Email Is Broken: Here's How To Fix It

My New Email Rules

On a recent one-on-one in my last stint in corporate life, I let slip what seemed to be a great transgression: that I personally hate email as a method of communication.

Let me clarify. What I should say is, as a system of communication in work life, it seems email is broken.

But again, I feel I should clarify further: as a system of communication in our working life, how we use email is broken.

Here are my rules about email that everyone should abide by. They may be more difficult for some than others. But if they are embraced, we could make email suck just a little less:

Rule No. 1: email is not for urgent communication.

Rule No. 2: email is not for one word responses.

Rule No. 3: there should be as few emails sent as possible.

Rule No. 4: your emails should be long enough to answer as many questions in advance as you can reasobably anticipate.

Rule No. 5: your emails should be as short as possible, without violating any of the other rules.

Rule number one: email is not for urgent communication.

Pick up the damn phone, people. Seriously. This rule plays into all the other rules.

Rule number two: email is not for one word responses.

This particular behavior is probably what set me off on this rant. One word responses – or even one word sentences as responses – are a huge pet peeve of mine. The fact that “Yes” or “Ok” occupies the same real estate in inbox as all the other (well-crafted, detailed, and human) emails is infuriating to me. 

You're not too important to take the time in order to actually craft a human response.

It doesn’t need to be purple prose and false praise; it just needs to be a complete idea. We’re all human beings over here, so let's treat each other as such.

Rule number three: there should be as few emails sent as possible.

If I could, I would say, there should be as few emails, period. But you can’t control the number of emails that you receive, you can only control your behavior – what you send. (There’s a larger life lesson in there, but I digress…)

If you start taking a little longer on each email you send, and each email takes up more of your allocated time to respond, you’re going to send fewer emails. And I’m a big fan of time-boxing when it comes to answering emails. That’s the nature of it. However, if you start crafting better emails – ones that anticipate needs, are packed full of useful information, that reduce the need for back-and-forth follow ups, you will start to see the volume of responses drop. And if the volume of responses drop, and you’re sending fewer emails yourself, the world will be a better place.

Rule number four: your emails should be long enough to answer as many questions in advance.

Anticipate the follow-up questions to your request/response/answer. Do your best, but of course you can’t predict everything. Invite the recipient to follow up with you in a phone call, quick video call, or other medium if they need an immediate back-and-forth; don’t let the email thread devolve into that.

Rule number five: your emails should be as short as possible.

While it would be great to pointificate about every possible channel and sidebar and tangent you could possibly think of, that's not the point. All these rules shouldn't dismiss readability or scanability for your reader. Always, always, always consider the audience.

‍

What do you think? What rules am I missing? Drop me a line and let me know.