Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Avoid "Urgent" or "High Priority" Subjects and Symbols

There are certainly good reasons to send out messages with the “high priority” status (you know, that little red exclamation point in the left column of your inbox) set in Outlook. Disasters, natural or otherwise, come to mind. If you’re sending me an order to evacuate the building, please send it to me high priority. If the office is going to be closed because of snow, send me a message with the little red exclamation point so I notice before I leave home in the morning. If my automatic deposit isn’t going to happen on time, please alert me so I don’t go nuts with my ATM card.


Unfortunately, the vast majority of the messages that go out as “urgent” or “high priority” are anything but. Don’t believe me? Here’s an honest-to-goodness list of “high priority” items that showed up in my inbox in a month-long period:



A notice about a reception for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Attorneys


Several requests for information about who would be out of the office each week


Information about a ten percent discount on symphony tickets


A notification that a representative of a cell phone company would be on site


Information about a book club in another office


Requests for information about birthdays and anniversary celebrations


An announcement about staff appreciation week


A notice about a lost “womens” earring


A notice about a found pair of men’s pants


While all of that information may have been important to someone (particularly the poor guy who lost his pants) and some of it may have been important enough to send to an entire office or even to the whole firm, none of it seems so crucial that it needs to go out as “high priority.” The problem here isn’t just that some people seem to have no grasp of what’s truly critical. After a while it’s hard to tell what’s important on the receiving end as well. It as though you get several messages with the subject “Wolf!” every day. Eventually you just stop paying attention to them. And as bad as it is to be on the receiving end of self-important messages, it’s even worse if you’re one of the offenders in the habit of sending out mundane messages as “high priority.” Chances are that your readers are ignoring your messages as best they can. They may have started to resent it every time they see your name in their inbox.


It might seem hard to believe, but I’ve run across more than one person-- and not just lawyers-- who send every single message as high priority. And the problem keeps cropping up, despite the fact that my firm has gone so far as to counsel individual offenders and send repeated notices to the whole firm about the danger of using the urgent designation. You might be wondering why it’s such a big deal. Isn’t it just a little red exclamation point? But this is literally an issue that keeps people up at night. Many of us who are on call, provide user support, or otherwise need to be kept up to date when problems crop up have Blackberrys or other devices vibrate, beep, or play “Eye of the Tiger” every time they receive a “high priority” message. This can be shocking, annoying, or embarrassing when it happens on your nightstand at 3:00 am. So show a little compassion and refrain from marking your message as urgent whenever possible.

Be Clear About What You Want

As I’ve noted before, email just isn’t good at dealing with uncertainties or asking for input. So instead of asking a question like “Is there a time when the six of us can get together?” make the leap and propose something like “Can we get together at 10:00 on Tuesday?” instead. You’ll avoid rounds of discussion where everyone tells you when they are and aren’t available, sound more confident, have greater success in making something actually happen and actually get more responses to your email. You'll also be more likely to get what you wanted in the first place.

Although I suggest that you only use one-word replies with your most familiar correspondents, the reality of email is that you will often receive them. So you should try to phrase your questions in a way that a “yes” or “no” answer will make sense. Let’s say you want to take a day off to catch up with all of the episodes of “24” that have been building up on your Tivo (they’re more fun strung together that way). So you send your boss an email saying, “I’d like to take a personal day. Do you mind if I take off Friday?” What do you make of it if she writes back by just saying “yes”? Is she fine with the idea, or does she mind? Instead, ask something like, “Is it OK if I take off Friday?” so a one word response clearly answers your question. If she says “yes” then, you know you’re set. If she says “no” you might want to start thinking about your next job.

The reality of one-word responses also means that it’s a good idea to limit your emails to one major question. I’ve seen way too many cases where someone sends out an email with multiple questions and gets back a response like “yes” or “no.” There are all kinds of reasons that this happens-- inattentive readers, tiny Blackberry screens, people who mean to answer yes to all of the questions-- but there’s no way to figure out what such an answer means without contacting your correspondent again. This can be embarrassing for you, for them, or everyone. Make it easier by just asking one question per email.

Start With Your Conclusion

Another way to think about getting to the crux of your message is to always try to start with your conclusion. According to rigorously unscientific polling conducted in my classes, most people think that the perfect length for an email message is about three sentences and that anything more than that is just too long. And without a doubt the number one complaint I hear about email is that most of it is too long and time consuming. When people talk to me about this issue they tend to roll their eyes, throw up their hands and sigh dramatically, as though they’ve been victimized by some particularly senseless crime.

Don’t make your readers feel like victims. Whether they’re justified or not in feeling that reading a whole paragraph is a feat of endurance, treating your readers the way they want to be treated means that you’ll have much more of a chance of getting them to pay attention to your message and to treat it with the urgency and respect it deserves. Treat them poorly and they’re liable to ignore your message or even try to subvert it. Most people can easily think of someone who sends long and tedious messages. Come on, I bet you’ve got someone in mind yourself. In my experience these people often encounter a lot of resistance or are not treated seriously-- not because of what they say, but because of the length they go to in saying it. If you’ve ever ignored a long email from someone because you just couldn’t bear the idea of responding to it, you know just what I’m talking about.

Besides, if you write more than a couple sentences some of your readers are likely to just stop reading, discouraging as that may be. Get to your point right away. If you feel like you really need to explain yourself afterwards go ahead and do it in the end of your message-- not at the beginning-- where you can better afford to lose the attention of your readers.

Don't Bury Your Point

Email shouldn’t be written like a mystery novel, where you have to wade through the back story, character development, and misleading clues before you finally get to the real point of the message. But that doesn’t stop all kinds of people from writing like online versions of Agatha Christie. In rare cases I think this is actually a strategy on the part of these writers to bore you with so much background and irrelevant information that you quit reading before you actually get to the bad news tucked away at the end. Imagine getting a statement of your company’s finances full of charts and mysterious tax statements with a blurb tacked on at the end saying that, due to ongoing cost cutting, free coffee will no longer be available in the lunch room starting next month. The person who sent you such an email is really hoping that you don’t notice and that when the coffee makers eventually disappear they’ll be able to dismiss the whole issue by pointing out that they warned everyone about it and no one objected. People who do this are weasels.

The "Mystery Email" is also a lousy way to communicate. Most of the time people who save the important information for the end of a very long email aren’t hiding their point on purpose. They actually think they’re being helpful by providing you with a history of the project they’re working on and referring to the minutes of a meeting that happened months ago. Having been trained by English teachers to write five paragraph essays that back up their ideas with plenty of evidence, they’ve simply continued using the same tactics and are now writing five paragraph emails that are never going to be read.

If you want to fall back on a format that many of us learned in high school consider choosing the old model of the inverted pyramid from journalism class instead, where you find the most important information and a summary of what will follow at the beginning of a news article. Email and news stories actually have a lot in common-- think of your subject line and first sentence as the headline and lead of a news story. Both should be designed to summarize the whole message that follows and to draw in readers. Headlines in big, bold fonts sell newspapers and meaningful subject lines sell email messages. If you save the important stuff for the end of your email, very few of your readers are going to get there. And it’s never a good idea to make your readers work hard if you want to get your message across. Unless obfuscating information that you don’t want your readers to notice is what you have in mind, start with what’s most important. As a bonus, you’ll probably wind up writing shorter messages if you manage to get your main points out at the beginning. Your readers will thank you.

Change Your Subject Line if the Subject Changes

Email chains often outlive their initial purpose. Because it’s easier to just keep hitting “Reply” instead of starting a brand new email, what began as a discussion that’s strictly business can morph into a discussion of weekend plans or a referral to a dentist. As long as you stay within the bounds of your company’s email policy, there’s really nothing wrong with that. Still, it can be very helpful to take a second to indicate that the topic under discussion has changed by creating a new subject line. This is especially true if one work topic has branched off into another-- changing the subject line can help you indicate that what you have to say now has new relevance and isn’t just one more volley in what may otherwise look like a tired old topic. An even better idea is to go that extra mile and start a clean email that isn’t dragging along all that baggage of the old subject line and the text of previous messages. In addition to just being a tidier way of communicating, this can save you all sorts of trouble and embarrassment in the event that your email gets forwarded along to others who you never intended to see it.

Some people seem to use the collection of old email in their inbox as a substitute for an address book, searching for an old message that they can reply to rather than entering an address in a new message. This is why every now and then you’ll get a reply to your two year old Christmas invitation in June that turns out to be a question about a completely unrelated topic. Don’t be one of those people. Take the time to show that your message is important enough to read by starting a fresh new email with a subject line of it’s own.

Create Helpful Subject Lines

There are many ways to discourage your readers from paying attention to your emails, but you only get a couple of chances to grab their attention. Don’t waste them. One of the best things you can do to improve the chances of your email being read is to write an interesting and relevant subject line. I’m not talking about resorting to spammer techniques like promising miracle diets or pictures of Anna Kournikova-- which would surely annoy your readers (especially when they find neither) or get your message caught up in a spam filter, where it would most likely be lost for good. All I’m suggesting is that you should use the subject line of your message to accurately summarize your message rather filling it with something meaningless like “Hi” or, worse, leaving it blank.

