Mixing
Is it proper etiquette to alert a team with an email in addition to a ticket?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I often work with our web team to make changes to web server configurations for the applications I manage. Things like permission changes, file migration, PHP config settings, etc. I can not make these changes directly, so I rely on them to handle the work.
To follow procedure I put a ticket into our tracking system and assign it to their queue. I also follow up with an email describing the ticket and what I'm trying to do.
I feel a quick heads up via a personal email is a nice courtesy. However, upon this most recent request I wonder if I'm being more of a bother. It's a nuanced thing, but what is the proper protocol? Should the request and associated ticket be enough communication? Am I just bothering them further with a ticket (which generates an email to the team itself!) and an email or is it a nice personal touch that would be seen as welcome?
professionalism communication colleagues company-culture email
edited May 29 '13 at 16:02
IDrinkandIKnowThings
43.9k1398188
asked May 29 '13 at 15:48
ckoerner
1886
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I often work with our web team to make changes to web server configurations for the applications I manage. Things like permission changes, file migration, PHP config settings, etc. I can not make these changes directly, so I rely on them to handle the work.
To follow procedure I put a ticket into our tracking system and assign it to their queue. I also follow up with an email describing the ticket and what I'm trying to do.
I feel a quick heads up via a personal email is a nice courtesy. However, upon this most recent request I wonder if I'm being more of a bother. It's a nuanced thing, but what is the proper protocol? Should the request and associated ticket be enough communication? Am I just bothering them further with a ticket (which generates an email to the team itself!) and an email or is it a nice personal touch that would be seen as welcome?
professionalism communication colleagues company-culture email
edited May 29 '13 at 16:02
IDrinkandIKnowThings
43.9k1398188
asked May 29 '13 at 15:48
ckoerner
1886
8
I think the answer to this question is going to be very dependant on your company culture. The right answer for you is probably different than the answer to many other workplaces.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 16:02
What is your expected cycle time for resolution?
– Elysian Fields♦
May 29 '13 at 16:04
3
@Chad disagree with "too localized". A lot of companies have a ticketing system, and both answers explain when it might or might not be appropriate.
– explunit
May 29 '13 at 17:34
1
A decent ticket system generates those emails for you...
– jwenting
May 31 '13 at 5:38
I don't think it's improper etiquette, but I do think your ticket is incomplete if you feel that you need a follow-up email to explain it. Why can't you put that explanation in the ticket itself?
– alroc
Jun 3 '13 at 11:27
 |Â
show 2 more comments
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I often work with our web team to make changes to web server configurations for the applications I manage. Things like permission changes, file migration, PHP config settings, etc. I can not make these changes directly, so I rely on them to handle the work.
To follow procedure I put a ticket into our tracking system and assign it to their queue. I also follow up with an email describing the ticket and what I'm trying to do.
I feel a quick heads up via a personal email is a nice courtesy. However, upon this most recent request I wonder if I'm being more of a bother. It's a nuanced thing, but what is the proper protocol? Should the request and associated ticket be enough communication? Am I just bothering them further with a ticket (which generates an email to the team itself!) and an email or is it a nice personal touch that would be seen as welcome?
professionalism communication colleagues company-culture email
edited May 29 '13 at 16:02
IDrinkandIKnowThings
43.9k1398188
asked May 29 '13 at 15:48
ckoerner
1886
I often work with our web team to make changes to web server configurations for the applications I manage. Things like permission changes, file migration, PHP config settings, etc. I can not make these changes directly, so I rely on them to handle the work.
To follow procedure I put a ticket into our tracking system and assign it to their queue. I also follow up with an email describing the ticket and what I'm trying to do.
