Think Before You Send
February 5, 2009 by Doreen
Many people’s biggest e-mail pet peeve is the overuse of hitting “reply all.” The State Department would agree. They recently announced that they would take disciplinary action against American diplomats who unnecessarily used the “reply all” function on e-mails with large distribution lists.
American diplomats – and anyone else wanting to brush up on e-mail etiquette – should read SEND by David Shipley and Will Schwalbe, The New York Times deputy editorial page editor and former editor-in-chief of Hyperion Books, respectively.
For most of us, writing and replying to e-mails is automatic. The authors make a good case that it shouldn’t be. E-mail should be clinically dissected from who and why you CC: – and in what order … from taking the time to write a proper subject line … to making sure your response mirrors the tone and professionalism of the sender. After all, there’s a world of difference between “Thank you for making sure I got the report” and “Thank you for making sure I get the report.”
Other takeaways from the book include:
- Be careful making e-mail requests. The request that takes you ten seconds to write can take the person to whom you send it an entire day to fulfill. Even a question that’s easily answered is an interruption and to some degree an imposition.
- Exaggerate emotions for emphasis. Since it’s difficult to read emotions in email, it’s necessary to implicitly show them. One communications colleague said she ordinarily doesn’t use exclamation points in her writing but does so in e-mail to convey excitement or just generally make the e-mail sound more positive.
- Use contractions in e-mails. Not using contractions in e-mail takes a more formal tone and even sounds more severe and condescending. (The word “don’t” is a warning; the phrase “do not” is both a warning and a reprimand.)
The authors also contend that e-mail is still too fluid and evolving to stringently adhere to “rules” – since many things are situational. This sentiment echoes that of social media, and there is no doubt that books will be published on social media etiquette. In fact, many e-mail rules apply to social media … so it’s best to brush up on them to ensure a good foundation for communication.
Read the rest of this entry »
'); ?>Tags: Email
February 5th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Personally I don’t think that “reply-to-all” is the real problem with wasted mental/mail cycles.
My pet peeve is when one replies/forwards messages and does not delete all the digital cruft.
Things such as extra lines, annoying 5000 character “privacy/confidentiality” use warnings, LONG lists of previous recipients etc…
I would say that even more than replying-to-all, formatting a message (or group reply) to be more succinct (in verbiage and/or look) is more important that copying too many people.
Finally — people should learn how to use BCC properly. If you have a list of, say, 45 recipients – put all the recipients in the BCC field, put your OWN email in the TO: field.
This ELIMINATES the problem with reply-to-all completely – as the email can only be a direct reply to the original sender. It helps keep any forwards/replies clean and prevents recipients knowing who else is on the list.
–sstave
February 5th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
E-mail has become such a casual means of communication, that etiquette is too often overlooked. I think this post nails on the head some of the issues faced by so many – for me, the ambiguity of emotions and word choice are big issues. I have both sent and received e-mails that have appeared abrasive when that was not the intent. It can cause unwanted – and unnecessary – tension and pushback among colleagues who didn’t take kindly to the way a note was conveyed. The tips listed here are very helpful – perhaps companies should consider making SEND required reading to ensure more productive e-mail communication.
February 5th, 2009 at 5:17 pm
Crafting an email is definitely an art. Oddly enough, my company uses Outlook and recently removed the prompt that warns you that “you are about to reply to all, would you like to continue?” I suppose user convenience won in this case. When I email large groups, unless it’s purely informational, I have found myself bolding names of people who have an action item, color coding words (red for VERY important, for example), bulleting items, etc. Given how busy people are, it seems like emails become more about design to catch peoples’ eyes than an essay of text. Thanks for the tip on SEND. I have never heard of it so I’ll have to check it out. I wonder if they discuss the rise in use of the BlackBerry and how to construct an email for those who own these? That’s a blog topic in itself…
February 5th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Thanks, Angie! It’s funny that you bring up BlackBerry use. One of the authors recently did a commentary for NPR about how Obama should set an example by curbing his Blackberry use. http://tiny.cc/JYfpM
February 6th, 2009 at 9:41 am
People should be more aware of what they are sending in emails, especially when they will go out to large groups. It is good to get the info, but I don’t often need to be in on an entire conversation that doesn’t pertain to my work.
February 6th, 2009 at 5:50 pm
Love it! “Reply All” is my biggest pet peeve…don’t reply to me unless I NEED to know…otherwise, I could care less. Love that the State Department is doing that.
February 8th, 2009 at 6:15 pm
Great post. Email etiquette is so important and too often ignored! IMHO, understanding email is key to understanding social media in general — it’s about how people want to be approached electronically. So many of the same principles apply, from conveying tone and being concise, to keeping your message relevant to your audience, to crafting an appropriate subject line/heading. But email has been around longer than SM and is used more widely, so it’s smart to pay close attention to the evolving social mores that come from its use.
February 10th, 2009 at 8:51 pm
Do, you hit it right on. Emotions ARE so hard to read in e-mail.
My greatest peeve by far is when people call me Libby instead of Renee, especially when they’re replying to an e-mail that CLEARLY has my name in it.
Kudos to Costa DeVault for jumping on the blog wagon