David Silverman’s “How to Revise an Email” article in the Harvard Business Review has some good advice. I agree with all of it from the standpoint of advocating for clear communications and agree with most of it from the standpoint of keeping your job in corporate America. Or maybe I should say corporate culture, because most large American corporations employ a large share of their workers in other countries. These corporations are American, but also global.
Corporations assign their offshore offices names to indicate that the offices, although physically located in India or elsewhere, are nevertheless part of the U.S. organization. Rather than Corporation X, India, for example, the India office or offices would be named Region 10. That was the practice a few years ago. I understand that it is changing again to accommodate changing business needs.
I introduce this anecdote because the issue of writing emails for global business teams was not included in Silverman’s list, and it should be. The direct communication he advocates (item 6, no equivocation) would not fly in all circumstances, particularly when dealing with colleagues in other countries. I’ve no references to cite, but have seen first-hand and have heard from people working on the global teams of various U.S. corporations that communication with overseas colleagues requires a great deal of tact. In the United States, we prize directness in communication. In other countries, tactfulness, at the expense of specifying clear deadlines, reporting roles, and the like, is prized, and directness seen as uncivilized and rude.
Post a Comment