He said WHAT!*%!?

The consensus is that email sucks; although, it is a communications tool we use in astounding amounts and one that consumes vast portions of our time. As Samir Ghosh observes in his article "Seven Reasons Why Email Sucks," "Let’s face it. Most of us have a Love/Hate relationship with email." Survey results bear this out, and the consensus is that like most inventions (tools, transportation, drugs, weapons…) email is inherently neither good nor evil. It is a a valuable  tool when used responsibly. In all fairness to mankind, email is in its childhood, having been in general use for less than fifty years, as compared to written and verbal communications, which man has had thousands of years to master. So, perhaps our lack of experience with email explains why still wrestle with it? Perhaps our emotional intelligence is limiting our dexterity with the tool. (One could argue we haven’t universally mastered verbal and written communications either, perhaps for the same underlying reason.)

Emotional intelligence training will teach willing students to identify cues in body language, facial expression, and tone of voice. Email presents challenges because these cues don't exist in that environment. And worse, we build inferences from cues such as bold-faced type and text colors where no inferences were intended by the author. Emotional intelligence training focused on email will enable the reader to accurately assess the sender's intent and avoid misinterpretations or unfounded inferences. Emotional intelligence training will also help email writers increase clarity and avoid language and other message attributes that can cause miscommunications and unintended emotional responses from readers. Someone with this type of training will also recognize situations that need to be diffused and will end certain email threads, opting for conversations and meetings instead. The savvy email user knows when the best response is no response at all in any form.

Another problem with email, which someone with high EQ can mitigate, is that there is no way for the sender to know if the recipient read, understood, and accepted the message. An email application can verify that an email was delivered to a target inbox and was opened by the recipient. That’s not the same as confirming that he recipient read the content. And it is not the same as maintaining eye contact or observing other visual cues, such as nodding, to ascertain someone's understanding or acceptance of a message. Samir Ghosh observes that "some people ignore emails if they’re only included in the 'cc' or 'bcc' list." A week ago, this would have surprised me, but last week a colleague confessed this habit to me.

Admonishing other people’s email habits or ignoring them and continuing to encounter these flaws does nothing to further to goals of the sender's intended message. Someone with high EQ recognizes these behaviors as constraints of email and finds alternative approaches to information exchanges including meetings, phone calls, or perhaps different separate emails the intended 'to" list and 'cc' list with introductions such as "please take the following action," or, "this email was sent to your staff members and is being shared with you only for your awareness."

One survey respondent suggested that email is "good for certain things but not as a means of conducting business." Although the statement is probably too broad to be generally accepted, most people agree that email isn't the right tool for every situation. There are many occasions when it is appropriate to express emotions or sentiments to colleagues, subordinates, and superiors. Gratitude for a job well done, congratulations for achievements, condolences for personal losses are just a few examples. Email may often be the best option given time and distance between sender and receiver, but nothing can replace a handwritten note or greeting card much less a phone call, eye contact, a handshake, or pat on the back.

As the US Postal Service marketing campaign says, "Email Sucks, So Mail Stuff Instead." While they are obviously trying to sell more services, they do have a point. I recently donated to a program that purchased books for underprivileged kids. A few weeks later, I received an over-stuffed, legal-sized envelope in my mailbox. In it were several handwritten thank you notes from those kids. I was touched and will keep those letters for years to come. If they had sent me emails, the effect would not have been as profound. I'm sure their teacher's insight into the powerful difference between hand-written letters and emails led to their selection, but her choice is a good example of one that garnered the intended emotional response from the reader. This is emotional intelligence in action.