E-mail and Ethics From Employer to Employee Point of View - Literature review Example

E-mail and Ethics Like all other forms of online communication, it is vital to exercise good etiquette and protection when utilizing email as a form of communication (Jimenez, 2009). Etiquette refers to a set of rules and principles, which people apply in order to converse more effectively. Someone should also be aware how to protect themselves from various risks such as malware or phishing. In today’s fast changing work setting, ignoring the significance of the written communication is easy to do (Jimenez, 2009). Writing skills are as significant in electronic form as in any paper communication (Williams, 2012). It is vital to take an extra minute to organize and review your thoughts prior to keying them onto the text box and pressing the “send” button. This dictates the field of email etiquette. Email etiquette is the appropriate and adequate behavior expected from an email sender. It is mainly apprehensive with issues of courteousness in email communications (Williams, 2012). When someone uses the appropriate email etiquette, it shows efficiency and professionalism. When someone uses the inappropriate email etiquette, it provides a wrong or poor impression to the addressee and it portrays a lack of respect and care. Email etiquette is significant since people correspondences reveal a lot about them and it offers an instant intuition to the individual getting the email (Jimenez, 2009). There are a number of things, which are suitable when composing an email to another person and certain things, which are plainly not. Another explanation why it is significant is because people want to ensure they come across as friendly, respectful, as well as approachable. They do not want to sound demanding or curt back to impressions. Also, they do not want to provide the wrong ones from the wording of their email. A current quantitative research examining the perceptions of work-associated email from the view of corporate managers, executives, supervisors and non-supervising workers show three key findings: 1. Email is a useful internal communication method (Jimenez, 2009). Corporate managers, executives, supervisors and non-supervising workers overpoweringly concur that email is a successful way to communicate at work. 2. Workplace email agitates for an overhaul, but it should not be eradicated. Many employees and leaders concur that email should be improved by implementing email rules or etiquette (Jimenez, 2009). Few argue that email should not be used outside business hours. Supervisors, managers and workers spend a lot of time on irrelevant emails, which leads to a loss in wages and productivity at work. 3. Managers are particularly persuaded by email misconduct. They are considerably more likely to say work-associated email needs to be enhanced, and it might be influencing their engagement-level (Jimenez, 2009). They have a number of issues with work-associated email outside business hours. In addition, they spend more hours than non-supervising workers on emails, as well as irrelevant emails. Key Finding 1: Email is an effective internal communication tool Corporate managers, executives, non-supervising and supervising employees overwhelmingly concur that email is an efficient means of exchanging info at work (Williams, 2012). Electronic mail is a vital method for workers to interact in many organizations and companies (Williams, 2012). Employees use email because it is a way of: communicating well-timed information, maintaining a record of information for future reference and connecting with international clients, as well as co-workers. Key Finding 2: Workplace email requires a refurbish, but it should not be abolished In spite of its usefulness as a communication tool, a majority of corporate managers, executives, employees, as well as supervisors, argue that it needs to be enhanced. Managers are considerably more likely, when compared to non-supervising workers, to argue that email is not as efficient as it could be. On a normal workday, corporate executives use considerably more time when compared to their employee equivalents on job-related email both during work hours and outside typical business hours (Williams, 2012). Corporate executives also estimate using an average of half a house of their day on inappropriate emails. This is a projected 100 hours, or 6,000 minutes, on inappropriate emails per job year for each corporate executive. Some CEOs think that by reducing email, productivity will increase, and; therefore, they are adapting steps to ban or limit emails in their organizations. Nevertheless, Williams’ (2012) quantitative study challenges the notion that outlawing email is the best answer. According to this research, corporate managers, executives, employees and supervisors are not precisely sure what the net effect would be if emails are removed at work. In reality, only 30 to 40% of respondents in the study were confident that they would get much more work accomplished if their firms decreased the volume of work-related emails flowing into their computers. Results from the Williams’ study show that employees and managers are spending more time on inappropriate emails, plus they think it should be enhanced. Williams (2012) asked corporate managers, executives, employees and supervisors what should be done concerning email in their organizations and companies. Very few claimed that emails should be removed at work. In reality, a higher percentage of the respondents argued towards permitting unlimited email communications. However, the highest percentage of the people who took part in the study argued that implementing email rules or etiquette is the answer (61% of CEOs, 55% of middle executives, 58% of supervisors, as well as 40% of employees) (Williams, 2012). Managers are considerably more expected to say that these policies would be very efficient when compared to employees (Williams, 2012). This is because they are responsible for coming up with the content of the email. Employees and managers argue that the top issues with job-related emails comprise of a number of email misbehaviors. Respondents argue that workers misuse emails, as well as reply feature by having excessive back-and-forth replies, copying others unnecessarily, using “reply all” features, being unclear and poorly written and using email when a phone call or meeting would be suitable. Key Finding 3: Managers are particularly affected by email misconducts A 2009 study by The Grossman Group underlines the “frozen middle”, which is present in a majority of organizations (Williams, 2012). CEOs are in the know, but there is a huge gap between supervisors or managers and their employees. It is ironic that those who need the most direction and leadership are being led in numerous cases by people who do not meet the criteria. Only 50 percent of the American workforce argues that their managers provide them with the vital information, which they need successfully to complete their job (Williams, 2012). Even fewer workers (four out of 10) feel that their managers keep them well educated on what is transpiring in the firm (42%). Finally, only 41% of the American workforce feels that their managers take action on the notions and worries of their workers (Williams, 2012). Earlier findings presented prove that supervisors are more expected to argue that the use of email as a form of communication at their organizations should be enhanced and they use more time on email when compared to non-supervising workers. Supervisors are also more likely than workers to say regulations addressing email would be extremely effective in their firms. Interestingly enough, supervisors are considerably more expected to access job-related emails outside normal working hours compared to their workers (Jimenez, 2009). Workers, managers and supervisors access emails outside normal working hours so as to guarantee that nothing is missed, reduce the workload for the following day, read or respond to emails that they did not have time for during their normal working hours and also make preparations for the upcoming workday (Williams, 2012). Other issues include meeting vital deadlines, conforming to the company culture, impressing co-workers or other supervisors and connecting with international clients from different time zones. The consequences of using email outside normal working hours faced by the highest percentage of people who took part in Williams’ (2012) study comprise of a numerous of engagement-related areas: fear of missing appropriate information, balancing issues and stress from checking email. In addition, significantly greater percentages of supervisors argue that they face these issues when compared to other workers, who are more expected to claim that they do not experience these job-related issues. Williams’ (2012) study confirms that the higher cost to firms is generated from inappropriate emails and effects middle supervisors the most. More communicators and leaders are relying on quantitative email assessments—instead of personal hunches or experiences—to settle on the state of email in their firms, and the endeavors required to enhance the effectiveness. Firms need to evaluate how email is used, including which behaviors are most pervasive, time consuming and costly to develop an organizational email policy (Williams, 2012). Email evaluations quickly and economically recognize the top problems with email in a company and offer information for fact-based communication methods. In a recent study examining all forms of business communication, equally carried out by CPP, publisher of MTBI – the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator – assessment, they found out that email is the main offender in reference to creating confusion and resentment in the office (Emery, 2013). According to 43% of the respondents in the survey, of all the communication methods in the office, email is the most expectedly to create resentment between receivers and senders. Texting was also highly ranked on the record of offenders at 32%. Whereas 92% agreed email is a costly collaboration and communication tool, 64% reported having either received or sent an email, which resulted in unintended confusion or anger (Emery, 2013). Key grounds for this comprise of: failure to respond (51%), excess "Reply Alls" (25%), messages, which were vague or confusing (19%), emails that are very long (12%) and excess email in general (18%). But as Emery (2013) mentions, emails are not the real problem here, the users are. Also, it is not just about following standard email etiquette since everybody has his/her own idea on how emails should be used, as well as the timings. The research highlights the significance of both receivers and senders merging personality awareness with correct email etiquette in order to avoid passing the wrong message to others (Emery, 2013). For instance, extraverts who always send lengthy and normal emails must endeavor to trim the content. Another thing to take into consideration is age. The incorporation of younger employees who grew up on the Internet is mainly perceived as establishing a sort of generational tug-of-war in the office. However, as CPP’s survey confirmed, people should not make any quick assumptions (Emery, 2013). Maybe not astonishingly 18- to 29-year-olds are 13% less expected than 30- to 40-year-olds to be aggravated by email and 45% more expected to be upset by text. However, the more astonishing statistic on the SMS generation was that 7% are more irritated by poor grammar compared to all other age groups. Only 12% are more expected to value faster replies (Emery, 2013). Here are a couple of email tips, as well as a review of email diplomacy to help an organization maintain good email etiquette: Make the subject line precise in order to help recipients prioritize email. Email is a kind of professional communication and it is an asset of the employer, as well (Jimenez, 2009). Therefore, do not write anything, which would make you bumpy if it were published. Do not send an email when emotional or angry. Relax and then evaluate your response (Jimenez, 2009). You might find if important to send a more tactful or thoughtful message. Ask the original writer’s consent prior to forwarding their email to others (Jimenez, 2009). At times, a great deal is lost devoid of the context of that form conversation, as well as misunderstandings by third parties. Be careful on classifying some email as “imperative.” Use this caution carefully or you might find yourself in the same dilemma as the boy who mourned wolf repeatedly (Jimenez, 2009). Be discerning when sending long attachments. They take long to download and also time to read. When answering a question, simply copy the question in your email and then offer your response (Jimenez, 2009). Do not send a message, which only reads, “Yes.” It is too dull and the message could mystify the reader. Conclusion Like all other forms of online communication, it is vital to exercise good etiquette and protection when utilizing email as a form of communication. Etiquette refers to a set of rules and principles, which people apply in order to converse more effectively. Someone should also be aware how to protect themselves from various risks such as malware or phishing. This paper has presented vital concerning email etiquette in the workplace and finds that it is vital that organizations uphold proper email etiquette in order to ensure that emails are used effectively in the organization. References Emery, I. (2013). A little email etiquette can help banish workplace blues. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ian-emery/email-etiquette_b_3654788.html Jimenez, J. C. (2009). Email at the workplace: A survival guide. Solutions and tips. San Francisco, CA: Cograf Comunicaciones. Williams, L. C. (2012). E-nough alre@dy: Stop bad email. Retrieved from http://www.yourthoughtpartner.com/Portals/83405/pdf/email-whitepaper.pdf Read More