I was giving a workshop on Information Overload and an attendee   proposed that email is more effective when you precede it with a phone call. His thinking was this: if you first discuss the matter at hand on the phone, and only then send an email to confirm or flesh out details, then there will be no lack of clarity because both parties are aligned. This means less back-and-forth emails to seek clarification or correct misunderstandings.

Now, this actually makes a lot of sense, and in fact I use this system when I need to broach a subject or a request that may meet with resistance – first do the delicate introduction by phone, then promise to send materials to help the other party decide. But is it a good idea for more ordinary communications?

This may seem to many to be ineffective; a phone call can take longer than tapping out an email, so why not use the faster method? One can always pick up the phone to do damage control if the email is misunderstood. And yet, this may not take into account the total, cumulative time of the first email and the subsequent ones that may result.

What’s worse, I have no doubt that many people prefer email because they want to avoid clarity; there are many indications of the use of email to put a barrier between sender and recipient, as when someone delegates an action item or just passes it along with  the hope and intent that the recipient will be stuck with it. To such people, email is a tool of choice. But to those of us who actually want to collaborate with our coworkers to the benefit of the organization or the mission we share, paving the email message’s way with a preliminary call is often the preferable choice…

What do you think?