This document provides guidelines for effective email communication. It discusses how sending emails to multiple recipients often does not generate the expected response and can lead to frustration. It recommends considering the purpose and recipients of any email before sending. For responses, it suggests only replying to the initiator if you are a CC recipient, and not using "reply all" or involving others unless necessary. It also notes that alternatives like phone calls or meetings may be more effective than lengthy email chains in some situations. The aim is to instill thoughtful email practices to maximize productivity and communication within a project.

1. E MAIL PROTOCOL
INTRODUCTION
How often have we said:
• I feel I spend too much time keeping up with my email
• Email cuts into time I wanted to spend on other tasks
• I have trouble keeping up with email on days I am away from my desk
• I get too much email
I spend too much time getting rid of unimportant messages
• I am satisfied with the strategy I use to keep up with my mail
• When I return from vacation/time off, I feel overwhelmed when triaging my mail
Almost all of us!
Now having established a common view there are a few recorded observations about e-mail that may be
of interest:
1. As a rule of thumb, the more people you send an email to, the less likely any single person will
respond to it, much less perform any action that you requested.
2. The average time to write an e-mail message is about 4 minutes, and the average time to read a
message is about half a minute. It thus takes about eight times as long to write as to read
messages.
3. Most people cannot on average be overloaded by single-recipient messages, because the writing
time exceeds the reading time.
4. People get “too much email” because messages are sent to many recipients and not all recipients
actually need the message.
5. Messages to multiple users can result in the two extremes of
i. nobody doing something which anybody could have done but everybody thought that
somebody would do; and
ii. everybody doing something which only one person needed to do
A common theme within these independent views is that e-mails to and from multiple users do not
necessarily generate the expected response. Indeed it may result in further frustration that e-mails one
needs are being obscured by the fog of other mails.
The solution to the e-mail dilemma which almost all of s face is to use and appropriate e-mail protocol to
obtain the optimum communication using the medium of e-mail.
AIM
The aim of this paper is to instill some thought within the Project as to how e-mail should be used so that
our communication is effective and contributes to the overall productivity of the Project rather than
stultifying it.

2. INITIATING E-MAILS
The initiator of an e-mail may be creating the solution to a problem but, without thought, could create
unproductive work for many people through the use of multiple recipients resulting in multiple responses,
involving others whom recipients feel they need to consult or inform, unsolicited opinions from Others.
Such a situation tends to result in ‘busy-ness’ rather than “business”.
Prior to embarking on initiating a work related e-mail the following should be considered:
What is the purpose of my e-mail?
PURPOSE TYPE OF
COMMUNICATION
RESPONSE
NEEDED
REMARKS
Sharing
information in
order to update
Updating &
Informing
Nil No action is
required by
the recipients
Keeping people
‘in the loop’ on
possible issues
arising.
Informing Nil Use a bcc if
required in
order to limit
‘exposure’
issues.
Seeking an
opinion on an
issue
Questioning YES Direct
response to
the initiator
only, do not
use ‘reply
all’.
Discussing an
issue
Chatting YES Use ‘reply
all’ as views
are required -
but would a
meeting be
better?
Asking/instructing
somebody to do
something
Instructing YES Actionee
must
confirmation
acceptance
and also
completion.
Clarifying an
issue to establish a
way forward
Directing NO Silence will
be deemed to
be
acceptance.
Who is the recipient(s) of the e-mail?
RECIPIENT TYPE OF
COMMUNICATI
ON
RESPON
SE
NEEDED
REMARKS
Own Work
Group/Depart
ment
Collaboration /
Informing
Varies General information
on tasks in hand etc.
Confirm views.
“Reply All” may be

3. used.
Personnel in
‘other’ groups
Interfacing YES Confirmation of
understanding/complia
nce. BCC Department
Head. Respond to
initiator only.
Subordinate
Staff
Instructions/Direc
tion
YES Confirmation of
understanding/complia
nce. CC subordinates
manager if required.
Peers Discussion Yes Sharing of views &
opinions but would a
meeting be better.
Senior Staff Seeking
Direction/approva
ls
Yes Use BCC if you wish
others to know – but is
it really necessary?
Interested
Parties
Informing etc No Use BCC
Do all of the intended recipients need to be “directly” involved in the communication?
If there were no e-mail would you need to have all the participants in the discussion? If not, then
consider reducing the number of addressees in the “TO” field. If you wish recipients to be aware
of te communication then use the “CC” field or even “BCC” fields to limit the BCC’s recipient(s)
expose to the ‘reply all’ option.
Do you really require a response from all recipients?
If there is a real need for a response from everybody then ask for it in the e-mail and use the “TO”
field for all intended recipients.
If you only want a response from people directed to yourself then use the “CC” field. Recipients
who are CCd need not use the “Reply All”. If a recipient objects to something or has a contrary
view then this should be discussed with the initiator, the use of “Reply All” to initiate a discussion
should be discussed with the initiator. Differences of opinion need not always be shared with
everybody – remember the initiator of the communication initiated the discussion with an
individual through a multiple e-mail. Respondees should not hijack the intended purpose of the
initiator.
Do all recipients really need to be involved?
Is it necessary for a recipient to “need to know” or would it be “nice to know”? It is nice to know
everything that is going on but the topic may not be relevant or impact on the recipient. If an
opinion is asked for, is the recipient(s) the right person to ask?
Do you need a ‘read response’?
Is it necessary for a recipient to advise you that he/she has read the e-mail as a request for read
receipts will tender to clutter your own inbox. A read response will conform that the person has
seen the mail only. If a matter is so vital that a response is required a telephone call or face to face
meeting would be better, or a letter.