I feel a quick heads up via a personal email is a nice courtesy. However, upon this most recent request I wonder if I'm being more of a bother. It's a nuanced thing, but what is the proper protocol? Should the request and associated ticket be enough communication? Am I just bothering them further with a ticket (which generates an email to the team itself!) and an email or is it a nice personal touch that would be seen as welcome?
professionalism communication colleagues company-culture email
edited May 29 '13 at 16:02
IDrinkandIKnowThings
43.9k1398188
asked May 29 '13 at 15:48
ckoerner
1886
edited May 29 '13 at 16:02
IDrinkandIKnowThings
43.9k1398188
edited May 29 '13 at 16:02
IDrinkandIKnowThings
43.9k1398188
edited May 29 '13 at 16:02
IDrinkandIKnowThings
43.9k1398188
43.9k1398188
asked May 29 '13 at 15:48
ckoerner
1886
asked May 29 '13 at 15:48
ckoerner
1886
asked May 29 '13 at 15:48
ckoerner
1886
1886
8
I think the answer to this question is going to be very dependant on your company culture. The right answer for you is probably different than the answer to many other workplaces.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 16:02
What is your expected cycle time for resolution?
– Elysian Fields♦
May 29 '13 at 16:04
3
@Chad disagree with "too localized". A lot of companies have a ticketing system, and both answers explain when it might or might not be appropriate.
– explunit
May 29 '13 at 17:34
1
A decent ticket system generates those emails for you...
– jwenting
May 31 '13 at 5:38
I don't think it's improper etiquette, but I do think your ticket is incomplete if you feel that you need a follow-up email to explain it. Why can't you put that explanation in the ticket itself?
– alroc
Jun 3 '13 at 11:27
 |Â
show 2 more comments
8
I think the answer to this question is going to be very dependant on your company culture. The right answer for you is probably different than the answer to many other workplaces.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 16:02
What is your expected cycle time for resolution?
– Elysian Fields♦
May 29 '13 at 16:04
3
@Chad disagree with "too localized". A lot of companies have a ticketing system, and both answers explain when it might or might not be appropriate.
– explunit
May 29 '13 at 17:34
1
A decent ticket system generates those emails for you...
– jwenting
May 31 '13 at 5:38
I don't think it's improper etiquette, but I do think your ticket is incomplete if you feel that you need a follow-up email to explain it. Why can't you put that explanation in the ticket itself?
– alroc
Jun 3 '13 at 11:27
8
8
I think the answer to this question is going to be very dependant on your company culture. The right answer for you is probably different than the answer to many other workplaces.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 16:02
I think the answer to this question is going to be very dependant on your company culture. The right answer for you is probably different than the answer to many other workplaces.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 16:02
What is your expected cycle time for resolution?
– Elysian Fields♦
May 29 '13 at 16:04
What is your expected cycle time for resolution?
– Elysian Fields♦
May 29 '13 at 16:04
3
3
@Chad disagree with "too localized". A lot of companies have a ticketing system, and both answers explain when it might or might not be appropriate.
– explunit
May 29 '13 at 17:34
@Chad disagree with "too localized". A lot of companies have a ticketing system, and both answers explain when it might or might not be appropriate.
– explunit
May 29 '13 at 17:34
1
1
A decent ticket system generates those emails for you...
– jwenting
May 31 '13 at 5:38
A decent ticket system generates those emails for you...
– jwenting
May 31 '13 at 5:38
I don't think it's improper etiquette, but I do think your ticket is incomplete if you feel that you need a follow-up email to explain it. Why can't you put that explanation in the ticket itself?
– alroc
Jun 3 '13 at 11:27
I don't think it's improper etiquette, but I do think your ticket is incomplete if you feel that you need a follow-up email to explain it. Why can't you put that explanation in the ticket itself?
– alroc
Jun 3 '13 at 11:27
 |Â
show 2 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
In general, no. Especially if the email group you're using corresponds exactly with the queue assignment in the ticketing system.
However, it depends on the effectiveness of your ticketing system. If tickets routinely get mis-assigned or never-assigned, then emailing the people most likely to address the problem will help speed the process. And if that's the case, they're probably already accustomed to getting out-of-band emails for queue management.
