Do you use @name in business emails?

[MagpiePi]

A colleague has started using @name tags in emails when someone needs to take an action.

It is really irritating me; everyone who gets '@named' is cc'd into the email and we are all professionals who (I assume) can read and understand when we are asked to do something. eg. "MagpiePi, can you let OtherColleague know when you've done a task"

Is this a thing now or is he just being even more of a bell end?

I've not seen this tool, but it does sound useful actually. Much better than a needless and mildly PA cc to my line manager

My last boss would put the name in bold and coloured red when asking someone to do something and it always seemed negative to me, like a teacher marking your work in red pen

People are often CC'd for info only without having actions, so this allows you to very quickly see if you need to prioritise reading the email since there is a question or action in it that needs your attention (since you can see you have been tagged before you open it).

Depends on the email I guess - we use gmail and it doesn't show up that you've been tagged before you open the email. So you have to read it just the same as if there was no @

@MagpiePi

How can you see you've been tagged before you open it?

On my version of outlook I have set it so you get a preview of the email so you can glance at it without opening.

As others have said it makes it clear to everyone who has the actions rather than a generic email with no owner specified - in these instances either no one will pick it up or more than one person will which will lead to duplication or confusion

I don’t mind this and find it useful. What I don’t like is when someone opens an email with no greeting e.g HamishDent instead of Dear HamishDent. I find it rude. I wonder if it’s a US thing through, as only my US colleagues appear to do it.

@HamishDent

I don’t mind this and find it useful. What I don’t like is when someone opens an email with no greeting e.g HamishDent instead of Dear HamishDent. I find it rude. I wonder if it’s a US thing through, as only my US colleagues appear to do it.

Yes to this! Especially the first email, not that fussed if it’s a reply.

On a similar topic - blank invites for meetings is a pet hate of mine. Sending an invite only with no context or purpose of the meeting. These will be declined by me with a reason of if you can tell me what this meeting is about then I may be able to attend

@DinGaddy

Hmm. *@MagpiePi* are you British? (I am for what it's worth).

I've worked globally for decades, and we have this weird thing in British culture where people never want to be told to do anything, especially in front of their peers.

It's almost like the line manager has to slip in the directives as subtly as possible, so that no one looks like they're being given an imperative.

With that in mind, what's the biggest challenge you have to being "@" in an email - is it

• the fact you are notified twice, or

• the perception you're being asked to do something in front of others

Yes I'm English.

It's not the being told or asked to do something that bothers me, its the use @name that is irritating. Previously people have just put names, sometimes in bold, to highlight that an action is needed, or just directly type 'Can you do this thing'. That is fine.

I'm clearly not far enough up a management ladder* that I am cc'd into 100s of emails and am am expected to complete 100s of tasks flagged up in those emails. How does anyone ever get anything constructive done workinig like that?

*tbh I would rather stab myself in the eye with a biro than step onto the bottom rung of any management ladder.

Just wait til your email client starts telling you that you might have open actions for those people

Seems like a perfect recipe for people needing to be spoon-fed because no-one can be arsed to read an email properly any more.

Sometimes you might be cc’d in to an email with absolutely zero actions. Doesn’t mean the contents aren’t a) important TO YOU and b) require information that the other person needs you to be aware of.

Or are we now in a world where people need to b specifically @-ed in an email that has been specifically emailed to them just to tell them to read the damn thing?

🤦🏻‍♀️ Not require. Contain.

its the use @name that is irritating

Why? Because it's different?

I find it useful. I can filter emails by where I've been @named but can't in a meaningful way if people have just typed or bolded my name.

Fair enough if you don't find it useful but I don't see how it harms you.

Yes, tech company we now use it to tag actions rather than just something you're cc'd in for awareness.

I read my emails, I find the @ useful when I'm filtering my inbox/tasks and managing the work I have in hand.

I think the fact I've been sent something is enough of an instruction to read it! The @ is about actions. That's how we use it.

If people are using it as a shortcut for adding addresses to the CC field even though they don't need anything from those people that would be a bit stupid and irritating, yes.

I think it's useful as it highlights where your actions are in a lengthy email up front. So I can tell from the preview whether it's an email with an action specific to me or not, without scrolling through a load of stuff.

I don't understand this. Do you get the email twice?

Yeah, I find it really useful (sorry!). But as someone else said, we also use Slack a lot so it feels natural.

I’ve never had one of these.

TBH, I don’t think I’d trust just using @name to indicate I’m specifically asking someone to do something, but the request is part of a massive long email. I’d have to email the person separately to make sure they knew otherwise I’d get too angsty thinking they might have missed the request.

I’m not a manager though so WTF do I know?

I like it, and it’s still up to me to decide whether I want to complete the action. It’s generally a ‘FYI you need to do this’, not a demand. I can link it to the Microsoft To-Do app or search for actions without trawling through emails.

It’s not necessarily linked to being cc’d though? You can @ someone and have them in the main email ‘to’ field.

I guess so much is to do with company culture, not the tools used.

I find it useful to use when I have had to cc someone into an email chain because they need to be aware of the issue that they previously had no knowledge of and to highlight their input would be appreciated from that point onwards. This way everyone is aware of salient points.

In my workplace no-one uses @name, but if someone gets an action, their name is in bold, which is basically the same thing.

We do this, it's often useful and necessary to ensure things arent overlooked, or to most clearly delegate aspects of the subject email.

Not wanly, just good communication.

Not wanky either.

Oh this really annoys me - not because I don’t like being told to do something it just looks knobby. But it’s becoming more and more common, so I’ve given in to it (not using it myself though 😂)

@HorsePellets

I certainly don't fully read every email I'm cc'd to; it would be an entirely inefficient use of my time.

Yuck, that would annoy me. It's just too informal for business in my opinion. We just refer to people by name and ask them to do the specific thing we want them to do if it's an email to multiple people.

I work in a setting where I'm across multiple projects, work streams, couldn't possibly attend all the important & nice to attend meetings (I'm already mostly back to back with calls as it is, it's a joke, I have to multitask while half listening and drop off if it looks like my area specialism isn't needed for some meetings)... And this technique really, really helps. I'm drowning in communication across time zones, languages and so on... I have to be absolutely ruthless about organisation of my time and attention, burnout is commonplace, and I'll gladly do anything if it cuts down the noise to signal ratio.. which, this does.

I work for a global employer and this has been a norm for a few years.

I appreciate not everyone likes it. I volunteer for a charity and I'm pretty sure doing the same would be seen as blunt/inappropriate.

So it depends.