Six Traps in Email or Text: II

If you've ever felt a twinge of regret after clicking "Send," or if you've ever had to send a text message to correct what AutoCorrect did to what you actually typed, you're familiar with some of the traps that await you in email or text messaging systems. Last time I described a procedure for reducing the frequency of incidents like these. In essence, the strategy reduces the error rate by adjusting your approach to using these email or text messaging systems.

In this post, I describe four more examples of traps, and how to avoid them.

Writing to be funny

Writing to be funny is *difficult*. The difficulty might trace to the narrowness of the margin between humor and truth. That might be why the only thing worse than humor that falls flat is humor that's misunderstood as serious and which is then taken as insulting.

Unless your correspondent is a close pal, or you are yourself a professional comedy writer, writing to be funny is risky. You can manage the risk somewhat with emojis, but using emojis to indicate humor is roughly equivalent to writing, "I thought I was saying something funny, but just in case, I'm including this little cartoon to indicate 'this is supposed to be funny.'" That kind of note undermines the humor.

It's OK to be funny in email or text messaging. Just be sure to give message composition the effort and time humor requires.

Asking, "Let me know if X"

To set a Let-Me-Know trap for yourself, for example, advise your correspondent, "If you see any problems with this, let me know." That might be safe if you're communicating with a friend or someone who wants to be helpful. But it's risky if your correspondent doesn't care, or is abusive, or is seeking revenge, or is just plain mean. In those cases, your correspondent can choose not to respond at all unless the condition X is met. Consider our example, "If you see any problems with this, let me know." In this case, your correspondent would feel no obligation to send a "looks ok" response. You'd receive a response only if there's a problem. That's fine, if that's what you intend. But often people who express a Let-Me-Know request do expect a response of some kind whether or not there is a problem. To avoid this trap, express the request as "Let me know either way, if you see a problem or not."

Using terms that are familiar but not uniformly defined

Using terms that lack a single universal definition can lead to confusion. Examples that generally mean the end of the business day, but which are ambiguous, include COB (close of business), EOB (End of Business), EOD (End of Day), COP (Close of Play), and EOP (End of Play). The source of the ambiguity is that most organizations don't define these terms precisely.

Modern Unless your correspondent is a close pal,
or you are yourself a professional comedy
writer, writing to be funny is riskywork patterns that lead to ambiguity about the end of the business day include working from home, working at different sites or for different employers with different business hours, and working across time zones.

In the end-of-day example, to avoid the ambiguity trap, you can be specific about the time: "1700 Eastern," for example. Or you can cite the time using Team Standard Time, which is a predefined time zone you previously agreed to use for citing times.

Sending ambiguous correction messages

After you've sent a message, you might suddenly realize that it's incorrect in an important way. Perhaps it could be misinterpreted or maybe it contains outdated information. If the erroneous elements are important enough, sending a correction message is appropriate. A common error in correction messages is failing to clearly identify the message or messages that are being corrected.

Provide unambiguous identification of the message you're correcting. Include the recipients or recipient lists, sender, time sent, date sent, and message subject line (if any).

One more point. If the correction applies to only a part of the message, clearly indicate which part. Examples: "The second paragraph," or "the reference to butterflies should have been orange butterflies.

Last words

One way to reduce errors in messaging is to make templates for frequently sent messages (or portions of messages). Most email clients and many text-messaging systems have template facilities. For a more specific approach to error reduction, track the errors you make. Awareness of the traps that caught you in the past is your best defense against repetition.   First issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

Are you so buried in email that you don't even have time to delete your spam? Do you miss important messages? So many of the problems we have with email are actually within our power to solve, if we just realize the consequences of our own actions. Read 101 Tips for Writing and Managing Email to learn how to make peace with your inbox. Order Now!

And if you have organizational responsibility, you can help transform the culture to make more effective use of email. You can reduce volume while you make content more valuable. You can discourage email flame wars and that blizzard of useless if well-intended messages from colleagues and subordinates. Read Where There's Smoke There's Email to learn how to make email more productive at the organizational scale — and less dangerous. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Effective Communication at Work:

The Fine Art of Quibbling

We usually think of quibbling as an innocent swan dive into unnecessary detail, like calculating shares of a lunch check to the nearest cent. In debate about substantive issues, a detour into quibbling can be far more threatening — it can indicate much deeper problems.

When You Aren't Supposed to Say: II

Most of us have information that's "company confidential," or possibly even more sensitive than that. Sometimes people who try to extract that information use techniques based on misdirection. Here are some of them.

On Facilitation Suggestions from Meeting Participants

Team leaders often facilitate their own meetings, and although there are problems associated with that dual role, it's so familiar that it works well enough, most of the time. Less widely understood are the problems that arise when other meeting participants make facilitation suggestions.

Naming Ideas

Participants in group discussions sometimes reference each other's contributions using the contributor's name. This risks offending the contributor or others who believe the idea is theirs. Naming ideas is less risky.

They Don't Reply to My Email

Ever have the experience of sending an email message to someone, asking for information or approval or whatever, and then waiting for a response that comes only too late? Maybe your correspondent is an evil loser, but maybe not. Maybe the problem is in your message.

See also Effective Communication at Work and Effective Communication at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming January 22: Storming: Obstacle or Pathway?

The Storming stage of Tuckman's model of small group development is widely misunderstood. Fighting the storms, denying they exist, or bypassing them doesn't work. Letting them blow themselves out in a somewhat-controlled manner is the path to Norming and Performing. Available here and by RSS on January 22.

And on January 29: A Framework for Safe Storming

The Storming stage of Tuckman's development sequence for small groups is when the group explores its frustrations and degrees of disagreement about both structure and task. Only by understanding these misalignments is reaching alignment possible. Here is a framework for this exploration. Available here and by RSS on January 29.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info