In-Person Convos? No Thanks, We'll Take E-mail

Most surveys that have been conducted over the past few years indicate that while people applaud technology like e-mail, instant messaging, and cell phones as being beneficial to business, the majority rank in-person conversations above all else. But according to a new survey by Robert Half Technology, it appears that IT professionals actually rank e-mail above a face-to-face conversation!

The study, conducted with 270 randomly-selected Chief Information Officers (CIOs) in Canada, discovered that 49% of them would prefer to use e-mail when conversing with staff in the office versus chatting in-person, which was rated second-best at 34%.

I can understand where they're coming from. If I ran down to the front of the office to converse with Lindsay every time I needed to talk to her, I'd be reaching marathon territory by the end of every day! In the same manner, I'd also be less productive if I walked next door to Robert's office every time I wanted to ask him something, or vice versa. (Funny enough, we often use telephone intercoms, or the much less tech-savvy method of shouting!)

Consider, also, that CIOs focus much of their time on numbers, data, and complex figures that require back and forth often resembling cryptic "code". So perhaps e-mail does make the most sense in this case. In person, their conversation might sound like an audition for the latest Star Trek movie (or an episode of House: does anyone understand what those guys are saying half the time?!)

On a larger scale, however, e-mail can most certainly come in handy. It was, after all, introduced as a way to help improve productivity, and make it easier and quicker to communicate. So it does serve a valuable function on the business end, regardless of one's position. But should this apply to inter-office communication, or just to those who are situated elsewhere?

One could make the argument that e-mail began as a useful technology for chatting with friends and co-workers in a different area code or country. That way, you didn't have to incur long-distance fees. But with things like VoIP and free long distance, e-mail really has evolved to become a dominant form of communication for anyone, anywhere to talk with anyone else, anywhere. And yes, that even means two offices away.

But keep in mind that there are times when e-mail just won't cut it. If there's a meeting to be had, something visual that needs to be reviewed, or an important item that should be discussed in person rather than through a series of back and forth e-mails or instant messages, then for God's sakes, get off your butts! And there are some conversations that just make more sense in person than through e-mail. For instance, our office manager Jeanette never sends me an e-mail to ask how my weekend was: she'll walk down and ask me in person.

With that, the survey did surprisingly find that, aside from e-mail and in-person convos, CIOs don't prefer to use many other forms of communication internally. Only 6% would opt for the phone, 5% use instant messaging, and 1% use text messages.

It would be interesting to see how the number skew when talking to sales and marketing professionals, engineers, support staff, HR personnel, or other areas of company operations.

Do Not Call Reduces Annoying Telemarketing Calls, But Encourages Spam Mail

Canada's National Do Not Call List (DNCL) comes into effect today, which is good news for anyone who receives those annoying phone calls during dinner that ask if you're happy with your current car insurance provider. All you have to do is register at http://www.dncl.gc.ca/, and telemarketers will not be permitted to contact you by phone. If they violate this rule, they could be fined up to $15,000! It sounds great, but does this mean they'll stop trying to contact you for good? Not quite.

A survey conducted on behalf of Pitney Bowes by Harris/Decima finds that 66% of businesses that currently market their products and services by phone will simply switch to the direct mail method. Great. So my dinner, favourite TV show, or early Saturday morning will no longer be interrupted by some student reading robotically from a script, but my mailbox will be crammed with even more junk mail for recycling that I don't even open.

Nevertheless, direct mail campaigns obviously work to some degree, as long as the recipient is interested in your product or service. The same survey found that 26% of Canadians would be more likely to read unsolicited mail ifit were personalized. And the Direct Marketing Association (DMA) reports that every $1 spent in direct mail brings in $11 of business; more than twice as much as any other medium. (If this is the case, though, than wny wouldn't companies just go the direct mail route from the get-go?)

While the study was commissioned by Pitney Bowes with an obvious slant to snail mail campaigns, I'm sure that there are other studies that show many marketers will opt for the e-mail route as well. Online advertising spends will likely also go up as another method to reach customers. Funnily enough, my mom sent out an e-mail blast this morning letting everyone know about the DNCL, and suggesting that, while adding your name to the list might eliminate the calls, you could end up with "door-to-door (ding dong) telemarketers". (And yes, believe it or not, my mom is Internet-savvy!)

