To whom it may concern 3

[svanels]

Yeterday I received a CC of an e-mail to some of my subordinates from an internal client with exactly the header To whom it may concern. He had some grieves in it, some cover own (a..)stuff subjects, and maybe 30% things that after analyzing clearly indicate communication problems.

He sends it to, 3 of my subordinates, his boss, his co-workers and I got CC.

My staff finds the guy rude, and is ready to lynch him, I suspect that they read the header, were pissed-off, and did not care to read any further.

Are they over-sensitive?

I think with the ease of sending e-mail, people first look at in this sequence:
1)The header
2) To who it is sent
3) Who is the sender

and already know what it is all about, and have their opinion formed.

Sometimes I long for the good old days, when there was no e-mail and you could make use of guerilla techniques to get things done.

My favourite was the fake cc:
You have an employee who is not cooperating, and you do not have direct influence on him. In other words you are not his boss and you know that the going to his boss procedure would make things worse somewhere down the lane.
I would write the guy a nice letter, stressing that his input was very important for the success of overall company objectives. Remind him that on such date contact was made with him, but failed.
and.. at the end of the letter
CC: your boss

Which of course never saw the letter, but that he wouldn't know anyway.

100% cooperation guaranteed.

What is your first impression of header like this?

Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr

 

[GwydionM]

Whosoever calls me 'whom' is likely to be ignored. For 'whom' the bin lurks.

At my workplace, I have set office to drop certain people straight in the bin. People who give 'high priority' to trivia.

------------------------------
An old man who lives in the UK

 

[chiph]

I find using a fake CC: to be borderline dishonest. If the issue is important enough to include your or someone else's boss, then include them on the email. Otherwise, don't try and fake it, as that is lying.

Chip H.


____________________________________________________________________
Click here to learn Ways to help with Tsunami Relief
If you want to get the best response to a question, please read FAQ222-2244 first

 

[svanels]

The fake cc was before the e-mail area, call it dishonest but it gets the job done with by a cooperative person and in most cases you gained a friend. You don't go complaining to your boss about a friendly letter.

Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr

 

[pmonett]

It sounds like office politics and communication to me.
Communicating is an art that is taught nowhere, and it is quite a shame.
Once upon a time, there were behavioral classes in school. As ridiculous as they could be, they still conveyed what the rules were for conducting oneself in public.
I find that such classes would probably do a world of good nowadays. Our civilisation has collectively forgotten that it cannot be "gimme, gimme, gimme" all the time. Manners are a good thing, and those who lack the natural diplomacy skills have to be told what can be done and what cannot be done.

Pascal.

 

[Thadeus]

First of all, this is an ethics forum, the fake cc isn't bordeline dishonest, it is dishonest.

Secondly, I don't find the problem communicating so much as listening. I find that part of what Steven says gets right to the heart of the issue: People hear things as they wish the speaker to have said them, not how they were necessarily said. Even if what they think they've heard is not favorable.

~Thadeus

 

[DoubleD]

So who exactly was the email intended for?
Who would be expected to take action on the issues listed?

I personally would never send a message with that subject, because it looks like you're complaining without being willing to work toward the solution.

He sends it to, 3 of my subordinates, his boss, his co-workers and I got CC.

Why is this person emailing all three of your subordinates directly? Shouldn't he have discussed the issues directly with them, or at least addressed it with you before sending an email to all these individuals?

On the Fake CC issue:
The individual might file that letter in their "My Achievements" bin. Then pull it out during a review. Or they may go to their boss to discuss it. Either way, the boss never got a copy and won't know what it was all about. Fake CC was and is unethical, even it might be effective.

I am what I am based on the decisions I have made.

DoubleD

 

[svanels]

Thanks everyone for your input, Pascal and Thadeus, you get right to the point, it is about office politics and communication. I saw the e-mail and read it over and over again. It is the first impression that counts.

The issue is not the fake e-mail, that is another story. If the guy is deliberately not cooperating (sabotaging), he will ask himself when his boss will kick-him, you put the sword of Damocles above his head, and most likely will do the job before the boss find out. The unintentional thwart? will appreciate your letter and cooperate.

At least I can say to the writer that he has to polish his writing style, because people will throw his mesage in the bin without hesitating after reading 2 lines.

Proof--- I had part of the message analyzed by an international forum

Regards

Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr

 

[svanels]

I personally would never send a message with that subject, because it looks like you're complaining without being willing to work toward the solution.[/quate]

80% change that this is the message.


Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr

 

[SantaMufasa]

Steven,

I've always wondered what the official term is for "end quote"...now I know...it's "quate".

Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)

http://www.dasages.com

@ 18:55 (28Feb05) UTC (aka "GMT" and "Zulu"),
@ 11:55 (28Feb05) Mountain Time

Do you use Oracle and live or work in Utah, USA? Then click here to join Utah Oracle Users Group on Tek-Tips.

