|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Today's Feature Article |
|
From Our Founder December 2, 2009 By Bob Wichlinski
Increasingly I’m becoming
convinced that people aren’t reading their e-mail anymore.
Not like they used to. If you’re inbox looks anything
like mine it’s hard to devote the time necessary to read each and every
word in each and every e-mail. The spam that makes it
through my firewall and spam filter is easily recognized and discarded,
which leaves the remaining 98% of the mail left to consider. Discard the
retailers, daily blasts, and “auto notifications” and now I’m down to
75% left to sort. Another 25% is “forwards” from
well-intentioned friends & associates who feel compelled to “share” a
joke, story, warning, picture, editorial, recipe, video, or chain prayer
with me. So now I’m down to the 50% that is
meaningful to my daily existence… and that is what I’m left to sort
through. My first run at the remaining
50% of e-mail is based upon the ability to recognize the “sender.” If I
don’t recognize the name of the sender, I ain’t opening it, plain and
simple. This is followed by a quick review of the
“subject” line. From there I begin to “open mail.”
It is no wonder by the time I’ve reached this point in the
process, I’m pretty much burned out and it becomes increasingly unlikely
that I’m going to read each and every word in an e-mail. If your e-mail is
multi-paragraph and contains more than one question and a litany of
ideas, odds are that any response you receive back is going to be
fragmented at best and cursory at worst. In other
words, if you want your e-mail to be read and to elicit any response it
had better take on “TV commercial-like” quality. Why?
Because your reader’s patience is going to be tested by the
“culling” process and their attention span is going to be as short as
the time it takes to transmit an e-mail (i.e. the speed of light).
I’ve tested my theory and so far I’m right. So what’s an e-mailer to do? First, send a test e-mail to
yourself and make certain your name in the “from” header clearly
identifies YOU (that is, the name is YOURS and your recipient clearly
recognizes that fact). Make any changes required and
retest until you’re completely satisfied. You’d be
surprised how many people have no idea whatsoever what their name looks
like when it arrives in someone’s inbox. Next, when authorizing an
e-mail, if you expect the recipient to sort through their mail and
select yours to read, make the subject line short, sweet and compelling.
This is the “hook” in your little commercial which draws the
reader in and makes them want to read your message (noting of course
that if it’s a “fwd:” chances are pretty good it will not survive the
recipient’s delete button). E-mailers who habitually
“fwd” risk being ignored. Let’s presume the recipient
recognizes your name, is compelled by your subject line, and actually
opens your e-mail. If they find you’ve written a
short story or adorned your e-mail with cumbersome attachments, chances
are you missed your mark. Bob’s rule: one idea per
paragraph, no more than two sentences per paragraph, and no more than 3
paragraphs in an e-mail. Anything more and you’ve
lost your reader. Their interest will fade and
they’ll move on to “greener pastures.” If and when
they do reply, their response will be incomplete. Two final “don’t you dares.”
E-mailing is not texting, so avoid the glyphs, shorts, and
abbreviations. They’re annoying and distracting.
Avail yourself to the use of the full size keyboard in front of
you. Finally, if you’re sending to multiple
recipients, be considerate enough to keep your recipient’s e-mail
address confidential by sending the e-mail to yourself and bcc:ing
recipients on your list. If I wanted the whole world
to have my e-mail address, I’d publish it. Nothing
infuriates me more than some careless human “blasting” my e-mail to all
their friends in their personal mass e-mail. Here’s to more effective e-mailing.
|
||
