Adventures in Neglect - "...but I sent an email...

"
I was thinking...if only telepathy were a viable means of communication rather than
being told that I had been sent an email, along with several dozen others!
'Ineffective communication' is often cited as a principle contributor to project failure.
Communication should ensure that the right information is made available to the right
people, at the right time, and in the right medium. Email, as casual means of
communication, allows us to keep a record of, at least, our version of the facts and
what is being transmitted and received. But is this in case of any witch-hunt, or is it
just being careful, for historical purposes.
"Did you get my email", or "I'll send you a mail" are evidence of email substituting
face-to-face conversations or telephone calls. However it is possibly the most
undisciplined and confusing communication medium that we have managed to create.
We have all heard story of Everybody, Somebody, Anybody and Nobody and how "It
ended up that Everybody blamed Somebody when Nobody did what Anybody could
have done". If communication is ineffective then if somebody is not given
information, then anybody can blame everybody because nobody did their job or
rather, communicated properly. The converse is also true.
We can be inundated with a plethora of emails but are these emails actually useful or
are they the seeds of 'anticipatory blame' or 'plausible deniability'? How often are
emails expressions of people's opinion or frustration regarding a situation but yet their
input adds little or no value to the situation in hand. And, as frustration mounts, that
more and more people are introduced to a situation via 'cc', or even 'All Users'.
The good news...at least Everybody knows what is going on! The bad
news...unfortunately Nobody is doing anything about it!! Anybody may be capable of
resolving the situation if directed and, in order to get in the last word or not be
accused of 'not communicating', somebody composes yet another 1,000 word mail
referencing the trailing, but growing, email tome of evidence. Although recording for
posterity the team's communication efforts it may also be a tribute to ineffective
communication and a lawyer's delight.
But are Everybody, Somebody, Anybody or Nobody decision makers? If an issue is
raised and embellished through email chatter why is the 'situation' not realised in a
timely manner? Multiple addressees that include the entire chain of command make it
everybody's responsibility to do something and we create confusion.
This confusion may be avoided by establishing an escalation protocol through the use
of a 'single recipient email' to the decision maker with a limited 'cc' list. Then there
would only be 'somebody' in the loop rather than 'everybody'. 'Nobody' may deny
awareness and then 'anybody' would not be able to say they didn't know.
Email does not really work when 'everybody' is in the loop and a decision is required.
We need escalation so that everybody knows that if anybody raises an issue, nobody is
unaware that somebody, in particular, has been tasked to deal with the issue. And
then, perhaps, email can be made to work.