If you are asking yourself this question, I’m here to help.
You Are Frustrated
You have been sending your team email for a long time. Some people on the team are good at responding and others…well let’s just say they don’t seem to be as “on top of it”.
by Mzelle Biscotte via Flickr
You were talking about a specific topic in a meeting, and half the room didn’t know what you were talking about. “Didn’t you get my email?” you chided in frustration. What’s wrong here?
How Can I Make Them Read My Email?
You can’t.
And you’re going about this the wrong way. The problem is you, not them.
Email can be great for certain types of communication, but in my opinion it is an overused means of communicating, especially when so many of us have the option to walk over or get on the phone and talk to someone directly. It can be a great method of communicating when the needs are asynchronous and when people are disconnected geographically, but in general it gets overused in my experience.
I have been guilty myself of not fitting the communication channel to the situation.
Email is Easy
For some people, sitting down in front of a computer and typing an email is much easier than walking across the hall to chat with a co-worker. This can be especially true when the topic is charged, or if you are in conflict with the person on the other end. Ironically, these are the times when it’s most important to not rely on email, because the power of direct communication is often the best way to resolve issues of any kind.
Pareto’s Email
It’s likely that 80% of email in organizations is ineffective and would be better served via a face-to-face or phone conversation. The categories of email that may pass as prudent include sending meeting agendas and minutes, sending files, and when you are on totally separate schedules from those with which you want to communicate. It could be argued that there are better means of collaboration and communication even in these cases too.
The Missing Feedback Loop
One of the biggest problems I see with email is a missing feedback loop. If you are chatting with someone you can make sure they understood you, and that you understood them. Tones of voice and body language play a role and more information is communicated.
With email, a vast chunk of it goes out and the author assumes everyone who was on the list 1) read it, 2) understood fully, and 3) cares about what you had to say. It’s the “silence is golden” philosophy which, in my opinion, is a bad philosophy.
What do you think?
No related posts.
{ 19 comments… read them below or add one }
Josh,
I disagree. Communication is a ***two-way*** process. Blaming the sender for communication failure is just as wrong as blaming the receiver. The problem, and solution, is much more deeply rooted. I think you are being too simplistic here. eMail is just a tool, and for a number of reasons in my world (mostly as records/evidence), a critical one. Team members who do not participate in the email conversation shortly are no longer team members.
Josh,
Email is indeed the double-edged sword: it cuts one way (a great tool for getting the word out fast, and to lots of folks, pretty much regardless of their location), but also swings the other (folks don't always read them, they can be misunderstood or delayed, our inboxes are overflowing, etc.).
I now work in an office where I can get up and walk to any of my teammate's desks in 45 seconds or less. However, at my last job, my teammates were scattered throughout a huge office complex, or were located in different States, and even different countries. With that latter group, email was a real godsend … there's no way I could have coordinated with that many folks (50), located in areas throughout the world, with such speed. Use of email was critical to the success of our team. Thus, I mandated that our team members respond to emails. Some of them didn't like it, but as another poster here stated, if they didn't respond to emails, they soon found themselves off the team. I believe it's a matter of maturity. I had the same issues in the “good ol' days” when people wouldn't return phone calls. They were “too busy.” It was a lousy excuse then, and it remains a lousy excuse today.
I've had the same headaches with email as others; however, given the choice between having to put up with those issues, or having to go to extraordinary and time-consuming lengths to get the word out, I’d choose the headaches of email any day.
Josh,
Communication is situational, e.g. the situation determines the type and style of communication. Often I will produce emails to provide direction, which consists of a purpose statement, objective bullets, and of course a target date. Then I will mark the message with a follow-up flag prior to the target date. You get what you inspect not what you expect. I also try to make it a practice, if logistically possible, to walk over to the individual(s) for a face-to-face.
I also practice boom-a-rang email. If I receive an obfuscating or abstract email that is not directly asking me for a deliverable or is marked with an red ! mark, I will delete it. If it comes back, I will then address the situation accordingly. Sometimes email is over used and we cannot spend all our time being a servant to our emails. So boom-a-rang email has been an effective method for managing my time at work regarding email.
Thanks for the comment! I love disagreements, they foster growth. In my view, the sender is primarily responsible for effective communication. They are the initator, and have control over the channel/method selected. It is their responsibility to make a good choice, and 80% of the time in my experience, email is not it.
Well said Worthey, thanks for the insights!
Thanks for the comments Travis! The approach in your first paragraph doesn't work well for me….I may follow-up with an email clearly reiterating what has been discussed in person or via phone, but I (try) to only lead with email on something like that if it's rather insignificant.
Boom-a-rang email sounds dangerous, you are braver than I!
-Josh
Good stuff Josh.
The notion that email based PM is just that “notional.”
Notional
1. relating to, expressing, or consisting of notions or ideas
2. not evident in reality; hypothetical or imaginary a notional tax credit
3. characteristic of a notion or concept, esp in being speculative or imaginary; abstract
crgpm and Josh,
Here in defense we have a specific protocol for emails and other forms of communication. It is based around the “command and control” process. Not the dreaded C&C the agilest speak about but the C&C of people making commitments to get things done. It comes from the cockpit exchanges many have heard on TV of the Hudson River ditching.
I communicate something to you, and you respond with the affirmation that first you accept the request, then perform the request, then acknowledge to me it has been performed.
The request is a “deliverable,” and we both must concur on the deliverable. Captain Skully made a clear request, “my airplane,” the first officer responded “our airplane.”
We tend to use email as broadcast blather, rather than actual communication channel. The problem starts with the failure to define “why” are we communicating, and what actionable outcome do I want from the communication?
Thanks Glen, great insights! It sounds a little like what Travis was saying in the first paragraph of his comment.
-Josh
Can't agree with you more Josh…
My projects usually heavily involve C level staff. Getting them to attend meetings, read emails and respond can be impossible. The best approach; and key to being a great project manager (in my opinion) is to learn your audience. I've learned practical ways to get my message across in emails by using tables, bullets and highlights. They work well, but aren't the end to my journey. I have a note hanging from my computer at work 'Email is for Wimps'; I read that and know I've got to get up and take action. It is my responsibility to communicate in the most appropriate manner to the people that are on my project. Expecting people to do what you think is their job isn’t the best approach. Each project is its own unique journey; I get the sense of where everyone is at mentally and react accordingly. In a sense, you need to be the shepherd. Lead the sheep; monitor them and react accordingly to ensure they are all moving in the direction that is required. (Perhaps a bad example, but it works for me)
I love it Heather, especially the “email is for wimps” sign! I don't like the shepherd analogy though…. I used to be a gamer and so I like to think about it like a PC game I used to play.
In that game, team members each had unique skills and abilities…a medic, heavy weaponry, engineer, demolitions expert, spy, recon, etc. It's about bringing the unique skills of various people together and point them all towards a common goal.
-Josh
Can't agree with you more Josh…
My projects usually heavily involve C level staff. Getting them to attend meetings, read emails and respond can be impossible. The best approach; and key to being a great project manager (in my opinion) is to learn your audience. I've learned practical ways to get my message across in emails by using tables, bullets and highlights. They work well, but aren't the end to my journey. I have a note hanging from my computer at work 'Email is for Wimps'; I read that and know I've got to get up and take action. It is my responsibility to communicate in the most appropriate manner to the people that are on my project. Expecting people to do what you think is their job isn’t the best approach. Each project is its own unique journey; I get the sense of where everyone is at mentally and react accordingly. In a sense, you need to be the shepherd. Lead the sheep; monitor them and react accordingly to ensure they are all moving in the direction that is required. (Perhaps a bad example, but it works for me)
I love it Heather, especially the “email is for wimps” sign! I don't like the shepherd analogy though…. I used to be a gamer and so I like to think about it like a PC game I used to play.
In that game, team members each had unique skills and abilities…a medic, heavy weaponry, engineer, demolitions expert, spy, recon, etc. It's about bringing the unique skills of various people together and point them all towards a common goal.
-Josh
Email is a medium. Media requires management. My team developed a protocol for managing media. Team members were in an office and scattered throughout a five-state area.
We determined the need to manage the media so we could increase efficiency. The company was a service business. Field technicians did not have time to check email with any frequency. They did not always have Internet access. Customers were paying for a technician's time each day so keeping them on the job was critical.
We developed a system based on urgency of the message. Email was for sending messages that were not time critical. We sent specifications sheets, daily reports, etc. We sent product delivery information, regarding a product delivery that day, via text message. Time critical/urgent messages between the field and office required a telephone call.
The result of this system increased efficiency in the field and office. The technicians were able to spend more time working than communicating. We were able to keep the flow of information accurate and eliminate unnecessary time loss.
Nice! I like it.
Love it! Thanks for sharing…
My preferred discussion medium is email. It is self-documenting, there are numerous automation tools to categorize emails using filters, and re-directing them, and email suits my personality. For a year I was in a different profession, where I was away from my computer, and email. Definitely email was inconvenient for me, at that time.
I maintain that email is totally dependent on the situation. My current environment; it is essential. Thanks for a great, thought-provoking article Josh.
I think that one of the great errors PMs make is a practice I once heard called: “Send out and Review.” It's nice to send it out, perhaps, but it's folly to expect it to be read, consumed, and internalized by most people. At best, it's heads-up and a reference.
It's OK to send it out. But if it really needs review, then you'd probably better find a way to sit down together and review it. In today's world, that may mean meeting, conference call, chat session, or even a new collaborative tool like Google Wave or Novell Pulse. But somehow, you'd better sit down and review it, or you'll end up in exactly the situation you described at the beginning of your post.
“Send out and review.” “Silence is consent.” It doesn't work in a project. It probably doesn't really work anywhere.
Josh,
I know I already shared this with you, but thought some of your readers might find value in my blog post in support of your preferred communication style: http://right-brainedpm.com/2010/06/13/right-bra...