Thank Goodness It's Monday #298

UBIQUITOUS E-MAIL

AND CLASSIC SNAIL-MAIL STRATEGIES

TO MASTER IT

C’mon. ’Fess up. We’ve all got e-mail overload and anxiety, despite the efforts of the best G-mail, Hotmail, AOL, internal corporate tech masters -- whatever and whomever—to create and deploy digital tools meant to help us wrestle our In Box (In Boxes?) into some semblance of shape.

And even with the alleged falloff in e-mail use as social networks and short-form handheld connecting become the preferred channel of communication among the most youthful digerati, ubiquitous e-mail is still an important component of –

Real world communication. E-mail allows speedy, direct communication with a wide range of locations. It creates a direct line for correspondence to flow straight to and from you. Thus the volume of mail can still be quite formidable. So it’s a blessing and a curse to many business and community leaders.

Ignore e-mail at your peril. For most communicators – in business and their non-business counterparts – to allow serious mail addressed to them to go unacknowledged or unanswered is inexcusable.

TGIM Challenge: How does a thoughtful person deal with all the bits that can’t simply be deleted or passed along to a more appropriate place for action?

Old tech thinking to the rescue: The late Malcolm S. Forbes (1919–1990), publisher of Forbes magazine in the heyday of the ink-on-paper version, suggested solutions for snail mail that are just as fitting for electronic correspondence; perhaps even more so.

“Sometimes,” he said, “I get very long letters about editorials and articles. Many of these are answered with just two or three words.

“If the three-, four-, five-, or six-page letter expresses a compatible point of view, the reply, aside from salutation and signature, consists of two words:

‘I agree.’

“If not, the reply, in addition to salutation and signature, is three words:

‘I don’t agree.’

“Letters of enthusiastic compliments (few),” said Forbes, “and letters of vehement disagreement (many) get two-word replies:

‘Thank you.’’’

TGIM Takeaway: These time-tested shortcuts are a good way to cut the communication workload in the digital world as well. Their very brevity signals the intention to bring the “correspondence” to a close without completely blowing off the communicator on the other side. Try ’em and apply ’em and reap the saving of time and trouble without appearing too rude.

But wait. There’s more: One more brief thought while we’re on the subject:

Another slightly crustier old-school thought leader who used a similar shortcut to good advantage was H.L. Mencken (1880-1956), the word-wise critical observer of life in the first half of the 20^th Century and founding editor of his own magazine, The American Mercury.

As a newspaper and magazine editor, Mencken often drew letters expressing outrage and indignation at ideas he had championed.

TGIM IDEA IN ACTION: Mencken would return all such correspondence to the originators with these words scrawled at the bottom:

“You may be right.”

Thumbs up?

Or thumbs down to the ideas put forward in today’s TGIM?

“You may be right.”

And thanks for reading.

Geoff Steck
Chief Catalyst
Alexander Publishing & Marketing

8 Depot Square

Englewood, NJ 07631
201-569-5373

tgimguy@gmail.com   

P.S. Both H. L. Mencken and, in addition to Malcolm, earlier and later generations of the Forbes family provided the world with vast quantities of In-Box-crowding quotable material.

Mencken himself originated scores of them; perhaps the most-quotable, best known is “Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public.”

The Forbes “Capitalist Tool” dynasty spread such wisdom widely through the magazine’s feature, “Thoughts on the Business of Life” where Malcolm wisely suggested, “The best vision is insight.” His grave marker bares the epitaph, “While alive, he lived.”