A ticketing system lets people (and the company) optimize their workflow around it, customize their notification preferences, keep all documentation of an issue one one place, etc. By adding another communication system you are:
- potentially subverting the work flow
- encouraging documentation to evolve outside the ticketing system (in replies to your email)
You said nothing about the urgency of the issue, but I'll assume that's not really the question here. I've seen many cases where people started with a direct contact (e.g. chat, phone) for urgent issue and then logged a ticket as a place to document the work.
answered May 29 '13 at 16:02
explunit
2,5471617
2
+1, plus it's extraordinarily distracting, especially if the ticketing system already provides some kind of notification. Now the target is getting notified twice of the same thing, which also subverts workflow. It's nearly as bad as sending an email to someone, then following up by approaching them at their desk shortly after sending the email.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:55
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
The answer is: it depends. You could always ask your co-workers if they are OK with getting the extra email.
It really depends on the ticketing system (or any other system that sends automated email alerts) and the people receiving the tickets. Some people at my workplace actually ask that I send them a heads-up email when I'm sending them a ticket. Apparently, they get so many notifications from the system that they have them all silently sent to a separate mail box they only check a few times a day. If I send a personal email alerting them to the ticket, they act on the ticket much faster.
I personally would start to find it annoying if I got an email saying:
I'm sending you a ticket
and then got the ticket.
If the email had more information in the ticket (maybe because the ticketing system only allows a limited amount of input, or some of the info is only tangentially related so should not actually be on the ticket itself) then I'd welcome the extra email.
answered May 29 '13 at 17:11
FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
10.7k43957
This is not really an answer so much as your opinion of when you would want and email and not.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 17:43
@Chad: I think the answer is "It depends", and I've tried to make that clearer, with the examples below.
– FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
May 29 '13 at 17:56
1
In Good Subjective, Bad Subjective, the first guideline explains that answers should explain why and how. The second suggests they be on the longer side than the shorter side. The third mentions they should be fair and impartial. The fourth suggests sharing experiences over opinions. The fifth suggests that, when there are opinions, they be backed up with facts, references, or experiences that happened to you personally; this is the foundation for the site's "back it up rule". This answer nails it. +1
– jmort253♦
May 30 '13 at 2:28
add a comment |Â
up vote
-1
down vote
The one who screams gets attention. If your conf team have a large queue to work off, its likely that they proritize someone that calls/mail about the task as well. Probably annoying but maybe good for your cause.
If you can write whatever you want, attach files etc. to the ticket, it will help solve it. Otherwise your conf team likely enjoy such extra info over mail (it makes their job easier and will likely be done quicker - who is not going for low hanging fruits first?)
answered Jun 3 '13 at 4:40
Petter Nordlander
1,089913
While technically true, this behavior can be a huge morale killer and subverts processes that are put in place for a reason. If the information in your email would be useful, they should be in the ticket to begin with. If you can't do things like attach files, and the company hasn't provided a route for it, then the process is broken and you should work to fix the process (and have an interim, approved, route for the extra information), not subvert it.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:53
This is overly simplistic. "Getting attention" does not imply that the attention will be positive. If your "screaming" annoys the recipients, the attention may take the form of complaints to your supervisor to stop it. They might go as far as trying to get you fired if you antagonize them enough.
– Andrew Medico
Apr 14 '14 at 18:10
Maybe so, but if someone is annoying a major instinct is to get rid of the "annoying person". One easy way to do so (short term) is to help out.
– Petter Nordlander
Apr 15 '14 at 8:04
add a comment |Â
StackExchange.ready(function ()
$("#show-editor-button input, #show-editor-button button").click(function ()
var showEditor = function()
$("#show-editor-button").hide();
$("#post-form").removeClass("dno");
StackExchange.editor.finallyInit();
;
var useFancy = $(this).data('confirm-use-fancy');
if(useFancy == 'True')
var popupTitle = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-title');
var popupBody = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-body');
var popupAccept = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-accept-button');
$(this).loadPopup(
url: '/post/self-answer-popup',
loaded: function(popup)
var pTitle = $(popup).find('h2');
var pBody = $(popup).find('.popup-body');
var pSubmit = $(popup).find('.popup-submit');
pTitle.text(popupTitle);
pBody.html(popupBody);
pSubmit.val(popupAccept).click(showEditor);
)
else
var confirmText = $(this).data('confirm-text');
if (confirmText ? confirm(confirmText) : true)
showEditor();
);
);
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
In general, no. Especially if the email group you're using corresponds exactly with the queue assignment in the ticketing system.
