E-mail Conversations

When do you stop?
How do you contribute?
What do you do to make better?
How do you file?

One of the things that I dread the most is "design by e-mail". Recently, I received this e-mail which was the last of 30+ responses:

Please handle the issue. 

This simple e-mail was a problem. The problem -- what was the issue and what was I expected to do?

Problem solutions via e-mail conversations can be problematic (no pun intended). In an ongoing conversation with many participants, after a while, it can be difficult to determine what the problem is, let alone what has been done and what you are expected to do about it. You can spend more time thrashing through the e-mails trying to determine what the original problem was and, what, if anything was done to resolve it. You have a difficult time to determine what was

• tried and rejected 
• considered and eliminated 
• tried and partially succeeded 
• rejected out of hand 
• considered and not tried 

Well, you get the idea. And this assumes that there weren't side e-mails -- e.g. e-mails between a subset of the original participants.

E-mails are particularly bad documents for design for many of the reasons above. Some of the responses may be curt, some are detailed, but irrelevant, others are pertinent, but poorly worded, and on-and-on. It can be difficult to determine who the decision makers are/were and what the actual decision is/was.

With today's penchant for texting and short messages, and the likelihood that e-mails will cross in flight, often the responses are ambiguous. You get a "go for it" and, unless you spend time analyzing the e-mail chain and the timestamps, you are uncertain just what should be gone for.

So what can you do? People aren't going to stop the practice. You're still going to get that 50 e-mail chain with directions to do something. What can people do to make that "something" more obvious?

Summarize before you comment

If you are going to propose a solution, summarize the issue in YOUR e-mail and then write your comment. This way, in a single response, you have stated the problem as you see it and made your comment. This is especially important if you are responding to a particular part of the chain and commenting only on a portion of a complex issue or design.

I like the colors proposed by John for the . . . 

is much stronger than

I like it. 

Rearrange the To: and Cc: headers

If you are responding to an individual's comment or directing an individual, rearrange the e-mail header to make that obvious. It's important to let people in the conversation know to whom you are responding or who you are directing. It can be very confusing to have 10 names on the To: line and not know who is the recipient of the direction. I might ignore your direction to me just because I see someone else's name on the To: line.

If you don't want to take the time to do that, at least start your response with the name of the individual(s) to which it is directed.

John, can you do . . . 

rather than

Can you do . . . 

Summarize before you direct

If you are going to add an implementer to the conversation or direct someone to implement the solution who has been part of the conversation, first tell them what you want done. Don't just include the e-mail chain. Summarize the solution in YOUR response. This serves two purposes.

First, it tells the participants what you perceive the problem and solution to be. Unless you're the manager of the entire team, someone at your decision level may not agree with your assessment of the situation. I like summarizing both the issue and the proposed solution in a single e-mail response because it eliminates any ambiguity in the situation.

Also, if it isn't patently obvious that you are the person with the authority to make that direction, somehow state that you are taking charge and directing the solution. This is especially important if you are going to propose a solution which requires involvement of other resources not under your direct control.

Make things as concise and clear as possible

An e-mail chain is NOT a conversation. The participants have not necessarily been in the chain and, if they have, may not have paid all that much attention as the exchange went on. The bottom line is to make each discrete response and concise and clear as possible. By doing this, you will save time (and money) and achieve the end that you intended with as little hassle as possible.