Submitted by joshuarherring on
in
Forums
My organization has a culture of responding to (nearly) every email. If I receive an email with any substantive content or attachments, it is the cultural norm to send a simple "thank you" in response. The intent is to inform the sender that you did in fact receive the information and did, or will, digest it.
I understand the value of letting others know that their message has been received, but I also see some inefficiency in sending dozens of these emails daily. That applies both to the sender, and the receiver.
Personally, when I send an email with substantive information, and where I want a response, I ask for a commitment from the receiver. Examples include "Can you have that back to me by XXX?" or "Please let me know that this instruction is clear". If it is truly informational, and I don't expect a response, I don't ask for one. This behavior is not the norm.
So the question is - do you send simple "thank you" notes when the sender has not asked for any information in return?
Yes, it only takes a moment
I always acknowledge an email with a thank you at a minimum. The only exception is for mass emails but even some of those I reply if I work closely with the sender and want to acknowledge the information.
I find this quick courtesy avoids any doubt that the email is received. I appreciate receiving these thank yous back from my emails and don't have to wonder whether the receiver has seen email and actioning as needed.
Dawne
Are you new? Are you otherwise super-responsive?I
I'm a long-time lurker here, but this post caught my eye.
A few years ago, I started working for an org with the same culture. It drove me CRAZY....I received 100+ direct emails each day -with probably another 50 or so ""cc" emails. I selectively participated in the courtesy thank you practice, based on sender, topic, urgency, and how long I thought it would take to give substantive reply.
It did not go well for me....perhaps because the culture also did not really support prioritization, i.e- it was unacceptable to say "I know this is important to you, but it is not a priority task for the division or organization, so I'm unlikely to EVER get to it"
In the end, I developed a rep for poor responsiveness.....which was largely backed up by "I never know if she's received the email becaus she never responds,"
As an aside, the day a birth announcement went out and received 200 "reply all" messages of congratulations, I knew I was done with that org!
If I had to do it over again, I would just set up an auto-responder to acknowledge receipt and set an expectation for further action/communication. It really wasn't worth fighting against-particularly since it was a symptom of larger problems in the org.....
Suzanne
I don't
I don't, it's more emails on the other end. It would drive me bananas if I got a lot of replies like this today. Hard to break out of norms though. This is a great use for "Quick Steps" if you are an Outlook shop. You can reply with one click.
Great Idea
Using the quick steps is a great idea. If it must be done, might as well do it efficiently.