A Corporate E-mail Hypothesis

I don't work in an office, but our boss regularly sends out emails with nothing more than a link to our website so we can get the promotional info for anything going on in the salon....

Your hypothesis makes sense. Less powerful people in an organization have to watch their words more carefully than more powerful members.

Yeah, our company’s president doesn't send out group emails, but this sure does fit his work demeanour. He'd be an HR nightmare if he wasn't in the position he is now! I mean, last Xmas when we had the Secret Santa, he gave one of the VPs a copy of Broke Back Mountain, a bag of candy Hot Lips, and a small pack of lubricant. It was a good laugh all around though.

David I fixed format of post

I agree! I work for a large corporate company and I can confirm that this is what happens!

Totally true. I think the idea behind this is that these higher-ups are so busy and important they can't put any time or effort into communicating in a well-mannered way.

It's true.

At my company, upper management types often leave the body completely blank and cram all the info into the subject field. Apparently, this is so they don't have to actually open the email to get the information, thus saving their valuable time.

I think this might have to do with how many arrows are being shot in each person's direction. Mr. Average has this as a very important communication. Ms. Vice President sees this as one of five things to deal with. Madam Sr. VP has to dash off a note between ten other things. Managing Dir has learned to write the same way s/he speaks; in terse phrases that cover the subject before moving on to the next twenty issues.

Totally true. There was another post going around the internet a while back talking about the signature area with regards to your standing in the company, basically following the same principal. Those lower down have all their information (Name, Title, email, phone, etc) and the top people put their initials as their signature. I think it went that you should know how to get a hold of them instead of them having to give that information to you. Which is why I made my signature my initials, since everyone knows who and where I am.

yeah

The only thing I'd add, for the Managing Director is the following:

"Sent from my BlackBerry" at 2AM, since that alway seems to happen in my organization.

It makes sense, given the inverse relationship between intelligence and standing within the company; the dumbest people get promoted to the highest positions.

"no can do - have standing tee time with Carl
- CEO"

In other words, after months of meetings and meta-meetings, the whole thing gets vetoed in nine words.

I like the brevity of the final message. Email is good for that style. Aside from a quick 'thanks!' at the end, most of the flourishes detract.

Save the chatty social graces for in person, when sincerity can be measured first-hand.

Amendment to the hypothesis:

But the manner is likewise proportional to the person to which the email is addressed.

If Joe Everyman sends that email to management, it would look like the first example. However, and this applies to all mentioned except the CEO, when sending emails to other cohorts of the same level, the last example applies. Joe only needs to impress the power above him and not someone who can't promote him. Also known as the Kiss-ass Postulate.

Definitely see this at my company.

I so prefer to get the managing directors email. Those long ones exhaust you.

One thing for sure, there are a lot of people talking about that Tomkins fellow.

You can also tell who ranks highest in the mind of the composer by the order in which the recipients are added in the To: field.

This definitely holds some weight, though I've heard this theory before.

I'm a teacher and our principal will just send emails with "?" and nothing else-- no subject line, no message except ?
-- I always have to keep myself from incriminating myself -- like a little kid who spills everything thinking their parents already knows.
sucks

I have no boss, thankfully, and seldom send e-mails, but there are other indicators of status within my professional hierarchy- the size of one's briefcase. The smaller the briefcase, the higher up one is. Those who carry nothing are at the top of the heap. At least in the eyes of their colleagues.

i think the shorter, to the point messages improve written correspondence. i say, do away with formal bs, keep the content.

Accurate. Mikos: Formal BS is often there as part of explanation which is sometimes the only tool someone lower in the ladder has. You cant rely on your position and argument from authority is you are lower in the hierarchy, you must make your case and therefore you must be able to present the formal case, like it or not. Otherwise you will be subject to "You just said X and didn't back it up." from your supervisors. You can't assume that you are going to be given the same amount of leeway as they have when it comes to communications. They aren't communicating like that because they always have done that, they are doing it because they can now and because they basically are the top level responsible party for yes/no decisions. Argumentation in a hierarchy works upwards. The boss doesn't need to justify shit to you, but you have to justify everything to the boss.

power aside, the length of the message is inversely proportional to the arrogance of the individual writing it

Yup.

Yep, that's more-or-less the way it was at Big Pharma when I was there. Except, when you did get an email containing more than 3 paragraphs for a VP or above it was usually a sanitized version why someone's Golden Parachute was activated and how we should all wish them well on their new endeavor. Those emails tended to be rather long, with a psudo blue pen signature graphic at the bottom (first name only).

Also, Along the lines of what was mentioned by moop2000, anything sent via CrackBerry would always be less than one paragraph no matter who sent it or what level they were.

Not here, my boss is so long winded Magellan could have used him to power his sails.

100% true. It's as though they are too busy lighting their cigars with money to form a complete sentence or attempt to be grammatically correct. Maybe, they feel they are too important to actually put the time into composing a proper email. It drives me crazy. As a matter of fact, they are too important for anything. "Why isn't my assistant writing this email for me? Fine, I guess I have to do everything myself!" If you ask me, they often times act like babies.

This is pretty accurate, although you forgot the part where they attach a 20MB PowerPoint file that explains what they are talking about in their punctuation free sentence.

i.e.

fine Just be sure to loop back with Carl - see attachment

Efficiency in any organization is inversely proportional to the position of the employee.

The illusion of efficiency is, however, directly proportional to the position of the employee.

Anyone who starts an email with "Good morning gentlemen" Is clearly out of touch and unlikely to have much of value to say.
That aside, I deal with CEO's a fair bit and the final example is very representative of their style of communication. It's a style I prefer but not when they miss the point. For example: "sounds good" is not a good answer to "we could approach it via Method A or via Method B, let me know which you would prefer"

I work with VIPs everyday. Your hypothesis is quite correct.

that is so true.