 

[svanels]

Clicked the Submit Post button instead of preview

Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr

 

[philhege]

So do a lot of people who write flame emails!

If I'm hacked off at someone, I write a scathing email, and then press Delete (making sure, of course, that the Delete button is far, far away from the Send button). I feel better, the flamee is spared my wrath, no feathers are ruffled, and no one's the wiser. And I might even save it to Draft for sh*ts and giggles at some later time, to remind myself how ridiculous it was for me to feel that way.

<DISCLAIMER>This post BTW was sent blithely into the forum without preview, so if I upset someone, it was a mistake. My bad.</DISCLAIMER>

Phil Hegedusich
Senior Programmer/Analyst
IIMAK

http://www.iimak.com

-----------
I'm not as think as you confused I am.
-----------
Flabbergasted (a.): Amazed at how much weight one has gained.
-----------
Oyster (n.): One who sprinkles their conversation with Yiddish expressions.

 

[Craftor]

Of course, you do understand that Murphy's Law states that you will accidently hit Send on the most vituperative and scathing email that under no circumstances should ever be seen by anyone else ...

Maybe just writing it out in Notepad is better ;-)

Craftor

 

[willir]

Regardless of ethics, the internal client who sent the email did not sound very professional. When people loose their professionalism, they may loose their objectivity and they may become more emotional.

We had this guy at work who did several stunts like this -- submit a grievence memo to just about everyone. We tried talking to him. Even a couple of managers did the same. We gave up covering, and gave him enough rope to hang himself. Notice the initial two words ... We had

svanels - hopefully this is a one-time-only occurence, but I like your subsequent points about communication. eMail makes it much to easy to send inappropriate memos compared to the past. Often, we would hash things out first verbally -- typing a memo required much to much work. However, in the past, it was unlikely that you could rub shoulders and discuss greivances with the boss, or boss's boss. You can do this with email.

I still think verbal disucssions is preferred. Anybody talk to this guy and find out what is wrong? Perhaps it is more than business that is bothering him.

Good luck with this.

 

[svanels]

Willir,
I talked (scrubbed) with the guy at home, over a couple of beers.
Years ago when I started working (me a young engineer), he an experienced tech, he was my first mentor, he was not very happy that he had to learn somebody to work, without extra pay.
On my first day he handed 3 bulky (equipment) manuals with the words: "if you finish this then we can talk" and ...we became great friends.
Several years, mutations and promotions later we are still in the same company, both in different divisions and I am 3 layers above him in the corporate food chain. He is stubborn (black sheep) but I read his message over and over again despite the offensive header (the lynch posse already formed by my staff).
I warned him about the rope using your words willir, hope he gets the message.

OK in our company e-mail is relatively new (5 years) and people are still making mistakes. Two weeks ago I explained the term bcc and I saw some worried faces.

You wouldn't park your car in front of your mechanics garage at night, put a post-it note on the hood written Fix it ASAP and go home waiting for his call.

Some people manage to send the car attached...

Regards

Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr

 

[willir]

he an experienced tech, he was my first mentor, he was not very happy that he had to learn somebody to work, without extra pay. .... and I am 3 layers above him in the corporate food chain.

Some who are passed over for promotion, especially if very strong technically, and perhaps weak with people skills, can become very bitter.

I am not sure what the answer is. But I will talk to those I know and let them vent. ... until I cant stand it anymore.

 

[svanels]

I said mentor (not boss), my entry level was above his ceiling 12 years ago, and also tech x engineer in terms of education.
When I started they threw me right into the lions den, and I am still benefitting from that approach. There was no red carpet, just the school of hard knocks.
In his carreer he did very well, but if you think your smarter then the president, you will not find job satisfaction and become bitter. (The "I-told-you-so" type)

Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr

 

[Rich13]

If sending a fake cc: is dishonest, is sending a bcc: also "dishonest"? Stated differently, which is worse:

1. Sending a memo to a person and a "fake cc:" to his/her boss? or

2. Sending a memo to a person and blind-copying his/her boss without their knowledge?

Just curious what you all think?

Rich

 

[svanels]

I don't use the bcc, and forgive me the expression, I consider that "stuff for women who nave nothing do" can't remember the verb in english for it.

The fake cc, is a stick behind the door, you always can pull it out when you need it. If the person still doesn't cooperate, the next letter will go, with a CC (personally delivered), and will not be friendly, motivating, and nice, but a cold and calculated report about facts and consequences (the crush report), the one that makes enemies.

Steven van Els
SAvanEls@cq-link.sr

 

[CajunCenturion]

And when the next letter does go out, with a real cc to boss, what happens when the boss investigates, finds the first letter with the fake cc to him/her and now wants to know why the original cc was never delivered? The boss says, "If you had delivered the original cc, as appears ont he original memo, I could've dealt with this before it got to this stage." The boss now is focused on the notification failure rather then your issue. You, because of the fake cc, have introduced a whole new problem, taking away the focus from the issue, and putting the focus on yourself.

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein