We waste a lot of time by choice. That's OK, but when we've chosen to waste it, complaining bitterly about what we ourselves are doing isn't OK. And that's what many of us are doing with email.
Here's Part I of a little catalog of painful things we do (or don't do) with email. See "Email Antics: II," Point Lookout for December 31, 2003, for more.
Wasting time is OK,but complaining bitterly
about what we ourselves
are doing isn't
- Forget to attach the attachment
- Not so bad if you realize it, and then quickly send another copy with the attachment. This one is so common that an explanation for the second message is no longer necessary. Truly embarrassing, though, if you don't realize it and someone chooses to Reply All to tell you, especially if "All" is a large number of important people.
- Forget to remove their attachment from your reply
- Some email systems include the attachment in replies by default, which is annoying to people on mobile devices or slow connections. Change your preferences.
- Reply to All when replying to one will do
- Especially when your reply is something like "thanks." Restrict your reply to the people who really care.
- Reply when you're angry
- I call this Typing Under the Influence (of adrenaline). You're sure to regret it, perhaps as soon as you click Send. Before you click Send, Breathe. See "Avoid Typing Under the Influence," Point Lookout for May 23, 2001.
- Write an outrageously angry reply, not intending to send it, and then send it accidentally
- You might think of the writing as a therapeutic exercise, but it's dangerous. Never type anything into your computer that you wouldn't want the entire world to see.
- Participate in an email feud with many CCs
- Even with no CCs, this is worse than a waste of time. You can't "win," and you're bound to look foolish (or worse) to some of the observers.
- Try to resolve in email any issue that has high emotional content
- Even a great writer has difficulty dealing with emotions in words. Deal with emotions in person or at least by telephone. See "Email Happens," Point Lookout for September 5, 2001.
- Get their address by replying to an old message that predates their change of address
- You'll think you sent them the message, but what if they no longer check email there? If you're lucky, you'll get a bounce report. If not, you both lose valuable time.
- Believe that your writing is so clear that nobody could possibly misinterpret it
- It's strange, but when somebody interprets our words in a way different from what we intended we call that a misinterpretation. Maybe what we sent was a misstatement.
- Believe that your first interpretation of someone else's words is the only possible interpretation
- If you can't think of three ways to interpret something, keep thinking. Or maybe start thinking.
If you do some of these, and you'd like to stop, tack this list on your wall. Highlight the ones you want to avoid, and review it once in a while to see how you're doing. Be patient, expect lapses, and celebrate your victories. Next in this series Top Next Issue
Are you so buried in email that you don't even have time to delete your spam? Do you miss important messages? So many of the problems we have with email are actually within our power to solve, if we just realize the consequences of our own actions. Read 101 Tips for Writing and Managing Email to learn how to make peace with your inbox. Order Now!
And if you have organizational responsibility, you can help transform the culture to make more effective use of email. You can reduce volume while you make content more valuable. You can discourage email flame wars and that blizzard of useless if well-intended messages from colleagues and subordinates. Read Where There's Smoke There's Email to learn how to make email more productive at the organizational scale — and less dangerous. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
Related articles
More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:
- Annoyance to Asset
- Unsolicited contributions to the work of one element of a large organization, by people from another,
are often annoying to the recipients. Sometimes the contributors then feel rebuffed, insulted, or frustrated.
Toxic conflict can follow. We probably can't halt the flow of contributions, but we can convert it from
a liability to a valuable asset.
- Indicators of Lock-In: I
- In group decision making, lock-in occurs when the group persists in adhering to its chosen course even
though superior alternatives exist. Lock-in can be disastrous for problem-solving organizations. What
are some common indicators of lock-in?
- Hill Climbing and Its Limitations
- Finding a better solution by making small adjustments to your current solution is usually a good idea.
The key word is "usually."
- The Limits of Status Reports: I
- Some people erroneously believe that they can request status reports as often as they like, and including
any level of detail they deem necessary. Not so.
- Disjoint Awareness: Analysis
- Breaking large problems into smaller parts can sometimes create a set of risks that make solving the
problem in pieces more difficult than solving it as a whole. But we can still profit from breaking the
problem into parts if we manage those risks.
See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Writing and Managing Email for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming April 3: Recapping Factioned Meetings
- A factioned meeting is one in which participants identify more closely with their factions, rather than with the meeting as a whole. Agreements reached in such meetings are at risk of instability as participants maneuver for advantage after the meeting. Available here and by RSS on April 3.
- And on April 10: Managing Dunning-Kruger Risk
- A cognitive bias called the Dunning-Kruger Effect can create risk for organizational missions that require expertise beyond the range of knowledge and experience of decision-makers. They might misjudge the organization's capacity to execute the mission successfully. They might even be unaware of the risk of so misjudging. Available here and by RSS on April 10.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed