Aarrrrggggggg, out of office replied are the BANE of the internet.
Its an asynchronous medium, like the postal service. Its not a conversation on the telephone. Replies are not expected to be instant. Anybody that calls you up 1 hour later to find out why you've not answered is clearly "doing it wrong"®. Use the correct tool for the job.
The guy could have stopped spamming people and just answered his emails once a month instead for the same effect.
People that claim email is a bind or that they are a slave to it should have it removed and see how they prefer life.
Don't agree at all. Whilst it may be asynchronous, people do have an expectation of a reply within a reasonable time frame - hours to a few days depending on the relationship.
It is _incredibly_ infuriating when people are out for 2 weeks and don't alert you to this fact. You end up wasting time waiting for a repsonse when you culd have immediately sought assistance from an alternative contact.
Which is exactly fundamental to my point and to the article. You have an expectation which you are placing on other. When the author stopped trying to be synchronous with an asynchronous medium he found himself to be more productive and people were OK with that.
It turns out that the frustration you feel is the problem of someone not replying, it is you externalising your problems as other peoples fault. If you really need a response quickly pick up the phone, get a synchronous answer via a synchronous medium.
> Whilst it may be asynchronous, people do have an expectation of a reply within a reasonable time frame - hours to a few days depending on the relationship.
Not at all, unless frequent contacts are expected in which case you should be warned through other channels.
> You end up wasting time waiting for a repsonse when you culd have immediately sought assistance from an alternative contact.
If you need fast turnaround, use a fast turnaround transport. That's what instant messengers or phones are for.
> It's not spam. It's polite and helpful.
I completely disagree, especially when the numbskull using out-of-office replies can't be arsed to turn it off for mailing lists. It's spammy, impolite and unhelpful.
>Not at all, unless frequent contacts are expected in which case you should be warned through other channels.
Obviously, this differs. At my actual job, email is the "need a response today" communication, while instant messaging or phone is "need a response now". Out-of-office messages are invaluable to know if someone is just out today, in which case things are fine, or they are out for two weeks, in which case I need to find their delegate.
"It is _incredibly_ infuriating when people are out for 2 weeks and don't alert you to this fact."
Email is a great "electronic mail" system but a miserable trouble ticketing system. None the less, just like "Excel" is the corporate standard database system, in practice email is the corporate standard ticketing system. Of course it doesn't work very well, but incorrect application of the tool, is not the fault of the tool.
The problem is using a binary vocabulary to describe something that should be on a spectrum. Just because I use an asynchronous medium doesn't mean that I don't expect a reply in a "reasonable" time, and "reasonableness" will depend on the situation and hopefully both parties are in some agreement.
Think of an asynchronous ajax call. It may be ok to wait 5 seconds, but not 5 days.
I find far more intrusive the phone call that could have been taken care of via email. I deal with this because a community service group I work with has a lot of elder people. They like to call. Yes, I understand it's Tuesday, and we have a meeting Friday, but I can answer you in two hours (by email). Don't interrupt me right now (by calling). But it can't wait two weeks.
eh, the big problem is people on mailing lists. Everyone hates out of office emails in mailing lists.
Vacation messages, when emailing individuals? Yeah, in the technical sphere, they are generally considered kinda rude. In the business sphere, the opposite. So yeah, here on hn, with a foot in both camps, eh, just make sure you don't vacation message a mailing list.
That's easy to say, but hard to actually do. As much as I hate spamming mailing lists, it's not like I'm going to spend two days carefully specifying answering rules for every autoreply message target in my Outlook that I must use at work. So, the burden of doing that properly is on Microsoft or company IT to make sure who will get the auto reply, while all user can and has to do is to tick a check box and type an actual message.
Is it really hard to do? Wouldn't it be enough to have the server always set the right MIME headers for messages from a mailing list? And then have the vacation mailer not send any out of office replies to mails from mailing lists? This sounds like a problem with a technical solution.
Implementations SHOULD NOT respond to any message that contains a
"List-Id" [RFC2919], "List-Help", "List-Subscribe", "List-
Unsubscribe", "List-Post", "List-Owner", or "List-Archive" [RFC2369]
header field.
