Two high-ranking executives from Ireland have recently fallen foul due to their email communication. In the first instance, a jesting remark taken out of context and a subsequent terse response put Football Association of Ireland CEO, Jonathan Hill, in a precarious situation. Meanwhile, an affirmative reply sent by Ex-PTSB leader, David Guinane, to a peer to limit the association’s exposure to tracker mortgage rates resulted in a regulatory probe 15 years later.
Emails, with their speed and efficacy, often rely on abbreviated responses composed hurriedly. Ostensibly, their use seems relaxed, but it actually creates an official record of conversations that can be scrutinised ages later. While it may appear less formal than traditional business communication, treating emails as casual chat in professional settings is ill-advised.
The conciseness characteristic of emails promotes abbreviated thinking and expression. The intersection of informality and brevity can lead to dismissive comments that have the potential to rebound negatively. The problem is exacerbated by the anticipated rapidity of responses associated with digital communication.
Interpretations become more complicated when hasty emails are sent in moments of irritation, worry, or rage – akin to unexploded bombs waiting to detonate upon receipt. The onus of discerning the sender’s tone and intent falls upon the recipient, who’s left negotiating the ‘cold’ technology instead of a more compassionate human interaction. This adds a provocative element to email, unseen in other communication modes, barring texts.
The crux of the concern lies in discerning tone and meaning. Expressions that seem perfectly logical when spoken can often be misconstrued in writing. A poorly selected phrase or an unclear sentence can stir the recipient, triggering their biases (often adverse) about the sender and shaping their response. In the best-case scenario, the recipient might charitably ignore any unintended offence. However, in the worst case, their ire might provoke a retaliatory response, straining the relationship.
Traditional letters can elicit similarly ardent responses, but they generally offer greater detail and lack the instant reply expectation. Once, taking time to reply was customary, but today, relentless knee-jerk reactions brought on by digital communication contribute significantly to the work-related stress observed by business coach Tom Hennessy.
“Lack of restraint significantly influences our choices,” is what is suggested. This means that a person may act hastily, such as quickly sending a disagreeable message or confronting a sensitive matter, which tends to lead to disagreements. On the other hand, taking a pause and giving the situation a 24-hour cooling-off period may substantially simplify the management of a challenging circumstance.
Email has an inherent characteristic known as the “online disinhibition effect,” which emboldens individuals to say things they wouldn’t ordinarily express without the anonymity of a screen, according to Amy Gallo, contributing Harvard Business Review editor and author of Getting Along. This provides guidance on dealing with all kinds of people, even those who may be somewhat troublesome.
She further noted that, “Email is notoriously poor at transmitting tone.” The subtle rises and falls in a person’s voice over the phone, or the body language they display in a face-to-face conversation often provide vital information about the interaction, all of which is lost in emails. She confirmed that while emojis can help convey one’s emotions and intent, they are no match for the expressiveness of human’s facial expressions or body language. Furthermore, the interpretation of emojis can vary from one generation to the next, thus they can’t be seen as a universal language.
Although comfortable with current technology, Gallo had her own negative experience with a misplaced email where a confidential message about a problematic client accidentally found its way into the client’s inbox. As a result, Gallo strongly advices care with emails. While she doesn’t propose a complete return to traditional letters, she does stress the importance of being thoughtful when interacting via email.
She explains, “I receive between 500 and 1,000 emails daily, with a significant portion of them being spam. The presence of such junk emails affects our views about this form of communication, as sometimes it feels like sifting through litter. The barrage of spam has lowered our respect for email communication.”
Setting semantics aside, email communication can be fraught with errors such as sending messages to the wrong recipients. Nonetheless, a brief pause before hitting send can make a significant difference.
Always aim to keep your emails polite and respectful. Avoid sending replies when you’re angry. The better approach is to draft a response and then wait a day before sending it. Treat sensitive or challenging emails with the attention they warrant. On occasion, a written letter might be more suitable, as it allows one to be particularly thoughtful about the tone and content.
It’s important to keep in mind that your email may not always remain private. Consider how you’d feel if it were read aloud publicly. If that would cause embarrassment, it’s wise to rethink your wording before sending the message.
If you’re interested, sign up for business push alerts to get top news, analysis and commentary directly on your mobile device. You can also keep updated by following The Irish Times on WhatsApp. Additionally, our weekly ‘Inside Business’ podcast is always available for your convenience – find the most recent episode here.