Nevertheless, in the few companies, effective cost-calculation is linked to ‘store’ or to asking for colleagues’ time. There are many hours in a working day and there is no doubt, for example, that inefficient meeting activities are one of them. Inefficient meeting activities can be described as a runnin with Finnish cap and machete — in other words, there is rarely any doubt that if you meet at this time-lift, you will be robbed.
In the world of metaphors for time thieves, however, e-mails are more like a cleptoman friend who almost unnoticed nakeds with items from your house when she is visiting coffee. Many of us are being deprived of valuable time every day without necessarily being aware of it.
How much e-mail do we send?
Research shows that a working person in the United States sent and received about 115 emails daily in 2013. However, recent data indicate that: an average person in 2018 receives and sends out a full 235 emails daily. There is no doubt that the use of e-mail increases as a means of communication.
E-mail is one of the largest, but perhaps least noticeable, time-twenties in companies around the world. But how do you get rid of it? In this article we are doing a deep in the effect of the e-mail on the daily work of a company and what steps you should follow to minimise the time you throw away to send e-mail.
Golden Rule of the Mail
CEO I LinkedIn, Jeff Weiner, has written about several good tips regarding excessive use of email. One of them is very simple and sounds like: If you want to receive less e-mail, send less e-mail yourself.
Weiner's advice may sound too good to be true, but a study carried out at the University of Glasgow in cooperation with Modeuro Consulting shows that “do to others what you want others to do to you”-essen of the simple council has something for itself.
In Modeuro Consulting, managers spent a average of 1.5 hours a day sending about 56 e-mails each to their colleagues and employees. By being aware of its excessive use of e-mail as a means of communication by the leaders of Modeuro and starting to think twice before they pressed on the send, reduced the number of e-mails sent daily by 54%. Even more shocking, and in line with Weiner’s advice, the reduction in the number of emails sent by managers resulted in a decrease of 64% in the number of emails sent between other employees.
By sending smaller e-mails and rather communicating with their employees by telephone or face to face, the managers saved the entire company for a large number of e-mails that would otherwise be sent out to settle the first e-mail or to delegate further tasks that the employees had received from management by e-mail.
On the basis of the golden rule, Modeuro Consulting collectively saved 10,400 hours a year on something as simple as the leaders thought twice before they pressed. The founder of Modeuro Consulting, Andrew Killlick, believes that these results are not only limited to Modeuro but that other companies should follow their example. Killing assumes that other organisations are likely to increase their productivity by between 5-30% by sending smaller e-mails.
Ifkeleken with e-mail
The golden rule of the mail shows a good example of not all the things that are suitable for the format of the email. If, however, you have thought twice and decided to send an e-mail to your colleagues, you should also give the contents of the extra care before you press send.
An example that illustrates the potential domino effect of a fuzzy email, or a clear email sent to the wrong person, is the whisper of childhood. In the whispering whisper “I will slide after the school” and on the journey from one ear to the other end “I will slide after the school” up as “I will ski in the woods” when the last stop of whispering is to reveal what has been whispered in her ear.
A group of researchers from Carnegie Mellon University found in their study of people's e-mail habits, results that suggested that people with a higher probability would respond to enquiries by e-mail if they were easy to addressSo let's say that this is the same thing as that. The finding was completely independent of whether the questions were considered important or completely trivial by the recipient. This tells us that it is critical that the content of the email is both clear and sent to the right person if one wants a good answer and to avoid and trigger a collective whisper through e-mails around the organisation to interpret the first email.
The clearer the content of the e-mail, the less the e-mails the recipient needs to send to resolve it, and the more chance you have of getting a reply.
Malformed use of "copy" field
Top manager in Lloyds Bank, Ian Hallett, claims to save the entire 5 hours wasted time a week only by sorting out all the emails he stands on “copy” in. Hallett created a simple automatic rule using his e-mail system which allowed him to segment out all the emails he had copied into a separate folder. E-mails that were not directly to Hallett represented 50% of all e-mails he received and 90% of the emails turned out to be deleted by a quick review.
Hallet's discovery is shocking and shows that simple grips can save significantly with time in their work week by giving less attention to the emails we are copying. But the big question is...
Is Hallett's experience universal?
Not necessarily.
The incorrect use of the Copy field in an email may pose problems that make the use of the Hallett rule difficult. Weiner pointed out that the copy field too many people have become synonymous with the to field in an emailSo let's say that this is the same thing as that. This, however, is a misunderstanding and the fields should be used to symbolise different action expectations to the recipients. The To field should be used for those recipients for whom a response is requested, while the Copy field should be used when someone should be informed about the content of the email, despite the fact that it is not directly related to them. If all the fields used were to and copy in this way, Hallett's rule would be the only one and only the holy gral to be rid of the time-thirty-mail. Unfortunately, that's not always the case.
Why do we really put people on a copy?
Melissa Gratias from Redbooth has examined why people choose to put their colleagues on a copy in an e-mail. She means The most common reasons for copying people are fear and need for positive reinforcementSo let's say that this is the same thing as that. People are copying others to show what they have done in the hope of positive feedback and praise. Others put colleagues and managers in a copy of the fear that they would otherwise not believe that work has been done.
There are a number of reasons why people are being copied in e-mails that do not directly concern them or require a response from them. The picture below shows several reasons for putting someone on a copy that most of us might recognize in – on the receiving or dispatch page.
Email affects work environment
There is no doubt that the wrong use of the copy field is a timer without equal. However, the excessive and incorrect use of the copy field also appears to be a threat to good working environments.
Studies show that: when a manager is included in the copy field of an e-mail between colleagues, the recipient feels that they are getting less trust. In the case of recurrent cases of a copy manager, the recipient feels more likely that the organisation as a whole has less confidence in them. This is disturbing given the number of emails sent daily.
Conclusion
There is no doubt that most jobs are sent too much e-mail and that there is a significant proportion of our working day lost for inefficient e-mail communications. Furthermore, the incorrect use of the email company’s culture and well-being is also affected. It is therefore not a question of whether we should improve by e-mail in companies, but how.
This article has developed three specific tips for more efficient communication through email. By sending smaller e-mails, by sending well-written and clear e-mails, and by using the correct copy function by e-mail, individuals in Norwegian companies will be able to save significantly with time in their daily work.