However, it depends on the effectiveness of your ticketing system. If tickets routinely get mis-assigned or never-assigned, then emailing the people most likely to address the problem will help speed the process. And if that's the case, they're probably already accustomed to getting out-of-band emails for queue management.
A ticketing system lets people (and the company) optimize their workflow around it, customize their notification preferences, keep all documentation of an issue one one place, etc. By adding another communication system you are:
- potentially subverting the work flow
- encouraging documentation to evolve outside the ticketing system (in replies to your email)
You said nothing about the urgency of the issue, but I'll assume that's not really the question here. I've seen many cases where people started with a direct contact (e.g. chat, phone) for urgent issue and then logged a ticket as a place to document the work.
answered May 29 '13 at 16:02
explunit
2,5471617
2
+1, plus it's extraordinarily distracting, especially if the ticketing system already provides some kind of notification. Now the target is getting notified twice of the same thing, which also subverts workflow. It's nearly as bad as sending an email to someone, then following up by approaching them at their desk shortly after sending the email.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:55
add a comment |Â
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
In general, no. Especially if the email group you're using corresponds exactly with the queue assignment in the ticketing system.
However, it depends on the effectiveness of your ticketing system. If tickets routinely get mis-assigned or never-assigned, then emailing the people most likely to address the problem will help speed the process. And if that's the case, they're probably already accustomed to getting out-of-band emails for queue management.
A ticketing system lets people (and the company) optimize their workflow around it, customize their notification preferences, keep all documentation of an issue one one place, etc. By adding another communication system you are:
- potentially subverting the work flow
- encouraging documentation to evolve outside the ticketing system (in replies to your email)
You said nothing about the urgency of the issue, but I'll assume that's not really the question here. I've seen many cases where people started with a direct contact (e.g. chat, phone) for urgent issue and then logged a ticket as a place to document the work.
answered May 29 '13 at 16:02
explunit
2,5471617
2
+1, plus it's extraordinarily distracting, especially if the ticketing system already provides some kind of notification. Now the target is getting notified twice of the same thing, which also subverts workflow. It's nearly as bad as sending an email to someone, then following up by approaching them at their desk shortly after sending the email.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:55
add a comment |Â
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
up vote
14
down vote
accepted
In general, no. Especially if the email group you're using corresponds exactly with the queue assignment in the ticketing system.
However, it depends on the effectiveness of your ticketing system. If tickets routinely get mis-assigned or never-assigned, then emailing the people most likely to address the problem will help speed the process. And if that's the case, they're probably already accustomed to getting out-of-band emails for queue management.
A ticketing system lets people (and the company) optimize their workflow around it, customize their notification preferences, keep all documentation of an issue one one place, etc. By adding another communication system you are:
- potentially subverting the work flow
- encouraging documentation to evolve outside the ticketing system (in replies to your email)
You said nothing about the urgency of the issue, but I'll assume that's not really the question here. I've seen many cases where people started with a direct contact (e.g. chat, phone) for urgent issue and then logged a ticket as a place to document the work.
answered May 29 '13 at 16:02
explunit
2,5471617
In general, no. Especially if the email group you're using corresponds exactly with the queue assignment in the ticketing system.
However, it depends on the effectiveness of your ticketing system. If tickets routinely get mis-assigned or never-assigned, then emailing the people most likely to address the problem will help speed the process. And if that's the case, they're probably already accustomed to getting out-of-band emails for queue management.
A ticketing system lets people (and the company) optimize their workflow around it, customize their notification preferences, keep all documentation of an issue one one place, etc. By adding another communication system you are:
- potentially subverting the work flow
- encouraging documentation to evolve outside the ticketing system (in replies to your email)
You said nothing about the urgency of the issue, but I'll assume that's not really the question here. I've seen many cases where people started with a direct contact (e.g. chat, phone) for urgent issue and then logged a ticket as a place to document the work.