Instead, think of your subject as the headline you get in order to draw in your readers. It’s the first thing people will see when they get your message, and it may be the only part of your email that they read. On most Blackberrys and other handheld devices it’s all that your recipient can see without opening the message and it’s what they use to decide whether they are even going to read your email. Far too many people fail to take advantage of the power of the helpful subject line and fall back on lazy defaults like “hey” and “good morning” that can easily be mistaken for computer generated junk and are far less interesting than some of the random two word subjects on the junk mail I sort through each morning. One recent spam in my inbox had the subject line “Squeamish Dumbledore.” How could I not read that, even if it wasn’t clearly related to the Viagra pitch in the body of the message?

On the opposite end of the relevance scale, I had a message from my HR department this morning that had “Retirement Plan Investment Changes” as its subject. They couldn’t have done a better job of summarizing what the email was about or in getting the attention of the people who needed to read it. If there’s something that people are sure to pay attention to, it’s changes to their retirement plans. Bravo!

Tuesday, November 27, 2007

Keep to One Subject Per Email

Has something like this ever happened to you? You need to write an email to your boss because you have a question-- let’s say it’s about the cost of some equipment. But she’s been on vacation for the past two weeks, so you figure you’ll earn some bonus points by asking about her trip. While you’re at it, you decide you’ll save time by writing just one email and ask her about throwing a going-away party for an employee who is leaving next week. So you write the following:


Lucretia--


How was your trip? I hear Sicily is lovely in August. Have you gotten over the jetlag yet? I did some pricing on the new copiers, and it looks like the cost is almost twice what we’re paying per page now. Does that seem outrageous to you? Also, next Friday is Freddie’s last day. Would the firm object if the department went to lunch early and didn’t come back? It’s awfully hard to work after a couple Margaritas.


Barney


Of course this is all very important, and you need a response right away. When you get one it says: “Yes.” That’s all. “Yes.” What are you going to do with that? Write your boss back and ask her to reread your email? Guess which one of your questions she was answering? Or apply it to each of your questions so you can take the half day on Friday?

Email may be a great medium for conveying information, but it’s not so good at dealing with a lot of questions or details all at once. Part of the problem is just due to email’s format. While books, word processors and newspaper columns are all set up so that only a certain number of characters fit on one line for easy reading, that isn’t true of email. A line of text in an email can be as long as your computer monitor is wide, which can make for difficult reading. But most of the problem is simply the result of email’s being perceived as a “fast” medium (which isn’t an oxymoron). People tend to write email quickly and they tend to race through when reading them, scanning rather than reading them thoroughly. They may even hit “Reply” and start writing their response after reading just the first sentence or two, which is why you get replies like Lucretia’s “yes” that don’t really respond to the entire email. Those curt, one word responses that aren’t very helpful are also inappropriate. But there isn’t much you can do to improve someone else’s writing skills-- especially those of your boss.

If you want to improve your written communications you’re going to have to do the heavy lifting, and one of the best ways you can do this is to limit your emails to one main topic. Sure, you can throw in a little chatter about the weekend or the weather, but keep to one issue that matters per email in order to avoid having to figure out what someone means by “yes.” Sticking to one topic can also help you avoid writing long emails full of questions (which often looks like polls) or facts (that can read like those tickers running at the bottom of the screen on the news channels) that, in all likelihood, aren’t going to be read all the way through. If you’ve asked too many questions, you probably won’t get all the answers you need. And if you’ve provided too much information all at once it’s likely to be ignored or put aside to be read “later.” Avoid all this trouble by sticking to one main topic and sending more than one email if necessary.

Always Think of Your Email in the Context of Office Politics

Chances are that someone is reading your email and you don’t even know it.

Over the years I’ve worked with more than one person who was sure that all of their email was being monitored. They were convinced because mail would disappear from their folders or because messages they were sure they hadn’t opened would be marked as “read.” One woman took me aside and warned me not to send her anything I didn’t want her email administrator to see because she was sure that he was monitoring her inbox. While she was probably a little nuts and flattered herself that the contents of her mail would be quite that intriguing to anyone, her advice was excellent. It’s true that you should never put anything in email that you wouldn’t want your email administrator or anyone else to read.

I know that sounds extreme-- and next to impossible to implement since most of us use email to discuss everything from our personal lives to employee compensation and confidential information about our businesses-- but every time you put sensitive information into an email you are all but making it public. While you may have the most ethical and incurious email administrator in the world, she’s far from the only person who might be reading your mail. Once you hit "send" you have lost the ability to control the information in your email and ceded it to your recipients. They can then forward it along to as many other people as they chose, whether they do so by accident or on purpose, innocently or out of malice.

This is where the idea of office politics comes in. Before you send anything important in your email you have to ask yourself if there’s anything in it that someone could take advantage of. Could they profit financially? Could they make you look bad? Is there juicy information that they’d enjoy sharing with the water-cooler crowd? Or maybe your trust your recipients. But do you trust them to never make a mistake and always check that they’ve forwarded your message to an appropriate address or distribution list?

There’s a great example of careless email usage and the havoc it can wreak in the workplace in the U.S. version of The Office. Michael Scott (Steve Carrell) has just returned from vacation in Jamaica-- with one dreadlock-- and wants to impress his loutish friend David Packer with the fact that he has secretly been there with his boss, Jan. Of course Packer doesn’t believe him, so Michael tries to send him a picture of Jan sunbathing topless to prove it. But Michael, who makes a career out of cringe inducing behavior, outdoes himself this time. Instead of sending the photo to Packer he sends it to the Packaging department. Michael’s first impulse is to get the message back, but of course it’s too late for that. Soon everyone in the warehouse, the office, and the company has pictures of Michael and Jan in Jamaica.

Once your email is out in the wild, it’s just about impossible to make sure that you have recovered or destroyed all of the copies. It might be sitting in someone’s inbox, on their hard drive, have been printed as a hard copy or posted on someone’s blog. In the case of The Office, it might even have been blown up to poster size and hung on the wall of the warehouse.

Be Aware Whether You Sound Casual or Careless

Because we compose, send and respond to email so quickly, it is generally treated as a casual means of communication. As I suggested earlier, it’s more like a phone call than a formal business letter and it’s not very well suited for “serious” discussions because of a variety of issues ranging from the difficulty of capturing the right tone to our inability to secure our messages. But that doesn’t mean that email is an “anything goes” format or that we should all be using instant messaging style shortcuts to save precious keystrokes. At the risk of sounding like a curmudgeon, I have to admit that I believe that all but the very most casual of our business emails should contain at least an approximation of proper punctuation and be written in complete sentences. If the point of email is to communicate, you can’t risk being misunderstood or forcing your correspondents to pull up an instant messaging glossary so they can figure out what your acronyms mean. Are you really saving time if you’re confusing people?

A group of people in one of my classes asked me what “EOM” meant, and I had to admit that I had no idea. Apparently one of their attorneys was signing off on all of his email with “EOM,” which was confusing people because those weren’t his initials. Since I had the computer right there in front of me I did a quick search and found that he must have intended this to mean “End of Message,” which is apparently something that is recommended to email writers so that their recipients know when the body of the text is done and that they don’t have to keep scrolling through the signatures, disclaimers and previous messages that might be attached. Not a bad idea-- as long as your readers know what it means. None of his, not even his secretary, had any idea.

One senior executive I know telegraphs all of his messages, condensing everything in his emails to a bare minimum-- nothing is ever capitalized, and punctuation is often limited to dashes that break up separate ideas. He also makes liberal use of what seem to be personally developed acronyms and abbreviations and the resulting messages often look more like a jumble of text than coherent thoughts until you take the time to sort out what it means. Of course, the reason he can get away with this is that he’s important enough that people are going to go to the effort of figuring it out. I know there are probably some of you out there who are offended that there are people (and emails) that are more important than others. But come on! No one would bother trying to decipher what I had to say if I wrote like that, except maybe the few unfortunate people I supervise and who feel like it’s their job to try to understand me.

Which brings me to an interesting phenomenon I’ve observed. Over time, people who work for sloppy writers start thinking that it’s acceptable for them to write the same way. You start to see entire working groups and whole offices that seem to have lost the ability to use their shift keys or end a sentence with a period. My advice to you is not to fall into this trap. Unless you’re way up there on that totem pole people aren’t going to give you the same sort of latitude or put the same amount of effort into figuring out what it is that you have to say. Worse, they may just give up trying.

Aim For a Professional, Conversational Tone

OK all you old-timers out there. Remember when we learned to write “professional” letters? How did they start?

Dear Sir or Madam:

To Whom it May Concern:

Gentlemen:

How would those look as the salutation in an email? As a rule, you don’t want to use those dry old greetings from business letters. “Hi” and “Hello” are generally fine. And as odd as it seems when you think about it, if you’re corresponding with someone you don’t know you might consider starting with “Dear:,” but even that sounds a little precious for a business email to my ears.

On the other hand, it’s important not to come across as sounding too casual or overly-familiar. A while back I was looking to fill a trainer position and some of the inquiries I got were just confusing. “Hey Corby,” one of them began, chatty as though it were from a friend. “I’ve been doing contract work for the last couple of years, and now I’m looking for a permanent position.” I had to look at the name on the resume a couple of times and search through the list of firms this trainer had worked for to make sure that he wasn’t someone I knew. He wasn’t, and the resume went in my trash can. If a trainer doesn’t know the appropriate tone to use when introducing himself to a potential employer, I didn’t want to take a chance on how he might present himself to a room full of lawyers.

