> If a reply is needed, they'll address either the first or last point raised. Never, ever all the points. Never completely.
Use numbered short topics instead of a wall of text, even if they're all in the same email. It usually gets me a lot more answers than something more prose like.
> I wonder if Slack is any better? Do folks respond better to one question at a time?
As a writer I sort of hate it, but bullets--often in a slide format--tend to make more sense in a business setting. And, yes, shorter is generally better.
It's also valuable to clarify why the information is needed. I don't really have problems getting information from somebody when I email them and the email starts with "We are unable to proceed with <the thing they care about> until we have answers to these questions: <numbered list here>"
As someone who both sends and receives a lot of business email and who is very busy, frankly if your email isn't structured like this, or it's written as a long rambling essay or something, 99% of the time you shouldn't send it
In my experience, the same is true regardless of medium. For that reason, I try to always form questions clearly (one question-marked sentence in the email, at the end if possible - no repeating the question in different words or dithering), and I give only one question. I write the rest down, but only deliver each after the previous has been answered.
If I ask you more than one question at a time, or give you the freedom to respond outside the framework of a question-answer pair, it means I respect your ability to communicate.
With regards to Slack or other asynchronous communication methods, its generally a mixed bag in my experience. Folks still tend to target some and not all of the points. Which then leads to more follow-ups.
I wonder if this has to do with other interruptions on Slack (or other mediums) occurring at the same time. Pretty common to be responding to something only to be interrupted by something else that pulls your attention away.
It's sync vs async. Slack won't help if you let it spam you with notifications for every OH SO URGENT message.
Make a habit to ignore it and batch answer now and then, between tasks not during tasks. Then teach everyone else in the org to do the same if they don't get the hint.
Agree heavily. Async mediums that interrupt like Slack with all the notifications stink.
Having good habits around notification and interruption management is important. As is making sure everyone understands and operates within the same mindset.
Sane defaults would be great. The amount of interruptions on a day to day basis I would imagine is a significant drain on the collective attention span.
(It really really might come down to people not addressing all points due to carelessness, -and- it being easier to "compete" (corral?) attention, when in a meeting.-
Correct, email is also async. I was mainly providing my experience with respect to Slack or other async communication methods. I could have been clearer.
Generally long emails are hard to process. And most are multi-tasking when an email comes in. Even now I will often type a bunch of stuff and if the reply is longer than a paragraph, or needs multiple replies/input i will just ask for a 10 minute call.
And even today when this was done, We addressed the context of the email and I helped with 3 other things that werent on topic in 10 minutes. So it was a better use of time (and I do acknowledge plenty of meetings are totally useless, even ones I have called...)
If a reply is needed, they'll address either the first or last point raised. Never, ever all the points. Never completely.
No wonder people tend to call so many meetings. They can corner colleagues, get a complete, coherent response to complex issues.
I wonder if Slack is any better? Do folks respond better to one question at a time?