answered May 29 '13 at 16:02
explunit
2,5471617
edited May 29 '13 at 17:46
answered May 29 '13 at 16:02
explunit
2,5471617
answered May 29 '13 at 16:02
explunit
2,5471617
answered May 29 '13 at 16:02
explunit
2,5471617
2,5471617
2
+1, plus it's extraordinarily distracting, especially if the ticketing system already provides some kind of notification. Now the target is getting notified twice of the same thing, which also subverts workflow. It's nearly as bad as sending an email to someone, then following up by approaching them at their desk shortly after sending the email.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:55
add a comment |Â
2
+1, plus it's extraordinarily distracting, especially if the ticketing system already provides some kind of notification. Now the target is getting notified twice of the same thing, which also subverts workflow. It's nearly as bad as sending an email to someone, then following up by approaching them at their desk shortly after sending the email.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:55
2
2
+1, plus it's extraordinarily distracting, especially if the ticketing system already provides some kind of notification. Now the target is getting notified twice of the same thing, which also subverts workflow. It's nearly as bad as sending an email to someone, then following up by approaching them at their desk shortly after sending the email.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:55
+1, plus it's extraordinarily distracting, especially if the ticketing system already provides some kind of notification. Now the target is getting notified twice of the same thing, which also subverts workflow. It's nearly as bad as sending an email to someone, then following up by approaching them at their desk shortly after sending the email.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:55
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
The answer is: it depends. You could always ask your co-workers if they are OK with getting the extra email.
It really depends on the ticketing system (or any other system that sends automated email alerts) and the people receiving the tickets. Some people at my workplace actually ask that I send them a heads-up email when I'm sending them a ticket. Apparently, they get so many notifications from the system that they have them all silently sent to a separate mail box they only check a few times a day. If I send a personal email alerting them to the ticket, they act on the ticket much faster.
I personally would start to find it annoying if I got an email saying:
I'm sending you a ticket
and then got the ticket.
If the email had more information in the ticket (maybe because the ticketing system only allows a limited amount of input, or some of the info is only tangentially related so should not actually be on the ticket itself) then I'd welcome the extra email.
answered May 29 '13 at 17:11
FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
10.7k43957
This is not really an answer so much as your opinion of when you would want and email and not.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 17:43
@Chad: I think the answer is "It depends", and I've tried to make that clearer, with the examples below.
– FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
May 29 '13 at 17:56
1
In Good Subjective, Bad Subjective, the first guideline explains that answers should explain why and how. The second suggests they be on the longer side than the shorter side. The third mentions they should be fair and impartial. The fourth suggests sharing experiences over opinions. The fifth suggests that, when there are opinions, they be backed up with facts, references, or experiences that happened to you personally; this is the foundation for the site's "back it up rule". This answer nails it. +1
– jmort253♦
May 30 '13 at 2:28
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
The answer is: it depends. You could always ask your co-workers if they are OK with getting the extra email.
It really depends on the ticketing system (or any other system that sends automated email alerts) and the people receiving the tickets. Some people at my workplace actually ask that I send them a heads-up email when I'm sending them a ticket. Apparently, they get so many notifications from the system that they have them all silently sent to a separate mail box they only check a few times a day. If I send a personal email alerting them to the ticket, they act on the ticket much faster.
I personally would start to find it annoying if I got an email saying:
I'm sending you a ticket
and then got the ticket.
If the email had more information in the ticket (maybe because the ticketing system only allows a limited amount of input, or some of the info is only tangentially related so should not actually be on the ticket itself) then I'd welcome the extra email.
answered May 29 '13 at 17:11
FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
10.7k43957
This is not really an answer so much as your opinion of when you would want and email and not.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 17:43
@Chad: I think the answer is "It depends", and I've tried to make that clearer, with the examples below.
– FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
May 29 '13 at 17:56
1
In Good Subjective, Bad Subjective, the first guideline explains that answers should explain why and how. The second suggests they be on the longer side than the shorter side. The third mentions they should be fair and impartial. The fourth suggests sharing experiences over opinions. The fifth suggests that, when there are opinions, they be backed up with facts, references, or experiences that happened to you personally; this is the foundation for the site's "back it up rule". This answer nails it. +1
– jmort253♦
May 30 '13 at 2:28
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
up vote
3
down vote
The answer is: it depends. You could always ask your co-workers if they are OK with getting the extra email.
It really depends on the ticketing system (or any other system that sends automated email alerts) and the people receiving the tickets. Some people at my workplace actually ask that I send them a heads-up email when I'm sending them a ticket. Apparently, they get so many notifications from the system that they have them all silently sent to a separate mail box they only check a few times a day. If I send a personal email alerting them to the ticket, they act on the ticket much faster.
I personally would start to find it annoying if I got an email saying:
I'm sending you a ticket
and then got the ticket.
If the email had more information in the ticket (maybe because the ticketing system only allows a limited amount of input, or some of the info is only tangentially related so should not actually be on the ticket itself) then I'd welcome the extra email.
answered May 29 '13 at 17:11
FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
10.7k43957
The answer is: it depends. You could always ask your co-workers if they are OK with getting the extra email.
It really depends on the ticketing system (or any other system that sends automated email alerts) and the people receiving the tickets. Some people at my workplace actually ask that I send them a heads-up email when I'm sending them a ticket. Apparently, they get so many notifications from the system that they have them all silently sent to a separate mail box they only check a few times a day. If I send a personal email alerting them to the ticket, they act on the ticket much faster.
I personally would start to find it annoying if I got an email saying:
I'm sending you a ticket
and then got the ticket.
If the email had more information in the ticket (maybe because the ticketing system only allows a limited amount of input, or some of the info is only tangentially related so should not actually be on the ticket itself) then I'd welcome the extra email.
answered May 29 '13 at 17:11
FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
10.7k43957
edited May 29 '13 at 17:56
answered May 29 '13 at 17:11
FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
10.7k43957
answered May 29 '13 at 17:11
FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
10.7k43957
answered May 29 '13 at 17:11
FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
10.7k43957
10.7k43957
This is not really an answer so much as your opinion of when you would want and email and not.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 17:43
@Chad: I think the answer is "It depends", and I've tried to make that clearer, with the examples below.
– FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
May 29 '13 at 17:56
1
In Good Subjective, Bad Subjective, the first guideline explains that answers should explain why and how. The second suggests they be on the longer side than the shorter side. The third mentions they should be fair and impartial. The fourth suggests sharing experiences over opinions. The fifth suggests that, when there are opinions, they be backed up with facts, references, or experiences that happened to you personally; this is the foundation for the site's "back it up rule". This answer nails it. +1
– jmort253♦
May 30 '13 at 2:28
add a comment |Â
This is not really an answer so much as your opinion of when you would want and email and not.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 17:43
@Chad: I think the answer is "It depends", and I've tried to make that clearer, with the examples below.
– FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
May 29 '13 at 17:56
1
In Good Subjective, Bad Subjective, the first guideline explains that answers should explain why and how. The second suggests they be on the longer side than the shorter side. The third mentions they should be fair and impartial. The fourth suggests sharing experiences over opinions. The fifth suggests that, when there are opinions, they be backed up with facts, references, or experiences that happened to you personally; this is the foundation for the site's "back it up rule". This answer nails it. +1
– jmort253♦
May 30 '13 at 2:28
This is not really an answer so much as your opinion of when you would want and email and not.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 17:43
This is not really an answer so much as your opinion of when you would want and email and not.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 17:43
@Chad: I think the answer is "It depends", and I've tried to make that clearer, with the examples below.
– FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
May 29 '13 at 17:56
@Chad: I think the answer is "It depends", and I've tried to make that clearer, with the examples below.
– FrustratedWithFormsDesigner
May 29 '13 at 17:56
1
1
In Good Subjective, Bad Subjective, the first guideline explains that answers should explain why and how. The second suggests they be on the longer side than the shorter side. The third mentions they should be fair and impartial. The fourth suggests sharing experiences over opinions. The fifth suggests that, when there are opinions, they be backed up with facts, references, or experiences that happened to you personally; this is the foundation for the site's "back it up rule". This answer nails it. +1
– jmort253♦
May 30 '13 at 2:28
In Good Subjective, Bad Subjective, the first guideline explains that answers should explain why and how. The second suggests they be on the longer side than the shorter side. The third mentions they should be fair and impartial. The fourth suggests sharing experiences over opinions. The fifth suggests that, when there are opinions, they be backed up with facts, references, or experiences that happened to you personally; this is the foundation for the site's "back it up rule". This answer nails it. +1
– jmort253♦
May 30 '13 at 2:28
add a comment |Â
up vote
-1
down vote
The one who screams gets attention. If your conf team have a large queue to work off, its likely that they proritize someone that calls/mail about the task as well. Probably annoying but maybe good for your cause.
