It seems that almost every day I come across people who are having issues with email. Some of them have an issue with the volume of email they are receiving and many are concerned about the quality of the message they are getting in an email. I was recently speaking with a friend who confessed that he uses email when he has a difficult message to pass along to someone. He believes that it is easier because it avoids the tension that comes with the person being upset at the message. When I asked him if he thought they were any less upset, having received the message by email, he gave me an interesting response. “Sometimes I can tell that they are upset by the email they send back and other times I’m not sure.” Although I “get it” when people say email is easier for sensitive messages because they don’t have to deal with the emotional issues, the more I talk with people about this, the more I discover that the emotional issues don’t go away – they just don’t get dealt with at the time. Sometimes the emotion can come back at the most unlikely moment, catch you by surprise and get intertwined into other issues that have nothing to do with the original emotional baggage.
So let’s reflect back on my last blog post with respect to email as a strategy for effective communication.
- Email communication is a choice – there are other ways to communicate.
- When chosen as the medium of communication, people need a better understanding of how to manage communication with email.
So let’s talk about gaining a “better understanding” of email. Email provides very little in the way of emotional content. The “tone” and “body language” that is in an email – if any – is usually seen in the eyes of the receiver and is often misinterpreted. The key here is that when you send an email, you don’t get to see the person’s reaction when they read the message. Sure, they may send you a reply, but it is often filtered and you may miss key messages that you would have heard or seen had you communicated in person , by phone or via an electronic medium such a Skype. The feedback you get when you see or hear a reaction can be invaluable.
So, when a message has emotional content or is somewhat sensitive, email is a poor choice for communication. You may think you are avoiding the “drama” that can come with the messages but more often than not, you are exacerbating the sensitivity and potentially undermining the sense of respect that the other person would have for you. Email is a choice. It can be a good choice for straightforward messages but not all messages. Don’t let the convenience of email fool you. If you choose email in the wrong circumstance, you may wind up creating more work than you thought you were avoiding by sending the message via email.
Now it’s your turn. Have you ever received an email on a sensitive issue that left you feeling “cool” towards someone else? Do you avoid tough talk by using email?
Send me your feedback on your views on email communication. Here on my blog, I offer commentluv. For you bloggers out there, if you leave a comment, you can link back to your own blog. But you don’t have to be a blogger to leave a comment; I’d like to hear from everyone!
Dave
I am reading Daniel Pink’s latest book entitled “Drive”. In his book he reveals some very interesting studies on motivation that challenge the current paradigms on the effectiveness of “carrot & stick” reward systems. One of the points I believe he is making is that individual motivation comes more from intrinsic drivers than from extrinsic drivers, meaning that people are driven by what they find meaning in (internal drive) vs. the demands or rewards that are placed upon them by others to motivate them (external drivers). Intuitively this makes a lot of sense but it goes against our common beliefs of motivation. Much of the work in developing reward systems focuses on developing a “one-size fits all” system for motivating people that, by its very structure, presumes that the same thing motivates each individual. Pink’s book makes the case for intrinsic motivation being a much stronger force, which means that we must understand each person’s 