Rest assured that telephone or not, marketers will find a way to get their message out, whether it's by ding-dong door calls (selling vacuums, perhaps?) or a few extra letters in the mail every morning.

The Web Complements, Not Replaces, Traditional Media

A new study conducted by The Canadian Internet Project (CIP) has found that the Web supplements traditional media rather than replaces it. Working for both print and Web publications, I'd be lying if I said this study wasn't a positive one from both a personal and an information perspective.

"Conventional wisdom would suggest that Internet use has increased at the expense of traditional media," explains Charles Zamaria, Professor at Ryerson University and Principal Investigator and Project Director of CIP. "But the amount of time spent attending to conventional media by Internet users and non-users is virtually identical.

"We found," he adds, "that Internet users are not finding time to be online by taking away from their traditional media diet. In many ways. media activity just begets more media activity."

It's not surprisingly, however, that people aged 12-17 (of which 400 were interviewed) spend about 15% less time with traditional media than adults. Still, it's promising numbers for anyone in the TV, radio, magazine, or book publishing industry. At the same time, the numbers related to the Y-generation users indicate that anyone who isn't seriously looking at the Web to complement your current strategy should do so in order to keep up.

The survey, which was conducted with more than 3,100 Canadians, also discovered that Internet penetration overall increased by 6% to reach 78% of Canadians in 2007. We're also spending more time online: 17 hours a week vs. just 13 in 2004. Of those aged 12-17, a whopping 96% are online; and more than 50% of those aged 60 and older are as well. But what's most interesting is that the 60+ group isn't just checking e-mail and basic Web pages: they're engaging in "hip" activities like social networking and photo uploading!

Another interesting finding: there's a significant, 15% gap between English-speaking Canadians and French-speaking residents, with the former online more frequently. Is there a need for more French-language Websites? It's an interesting question that I've never really made an observation about.

Personally, I find that I read paperback books almost as often as I read news on the 'net. The same goes for TV, and occassionally magazines. So even in my own personal experiences, I can see how new forms of media like the Internet just complement activities that have already become commonplace.

Is E-mail Really Faster & More Convenient?

Have you ever sent or received an e-mail, only to find out later that it had been misinterpreted? (My hand is raised on this one). According to a recent survey conducted by Strategic Counsel on behalf of Microsoft Canada, this isn't such an uncommon occurence. Microsoft reports that, since it's difficult to convey tone and emotion in e-mails, they are often misinterpreted, leading to the person having to follow up with a phone call to explain; or the recipient having to read, and re-read the message over and over, in order to confirm it's intended meaning.

"Please send the package to Mr. Smith ASAP." This could be interpreted as a terse, snotty, instructional e-mail. Is "ASAP" meant to sound authoritative, or simply conveying that it's an important package, and needs to arrive immediately? Often times, someone won't take the time to adjust verbage such that there's no room for questioning. (Keep in mind that this is just a simple example to illustrate the point. If you have some examples of your own, feel free to comment here!) Another popular method of conveying emotions is through the use of emoticons. For example, a simple :) can advise that a comment is meant to be taken lightly. But let's face it: how professional is it to use smily faces?

The point of Microsoft's study was to show that, although e-mail is meant to be a more convenient, faster method of communication, it often ends up taking more time out of one's day, having to triple-check the wording of an e-mail to ensure it "sounds right", or having to follow up by phone or in person. (The other point of the study was, of course, to promote the company's new software-enabled unified communication systems that integrate voice, video, and e-mail communication together).

I would have to disagree in many ways with the results of this study. For every misinterpreted e-mail that I've had to follow up on by phone, I've probably sent hundreds of others that saved me hours upon hours trying to reach the person by phone, or vice versa. Sure, there are times when e-mail simply won't cut it, and it's worth the extra effort to pick up a phone or jump in the car (for example, an interview by e-mail simply doesn't make sense!) But in other instances, e-mail is, and will remain, an important, faster, and convenient method of communication.

That said, I do agree that a product that can combine several methods of communication into one seamless process is certainly a welcome one in any business.