If you can write whatever you want, attach files etc. to the ticket, it will help solve it. Otherwise your conf team likely enjoy such extra info over mail (it makes their job easier and will likely be done quicker - who is not going for low hanging fruits first?)
answered Jun 3 '13 at 4:40
Petter Nordlander
1,089913
While technically true, this behavior can be a huge morale killer and subverts processes that are put in place for a reason. If the information in your email would be useful, they should be in the ticket to begin with. If you can't do things like attach files, and the company hasn't provided a route for it, then the process is broken and you should work to fix the process (and have an interim, approved, route for the extra information), not subvert it.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:53
This is overly simplistic. "Getting attention" does not imply that the attention will be positive. If your "screaming" annoys the recipients, the attention may take the form of complaints to your supervisor to stop it. They might go as far as trying to get you fired if you antagonize them enough.
– Andrew Medico
Apr 14 '14 at 18:10
Maybe so, but if someone is annoying a major instinct is to get rid of the "annoying person". One easy way to do so (short term) is to help out.
– Petter Nordlander
Apr 15 '14 at 8:04
add a comment |Â
up vote
-1
down vote
The one who screams gets attention. If your conf team have a large queue to work off, its likely that they proritize someone that calls/mail about the task as well. Probably annoying but maybe good for your cause.
If you can write whatever you want, attach files etc. to the ticket, it will help solve it. Otherwise your conf team likely enjoy such extra info over mail (it makes their job easier and will likely be done quicker - who is not going for low hanging fruits first?)
answered Jun 3 '13 at 4:40
Petter Nordlander
1,089913
While technically true, this behavior can be a huge morale killer and subverts processes that are put in place for a reason. If the information in your email would be useful, they should be in the ticket to begin with. If you can't do things like attach files, and the company hasn't provided a route for it, then the process is broken and you should work to fix the process (and have an interim, approved, route for the extra information), not subvert it.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:53
This is overly simplistic. "Getting attention" does not imply that the attention will be positive. If your "screaming" annoys the recipients, the attention may take the form of complaints to your supervisor to stop it. They might go as far as trying to get you fired if you antagonize them enough.
– Andrew Medico
Apr 14 '14 at 18:10
Maybe so, but if someone is annoying a major instinct is to get rid of the "annoying person". One easy way to do so (short term) is to help out.
– Petter Nordlander
Apr 15 '14 at 8:04
add a comment |Â
up vote
-1
down vote
up vote
-1
down vote
The one who screams gets attention. If your conf team have a large queue to work off, its likely that they proritize someone that calls/mail about the task as well. Probably annoying but maybe good for your cause.
If you can write whatever you want, attach files etc. to the ticket, it will help solve it. Otherwise your conf team likely enjoy such extra info over mail (it makes their job easier and will likely be done quicker - who is not going for low hanging fruits first?)
answered Jun 3 '13 at 4:40
Petter Nordlander
1,089913
The one who screams gets attention. If your conf team have a large queue to work off, its likely that they proritize someone that calls/mail about the task as well. Probably annoying but maybe good for your cause.
