|
Net Q & AQuestion of the Month: February 2001Is It A Good Idea To Try To Enhance Human-to-Human Communication Inside A Law Firm By Placing Limits On E-mail Usage? AnswerThe short answer is that this entirely the wrong approach to deal with e-mail's shortcomings. The Trend & Its Rationale A few law firms have begun placing limits on e-mail usage inside law firms, including ceilings on how many messages can be sent, or allowing intra-firm messages to be sent to whole departments, instead of individuals. The stated rationale behind e-mail restrictions is "to promote face-to-face communication and the ability to have a real conversation." Other motivating factors are bad experiences with misunderstandings, which can develop into productivity-sapping "flame wars," and wasted time due to swapping jokes, etc. Analyzing The Issue Let's put this notion into perspective by comparing e-mail to something everyone is more familiar with, telephones. After all, telephones are less personal than "face-to-face communication and the ability to have a real conversation," right? Further, because telephone conversations don't have facial or gesture clues, they have many of the same distancing effects correctly ascribed to e-mail. For these reasons, for years, long before e-mail became popular, I have personally preferred to avoid using the phone in favor of face to face discussions. However, let's get real. It would be crazy not to give communicators flexibility in using phone calls. Train them on telephone etiquette if needed, yes, but don't deprive them of an important option. As much as I dislike telephones (especially voice mail), sometimes they are the best approach. E-mail is exactly the same. The problems with e-mail are real, no doubt, just as those with telephones are real. However, the proposed solution is out of touch with reality. The solution to the deficiencies of telephones and e-mail is not going Luddite. It is learning how to use the technology correctly. As much as some might wish otherwise, technology is not going away. The law firms that learn how to use it correctly, for their internal functioning and otherwise, will have a competitive advantage over those that suffer under pointless self-imposed restrictions.
This page last revised: February 3, 2001. |
| |||||||||