Though finding the right tone for your emails is never going to be an exact science, my best recommendation is that a business email should generally be more formal that a phone call, but less formal than a letter. It’s a delicate balance that you need to consider-- if only for a split second-- each time you hit that New message button. You still want to include a friendly and appropriate greeting (more on that later), but you don’t want to err on the side being too stuffy, either. There’s no need to explain “This message is in reference to…” when you already have a working relationship with your correspondent. And there’s no excuse for using incorrect, overly formal language that usually seems intended to make the writer seem important.

I used to work with someone who always substituted the word “stated” when “said” would have worked perfectly well, as in “He stated that he was going to lunch early.” To me this seems appropriate only in court. The people who pull that are usually the same ones who replace “me” with the almost always incorrect “myself,” thinking that the more complex word is always better. It isn’t.

Think About Whether Your Tone Might be Misunderstood

Because it’s a format that is best at conveying hard facts-- not ideas that require discussion or subtle nuance-- it’s always important to consider whether there is anything in your email that could be misunderstood. Especially its tone. As we discuss the challenges inherent in writing email, we’ll return again and again to problems caused because of the difficulty in conveying tone in email. I’m not going to tackle that whole topic here, other than to say that it’s one of the most important things to consider as you’re writing. From my experience in teaching classes about email, I think that it’s something that most people are aware of. But I’m not sure that they’re actually giving it a lot of thought as they struggle to clear out their inboxes and fire off replies. One place where you will see people trying to make their tone clear is through the use of emoticons, those annoying, winking and smiling faces that pop up most often in the emails of young kids and elderly aunts. While I generally disapprove of them as too cutesy for business correspondence, they show that the writer is at least making an attempt to make their meaning clear. “Just kidding,” they signal when sarcasm or irony might not be apparent otherwise.


Sometimes the whole issue of tone can come down to how a sentence is punctuated. When there’s a problem, the exclamation point is often the offender. While a writer who uses emoticons is usually acknowledging the need to make their tone clear, the writer who uses an exclamation point often just muddies up theirs. Unfortunately we don’t all use or read exclamation points the same way, which can lead to misunderstandings. I’ve found that some people interpret any use of exclamation points in much the same way that they read ALL CAPS-- as though someone were angry or shouting at them-- while others simply use them to express enthusiasm. And then there are people like Elaine on Seinfeld, who is furious when her boyfriend writes down a message that her friend has had a baby but doesn’t use an exclamation point at all. In the Seinfeld universe, at least, a missing exclamation point is reason enough to end a relationship.


Just this week I found myself in an email exchange where I wasn’t sure what to make of an exclamation point. I was planning a presentation outside my office and corresponding with someone I barely knew but who I thought wanted to make a good impression on me. Though I was planning to take my computer with me, I was hoping that they might have a projector I could use so I wouldn’t have to lug one along myself. “Will there be a projector available in the training room?” I wrote after we had confirmed the date and time.


“Of course!” he replied. Just “Of course!” Now, there was probably nothing more to it than yes, they did have a projector available. The exclamation point was most likely intended to indicate enthusiasm, maybe even gratitude, that I was coming down to do training. Still, maybe it was just my mood, but I couldn’t help but wonder if he somehow felt that I was accusing him of not being prepared, or of being from one of those tiny firms that can’t afford a projector in the training room.


“OK, great,” I replied, not wanting to leave the conversation on that note. “See you next week!”

Select the Right Medium

If you’re having a hard time writing an email because it deals with a sensitive subject, start by thinking about whether email is an appropriate format at all and whether you’d be better off making a phone call, an in-person visit, or holding a meeting. Because sometimes it’s not what you have to say that makes the biggest impression, but the medium in which you choose to say it. There’s an episode of Sex and the City (of all things) that I often use to illustrate this point because it seems to have made such a big impression on so many people. Sarah Jessica Parker’s character Carrie Bradshaw has been dating a writer named Berger (played by Ron Livingston of Office Space and the Geek Hall of Fame). Their relationship has been rocky at best, and when he breaks up with her he avoids doing it in person or even over the phone. Despite the fact that they’re both writers, he doesn’t even send a letter. Instead, he leaves her a Post-It note. Carrie’s outraged that anyone would do this, but her friends all have similar stories of break-ups conducted in inappropriate formats. Miranda says that she was once broken up with by a boyfriend’s doorman. As much as she tries to contain her anger, Carrie herself reacts inappropriately by lashing out at friends of Berger’s she runs into at a club where everyone lounges on beds and she nearly gets arrested for smoking a joint in public. But Miranda manages to get Carrie off with just a ticket by explaining that she’s distraught over being broken up via Post-It Note. Even the police, it seems, understand how inappropriate and unfair that is.

When it comes down to it, Post-Its and emails are actually very similar formats. They’re both great for certain simple things, like delivering facts or messages. The cable guy will be here between 12:00 and 4:00. And they’re both lousy for conveying anything that requires finesse or might produce an emotional reaction. It’s not you, it’s me. But email lends itself to much more damaging reactions than you’d ever get with a Post-It. Break up with someone on a Post-It and they might show it to their friends or, at worst, to some cops on the street. Break up with someone over email and they can forward copies to everyone, with their own comment. It sure as hell was him.

Anyone who assumes that the emails they write at work aren’t capable of creating an emotional impact is making a big mistake. Though I can’t say I’ve ever hung out in a Manhattan nightclub drinking Cosmos in bed or been caught by the police smoking a joint, I have experienced the workplace version of being broken up with via Post-It Note-- the resignation by email. Several years ago I had an employee send me an email that basically said “I resign effective two weeks from today” and nothing else. No greeting, no “it was nice working here.” Nothing. And it wasn’t like I was out of the office at the time or as though he worked far away and couldn’t have just walked down the hall to tell me. He was sitting in an office two doors down from mine.

While I’ll admit that we weren’t particularly close as far as work relationships go, I hadn’t had any problems with him either. Which made the whole incident pretty shocking to me. Because whether he knew he was doing it or not, my former employee was conducting the same kind of bridge-burning as the law firm associate who wrote the “trophy husband” email. You don’t want to alienate anyone with what you don’t say (“it was great working here”), or with the format you use (email, Post-It Note). Even though we’ve all wanted to, it’s rarely a good idea to annoy someone you might need as a reference some day. Especially if you work in an industry as small as mine, where everyone seems to know everyone else. Because you never know what’s going to happen.

One more example. A good friend of mine worked for an arbitration company that wasn’t treating her very well and had restructured her commissions so she was making significantly less money. When she got a better offer, she jumped at the chance to leave. Even though she hadn’t done anything wrong, the fact that she’d left her old company for one of its major competitors made her former co-workers feel as though she’d betrayed them. What she didn’t know was that the two firms were engaged in merger talks. Within a couple of months she found herself back at her old desk, surrounded by people who treated her like a traitor and looking for yet another job. In today’s business environment, where mergers and acquisitions are announced every day, the same thing could happen to any of us. Building and maintaining relationships by observing the niceties of business writing-- saying the right things and saying them in the right format-- certainly can’t hurt. While email might seem like the easiest way to deal with difficult issues, it can come across as insensitive and as a cop out. (No offense to those Sex and the City police, who actually turned out to be quite sensitive.)

Understand that People Generally Like Personal Communication

Email is great for certain things. It’s especially good at quickly distributing easy to digest facts: the office will be closed Monday for Christmas; the price of a first-class stamp is going up (again!). But it’s not so great when it comes to dealing with topics that are open to debate or require some amount of discussion. How many times have you been involved in an email chain like this one?:

"Can you meet Thursday?"

"No"

"How about Friday?"

"What time?"

"Maybe 3:00"

"No"

This kind of communication just isn’t very efficient. Depending on how busy your correspondent is-- and what time zone they are in-- you might have waited hours between responses. By the third exchange you still haven’t accomplished anything besides identifying a couple of times that don’t work and ensuring that at least one of you is frustrated with the whole process. Especially since a quick phone call can often resolve an issue that might otherwise require hours of back-and-forth to accomplish.

But there’s an even better reason to pick up the phone or walk down the hall to talk to your coworkers: people generally prefer personal contact-- whether it’s face to face or on the phone-- to email. Sure, there are a few cyber hermits out there who would rather avoid human contact and deal with everyone via email if they could, but these are the same people who would prefer to never leave their houses and who went into extended periods of mourning when WebVan shut down and they found that they occasionally had to go out to buy food. I’m not sure I’m over it yet. Most people would rather deal with you than your email, however, and you’ll almost always get better results in person than you would with an email. Despite the hype surrounding social networking sites like MySpace and the odd wedding announcement you run into for couples who met online, it’s not very easy to build a working relationship via email. In fact, it’s probably much easier to get a date online than it is to bond with a colleague.

Certain things that are easy to do in person are very hard, if not impossible, to replicate in email. It’s difficult to chit-chat in email without it seeming forced or insincere, and it’s almost impossible to schmooze with your superiors if you’re not there in person for those "chance" encounters in the elevator or at the coffee station. It may seem a little superficial, but those opportunities to complain about the weather or feign interest in your coworker’s kids are valuable opportunities to build your work relationships. Don’t give them up by hiding in your cube.