If you can write whatever you want, attach files etc. to the ticket, it will help solve it. Otherwise your conf team likely enjoy such extra info over mail (it makes their job easier and will likely be done quicker - who is not going for low hanging fruits first?)
answered Jun 3 '13 at 4:40
Petter Nordlander
1,089913
answered Jun 3 '13 at 4:40
Petter Nordlander
1,089913
answered Jun 3 '13 at 4:40
Petter Nordlander
1,089913
answered Jun 3 '13 at 4:40
Petter Nordlander
1,089913
1,089913
While technically true, this behavior can be a huge morale killer and subverts processes that are put in place for a reason. If the information in your email would be useful, they should be in the ticket to begin with. If you can't do things like attach files, and the company hasn't provided a route for it, then the process is broken and you should work to fix the process (and have an interim, approved, route for the extra information), not subvert it.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:53
This is overly simplistic. "Getting attention" does not imply that the attention will be positive. If your "screaming" annoys the recipients, the attention may take the form of complaints to your supervisor to stop it. They might go as far as trying to get you fired if you antagonize them enough.
– Andrew Medico
Apr 14 '14 at 18:10
Maybe so, but if someone is annoying a major instinct is to get rid of the "annoying person". One easy way to do so (short term) is to help out.
– Petter Nordlander
Apr 15 '14 at 8:04
add a comment |Â
While technically true, this behavior can be a huge morale killer and subverts processes that are put in place for a reason. If the information in your email would be useful, they should be in the ticket to begin with. If you can't do things like attach files, and the company hasn't provided a route for it, then the process is broken and you should work to fix the process (and have an interim, approved, route for the extra information), not subvert it.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:53
This is overly simplistic. "Getting attention" does not imply that the attention will be positive. If your "screaming" annoys the recipients, the attention may take the form of complaints to your supervisor to stop it. They might go as far as trying to get you fired if you antagonize them enough.
– Andrew Medico
Apr 14 '14 at 18:10
Maybe so, but if someone is annoying a major instinct is to get rid of the "annoying person". One easy way to do so (short term) is to help out.
– Petter Nordlander
Apr 15 '14 at 8:04
While technically true, this behavior can be a huge morale killer and subverts processes that are put in place for a reason. If the information in your email would be useful, they should be in the ticket to begin with. If you can't do things like attach files, and the company hasn't provided a route for it, then the process is broken and you should work to fix the process (and have an interim, approved, route for the extra information), not subvert it.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:53
While technically true, this behavior can be a huge morale killer and subverts processes that are put in place for a reason. If the information in your email would be useful, they should be in the ticket to begin with. If you can't do things like attach files, and the company hasn't provided a route for it, then the process is broken and you should work to fix the process (and have an interim, approved, route for the extra information), not subvert it.
– Shauna
Jun 4 '13 at 17:53
This is overly simplistic. "Getting attention" does not imply that the attention will be positive. If your "screaming" annoys the recipients, the attention may take the form of complaints to your supervisor to stop it. They might go as far as trying to get you fired if you antagonize them enough.
– Andrew Medico
Apr 14 '14 at 18:10
This is overly simplistic. "Getting attention" does not imply that the attention will be positive. If your "screaming" annoys the recipients, the attention may take the form of complaints to your supervisor to stop it. They might go as far as trying to get you fired if you antagonize them enough.
– Andrew Medico
Apr 14 '14 at 18:10
Maybe so, but if someone is annoying a major instinct is to get rid of the "annoying person". One easy way to do so (short term) is to help out.
– Petter Nordlander
Apr 15 '14 at 8:04
Maybe so, but if someone is annoying a major instinct is to get rid of the "annoying person". One easy way to do so (short term) is to help out.
– Petter Nordlander
Apr 15 '14 at 8:04
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f12083%2fis-it-proper-etiquette-to-alert-a-team-with-an-email-in-addition-to-a-ticket%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
8
I think the answer to this question is going to be very dependant on your company culture. The right answer for you is probably different than the answer to many other workplaces.
– IDrinkandIKnowThings
May 29 '13 at 16:02
What is your expected cycle time for resolution?
– Elysian Fields♦
May 29 '13 at 16:04
3
@Chad disagree with "too localized". A lot of companies have a ticketing system, and both answers explain when it might or might not be appropriate.
– explunit
May 29 '13 at 17:34
1
A decent ticket system generates those emails for you...
– jwenting
May 31 '13 at 5:38
I don't think it's improper etiquette, but I do think your ticket is incomplete if you feel that you need a follow-up email to explain it. Why can't you put that explanation in the ticket itself?
– alroc
Jun 3 '13 at 11:27