Email
Etiquette – What’s The Missing Link ?
Copyright
© 2006 Bob
Selden,
Used
with permission of the author:
Author: Bob Selden
Managing Director
The National Learning Institute
www.nationallearning.com.au
I
looked up the web on email ettiquete and found many sites, yet
only one of the 10 sites on the first page of Google, dealt with
the real issue around email etiquette.
However, I did find that there’s even a new word for it
now – Netiquette. One
site had 32 rules (of course with links to other pages for a
fuller description) for email etiquette and yet they still missed
the main point!
What is the REAL issue on email etiquette?
Well, before I answer that, read the following statement:
“I
did not say she stole the money”
Now read it aloud to yourself (doesn’t matter if anyone
else is around, they won’t know what you’re doing).
The key question! What
is the meaning of this statement? What
did you interpret from this written statement?
Did you think that:
·
“I”
did not say she.., or that
·
I
did “NOT” say she .., or that
·
I
did not “SAY” she …, or that
·
I
did not say that “SHE” stole …, or that
·
I
did not say that she “STOLE” the money, or that
·
I
did not say she stole the “MONEY”.
Starting to get the picture?
You see, whenever we put words on paper (or in this case in
emails) they can be interpreted in many different ways – and
often are! In fact
the legal profession (with apologies to anyone of a legal nature
reading this) have built an entire industry on the interpretation
of the written words. Signed
any contracts lately? Notice
that they almost never have punctuations and even when they do,
they can still be interpreted by two independent people, quite
differently.
By
now you may have guessed what the golden rule of email etiquette
should be:
“If
the message has any emotional intent or is likely to have an
impact on the receiver’s emotions, look for another way other
than email to send it.”
Generally,
this will mean face to face, or failing that over the phone or by
video hook up, video cam etc.
Emails
should only be for fact, logic and reason. I have seen so many
innocent (on the surface) emails start a war of words between
consenting adults that if it wasn’t so serious, would almost be
laughable. In fact, I
have seen a situation where two colleagues who once had a very
good relationship, eventually deteriorate to the point of legal
action over each other’s interpretation of a simple email
message.
Emails
are unlike any other written word – they are not books,
newspapers or such where a great deal of thought has gone into the
written word (and which is often accompanied by a visual image).
Nor are they read that way, but keep in mind, that
they can be re-read by the receiver many times over!
Often
they are written quickly and sometimes without review, yet they
have replaced much of the face to face communication and phone
communication that once made up so much of our interpersonal
relationships. For
example, how often do you see people sending emails to one another
when they are in the office next door to one another or at the
next desk or cubicle, rather than speaking with the person
directly?
But
emails also lack all of the nonverbal communication that is going
on all the time as we talk face to face with one another and which
helps us understand each other.
Numerous studies have revealed that in face to face
communication, in terms of interpreting the message that is being
sent by one person to another:
·
55-60%
is through the non verbal signals that are being picked up
·
35-40%
is through the tone of voice being used
·
7-10%
is via the actual words that are spoken
Another recent
survey disclosed that up to 37% of a first impression is based
upon the speaker's tone of voice. On
the telephone, that number rises to 80% or higher.
So, if we have a
message that is meant to be motivational, confrontational or in
any way intended to impact the behaviour or feeling of the
receiver, where does that leave us with emails as our means of
communication if we can assume that only 7-10% of our real message
is getting through? As
one writer put it “This makes email a unique medium. The
lack of nonverbal clues makes it easy to misinterpret something,
but we're not careful enough to avoid these misinterpretations
because email feels so instant, easy and accessible, just like
talking.”
As I said
earlier, if you want to truly influence someone’s thinking or
impact their behaviour, my suggestion is to see the person face to
face, or as a fallback by some means of voice/video connection.
Well
that maybe ok when we KNOW that we want to impact the other
person’s feelings. But
how do we avoid unintentionally impacting their feelings?
(By the way, using any amount of “smilies” or similar
at the bottom of your email, or as is creeping into emails at the
moment, at the end of sentences, will have no positive affect –
in fact they may even work against you).
Other
than being as courteous as possible and re-reading the message
carefully before sending it, the main word to avoid in your
message is “You” – particularly used in the past tense.
When used in the past tense, often “You” infers blame
for something that the receiver has or has not done.
Perhaps we do not intend it to be inferred this way, but
that’s what happens. Moving
away from emails for a moment. think about the last time you had a
really heated argument with someone.
Often what triggers such arguments is one person inferring
blame by using “You” too often.
“You never do that for me”, or “You always miss my
appointments”. Pretty
soon the other person joins in with their own “Yous” and what
started out as a genuine and positive conversation, deteriorates
into an argument. My
bet is that when you really think about your last argument you
had, the word that was used more than any other, was “You” –
and it was used in the past tense!
Those
of you who have done any assertiveness training will know that
replacing “You” with “I” can be very powerful and without
offending the other person. As
a simple and quick exercise, I’ll leave you with the task of
rewriting the two “You” statements I used earlier - “You
never do that for me”, and “You always miss my appointments”
as “I” statements. This
technique takes a little practise, but can improve the
effectiveness of your email communications dramatically.
So,
I would suggest that we can have as much etiquette around things
like “salutations”, “cc’s” etc, and we can add as many
“smilies” as possible, but unless the real meaning of the
email is going to be received in the same way it was intended,
then think again before sending it.
I’d
like to get some feedback on email etiquette, so please email me
via www.nationallearning.com.au
Author
Bio
Like most of us, Bob
Selden gets hundreds of emails each week.
As MD of The National Learning Institute, he has written
this article in the hope that it helps you with your email
communications. If
you’d like to share your experiences with Bob, please contact
him via www.nationallearninginstitute.com
Brief
Description
If
you have ever had a negative response to one of your emails that
you thought was quite straight forward, then this article is for
you. Bob Selden of
the National Learning Institute outlines what he believes to be
THE Golden Rule for all emails.
Key
Words
Email
communication, leading by emails, managing for effect with emails,
email etiquette, netiquette, employee feedback
|