Tuesday, October 16, 2007

Plan Before You Start Writing

Let’s say that you are an HR administrator at a large company and you need to communicate an important change in benefits to all of your employees. I know that sounds scary, but it’s all hypothetical at this point. Unless you really are an HR administrator. Sorry about that. Anyway, you have to tell your employees about these changes and there are lots of things to think about before you actually send them an email. The first question I’d suggest you ask yourself is whether email is even the appropriate format for conveying something so important-- there are few things that people take as seriously as their compensation. If it’s good news that you have to share with them-- maybe everyone is going to get an extra week of paid vacation during the holidays-- it’s easier. But if it’s bad news-- maybe you’re doing away with their pensions-- you have to be considerably more careful. In a case like that an email is most likely going to come across as a heartless and impersonal way of communicating information that is going to have a major impact on people’s lives. If it’s at all possible, I strongly suggest that this is a case where personal contact is much better and less likely to alienate your employees. I’d even go so far as to say that it’s generally a bad idea to convey bad news in email since having someone there in person and being able to ask questions can often go a long way toward cushioning such a blow. Heck, why stop there? The personal touch is usually best for all kinds of emotional issues. Why waste the good news about that extra week of vacation in an email? Why not have a party to announce it and bask in the love and gratitude?

Whether email is even the right format for your communication is just one of the things you should think about before you write or send that message. Admittedly, not every email you write is going to require a lot of thought. If your best friend sends you a note at work asking if you want to have lunch, just say “YES!” (here the caps are perfectly appropriate in the sense of YES, GET ME OUT OF HERE!) and don’t worry about going through a checklist of rules to consider. But for anything more formal you should at least consider whether your message requires a little more thought and planning. For guidelines on what you should be thinking about as you plan those important emails, see below.

Saturday, October 6, 2007

Strategy

Having a strategy for your email doesn’t mean that you’re trying to pull something sneaky, though sometimes that’s exactly what you want to do. Sure, there are times when you want to wait to send out an important message until the end of the day Friday so you don’t have to deal with a whole bunch of annoying responses. It’s Friday and you’re ready for happy hour-- bring on the nachos! But most of the time having a strategy for what you’re writing just means taking a couple of seconds to think about what you’re doing so you don’t make mistakes. Taking the time to ask yourself a few questions can make all the difference between a good email and an embarrassing one. What is it that I’m trying to say? Who needs to know about this? How are they likely to react? Have I taken the time proofread and run spellcheck on my message?

So the first and single most important step in the SEAR program is:

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

SEAR

These days, it seems that everything needs an acronym. But while acronyms used to exist to make complex terms and phrases (Self Contained Underwater Breathing Apparatus) into words less terrifying (SCUBA) and easier to remember, sometimes it seems that they exist today just to bewilder and embarrass us. Maybe it’s because more and more technical terms are leaking into our everyday language. Maybe it’s because so many of them (HTML, SQL, IEEE 1394) don’t even look like words and give us no cues as to how we are supposed to pronounce them. Or maybe it’s because our clever and secretive teenagers seem to write in a new language that consists of little more than a series of acronyms strung together with smiley faces. IMHO a combination of all these factors has done a lot of damage when it comes to making everyday writing easy to understand.

Just the same, I’m going to go out on a limb and introduce an acronym of my own in the hope of making it easier to remember the key elements that I think are most important when it comes to writing clearly and effectively. I hope that mine is more reminiscent of the days of clear and helpful acronyms (CARE) than the muddled-sounding efforts (UNIFEM - which sounds like an evil supercomputer with a female voice but actually stands for United Nations Development Fund for Women) that people have been resorting to lately. I wanted to come up with a real acronym, something that you could recognize as a word and didn’t have to struggle to pronounce. Above all, I wanted something that you could remember and would help you to recall the four points that I wanted to emphasize as key to successfully writing business email.

What I came up with is SEAR, which is, I think, pretty good. Not only is it a real word, but it’s a verb-- an active, forceful word. It’s a command, for crying out loud! This is an acronym with a lot going for it! Creative writing teachers will always tell you that in order for your language to be memorable you should engage as many of your reader’s senses as possible. SEAR is just the kind of word to do that. It evokes the bright heat of a flame; you can practically hear the sizzle of the fire in its long, sibilant “S”. To make it even more memorable, take the mental picture a step further and imagine that it’s a nice steak that you’re searing. You can practically smell it, can’t you, your mouth watering as you almost taste that first bite?

“Alright, enough of the acronym,” you say. “We remember it already! You’re making us hungry! But what does it mean? How are those four letters going to help me with my writing, and why are the letters arranged in that order? Why is it SEAR and not EARS?”

So here we go. Here are the four things you need to think about when you sit down to write, in the order you should generally think about them:

Strategy-- Basically the idea here is to do a little planning before you start to write. Take the time to think about whether email is really the right format for your message. Have you clearly worked out what it is that you have to say, or are you still struggling? Have you given yourself enough time to write and to write well? Is there something in your email that could get you in trouble down the road?

Emotion-- Believe it or not, feelings play a crucial role in the overall success of your writing. As I mentioned earlier, email that is loaded with emotional content can cause you more severe problems than any other issue. And most of the time emotions get stirred up unintentionally because we are simply better at communicating in person than we are in writing. Email is notorious for lacking the cues to tone and meaning that we share in our everyday person-to-person conversations. Because of this, it’s often hard to tell if someone is kidding or if they’re really angry with us. Are they just being brief, or are they upset? And the truth is that we don’t always take the time to be good readers, either, which makes it even harder to communicate clearly. But we all need to take a little more responsibility for our writing to make sure that it isn’t going to stir up emotions unnecessarily. Is the message you need to convey something that’s loaded with emotional content? If so, maybe you would be better off considering another, more personal format. Do you have a history of conflict with the person you intend to write? Are they likely to react badly to this particular topic? If so, you might want to reconsider using email and pick up the phone instead. Better yet, walk down the hall and see them for a change.

Audience-- This idea really builds on the topic of emotion. It’s critical that you always think about who you are writing to. How are they going to react to your message? Do they even know who you are? If not, you’ll need to introduce yourself. How are you going to get their attention when they get hundreds of emails every day? What are they interested in and what information do you have that they are going to care about? It’s important to make sure that your message is modulated for this particular audience. Are you using the right tone? If you’re writing to the president of your company in the same tone that you use to write to your best friend, you should probably reconsider-- unless you’re also a VIP. Is the person you’re writing to a stickler for spelling and grammar? If so, you’d better run that spellcheck and proofread one more time.

Rules-- The rules really have to be followed to make sure that all of your other hard work isn’t wasted. So far I’ve played down the importance of correct grammar and punctuation, which is why I’ve made this the last of my four topics. But the fact is that you can do everything else well and still lose all of your credibility if your readers are put off by typos and missing punctuation. There are still lots of people out there who will judge your intelligence and ability based on the mechanics of your writing, whether or not that is fair. Know who those sticklers are and do your best to weed out the mistakes in your messages to them. But really, why not do your best in all the emails that you send? The rules of grammar and punctuation only exist to make language clear and easy to read. When you write poorly you increase the chance that your message will be misunderstood or not read in the first place. After all, if you can’t take the time to write clearly, why should your reader struggle to make sense out of what you have to say?

Those are the headlines, the big ideas from what follows. Read on for the specifics.

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Pay Attention!

If you think email has made communication easier, think again. I’m focusing primarily on email because it is overwhelmingly the way we communicate at work, but much of what you’ll find here are simply suggestions for maintaining good communications. And I’m not just talking about written communication-- email has also taken over for much of the conversation that we used to do in person and on the phone. Think about it, how often do you send email to the person sitting at the desk next to you rather than just getting up and going to talk to them? And much of what I have to say about email can also be applied to other forms of written communication. Unfortunately, the problem of short attention spans, the expectation of an immediate response and generally poor communication skills apply to all of our writing these days.

As much as we’d like to blame the format of email itself for all of our communication problems, much of the time we have nothing to blame but ourselves. Even though it has probably never been harder to get and keep someone’s attention, there are also a lot of things we do all the time that make people stop reading what we have to say and effectively shut down our communications. This is what happens when you send someone one of those long messages that they have to wade through to find your point. Or when they can’t figure out how your email is relevant to them in the first place. It happens when you send them a message that’s full of typos and makes them feel like you didn’t take the time to proofread it. If the message wasn’t important enough for you to run spellcheck on it, they may (rightly) think, why should they take the time to read it? They’re likely to stop reading if you haven’t made yourself clear and they find themselves struggling to make sense out of what you have to say. Why should they have to do all the work? But the very worst thing you can do is send them something that makes them angry, whether you’ve done it intentionally or not. If you make someone angry you run the risk of shutting down not only your current communication, but any future contact as well. Because when you make your reader angry they aren’t exactly going to be receptive to anything you send them in the future, either. So much for that relationship.

That’s the focus here, helping you to make sure that people pay attention to what you have to say, that you don’t sabotage yourself and make them stop reading. While learning the rules of grammar and punctuation are important in helping you write clearly and professionally, they only occupy one section of my tips here. My broader goal is to help you overcome the modern obstacles that make written communication more and more difficult. It’s to help you write persuasively and in a manner that will give you credibility at work and anywhere else writing is important. It’s to ensure that people pay attention to what you have to say and that you are able to share the information that is vital to your work. It’s to make sure that you don’t go around pissing people off unintentionally. If pissing people off is your goal, that’s another thing entirely. Still, there are some good examples of ways to do that later in the book. Keep reading!

Friday, September 28, 2007

Is Anybody Out There?

Never mind what the perfectionists and amateur English teachers would have you believe; grammar and punctuation aren’t even close to being the biggest problems in writing today. I have no doubt that the number one problem people have with their writing is simply getting someone else to read it. I’m not talking about selling that novel you’ve been working on since college. I mean just getting your coworkers to take the time to read the business email you send them at work. The speed and ubiquity of communications today have made it extremely difficult to get and keep anyone’s attention.

