The real "problem" with email is that it's simply too good.
It's
too cheap, it's too fast, it's too efficient and it's too easy to
access. Could you imagine if gas was 2 cents a litre, cars cost $50 each
and they could go 500km/ hour (and there were no speed limits)? The
loss of life, the pollution, the chaos? Anytime we have an overabundance
of an inexpensive resource - think water, electricity, even gas - what
do we tend to do with it? We overuse, misuse and abuse it. With no
visible cost why not send an email about anything and everything to
anyone and everyone? And that's exactly what's happening. Email is
spectacularly fast & efficient. An idea or question pops into your
head and within a minute or two you've created an email and pressed
sent. And similarly, I can respond very quickly. Within minutes or even
seconds I can hit reply, formulate a response and press send. Wow, we
sure are getting a lot done, fast. And we're getting it done from any
place we are in the world. But how much thought goes into the question,
the response or if this issue is even a priority for our time? The
efficiency of email allows us to create work for each other faster than
we're able to do the work.
So what can we do? Well, understanding
the real challenge is a start to identifying real solutions. Email is
simply too good - too cheap, too efficient - and as a result we're
sending too much. Strategies to get faster at sorting, handling and
responding to email can only go so far, we need to go beyond managing
the Inbox and start managing the Outbox.
I propose the postage
stamp solution. What if we had to pay the price of a stamp for each
email we sent, including those people CC'd? How many email would we now
decide not to send? How many fewer people would we copy on an email? And
if an email isn't worth the price of a postage stamp should we really
be sending it?
We could go a step further. What if the person
receiving the email had to spend a postage stamp as well? This isn't as
ridiculous as it sounds because you know what, that email you send does
cost them. In fact it probably costs them more to receive the email than
it costs you to send it. If you think about the typical email, on
average it takes less time to ask a question than it does to formulate
the answer. It takes less time to copy someone than it takes them to
review it. Even that momentary distraction from something else carries a
cost for the receiver. So would the receiver say that the email was
worth the price of a stamp? And once again, if that email we send isn't
worth the price of a stamp to the receiver, should we be sending it?
No,
I'm not seriously proposing some kind of email tax. I am seriously
proposing that we wake up to the real costs of email and put more
thought into what we're sending to others. And that if we acted as
though every email cost us a postage stamp, we would quickly see a lot
of opportunities to cull low value email from our sent folder. We would
think twice before pressing the send button. The quality of the email we
send would go up, confusing strings would be reduced and fewer
unnecessary names would be included in the cc field.
No comments:
Post a Comment