4. The attendance at meetings may be a reason for a read response. A nil response is taken as a yes as
the person has been asked to attend. If the recipient cannot attend then a courteous ‘no’ should be
sent otherwise acceptance is presumed.
RESPONDING TO E-MAILS
The content and style of the response to an e-mail is up the individual. However the response to an e-mail
can and often does create an e-mail ‘chain’ which frustrates other recipients due to the mail being
irrelevant to them, interfering with other work, duplicating the
Are you in a position to respond to the e-mail?
If the e-mail has come from an external party and is related to the Project or Business, are you able
to speak on behalf of the organisation or to commit the organisation to something. If in doubt,
defer from responding and speak to your line manager. A formal means of communication or the
following of established protocols for dealing with, say queries regarding quality control or
methodology, may be followed.
Do you really need to use the “Reply All” button?
If the Initiator has asked for your view as a “CC” then you should only respond to the Initiator and
not everybody. .
Do you need to respond or contribute?
If you are not in a position to offer anything of real value one can politely decline to contribute. A
simple NIL response or “No comment” to the Initiator only adds value by not taking up to much
time or requirement the others to know you had “No Comment”.
If you are a CC recipient your view or input is not necessarily required – you are being kept ‘in the
loop’ and a response or input is not necessarily needed. If there is a view then share it with
selected personnel or the Initiator and let the Initiator take the lead; after all the Initiator started the
communication chain and should be allowed to close it
Do you need to involve Others?
If a Respondee needs to discuss the item with Others then the Respondee should initiate an e-mail
accordingly rather than reply to all with other addressees; after all you have been asked for your
input and attracting Others just adds to the e-mail overload
Do all recipients really need to be involved?
Is it necessary for a recipient to “need to know” or would it be “nice to know”? It is nice to know
everything that is going on but the topic may not be relevant or impact on the recipient.
OTHER FORMS OF COMMUNICATION
E-mail is an effective and rapid communication tool for seeking advice, delegating, instructing, directing
and collaborating. However there are other, older alternatives. If one needs to communicate and e-mail
mis the best way then use it. However the following should be borne in mind:
Would it be quicker to call/see the person? E-mail is often used to ‘create a record’ to cover
one’s actions and let the worlds know how busy somebody is. The telephone is a quick and

5. effective communication tool as is walking to an office to discuss a matter. Such verbal
communications should be ‘to the point’ and can be confirmed in an e-mail later if required.
Would it be quicker to convene a meeting? One should consider that a 30 minute focused
meeting could be more productive that the man hours involved in chasing a multiple e-mail chain
and the number of ‘reply all’ responses which clutter mail boxes either unread or skipped over.
Is the Recipient on Leave? – if a person has gone on leave it is to serve the purpose of ‘going on
leave’. If it is major and significant issue that the recipient really needs to know about during
vacation then use the “BCC” field in a multiple e-mail. If the recipients input is really required
then send a ‘single recipient’ message or call them!. It would be preferable to prepare a briefing
note on issues etc for the recipients return to bring them ‘up to speed’ rather then interfere with a
person’s leave.
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
E-mail is an effective means of communication. However the effects of multiple recipient messages,
multiple recipient responses, incorporation of Others into e-mail chains, using “Reply All”, directly
incorporating Project Staff who are not directly involved in issues, or involving personnel who are known
to be on leave creates e-mail overload and subsequent inefficiency.
The use of e-mail in a systematic controlled manner will lead to less e-mails and less time wasted. The
use of e-mails must be efficient and in order to enhance efficiency it is recommended that “All Users”
adopt the above protocol.
NOTE – EMAIL SHOULD NEVER BE USED FOR CONTRACTUAL COMMUNICATION, THE
GIVING OR ACCEPATANCE OF INSTRUCTIONS, AGREEING TO CHANGES/VARIATIONS. IT
IS A METHOD OF COMMUNICATION THROUGH CONVERSATION RATHER THAN FORMAL
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
MP - 2 Aug 2007

6. effective communication tool as is walking to an office to discuss a matter. Such verbal
communications should be ‘to the point’ and can be confirmed in an e-mail later if required.
Would it be quicker to convene a meeting? One should consider that a 30 minute focused
meeting could be more productive that the man hours involved in chasing a multiple e-mail chain
and the number of ‘reply all’ responses which clutter mail boxes either unread or skipped over.
Is the Recipient on Leave? – if a person has gone on leave it is to serve the purpose of ‘going on
leave’. If it is major and significant issue that the recipient really needs to know about during
vacation then use the “BCC” field in a multiple e-mail. If the recipients input is really required
then send a ‘single recipient’ message or call them!. It would be preferable to prepare a briefing
note on issues etc for the recipients return to bring them ‘up to speed’ rather then interfere with a
person’s leave.
CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS
E-mail is an effective means of communication. However the effects of multiple recipient messages,
multiple recipient responses, incorporation of Others into e-mail chains, using “Reply All”, directly
incorporating Project Staff who are not directly involved in issues, or involving personnel who are known
to be on leave creates e-mail overload and subsequent inefficiency.
The use of e-mail in a systematic controlled manner will lead to less e-mails and less time wasted. The
use of e-mails must be efficient and in order to enhance efficiency it is recommended that “All Users”
adopt the above protocol.
NOTE – EMAIL SHOULD NEVER BE USED FOR CONTRACTUAL COMMUNICATION, THE
GIVING OR ACCEPATANCE OF INSTRUCTIONS, AGREEING TO CHANGES/VARIATIONS. IT
IS A METHOD OF COMMUNICATION THROUGH CONVERSATION RATHER THAN FORMAL
CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
MP - 2 Aug 2007