Shortcuts: The Anxiety of the Unanswered E-Mail

OVER the last few weeks, I’ve repeatedly run up against one of the classic frustrations of modern life — sending out e-mails and hearing nothing back.

In this case, it was business-related and the issues were resolved, later rather than sooner. But like everyone else, I’ve also had times when friends seem to inexplicably drop out of sight and my mind races as I pick through our past interactions, wondering if I’ve somehow offended them.

It’s not just e-mails. Unreturned phone calls, texts and messages via social media can be just as irritating. But I’m going to concentrate on e-mails because for most people (teenage sons excepted), they are the most common tool of business and personal communication.

A large part of the problem, said Terri Kurtzberg, an associate professor of management and global business at Rutgers Business School, is that in face-to-face or phone conversations, “it’s clear how long a silence should last before you need to respond,” she said. “There’s no norm with digital communication.”

The nonresponders — the ones who regularly let e-mails slide through the cracks — are at the opposite end of the spectrum from the constant responders. Those are the ones who can barely look up from their smartphones, even while walking or dining, because they are so intent on answering every query.

I’ve written about the problem of expecting instant responses. So this time I’m going to focus on the laggards. I was curious to hear their side of the story, so I sent out the question to friends (via e-mail) and out over some Web sites.

I was somewhat surprised to get so many responses from people who went into quite some detail explaining why they don’t respond to e-mails.

First of all, I’m talking about answering friends or colleagues, not people you don’t know who are trying to sell or pitch something.

Lack of time and too many e-mails are the most common reasons people say they don’t reply (although some of the busiest people I know are the most prompt responders). Checking their e-mails on one device, like a smartphone, making a mental note to reply more in-depth later, and then forgetting, is another. And, of course, there’s always the possibility your e-mail ended up in the junk or spam folder.

But there are more emotional reasons as well. One is fear of commitment or a hesitation to say no. My friend Janine said she would drop the ball when she was invited to something she didn’t want to go to but thought she should.

“I want to say ‘no’, but feel that the right thing is to say ‘yes’, so I am frozen and then I plan on going back to the e-mail to draft a reply, but it gets buried,” she said. “Then I feel even worse for not replying and put it off again. It’s not nice to leave people hanging, but I do.”

Over the last few years, Adam Boettiger, a digital marketing consultant based in Portland, Ore., said, “We’ve seen an increase in the nonresponse rather than just politely declining. You delete it and hope it goes away, just like if someone comes to your door and you pretend you’re not home.”

Notoya Green, of Manhattan, knows both sides. When she worked as a lawyer, “I used to live by my BlackBerry. If people didn’t respond, I thought it was unprofessional and rude.” Now, the mother of 2-year-old triplets, she’s the one no one can get hold of.“If people send me a message that I don’t want to deal with, it’s easier not to respond,” Ms. Green said. “At this stage, there are so many requests from my children, I can’t deal with requests from adults.”

While time is the major factor, it’s not the only one. Like many others, Ms. Green said she may feel uncomfortable turning people down, so she will just ignore the query.

Shortcuts: The Meaning in a Drawer Full of Old Family Snapshots

But as I began my research, I came across a Facebook page where lost photos from the storm were posted. Called “Union Beach — Photos and Misplaced Items,” the page shows photos of newborns and birthday parties, weddings and family gatherings.

Starting the morning after the storm devastated her community of Union Beach, N.J., Jeanette Van Houten and her niece have collected over a thousand photos and some photo albums. She is making it her mission to scan and post to Facebook as many as possible, including those turned into the fire department, police station and borough hall.

In addition, she was handed a drawerful of over a thousand family photos that must have been wrenched from a dresser.

About 60 photos have been claimed so far, and some professionals have offered to restore damaged photos free.

“These photos were passed down through families and they survived Sandy, even if the structures they were in didn’t,” Ms. Van Houten said. “They tell our story.”