Part of my job as a training manager is to send out announcements about upcoming training. Some of it is for routine stuff, like the 300th Excel class we’ve offered for the year, but some of it is considerably more important and has a direct impact on the way we practice law. We recently rolled out a metadata scrubber, for example, that is designed to help protect us from unwittingly sending out sensitive information that can be concealed within the documents we create for clients and share with opposing counsel. Ultimately, we bought it to help avoid being sued. So when it came time to roll it out to our users we sent our typical training notice, but we also sent out other information that included references to articles about the dangers of metadata and stories from The Wall Street Journal about how other firms had gotten into trouble by sharing hidden metadata. This was important stuff. It seemed to me that this was exactly the sort of topic attorneys should be interested in and that we were doing a great job of promoting the training. But out of approximately 150 attorneys in our San Francisco office, we had exactly one show up. Pretty sad, but typical.

Another frustrating problem that I often encounter is that we send out announcements that we will be rolling out a new product, conduct the training for the few people who manage to make it, and then I start to hear complaints once people notice the new application on their computers. “What is this thing?” they demand. “Why weren’t we offered training!” (There’s often a “hell”, “damned” or worse thrown in there somewhere). One of the nice/scary things about email is that it keeps track of everything you do. So I can go into my Sent Items while I still have the caller on the phone and pull up the training announcement that we sent to all of our users. “The first training announcement went out on November 2nd, and there were two more after that,” I can tell them. “Would you like me to forward you a copy?” When I can tell them the date we sent it, they don’t usually ask for a copy. What usually does happen after that causes me endless despair.

“Oh, I don’t read email that comes from you,” they’ll say. Sometimes they substitute “trainers” or “IT” for “you.” This really doesn’t make me feel any better.

But it’s hard to blame people. We all get so much stuff to wade through that it can be overwhelming. It’s no secret that many of us receive hundreds of emails a day, and it piles up at an alarming rate. Go on vacation for a couple of weeks and you’re done for. I’ve seen Outlook inboxes with more than 30,000 items in them. Some of it-- the Nigerian scams, the email generated by viruses, the come-ons for various physical enhancements-- is clearly junk and can be deleted right away. Unless you’re like me and are entertained by these things. (If you’re not, find a good spam blocker. They can save you a huge amount of time managing your email.) Other messages are basically junk that we’ve asked for-- ads from online retailers where we’ve ordered things in the past, word-of-the-day emails, news summaries from The New York Times-- that can be dealt with (or not) when we have time. Then there are the administrative messages that contain information that might actually be important, but that we habitually ignore: the notices from HR about our benefits, the emails about what support services will be available on weekends and holidays, those pesky emails from the training department. They might all be useful, but the sheer bulk of the messages that we receive makes it difficult to pay attention to any of them. Where I work there is a large group of people who get what we call “staffing notices.” A staffing notice is generated whenever someone leaves or joins the firm, changes their title or their name, even when they switch desks. If you follow the staffing notices closely you can learn a lot: who has gotten married (or divorced), who finally made good on their threats to quit, who has been promoted. But the volume of them-- dozens a day-- means that very few people pay attention to them. When I was teaching classes on email etiquette, the staffing notices were specifically mentioned as “spam” more than any other kind of email.

Even if you get your readers to notice your email, they aren’t necessarily going to read the whole thing. When I talk to groups of people and ask them to name the single most annoying thing about email, what they talk about most often is that email is too long. It turns out that most people don’t want to receive email that looks like a letter, memo, or report. What they want is “just the facts.” The general consensus that I’ve seen is that anything more than three sentences is too long. I’m not saying that’s a good thing, but that’s probably the way most of your readers feel, too. Unfortunately, many of them will react to your message based entirely on its subject line and won’t ever read the body of its text at all.

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Never Write a Book About Writing

Even the people who put themselves forward as the defenders of the language, the cranks who love nothing more than spotting someone else’s errors, the maniacs who would dare to write books about writing, get caught up in the complexities of English. Take the example of Lynne Truss’s shockingly popular-- for a book on grammar and punctuation-- rant, Eats, Shoots & Leaves. Truss characterizes herself as the ultimate language crank, turning what is basically despair over misplaced or missing apostrophes into the basis for a whole (if slim and wide-margined) book. It’s entertaining in the way rants often are and she provides some funny examples. Still, the impression Truss creates is that she isn’t exactly someone you’d want to share an email exchange with. Chances are she’d rather grade your message rather than read it, then she’d use it as an amusing example in her next book. Which is probably why the response of so many critics was to take out their red pens and mark up her prose. The toughest response may have been that of Louis Menand, writing in The New Yorker, who doesn’t get very far before digging in the long knives:

The first punctuation mistake in “Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero ToleranceApproach to Punctuation” (Gotham; $17.50), by Lynne Truss, a British writer, appears in the dedication, where a nonrestrictive clause is not preceded by a comma. It is a wild ride downhill from there. “Eats, Shoots & Leaves” presents itself as a call to arms, in a world spinning rapidly into subliteracy, by a hip yet unapologetic curmudgeon, a stickler for the rules of writing. But it’s hard to fend off the suspicion that the whole thing might be a hoax.


A non-restrictive clause not preceded by a comma! Oh my! Menand goes on to provide a catalog of Truss’s sins:


The preface, by Truss, includes a misplaced apostrophe (“printers’ marks”) and two misused semicolons: one that separates unpunctuated items in a list and one that sets off a dependent clause. About half the semicolons in the rest of the book are either unnecessary or ungrammatical, and the comma is deployed as the mood strikes. Sometimes, phrases such as “of course” are set off by commas; sometimes, they are not. Doubtful, distracting, and unwarranted commas turn up in front of restrictive phrases (“Naturally we become timid about making our insights known, in such inhospitable conditions”), before correlative conjunctions (“Either this will ring bells for you, or it won’t”), and in prepositional phrases (“including biblical names, and any foreign name with an unpronounced final ‘s’ ”). Where you most expect punctuation, it may not show up at all: “You have to give initial capitals to the words Biro and Hoover otherwise you automatically get tedious letters from solicitors."

So what’s one to do when “experts” on punctuation and grammar, people with book deals and (presumably) professional editors available to them, can’t keep things straight? How are we supposed to get the commas right in our correlative conjunctions if they can’t? What the hell is a correlative conjunction, anyway? Truss’s first mistake was to set herself up as an expert in the first place. Anyone who puts themselves in this position is just asking for trouble because they are going to have to watch every comma they use for the rest of their lives. Because Truss’s biggest problem is that she sets her rules of punctuation down in black and white, then proceeds to break them. Most of us won’t ever find ourselves in this position and don’t even have to worry about memorizing all of the rules and their oddball exceptions. What we want to do is gain a basic understanding of the rules and try to be consistent. Unless it makes your writing hard to read and understand, it’s probably not the end of the world if you abuse an apostrophe or indulge in a superfluous comma every now and then. As long as you’re not writing a book on grammar and punctuation, that is.

Friday, September 21, 2007

Rules and Exceptions

Still, the dynamic and open nature of English causes problems for any of us who try to write in it. Not having an “official” set of rules means that it’s often hard to understand how the language should work. There are plenty of places you can go for advice-- the trick is trying to get these sources to agree. You can consult dictionaries, grammar books or newspaper and wire service stylebooks for guidelines, but you are likely to come away confused by their very different opinions. The New York Times writes the plurals of CD and DVD as CD’s and DVD’s, for example, while The Wall Street Journal writes CDs and DVDs. The rules and the exceptions to them can be maddeningly confusing, even within one source. Take the example of the rules for punctuating possessives, which might cause more errors than anything else in written English (and contributes to the confusion when the Times writes CD’s and DVD’s). Strunk and White’s well-worn Elements of Style is generally a model of clarity and simplicity, but the details of its guide to punctuation can be harrowing. They tell us to form the possessive singular of nouns by adding 's, regardless of the final consonant. Except when you’re writing about Jesus (Jesus always seems to get an exception). Or other ancient proper names ending in either -es or -is as in Moses’ or Isis’. And common phrases like for consciences’ sake and for goodness’ sake. Oh yeah, and possessive pronouns (hers, theirs) don’t get apostrophes. How are we supposed to keep this stuff straight without having to memorize all the rules and their exceptions?

The truth is, the “rules” most of us were taught in school aren’t nearly as firm as we were led to believe. Sentences must include a verb. Really? You can’t start a sentence with and, but or because. And what will happen if I do? Because I do it all the time. Many of these rules were given to us by our English teachers in the hopes of helping us develop more complex thoughts and sentence structures. But others are simply rules transplanted from Latin by people who wanted to impose a little order on the chaos of the English language. Many of these rules, like not ending a sentence with a preposition or not splitting an infinitive, have become more like conventions than hard and fast rules. We only need to be bound by them as long as they help make our writing clearer and easier to read, especially since the stylebooks of major newspapers often can’t agree on how something as basic as the plural or possessive is formed.

Tuesday, August 28, 2007

The 24/7 Language

Unlike the official idea of the French language being conserved and defended by the AcadĆ©mie FranƧaise, English (in all its varieties) is a language that is constantly re-making itself. Of course, the actual French language spoken by actual French speakers is also evolving in all kinds of interesting ways, but the AcadĆ©mie tries to do everything it can to keep French, well, French. English isn’t like that. Still have that dictionary out? Thumb through a bit and check out the etymology, or origins, of a sample of English words. These things come from everywhere! They’re rooted in German, English, Latin, even French; Dutch seems to have lent us some of our best dirty words (probably because all those hard “K” sounds are just funny to begin with). No wonder none of us can spell. Even though we do have a fair number of self proclaimed language experts who would like to preserve English the way they imagine it was widely written in Jane Austen’s day (and seem to be constantly correcting us as they defend what they see as the “rules”), English is basically an inclusive language, welcoming new words and usages when they seem helpful.

To borrow an idea from my IT background, English is a lot like the “open source” movement in software development. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the creation of the language and no one “owns” the final product. Because its evolution never stops, there never actually is a “final” product. This model can work miraculously well in certain situations (check out Wikipedia, the open-source encyclopedia, for a useful example). It can also be a disaster. Several big companies have experimented with Wikipedia-like websites, allowing anyone to post unedited messages, but had to pull the plug when they found that much of the content added by the public wasn’t exactly flattering to their businesses. Of course, this free-wheeling openness better suits Americans’ sense of who were are, whether it’s accurate or not. While the French are busy trying to protect their culture against outside words and ideas, we’re enthusiastically adopting foreign words and making up new ones. We like to think of ourselves as a “melting pot.” What could possibly exemplify this better than the big gooey mess of our language with its multicultural roots and frustrating complexities? Take the phrase “twenty-four seven,” often written as “24/7” and meant to indicate something that happens 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. While it grates on my nerves every time I hear a middle-aged broadcaster use it, it has become a part of the language because it represents an easy shortcut for a common idea. Besides, we need it in our dictionaries just in case aliens land on Earth, find our civilization in ruins, and need to decipher what’s being shouted on all those recordings of Jerry Springer.


Think how hard it would be to get by without some of the words that have been borrowed by American English. How could we possibly describe any female celebrity without using the word diva? What would we name our new tract housing developments if we couldn’t give them an air of luxury by calling them Tuscany Villas or Casa Montepulciano? One development listed in my newspaper offered four models of homes, the Lucera, Bergamo, Marsanne and Dolcetto. Not a Williamsburg or Mayfair in the bunch. What would we call our daughters if not Brittany or one of the seemingly endless variations on the name? And we’re not happy just borrowing words from other languages; English grows with additions from all kinds of interesting and unexpected places. Dictionary publishers love to get publicity by creating news stories about new words added to their latest editions. My favorite of these recent additions is D’oh!, the exclamation made famous by Homer Simpson, which you can now find in both Webster’s Millennium Dictionary of English and the Oxford English Dictionary, which many consider to be the closest thing our language has to a final authority. How cool is that?

Sunday, August 12, 2007

Who Owns English?

While we want to make sure that we write effectively and clearly, it’s probably not even possible to write unassailable English. Unlike its French or German cousins, English is a language without an official set of rules. We don’t have a formal body presiding over our language in the same way that French speakers have the AcadĆ©mie FranƧaise, the organization that acts as the state-sponsored authority on French and publishes the official French dictionary. Even if you don’t recognize the name of the AcadĆ©mie FranƧaise you’re probably aware of their work. They pop up every now and then in those news stories on TV about the French trying to reassert control over their language by weeding out anglicized words like “weekend,” “t-shirt,” or “parking.” That’s the AcadĆ©mie FranƧaise in action. These reports seem to be cyclical and recur every few years, much like panic over Pit-bull attacks or threats of the imminent resurgence of bell-bottoms, but they seem to recur much more frequently when the French are out of favor and we have troops in Iraq. I remember hearing one of these anti-English stories for the first time when I was a teenager. Back then I was in the middle of spending several years being outraged by everything so, of course, I was outraged. Telling people how to speak and how to write! What could be wrong with calling a t-shirt a t-shirt! That’s un-American!

Now that I’ve spent more time trying to write clearly myself and have many years experience in trying to teach other people how to write, the idea of having a well-defined set of rules doesn’t sound so bad. In fact, it sounds a little comforting. Because the way English works is very different. You can’t even get very far in a discussion of English spelling, punctuation or grammar without having to clear up which version of English you’re talking about. Is it American English or English English? The language spoken in Australia or in India? And don’t even think about going out and buying a copy of the official English dictionary-- there’s no such thing. Despite the opening paragraphs of millions of high school essays (“Webster’s Dictionary defines Freedom as…”) and factoids from an equal number of corporate PowerPoint presentations, there’s no such thing as Webster’s Dictionary. Many publishers have piled on the legacy of Noah Webster by creating dictionaries that include “Webster’s” in their title, including the Merriam-Webster dictionary-- which is the legitimate descendant of Webster’s original work. English dictionaries, even the big impressive ones with the leather covers, even the ones with the gilt-edged pages, are different than the dictionary published by the AcadĆ©mie FranƧaise because they are meant to chronicle the way the language is used, not the way that it should be used. Webster’s first dictionary was conceived, in fact, to document uniquely “American” usages, to show how the language had grown in the English colonies. One of Webster’s original goals was to capture the everyday language of Americans, including new words derived from Native American languages (like “wigwam”) that seemed to especially excite him.

Don’t believe me? Get out the dictionary and look up a word that your elementary school English teacher told you not to use. No, not the dirty ones (though they are there too). How about ain’t? Most of us know a little ditty that tells us that the word doesn’t even exist: “Ain’t ain’t a word/ so you ain’t supposed to use it.” But when I look it up in the online version of the Merriam-Webster dictionary, there it is:


Pronunciation: 'Ant
Etymology: contraction of are not
1 : am not : are not: is not
2 : have not : has not
3 : do not : does not : did not -- used in some varieties of Black Englishusage Although widely disapproved as nonstandard and more common in the habitual speech of the less educated, ain't in senses 1 and 2 is flourishing in American English. It is used in both speech and writing to catch attention and to gain emphasis .


While the dictionary tells us that the usage of ain’t is widely disapproved, it doesn’t mind including it right along with all of the respectable words. In fact, it makes it seem kind of rebellious and cool. Heck, if Nixon is using ain’t, why shouldn’t I?

All right, then, go ahead and look up some of those dirty words. Just promise to come back.

Monday, August 6, 2007

A Warning

Before you commit yourself any further to Get Your Message Heard, I want to make something clear; this is not the guide for anyone hoping to learn the secrets of writing consistently perfect, impeccably grammatical sentences. We’re all busy people these days and the last thing I would want is for you to start reading this, get halfway through and discover that you still don’t have a thorough understanding of the subjunctive tense when that’s what you were looking for all along. If following along and not coming away with a definitive answer to the problem of the serial comma would leave you feeling cheated, please look elsewhere for help. Perfection is just too much for us to shoot for. Let’s face it, if you weren’t a grammar savant in high school you’re probably never going to be one. We’re just too busy, and what we need today isn’t flawlessness so much as functionality.

Besides, I’m really not the person to try to teach you perfection. By the time I went to public schools in the 70’s they had all but done away with teaching grammar and instead devoted most of their time teaching “English” to drilling us on a list of spelling words that administrators knew would show up on standardized tests. Despite this, I’m still a lousy speller and would be lost without spell-check. I wouldn’t even know where to begin diagramming a sentence, and I seem to have a very specific form of dyslexia where I often can’t tell the difference between a lowercase “d” and a “b”. Many of you are probably better proofreaders than I am so, go ahead, look for mistakes here. I’ll own up to them. While we’re cataloging my flaws, I stubbornly resist anything I’m told I “have to” do, and I tend to get way too emotional watching TV. There are at least three episodes of Futurama that make me cry-- go figure.

My main goal is to help you develop some basic writing skills that will enable you to communicate more effectively at work. The first step is convincing you that good writing is important in our fast-paced workplaces and that it is still possible in the era of email and instant messaging. It’s a good sign that you're paying attention now. All it takes for most people to make a significant improvement in their writing is to step back from it a little bit and think about what they’re doing. Because most of us who are writing badly at work don’t know that’s what we’re doing. We have no idea that our typo-ridden messages are causing us to lose credibility with our clients, that our boss never reads past the third sentence of our epic emails or that the red font we habitually use has so annoyed our co-workers that they’ve set up a rule to automatically delete all of our incoming messages. While it would be wonderful if we could all write dazzling prose, that’s really not what most of us need at work. What we need is something more utilitarian. Almost all of the writing we do in our jobs is focused on conveying information; we’re either asking someone a question that we need answered or we’re supplying information that someone else needs. So our writing should be primarily concerned with making sure that we’re getting this information across to our readers. If we don’t get their attention, if they stop reading because we’ve made them angry or they don’t take us seriously, if they can’t even make sense of what we’re trying to say, we’re not getting our message across. If our writing fails, communication fails.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Everyone's a Writer

Despite constant complaints and widespread evidence of bad writing all around us, I’m not convinced that the writing skills of the average person have really deteriorated that much. It seems to me that the more important change over the last decade or two is that we now expect everyone to be a writer. Just think about the changes that have happened in the workplace in the last fifteen years or so. When I left school and took a job teaching computer applications email was a relatively new means of communicating in the workplace and it often required you to memorize lots of commands that included backslashes and colons if you wanted to do something as simple as send a message. Colons! That’s enough to make anyone freak out a little bit. The awkwardness of these email programs meant that email was mainly something for the young, the adventurous, the geeky.


