It’s interesting to think about how tools like email have shifted the way that people communicate on large scales in the workplace. It’s a strange sort of development because it has plenty of pros and cons to its use. People at any level in a company can communicate with others who are at any level in the company instantaneously, or to every other employee with the exact same message. Alternatively, it becomes a tool that can be used in passive-aggressive ways or can be misunderstood as easily, or perhaps easier, than in-person communication.
When talking to someone in person, there’s the added nuance of body language and tone of voice. In electronic forms of communication, these nuances are lost and the meanings of the words can be misinterpreted by the recipient. Sometimes, I’ll get texts and think that someone is angry when they’re not, but it’s hard to tell because I can’t physically see them or hear how they meant the words to sound. In the context of company communication, that can be terrifying. If you receive an email from a higher up, it’s harder to ask for clarification if you misunderstand the emotions behind it than if you’re talking to a friend or relative. By sacrificing the personal touch of communication for efficiency, we might make it easier to communicate, but do we sacrifice the clarity of communication in doing so?
Mel's 245 Blog 