If your Exchange server is 2007SP1 and up, you can specify your OOF to only send to external users who are on your contacts list. That should resolve the mailing list spamming issue here.
* People will seek you out if they think they need you urgently. It doesn't matter there's a 24 hour help desk available by phone or IM to answer the same question.
* Colleagues will IM you every time they see you online, even if it's 1am and you only signed on because you're on-call and need to fix something urgently.
* Some issues resolve themselves if you don’t answer straight away, but they won't tell you, so you still spend time answering them.
* Email is a chore to many people, so they don't bother to read what you said, even if it helps them out.
I while back I set up a rule on my mail server that would effectively OOF respond if people in my company if they didn't CC my manager (indicating that you should CC my manager so that he can triage whatever issue you may need me for). People started coming to me with real issues (instead of the "reflex ask the senior engineer") with valuable evidence (logs, etc.) - they not only needed to convince me to use my time on their work, but my manager as well. Some even found their answers on Google (I was in complete shock). That extra barrier (my manager) was an excellent deterrent for people pawning their work off on to me.
I have since turned it off, but people remain a lot more respectful of my time (I may now be perceived as a dick because of it).
You are probably perceived as a dick, as am I these days but it doesn't mean you are wrong. This is an unfortunate side effect of office politics and double-standards.
My particular perception switcher was when people started starting side conversations by forwarding JIRA ticket email notifications to me with comments etc and emails with ticket references in asking questions.
I rejected these with a simple filter [A-Z]{1,3}-[0-9]{1,6} with "write it on the damn ticket, peon" (in slightly friendlier language).
Everything turns up on tickets now and I get 4-5 emails a day compared to 80-100.
While having a good relationship with your coworkers is an important part of being an employee; I am here to do my work. So if "I am a dick who gets stuff done" so be it :) .
Unfortunately this requires having a good manager who is willing to take some heat for you. In my experience, managers view their reports as being there to cover for them, not the other way around.
There are plenty of problems that go away by themselves because there was no problem to begin with. The micro-managing managers that suddenly get a bright insight that needs to happen now, only to completely forget about it a day later. The impatient people who can't wait 5 minutes before the annual reports are generated and sent out to their inboxes. There are plenty of solutions out there just looking for a problem that doesn't need to solved.
Sounds like you've never worked a computer help desk. Lots of times people would call in and the problem would stop as soon as they got halfway through explaining it. They just weren't patient enough.
Sometimes people would call in and through the process of describing the issue they would figure out exactly what they needed to do, they just needed to talk it out.
System down for an hour to convert data while XYZ software was shut off to upgrade from 1.2.3 to 2.3.4 last week while you were not answering email? Solution, don't upgrade XYZ software from 1.2.3 to 2.3.4 again, seems simple enough.
Also in the real world random end users are free to request absolutely any imaginable feature or capability which management via budgets or goals have already declared will not be done. So waiting for some higher up to deliver the bad news when you can't deliver the bad news, is perfectly valid assuming you have a reasonable excuse. Oh you'd like it quadruple redundant as long as that redundancy is free? Yes I'd like that too, but it isn't happening.
I can't count how many tickets I've closed by saying "This is lower priority than X, Y and Z. We will address it, but not this very second." Then, two weeks later, going over to the person to gather more information about the ticket, it's suddenly not required any more.
The operative word is "some". The OP was not implying that "All" problems resolve themselves, surely you must have experienced something that you thought was a problem only to discover a bit later that it was not?
Basically work email is horrible, do all you can to stop it.
It creates individual silos of knowledge that only people included are party to, whenever someone leaves they take this with them (would you start a job and take on someone else's old mailbox, yuck!)
It drags people into work 24/7, especially in global organisations but also in 9-5 local time type places, yuck!
I've worked hard to get everyone at the start-up I work at to stop sending each other emails and use yammer instead - this has worked remarkably well especially among the techies.
Make your life better and do what you can to stop using email.
I'm really surprised at this attitude. What is fundamentally wrong with email, that I should do what I can to stop using it?
I prefer written communication since I find it more deliberate, and therefore more productive ultimately (more thought goes into writing than into a phone conversation; the pace is slower). Email lets me keep my written communication all in one place.
I can see how it would create silos; I try to be liberal in cc'ing others to avoid this and to be inclusive.