Even though this first “real” job was working for a company that provided computer training, email was still new enough that the company didn’t just hand out email accounts to every employee. You had to ask for an email account, and your request had to be approved by both your manager and by company headquarters in Texas. Most of the people I taught how to use Outlook or Lotus Notes worked at big companies or government agencies but had never used email. Some of them had never used a computer.

When I went to work for a law firm a couple years later email was more widespread, but we still had partners at the firm who didn’t have email accounts. In this case it wasn’t because they lacked the approval to get an account but because they didn’t want to have to learn to use a computer and to regularly check to see if they had mail. Taking care of the mail was something they were used to having their secretaries (law firms are such conservative places that they still use the title “secretary” when every other workplace seems to have moved on to “administrative assistant” or just “admin”) do for them. Frankly, they saw the idea of working with a computer and answering mail as things that were beneath them. They were lawyers, for crying out loud! Now that clients demand twenty four hour access to their attorneys and it seems as though a Blackberry is a basic necessity for anyone doing business, it’s hard to imagine that they would resist having email accounts. But trust me kids, it’s the way things were.


It wasn’t that long ago that most writing responsibilities at large companies like my firm were handled by a few specialized employees who were largely professional writers. These people, attorneys writing contracts and briefs, marketing people creating news releases and advertising material, managers drafting memos and reports on whatever it is that managers report on, were supported by a large group of employees who were expected to do little writing, if any. Secretaries were called on to interpret and type up the words scrawled or dictated by their bosses, but were seldom required to draft anything on their own.


Of course it was much the same in other kinds of workplaces. Most people who worked for a living-- clerks, factory workers, truck drivers, janitors, construction workers, salespeople-- did little or no writing. But even in professional organizations such as a banks or accounting firms there were lots of people who had no need to write. The people who worked in the mail room delivered the mail, but didn’t create much of it themselves. These days it might seem insensitive, but it probably would have struck many people as odd to think that the mailroom staff would ever need to send their own messages to everyone in their company. But now we automatically give every employee an email account and access to the distribution lists that enable them to send messages to everyone at their firm with no more effort than a click or two, no matter how big the company might be. And we give them little, if any, training on how to use these powerful and potentially dangerous tools. Most email training that companies provide-- if training includes the topic of email at all-- is focused on which button you hit to start a new message or how to send a meeting invitation. Training programs are so pressed for time and resources that important subject like etiquette, the use of distribution lists and the mechanics of writing itself aren’t discussed at all.


As bad as the email situation is it actually amazes me that we don’t have more disasters than we do, especially considering that people often don’t even seem to be speaking the same language. Take the example of messages written in ALL CAPS. When I ask a classroom of people about their top annoyances in email, this is always near the top of the list. It’s usually the second thing mentioned, right after emails that are just TOO LONG. For most people, an email written in all caps signifies that the writer is angry and “shouting” at their recipient. Even though they’ve probably never been formally taught email etiquette, this meaning is something that most people have picked up along the way. But not everyone.

Almost every time this topic comes up in class there is someone in the room who is surprised that this would be read as rude or explains that they write to an elderly relative in ALL CAPS because they think it is easier to read that way. These aren’t bad, angry people; they actually think that they are being polite and helping their readers. (It’s true, by the way, that it actually takes significantly longer to read text written in ALL CAPS. A better solution for making text more legible for aging eyes would be to set the display properties on your computer to use large fonts. But how many older computer users know how to do that?) I was surprised myself the first time I became aware of this disconnect in the way people were trying to communicate, one person trying to help and make things easier to read while the other thinks they’re being yelled at.. But why should I have been? There are whole generations of people out there who are befuddled by the use of “LOL” and winking smiley faces scattered throughout emails-- and just as many young people rolling their eyes at the old-timers who don’t get it.


Most of the time no one teaches us this stuff-- it’s something people have to figure out on their own, through context. Throw in the fact that most of us never were very good writers (or readers) to begin with and it becomes even harder to figure out what message people are trying to get across in their email. Now when I encounter someone who writes all of their messages in caps-- “THANKS” in addition to “WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO FOR LUNCH TODAY?” and “SEND ME THE REPORT BY 3PM”-- I don’t automatically assume that they’re an angry jerk (though that’s often exactly what they turn out to be). Instead, I try to gently suggest that other people might be reading their messages that way. Even better, especially if I suspect that I really am dealing with an angry jerk, I ask HR to have that talk with them.


When you think about it, someone made a point of teaching you all the forms of communication you use. Even though our brains are wired to learn them, none of us are born with communication skills. Your parents probably taught you to say “hello” when you answer the phone and “goodbye” when you hang up. Hopefully they encouraged you to say “please” when you were asking for something and “thank you” when you were lucky enough to get it. If you ever had the privilege to take a typing class, chances are you spent more time learning the correct format for business letters and memos than you spent learning how to press the right keys without looking at them. Back then the form of your message, the way that it looked, was critical to what you had to say. Writing a letter correctly showed that you were respectful and competent. When I took typing in the tenth grade Mrs. Davenport would smack my desk with a yardstick if she caught me looking at my fingers while I typed. But it was worse if you didn’t get the format of the letter correct-- she’d make you retype the whole thing until you did.


As far as I know, there are no equivalent classes for learning the correct format for email correspondence. Instead we assume that email is like all other forms of written communication. And it’s not. Even if high schools and colleges turned out graduates who were capable of writing perfect five paragraph essays-- and trust me as someone who tried to teach those kids, they don’t-- that doesn’t necessarily mean that these writers would be adept at writing email. Because with all the advantages inherent in email conversation (it’s fast, it’s easy), it also has some major drawbacks as a form of written communication. Some of the biggest are probably the very things that we like most about email.


It’s probably just too fast and too easy.


Think about those memos we old-timers learned to write in typing class. There was a lot of work that went into them. Chances are, most business memos probably started out as a draft scrawled onto a legal pad or dictated onto a tape that was then handed off to a secretary to be deciphered and transcribed. People took their time composing them because corrections meant starting over or performing messy surgery with correction fluid-- or even with scissors and tape. So there were a couple drafts, maybe several, involved in writing them. Once a document was finished, someone had to physically deliver it. If it was going to be delivered outside the firm, it would require postage. We even used to go to the extra expense of printing engraved letterhead and envelopes. Because of all this effort and cost, people didn’t just send out a bunch of stuff that didn’t need to be sent out and they didn’t create nearly as many half-baked documents that could get them in trouble. It was just too hard.


On the receiving end, people didn’t send out nearly as many cranky or angry responses to paper memos because there was a built-in delay between when you received a message and when you could get a reply into the hands of the sender. Mail was only delivered once, maybe twice, a day. Since there was going to be a significant lag time between when you first started composing a letter and when it would finally get delivered, you really had to think about whether your message was still going to be relevant when it got there. You could even count on that delay to consider how you wanted to respond. Since everyone knew that it took some time for written correspondence to make it’s way around, no one expected a response right away. People who worked together did most of their business in person or over the phone if they needed to get something done quickly.


How quaint. How nice!

Saturday, July 14, 2007

Don't Panic

I used to start a version of a writing class I taught for managers at my firm by starting with what I thought was a really funny joke. After the title slide of my PowerPoint presentation (I know that my dependence on PowerPoint is one of many bad habits I should kick, but they don’t make patches for this one) I would move on to a slide labeled “Writing for Managers Agenda” and slowly reveal these bulleted points:

  • Diagramming sentences
  • Examining the differences between analogy and metaphor
  • What is the subjunctive tense anyway?



I always had to stop after the third bullet because it just seemed too cruel. I could see the blood draining from the faces of my friends and coworkers as their worst fears about attending a writing class appeared to come true. All I had to do to turn these professionals into squirming junior high kids was threaten them with rules for writing. After this happened the first couple of times I took the joke out of my presentation; I didn’t want to come across as a sadist.


But I eventually put it back in once I realized that there was a reason I had put it there in the first place. And it wasn’t all about having a joke to open with. The truth is that when you tell someone that they are going to attend a writing class the first thing they think is that you are going to ask them to memorize arcane rules and grammatical terms. So I started opening later versions of the class by acknowledging that most people probably weren’t thrilled to be attending a class about writing. By warning them about my “joke” slide in advance, I was able to reassure them that these were not the kinds of writing topics we were primarily concerned with. In retrospect, maybe I should have just begun with a slide displaying the words “Don’t Panic,” which were famously written in large friendly letters on the cover of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy and is still the best piece of all-purpose advice I know. Because while the rules of English grammar are important, they certainly aren’t all there is to know about writing well.

Tuesday, July 10, 2007

Don't Be Bob

Not every badly written or poorly considered email is the kind that is going to get you fired, but they can easily have an impact on the impression you make on your boss, your employees, your coworkers and clients. My interest in the problem of writing effective email developed out of a class I taught at the firm where I work. Concerned that her employees were sending unprofessional emails to clients and inappropriate messages to each other, a friend asked me to put together something along the lines of an “email etiquette” class we could deliver to everyone in her department. She was having particular trouble with one of her supervisors, “Bob,” whose emails to his co-workers were rude and often wound up annoying the attorneys and clients he dealt with. My friend hoped that offering a class to her employees would be useful to all of them, but would have a special impact on Bob.

