Email, space and time

In my book, The Leader with Seven Faces, I refer to the protection of space and time. Email is a key character in this plot. It is destructive of space and time. One of the measures often used by organizations is to fiddle with ‘the governance’ of things such as email and proclaim a rule with the idea of tackling a problem; in this case the excessiveness of email traffic, a significant percentage of which is useless. Suw Charman’s blog has an entry on ‘Turning off email won't help’ and I have made some comments on it, which I copy below:


Your excellent entry ‘Turning off email wont help’ contains a number of important points, some of them music to my ears. I am an organisational consultant developing and successfully implementing broad behavioural and cultural changes in organizations in an unconventional way. We have been working for a while on VIRAL CHANGE™, which in a nutshell uses the power of a small set of behaviours endorsed and modelled by a small number of people (with high degree of influence and/or connectedness in the organization, mainly hidden networks), spreading through the organization like an infection (or fashion), which will lead to suddenly appearing tipping points of new established routines (= ‘new culture’). This is described in my book of the same title, VIRAL CHANGE. A summary of the theoretical and practical basis can be found in this 8 page article summary. You’ll understand why I was so excited reading your article! There are many points to pick up!

1. Why email is addictive – explanation via behavioural sciences (Mindhacks ) is spot-on - with a minor glitch (spotted by a commentator in the Mindhacks blog): variable interval reinforcement [getting a reward from time to time, apparently random] only works well once the behaviour has been established. Initially, you need to reinforce a new (desired) behaviour every time while it is still ‘new’. But, it doesn’t contaminate the argument, since we are starting from the fact that using email ‘all the time’ is a well-established behaviour in most of us!

2. ‘Programmers are not natural migration pathways for viral behaviours to spread’. I am sympathetic with the spirit of your statement, but you would be surprised how viral change does not distinguish between ‘types of behaviours’. Once started and with enough critical mass of people in ‘social copying mode’, the infection spreads no matter what. So, I don’t mind to have programmers in my client pool! Viral Change works regardless. Almost in any function/corporate tribe ( sales, marketing, IT…) you’ll find similar presumptions: individualistic-social-Darwinian-sales people are not good for collaboration or collaborative tools etc. I am proud to be associated with significant ‘cultural changes’ I am leading, that were written off (impossible, never, not in a million years, long….) at the beginning of the intervention. So, don’t despair.

3. The turning off of emails on Fridays. My experience is that isolated measures such as this one have limited impact if other variables are left untouched. This is by the way a measure that I often find in the context of grandiose ‘work-life’ balance schemes, many of which, in my view, are fundamentally flawed. If the volume of work, distribution of labour and headcount etc. doesn’t change, then banning emails on Fridays or over the week-end is far from ‘helpful’, but rather a new straight jacket. However, if the measure were taken in a broader context of behavioural change, it may just be useful as trigger for other behaviours. I say it 'may' because my background in behavioural sciences tells me that it should theoretically be possible! But I haven’t seen it yet!

4. In behavioural terms, ‘banning’ is far weaker than promoting (reinforcing) an alternative . Here I agree with you that if the measure is taken, for example, in the context of introducing blogs or collaborative tools then the potential value is higher. The real trick is to promote, reinforce, reward, ‘infect’ face-to-face conversations (for example, when possible) or collaborative tools, MORE THAN make something forbidden – like no use of email on Fridays.

5. The email-itis disease has gotten increasingly more widespread since the infection of Blackberries across continents. Now, not only the worker/manager/executive is looking at his/her PC or laptop screen in the office for newly delivered emails but also when he /she is out (field, travelling): they can get anything ‘new’ on their Blackberry. This is the climax of the ‘always-on’ worker who is attached directly to the company server via wireless umbilical cord (I suppose I should trademark ‘umbilicalberry’!). It will take a lot of space to navigate through the serious philosophical implications of the 365/24/7 ‘always-on’ executive and I have referred to it in my book The Leader with Seven Faces. Space and time are assets that have become totally commoditised. We need measures to protect ourselves and others working with us/for us from this terminal commoditising syndrome. I am afraid it is a bit more complex than shutting down Outlook on Fridays. Leandro Herrero http://www.thechalfontproject.com/