With the Facebook page, Ms. Van Houten uses newer technology to help people reconnect with their old-fashioned snapshots. And seeing the photographs of mundane scenes and milestones on Facebook, along with the grateful comments from people who got back a bit of their lives, reminded me of both the fragility and strength of photos and their continuing importance in our lives. Judith Dupré, author of “Monuments: America’s History in Art and Memory” (Random House, 2007), and other books, teaches a class at her local library in Mamaroneck, N.Y., called “Stories from My Life,” for older residents. They use photos and stories to write about their lives.

“They bring in a basketful of photos,” Ms. Dupré said. “Each one of these photos contains a story — they’re like a key that opens the door to a life.”

And a printed photo “is a different species than a digital photo,” she said. “I don’t think anyone’s figured out the place of digital photos in terms of memory keeping.”

When an elderly aunt of hers died and left behind lots of photographs, Ms. Dupré said the family took them to the memorial service.

“We had a table and people could select and take what they wanted,” she said. “It was a very moving part of the memorial.”

Of course, even prints can lose their meaning and poignancy through the generations.

And in some cases, as with Hurricane Sandy, photos may be safer in cyberspace than in an album on a bookshelf — as long as you remember to upload them to a site like Flickr, Shutterfly, Snapfish or countless other photo sites available. (And make sure you know how long a site will keep your photos. Some, for example, require you to show some activity at least once a year.) That way, if you lose your hard drive, you don’t lose your photos.

But Ms. Dupré said she worried that photos that existed only online somewhere might die with the photographer.

“I don’t even know what my parents have in terms of digital photography,” she said. She said she put the password to her photos safely away with her will and other documents, so her children can access them.

Now I’m not trying to say that the old-fashioned way is the only way. Photography has constantly evolved. The Brownie camera, first sold by Kodak for $1 in 1900, radicalized photography by making it available to just about everyone.

But, and I know this largely a generational thing, I can’t help but wonder about the ubiquity of the cellphone photo. As Ms. Dupré said, “The infinite number of digital photos that can be taken has devalued the single image and made one-of-a-kind prints that much more precious.”

Shortcuts: Companies See Benefit of Time Away From Mobile Devices

MOST people I know feel too connected — not to family or friends, but to electronic devices like smartphones and computers. They feel a need to check e-mails, texts and social networks almost constantly on the off chance that an emergency has popped up in the last five minutes that they absolutely, positively have to address.

Most people I know also would like to feel less connected to those devices. They realize that they could go an hour or a day — or (gasp!) even longer — without going online, but two things prevent it: constantly checking our texts and e-mails has become like a tic, or a hard habit to break; and most of us feel that if everyone else is available 24 hours, then we have to be, too.

“Some industries are so highly volatile that people need to be connected all the time, but most of us overexaggerate our own importance,” said Dalton Conley, dean for the social services at New York University and author of “Elsewhere” (Pantheon, 2009).

“Then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy — if we’re always available, then we’re expected to always be available.”

But, as Professor Conley added, companies are increasingly realizing that employees need to be disconnected from time to time and that “giving workers time to chill helps ultimate long-term productivity.”

But the question arises: Is this something we can do unilaterally as individuals or do we need some sort of corporate shift that acknowledges and addresses the burnout of always being on call?

“It’s very hard to turn off by yourself,” said Leslie A. Perlow, a professor of leadership at Harvard Business School and author of “Sleeping With Your Smartphone” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2012).

Professor Perlow did a survey of 1,600 managers and professionals and found that only 2 percent turned off their devices, even while on vacation. But Professor Perlow discovered during her research that organizational change, even on a relatively small scale, could make a huge difference.

She did an experiment with a six-person team at the Boston Consulting Group.

Each team member would have a night off a week, starting about 6 p.m., when they would be unreachable electronically. There also was a weekly team discussion about how the process was working.

Not everyone was happy to participate. Although the workers could each choose their night off, many of them — at least at first — didn’t want to take it.

“Some said they didn’t know what they would do with a night off,” she said.

There was a safety net. The team member covering for the out-of-pocket employee would receive any e-mails and assess whether they were urgent.