Having been subjected to bad writing and bad manners in email for years, it was amazingly easy for me to come up with a list of topics that we could address in class: the careless spelling and grammar mistakes; the angry emails ricocheting around the office like bullets; the misdirected messages informing all two thousand people in our nine offices that there were leftover sandwiches in the 45th floor conference room in Los Angeles. Still, it seemed like a good idea to go around and talk to a few other people to see if they had any suggestion that I hadn’t thought of. So I talked to our HR manager, the secretarial supervisor, and a friend in marketing. While they all had good ideas (and some horrifying examples), I was surprised at how many of the things they mentioned were already on my list, and the consistency with which they all mentioned seeing the same problems in email across the firm.

The same thing happened whenever I mention to anyone at work that I was working on an email etiquette class-- I’d get pretty much the same response. “That’s great,” the receptionist said when I talked to her about booking a conference room for the class. “You really need to make the secretaries go to that.” Of course, the secretaries had other ideas. “Too bad you can’t get my attorney to go to training,” one of them said to me. “You wouldn’t believe the stuff he sends people.” The IT department was also at the top of everyone’s list of people who could use training. “No one knows what those people are trying to say,” one attorney complained. “I mean, what the hell is an Exchange Server? Why can’t they just speak English?”

By the time the first class met I had pulled together a lot of material. My plan was to open by talking about the importance of effective communication at work and the ways in which communication had changed since we started to depend so heavily on email. I also had what I hoped were entertaining examples of spelling and grammar mistakes and quick suggestions about how to avoid them. I had the PowerPoint slides that are all but mandatory for any presentation these days. But it turned out that all I really needed was a little exercise that I had planned as an icebreaker. Having divided the class into small groups, I asked them to work together to come up with a list of problems they had seen in other people’s emails: things that annoyed them, things that were rude, things that made their writers look “less than smart,” as I tried to phrase it diplomatically.

We never even got to the second half of my agenda. “Less than smart” me, I should have realized from the beginning how much people love to complain. I couldn’t get them to stop talking. Everyone was having so much fun and they were coming up with such comprehensive lists of things that they hated in email that I decided that it was just best to let their discussion take over most of the class. By the time we went over their lists and everyone explained why the items on them were problems, our time was up. But we had also covered almost all of the items on my agenda, and it felt to me like the most organic teaching experience of my life. I’d never experienced a subject that just seemed to teach itself this way, and I was pleased that everyone seemed to be having such a good time discussing an important topic.

“See, you already know this stuff,” I said to the class, summing things up as I prepared to let them go back to work and their email accounts. “You just need to slow down a little and take some time to think about your messages before you hit the ‘send’ button.” They all nodded in agreement as they finished filling out their evaluation forms for the class (which were all excellent, by the way). I tidied up the room and closed down my laptop as people straggled out the door. Eventually the only person left was Bob, the supervisor whose problematic emails had prompted us to create the class in the first place.

“Hey Corby, I just wanted to thank you and tell you that this class was great,” he said once everyone had left. At that moment I was sure that this was going to be one of those moments trainers live for, one of those times when you just know that you’ve really gotten through to someone who needed your help. “Some of the people who work for me really needed this,” he confided. “You wouldn’t believe the stuff they write.”

This book is for all the Bobs out there. And I’m afraid that we’re all Bobs, convinced that everyone else is committing email atrocities while we’re communicating effectively and charming all of our correspondents with our sparkling wit. I think that I’m generally a pretty good writer, but I know that I’m much more aware of what I’m doing since I’ve spent time thinking about how our writing can derail good communication. So pull up a seat and pay attention. Trust me, you don’t want to be Bob.

Saturday, July 7, 2007

It's just email, right?

Why should you care about how you present yourself in email? To put it bluntly, you don’t want to look stupid. While email is undoubtedly a powerful tool that allows the average person to communicate with an unprecedented number of people quickly across huge distances, it also gives us unprecedented power to make asses of ourselves on a global stage. There’s a rule I learned from working on technology projects that says that you can do things fast, you can do them cheap and you can do them well, but you can only achieve two of those three goals on any one project. The idea is that if you try to do things quickly and on the cheap you’re bound to have a bad result. And a similar rule applies to email communication. Email is certainly fast and cheap (which is why it’s so popular with spammers), but you also have to make the effort to do it well if you’re going to avoid getting yourself in trouble. Most of us take the speed and ease of email communication for granted without considering all the things that can go wrong when we don’t bother to communicate clearly or to consider the life-changing results that can happen when we get caught up in the dizzying speed of electronic communications. I’m not just talking about what happens when you send your boss a message full of typos or when you mean to forward along a message to a friend with a snotty comment and accidentally hit the “reply to all” button by mistake. The incredible, thrilling power of email can easily extend to getting you fired or changing the path of your entire career.

Since I’ve spent most of my professional career working at various incarnations of a law firm which, Borg-like, continues to absorb other firms as it grows and occasionally changes it’s name, the examples of career suicide by email that I know best come from the legal world. I’m sure every industry has its favorites. Mine is the farewell email from an associate at the big firm of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker. I get the garden variety of these emails every week-- you probably do too. Someone is leaving the company and they drop a note to everyone in the office letting them know where they can be reached in the future and thanking all the people who made the firm such a wonderful place to work. (Which always makes me wonder-- if it’s such a great place, why are you leaving?)

The email from the Paul Hastings associate left no such doubt in anyone’s mind. His email declared that he was leaving to become a “trophy husband,” which he explained would be “a step up from my current situation” at the firm. And while he did manage to thank some of the people he had worked with, he also complained that "I am no longer comfortable working for a group largely populated by gossips, backstabbers and Napoleonic personalities," and that he would rather be “dressed up like a piƱata and beaten than remain with this group any longer." Apparently not satisfied that he’d thoroughly finished off his future practicing law at a large firm, he wished Paul Hastings "continued success in your goals to turn vibrant, productive, dedicated associates into an aimless, shambling group of dry, lifeless husks."

Honestly, it’s the kind of email that we’ve all wanted to send at one time in our lives or another. In a way I kind of admire the guy for actually following through on that fantasy we all have every now and then of living out that “take this job and shove it” moment. Other people must also have taken pleasure in his moment of uninhibited criticism, because the email escaped the confines of Paul, Hastings and spread in the wild with remarkable speed. Within 24 hours everyone I talked to in the legal industry had received at least one copy of the email. I had five of them forwarded to me, even though this was before I was teaching “email etiquette” classes. And while I have to respect the associate’s chutzpah, I have to cringe when I think what this incident may have done to his career. I hope that trophy husband thing worked out well for him, because even though the whole incident happened a couple of years ago, that email is still floating around out there. It’s still lurking in people’s inboxes waiting to get forwarded and stories about the episode can still be found in the archives of the legal news websites. I’m not going to print the poor guy’s name, but it’s easy enough to find if you do a little searching on the web.

Chances are he probably never meant to send the message in the first place; apparently he made a futile attempt to recall it once it had gone out. But if he didn’t mean to send the message he never should have written the email in the first place, and he certainly shouldn’t have addressed it. I’ll admit I’ve written some hotheaded things myself, but I always make sure that the address fields are empty so I don’t run the risk of accidentally hitting the “send” button and making a fool of myself. And if he really did address it and send it on purpose, he made a big mistake in not realizing that his potential audience was much larger than the list of names in his “To:” and “Cc:” fields. Every one of the co-workers he sent the message to (including those he insulted) was free to forward the message along to anyone in their address books. From the speed with which the email made the rounds of the legal industry, I’d guess that just about every one of them did.

Another favorite cautionary tale? How about the spat between two legal secretaries working at the firm of Allens Arthur Robinson in Sydney, Australia, which started with email accusations that someone had stolen the makings of a ham sandwich, progressed to a public exchange over which of them made more money, why one couldn’t keep a boyfriend, and whether blondes really are dumb, and wound up with both of them getting fired for misusing the firm’s email system. Sounds like a urban legend? Well it’s not. I’ve seen pictures of both ladies in Australian newspapers. According to the urban legend debunking site Snopes.com, this one is true. As Snopes recounts:


The pair's e-mail spat was forwarded to colleagues at Allens, who copied it to rival firms, including Mallesons, Phillips Fox and Gadens. Soon it was sweeping the city's legal and financial offices, drawing comments from employee of Westpac, Deloitte, Macquarie Bank and JP Morgan. The two secretaries who had descended into slinging words at one another were fired by the firm, and an Allens Arthur Robinson spokesman said anyone involved in forwarding the e-mail along to others would be disciplined. "E-mail is a business tool, not a personal messaging system. The use of it in this case was not in any way acceptable, nor is that the way we expect people totreat their work colleagues," he said. "We have taken appropriate disciplinary action against anyone who dealt with the e-mails inappropriately."


http://www.snopes.com/embarrass/email/ham.asp

Like the associate’s bridge-burning email, the argument between the two secretaries didn’t stop with them; the email spread throughout law firms in Australia and eventually made its way around the world as one of those “they can’t make up this kind of stuff” news blurbs. The fallout from the incident didn’t stop with them either. While they were both fired, other employees of Allens Arthur Robinson were also disciplined for forwarding the message along to their co-workers as well as to people outside the firm. You don’t even have to write a nasty email to get in trouble-- all you need to do is forward one.


Though these might seem like extreme examples, they are really only exceptional in that they were seen by so many people and briefly made their way into the media. Trust me, people lose their jobs over email every day-- I’ve even known a few. And it could happen to you. For more stories and more suggestions on how you can avoid committing the kinds of mistakes that can make you look stupid or even get your fired, keep reading.