I don't understand how email drags people in to work in off-hours. I don't typically expect people to have access to work email off-hours, although I realize many do (myself included). For urgent questions yes, I'll pick up the phone.
To be clear, I get 100+ emails on a typical business day. I'm sure if you get a lot more, a different strategy might be necessary to manage them all.
I'll add to why I think it is so bad, there is so god damn much of it!
I am not trying to convert anyone but I would hate to get 100+ emails a day, how do you get anything else done?
Since Monday morning (all of Monday and 3/4 of Tuesday) I have had 21 emails, mostly I have been cc'd by customers and they are irrelevant for me.
For the out of work hours thing I have had a lot of emails out of hours and felt that I had to reply - I do accept that if I turn off emails out of work then I'm less likely to be dragged in out of work and maybe other people can read stuff and put it to the back of their minds or just ignore!
I really felt it liberating to stop receiving so much email, I highly recommend it!
"I would hate to get 100+ emails a day, how do you get anything else done?"
I run 200+ most days and a LONG time ago (decades ago) I set up three rule based inboxs or whatever you want to call it, the junk that I know is junk and will not look at unless I'm actively searching, could be important but probably isn't (more or less the default), and the real inbox which is very carefully filtered, only certain from addresses and certain subjects.
The name of the game is making as many rules as possible to permanently shovel junk out of your official inbox and as few rules as possible to shovel real content into your "real inbox"
To say people get personally offended if they are (in their incorrect opinion) miscategorized would be a profound understatement. Always pretend you're incompetent WRT email (I've only been using email on the internet since 1991, I'm a total noob, so sorry) and I have no idea how to write rules and regexes when confronted.
About 3/5 of emails I get I delete without looking at in one folder, 1/5 I just glance at the subject line in that folder about once a day (usually the morning) and then delete, and the remainder I actually care about enough to read. Of those I read, most are irrelevant read and delete. In terms of actual actionable items I get about one per weekday from email.
Is it "safe" to simply delete emails, unread? Sure. I honestly forget stuff occasionally, probably more often than I incorrectly delete email.
The more intense the CYA culture, the more emails are sent but the fewer are read. It inevitably converges on a blogging model where everyone could read what everyone else is doing, but no one actually reads anything because there's just too much. If you send an email you've proactively given yourself the opportunity to blame the victim, who doesn't like that?
"The name of the game is making as many rules as possible to permanently shovel junk out of your official inbox and as few rules as possible to shovel real content into your "real inbox"" - doesn't this just feel like your treading water?
"If you send an email you've proactively given yourself the opportunity to blame the victim, who doesn't like that?" - there is a lot to love in that, maybe I will fire up outlook!
"doesn't this just feel like your treading water?"
I've spent a fair amount of my programming career automating humans out of inhumane jobs, so if anything it feels like work to me, rather than treading water or grinding. Human beings shouldn't have to read a weekly email announcing Casual Jeans Day Is Friday every single week or whatever.
There is some grind game aspect to it. Some people grind their virtual farm production, I grind the minimization of my real email inbox. Some days I login and see I have no real emails at all. Cool!
One of the biggest keys to this experiment is he notes that he will only be checking email at specific times. If you are in a position to do so, this can be one of the very best ways to get your email overload under control.
Love the experiment, and being explicit about this type of social contract would help many of us have better communication patterns.
Hi Doug, I was in your presentation for Super Mondays at Newcastle University yesterday.
Just wanted to say thanks for coming,and congratulations for getting to the front page of HC again, interesting how you mentioned that yesterday and it happened today.
When I am in crunch I always enable my OoO with a polite message explaining I am in crunch and that I cannot respond to them immediately but will do within the next few days. I also have a dedicated mobile number which I include (which is different to my regular mobile) when I have for people to contact me in there is a real emergency that only I can resolve. Nobody has ever called it :)
Its an asynchronous medium, like the postal service. Its not a conversation on the telephone. Replies are not expected to be instant. Anybody that calls you up 1 hour later to find out why you've not answered is clearly "doing it wrong"®. Use the correct tool for the job.
The guy could have stopped spamming people and just answered his emails once a month instead for the same effect.
People that claim email is a bind or that they are a slave to it should have it removed and see how they prefer life.