by: DaBear
» RE: Whoa there!
Posted by: hagwind
Comments are closed-
Posted by: chaoslegs on Oct 18, 2007 6:49 AM
Current rating: 4 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: Sometimes e-mail helps
Posted by: rcusol
» RE: Sometimes e-mail helps
Posted by: DaBear
Comments are closed-
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Oct 18, 2007 7:21 AM
Current rating: 1 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: KeeperofStars on Oct 18, 2007 7:39 AM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So, let them give it up while the rest of us use it to our advantage.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» RE: No Email for Execs Starting NOW
Posted by: DaBear
» RE: No Email for Execs Starting NOW
Posted by: VZEQICVA
» RE: No Email for Execs Starting NOW
Posted by: VZEQICVA
Comments are closed-
Posted by: leftymathprof on Oct 18, 2007 7:49 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Smiggsy on Oct 18, 2007 8:52 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By golly I don't even know anybody who posts a comment from a bar of soap.......who the f@ck are you posters?. Trash collecting - Its just like spam.
Why do i care what you all think about these stories, dammit you shouldn't even be reading this (why did i even bother to do this.........why?......)
btw this is a joke people...lol & the irony!
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: anothername on Oct 18, 2007 9:03 AM
Current rating: 5 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
E-mail has caused changes to the U.S. Postal Service. Is this good or bad? The USPS serves everybody everywhere, which is not feasible with e-mail, yet. There are a few other alternatives to the USPS and there have been problems with service delivery that e-mail has made less irritating. Still, we have the question of what do we do with the USPS in an era of e-mail.
Individual time spent on e-mail is only part of the cost. IT staff in large companies must regularly guard against cyber attacks related to e-mail, down to every laptop. IT staff also regularly work to reduced server space needed by undeleted e-mail. What is the cost to productivity of these non-revenue generating staff members?
How do we assess whether an e-mail has been received, shunted to junk mail by a router, or just been buried? A small business owner having to sort through mail, phone messages, electronic mail, and all the other tasks can have productivity decreased by e-mail. However, some people's businesses are based entirely on e-mail and that makes their work possible.
It seems as though e-mail was built up by assorted management as the next big thing. Now that it has become that Big Thing, it is a problem that needs managed. Unfortunately, managing the monster is much less fun, much less exciting, and much harder than creating it.
In some situations, picking up the telephone is not an alternative to e-mail. There is one foundation-funded news site on the Internet with which I deal sometimes that has no way to contact the editors except through e-mail. Even then, the editors do not respond. I do not know if they are ignoring readers concerned about accuracy and quality of news content, or if they just never received the e-mail. There is also the question of how e-mail has changed Congress. It’s much easier for a congressional office, or even a local school member’s office, to be flooded with pre-scripted e-mails. Does this improve democracy or merely allow a few people to use e-mail to dominate opinions expressed?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» How many emails to your congressman does it take to change a lightbulb?
Posted by: Coleman
Comments are closed-
Posted by: DaBear on Oct 18, 2007 9:28 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
By an large the article is typical of the bad writing that is rampant these days---make a headline, byline claim open with a lead that matches then undo it in the middle then reassemble it, as a ragged disclaimer by the end. Thesis 101, people: you either make a claim and prove it or disprove it, don't go into a whole disclaimer bullshit about the real problem is mis-use of email when you're trying to wail about email as the enemy. You don't get to have it both ways, no more wiggling journalists. Course, maybe it's because of email..... The real analysis of the situation was posed better by most of the commentors: email mis-used is shite. Execs eschewing email make a good point, but they're really hiding behind their own shite, which email brings to the surface for all to see and well, we can't have aristocrats being called out on their own shite now can we?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
» And maybe "decreasing productivity" isn't a bad thing?
Posted by: hagwind
Comments are closed-
Posted by: BlueTigress on Oct 18, 2007 9:45 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The exec who blocked all "cc" email does have a point. Me, personally, I never cc'd anyone unless I thought they needed to know about the content. If I wanted their help, I would ask.
Some emails take the place of paper memos and should be handled accordingly. Glance at them and file.
Subject lines should be informative. That way you can read it and decide if you need to look at it now or it can wait. No every email needs to be dealt with immediately.
A little common sense all the way around would help.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on Oct 18, 2007 10:02 PM
Current rating: 3 [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ross Perot, conservative right-wing Ross Perot, proposed a national referendum system. Slightly more than 20 states have a referendum system. Without participatory democracy we are not going to have democracy. We must take our own fate into our own hands. Our representatives no longer represent us.
I say that where democracy is concerned, it is not possible to have too much of it. It is not possible to be radical.
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: InsertNameHere on Oct 18, 2007 10:07 PM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That said, there is a fair amount of email that is useless. Sometimes you end up involved in an email 'conversation' because you were CC'd on an email that people respond back and forth on, but don't seem to be know when they should use reply, or reply to all.
There are other people that send email whenever they have a thought. These people are annoying. There is also an unwritten rule that I have known to hold true in life. That is: the further up the managerial ladder that the email originates, the shorter and more curt the content. Lower ranked employees tend to write longer emails with larger explanations, upper management tend to respond to such emails with: ' Can we follow up on this? Please advise' .
I'm a bit of a stickler for form, so I always use salutations and end with an appropriate complementary closing.Typically I follow standard business letter writing form. I do this even for short emails and replies. It's just good form. I only ever get informal if the person is an associate of equal rank who is a good friend. I also check for spelling and grammar using that long-forgotten tool; proof-reading. Often I will write a long email and upon proof-reading will find a more clear and concise way to express my message. It doesn't take long and it doesn't hurt to think about what you actually want to say. Especially when responding to an email that angers you.
It's amazing how much potential embarrassment you can spare yourself by actually checking to see what you wrote. Not that senior executives follow this rule, but it depends on the person. It's a shame how one of the most important tools in business, the ability to communicate well regardless of medium, has slipped so far. If your spelling and grammar are so poor that the meaning of your message is lost, then you are a liability to your company.
Then there are the Blackberry people. I realize it's hard to compose a well written email on a PDA, but there really should be standards. Send a quick, concise message and wait until you can follow up at your PC.
One rule I follow strictly is that my work email is for work only. You can never expect privacy on a company intranet, so keep it business related. Don't bad mouth other people over email because it is easily seen by I.T., and with today's email clients, it's all to easy to send out your smart remark about a co-worker or a superior company wide or to become a victim of the auto-fill to: field. I shouldn't even have to mention forwarding dirty jokes, why risk your job?
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Comments are closed-
Posted by: pdxstudent on Oct 21, 2007 8:19 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]
Tax the Corporations and the Rich or Take Draconian Cuts -- the Decision Is Ours
Home Underwater? Walk Away from Geithner's Perverse 'Homeowner Relief' Plan
Fury at Wall St. Banks Fuels Public Action for Move Your Money Campaign