If it was a rare, real emergency and no other team member could handle it, then the worker taking the night off would be called.

When everyone was on board, the process worked far better and with more positive results than Professor Perlow expected. Team members felt empowered and expressed increased satisfaction with work and their work-life balance. They started scrutinizing operations, like whether their travel schedules might be shifted to make their lives more relaxed and productive.

“We were surprised — we didn’t go in expecting to get that result,” she said. “People were more engaged, were prioritizing and talking more.”

Professor Perlow replicated the pilot program several times at the Boston Consulting Group and has now expanded it to 14 countries with more than 1,000 teams. She stressed, however, that it was not enough to take the time off. Employees also need the element of group discussion to “collectively rethink how to do work.”

Other companies have tackled the problem as well.

At the beginning of 2012, Volkswagen reached an agreement with a small portion of its work force to stop the e-mail server for employees who used BlackBerrys 30 minutes after their shift ended and restore it half an hour before work began the next day.

Shortcuts: Companies See Benefit of Time Away From Mobile Devices

MOST people I know feel too connected — not to family or friends, but to electronic devices like smartphones and computers. They feel a need to check e-mails, texts and social networks almost constantly on the off chance that an emergency has popped up in the last five minutes that they absolutely, positively have to address.

Most people I know also would like to feel less connected to those devices. They realize that they could go an hour or a day — or (gasp!) even longer — without going online, but two things prevent it: constantly checking our texts and e-mails has become like a tic, or a hard habit to break; and most of us feel that if everyone else is available 24 hours, then we have to be, too.

“Some industries are so highly volatile that people need to be connected all the time, but most of us overexaggerate our own importance,” said Dalton Conley, dean for the social services at New York University and author of “Elsewhere” (Pantheon, 2009).

“Then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy — if we’re always available, then we’re expected to always be available.”

But, as Professor Conley added, companies are increasingly realizing that employees need to be disconnected from time to time and that “giving workers time to chill helps ultimate long-term productivity.”

But the question arises: Is this something we can do unilaterally as individuals or do we need some sort of corporate shift that acknowledges and addresses the burnout of always being on call?

“It’s very hard to turn off by yourself,” said Leslie A. Perlow, a professor of leadership at Harvard Business School and author of “Sleeping With Your Smartphone” (Harvard Business Review Press, 2012).

Professor Perlow did a survey of 1,600 managers and professionals and found that only 2 percent turned off their devices, even while on vacation. But Professor Perlow discovered during her research that organizational change, even on a relatively small scale, could make a huge difference.

She did an experiment with a six-person team at the Boston Consulting Group.

Each team member would have a night off a week, starting about 6 p.m., when they would be unreachable electronically. There also was a weekly team discussion about how the process was working.

Not everyone was happy to participate. Although the workers could each choose their night off, many of them — at least at first — didn’t want to take it.

“Some said they didn’t know what they would do with a night off,” she said.

There was a safety net. The team member covering for the out-of-pocket employee would receive any e-mails and assess whether they were urgent.

If it was a rare, real emergency and no other team member could handle it, then the worker taking the night off would be called.

When everyone was on board, the process worked far better and with more positive results than Professor Perlow expected. Team members felt empowered and expressed increased satisfaction with work and their work-life balance. They started scrutinizing operations, like whether their travel schedules might be shifted to make their lives more relaxed and productive.

“We were surprised — we didn’t go in expecting to get that result,” she said. “People were more engaged, were prioritizing and talking more.”

Professor Perlow replicated the pilot program several times at the Boston Consulting Group and has now expanded it to 14 countries with more than 1,000 teams. She stressed, however, that it was not enough to take the time off. Employees also need the element of group discussion to “collectively rethink how to do work.”

Other companies have tackled the problem as well.

At the beginning of 2012, Volkswagen reached an agreement with a small portion of its work force to stop the e-mail server for employees who used BlackBerrys 30 minutes after their shift ended and restore it half an hour before work began the next day.