Why do we meet?
To avoid going on a picnic and while unpacking the food
someone asking: "Ok, who brought the salt?" and everybody
getting a blank look.
That its easily achieved today with online tools.
Then why we keep having meetings?
To avoid going on a picnic and while unpacking the food
find out that some people went to McDonalds because they
feel that the food and the whole idea of preparing your
food sucks.
It's group therapy.
It might help, or get on the way of getting things done.
Fun Yet Effective Meetings
41–45 of 45 posts
Re: Fun Yet Effective Meetings
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can "tag" people with email. Lots of people use this highly effective pattern: FW: Re: FW: Fw: Re: RE: Update on project hey chrisweekly, what do you think of this? Regards, John Doe, MSc, CPA, CMA, TLA, CISAOO Big Corp 123 Fake St Someplace, OT 90210 Phone 2025551234 x364375 Fax 2025553536 Cell 2025553788 Pager 20255522226 Check out our FacedIn page! [Broken image] [Broken image] [Broken image] [Broken image] [B…
Hi John -- Please remember that our corporate standard of email etiquette, as referenced in the employee handbook wiki [link], is to inline our responses while removing unrelated content. We've found that method to be very effective for the last thirty years. Also note that the standard for internal signatures [link] is 2 lines: NAME OR NICKNAME DEPARTMENT and that the standard for external signatures is a maximum of…
Anyone talking to Legal gets privilege. Not only Legal.
Re: Fun Yet Effective Meetings
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi John -- Please remember that our corporate standard of email etiquette, as referenced in the employee handbook wiki [link], is to inline our responses while removing unrelated content. We've found that method to be very effective for the last thirty years. Also note that the standard for internal signatures [link] is 2 lines: NAME OR NICKNAME DEPARTMENT and that the standard for external signatures is a maximum of…
Anyone talking to Legal gets privilege. Not only Legal.
The first thing that Legal says is "You don't communicate privileged information by email. Call me."
Re: Fun Yet Effective Meetings
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can "tag" people with email. Lots of people use this highly effective pattern: FW: Re: FW: Fw: Re: RE: Update on project hey chrisweekly, what do you think of this? Regards, John Doe, MSc, CPA, CMA, TLA, CISAOO Big Corp 123 Fake St Someplace, OT 90210 Phone 2025551234 x364375 Fax 2025553536 Cell 2025553788 Pager 20255522226 Check out our FacedIn page! [Broken image] [Broken image] [Broken image] [Broken image] [B…
Hi John -- Please remember that our corporate standard of email etiquette, as referenced in the employee handbook wiki [link], is to inline our responses while removing unrelated content. We've found that method to be very effective for the last thirty years. Also note that the standard for internal signatures [link] is 2 lines: NAME OR NICKNAME DEPARTMENT and that the standard for external signatures is a maximum of…
Try working in a non IT company. Its IT itself who set up the mile long footer and people will have no idea or no authorization tot change it.
Re: Fun Yet Effective Meetings
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
>usage patterns for a shared email channel are far more individual than for a branded async medium like slack on the other hand this can also be argued as a strength of email (which is what I would do) because different people need different usage patterns to work optimally, by forcing people into a one size fits all solution you will ensure some people will work less well than others.
Just invoke accessibility as an implicit benefit of the multitude of email usage possibilities and slack etc should be almost taboo.
which companies that care so much about accessibility is it that you've been working at?