sounds like an anorakky thing to do but there is a bit of insight to be had in this basic statistical analysis of emails over a number of years. I think that the most interesting thing is to cost out the timing of dealing with emails. "So there you have my finer-grained interactions 'laid bare'. Allowing ZERO minutes of response time for some finer-grained categories (e.g. semi-junk, self/meta, which don't require reading at all) and ONE-THREE minutes of response times for most categories, plus, say, TEN minutes of response time for an important research category such as 'main project work, paper writing', it is trivially easy to get to 2.5 hours per workday assuming a fairly ruthless, 'one-touch', knee-jerk email interaction regime. And worse if you deviate from the regime."
I can well believe it -there were times when invovled in the university when email must have been getting towards that for me: but there again it was interactions that I would have had other ways possibly involving more time and waiting. So some of it was, for me, actually correlative of a higher or faster workrate.... But it is worth thinking about how e-comms have changed our workhabits and lives.
Eight years of email stats, pass 1: Corante > Get Real >:
No comments:
Post a Comment