Draft - Non-Urgent Email
DRAFT for Discussion
Proposal for the implementation of an
Important, Non-Urgent Email Protocol
Where as:
School administrators receive large volumes of email from staff, SAT, consultants, MECY and parents. The time it takes to properly process this volume of email takes away from other important activities.
Where as:
Unlike phone calls which are always urgent, email can be urgent or not. (not sure if this is necessary...)
Many email messages come from senders who expect a quick reply while many others are simply for information; they are important but not urgent. Administrators value the immediate collaboration and problem solving that email can facilitate. However, the non-urgent email is at times like “noise” that drowns out the urgent email.
Where as:
The Globe and Mail recently reported on research that indicates that “it takes an employee one minute to read and process a new e-mail – send one e-mail out to 300 to 500 people and you’ve just lost the equivalent of one employee’s entire working day.” (The technology-productivity equation, Dec. 8, 2007)
It is proposed that an Important, Non-Urgent Email Protocol be established. We propose that the protocol be the following:
-When sending an email a PTSD sender should consider whether or not the email requires immediate attention (it is urgent) or whether a three day window for the receiver to review the email is sufficient (Important, Non-Urgent).
-If the email is urgent, the email is sent in the usual manner
-If the email is non-urgent (a 3 day window for review is sufficient), the sender includes the following in the subject “3D”. This allows the receiving administrator to automatically file the email for review within 3 days by employing a “rule” which identifies the incoming non-urgent email and moving it from the “in box” to a special folder for later review.
Note:
We recognize that as we move to Share Point it will be possible for bulletin boards to display all non-urgent information, making this protocol only necessary in the short-term.
Examples of Non-Urgent
- rules on the issuing of school permits
- how to get a DVD player cleaned
- council or committee minutes
posted by Brad @ 7:28 AM
7 comments
7 Comments:
I think the key idea is to sort email so that we are aware if we need to respond or take action immediately (perhaps urgent - response required is the label), respond later (non urgent response required) or simply archive the information (information). I am somewhat leery of using time labels as we may be establishing unrealistic future expectations. That said, perhaps the first category I am suggesting "urgent response required" be for email mail that needs an immediate to same day response.
Hi Everyone,
I agree with Brad that a Response Required would be an excellent tag to help us differentiate our e-mails. My only caution is that as we begin down this road, we try to keep our tags to a minimum (Urgent-Response Required, Non-Urgent, Interest Only).
Doug :-)
At the meeting most seemed supportive of the idea but thought it needed some thoughtful review. Someone mentioned that we may want to add the recommendation that a response required tag be added to our proposal. I look forward to reading your feedback.
Bill...
After reading the proposal I wondered what was happening in other organizations. How do folks in different kinds of business manage the email storm? Are we reinventing a wheel that may be out there?
Dave B....
As I read through, the idea is to manage the critical information sharing so as streamline the workload... I wonder why we don't consider using the built in protocols, including red exclamation marks, blue down arrow or flags... even response required... which, I do not like... kind of suggests, you can't ignore me.... Carolyn and a few others already use priority indicators, and if we all need to learn a new protocol, maybe the standard as suggested by Bill is the best way to go... must admit I do under-utilize the power within...
Sherry...
I like the idea of using existing priority indicators if we find that they meets our needs. However, I have not used the features enough to know if we would need more options. Are there enough built in features to be used to indicate the 3 categories mentioned above (Urgent-Response Required, Non-Urgent, Interest Only). With some simple guidelines people could attach the right priority feature one of the 3 categories mentioned.
Also, after having read a number of the articles it also seemed that there may be a need for some pd on email writing...or perhaps a template could be created to help people to cut to the chase when sending out information. This may help people avoid composing lengthy, wandering emails and help them cut to the chase.
So, Brad... this "wiki" has been fun (certainly an education for me) but I'm having a hard time reading the body language of our group members...what are our next steps?
Brad... (January 29)
I checked out the built in features on Outlook Web Access (which is the lowest common denominator) and I only see low priority and high priority. If we go with the tag idea, it sounds like we are thinking the following tags would be helpful
*Response Required
*Non-Urgent
I don't think we need to be fearful about recommending these as there is no real requirement to follow the recommendation. To the degree people use the tags will be up to them - the more that do the easier it will become. If the tags are helpful - they will catch on.
I would also like us to consider the protocol of identifying emails that are destined for the receiver only by putting their name in brackets e.g.
subject: Staffing denotes a general email, subject: Staffing (Bill) or subject:Staffing (MY Council) indicate specific audiences. What do you think?
Post a Comment
<< Home