Reply All Considered Harmful
Tags: career, beginners, watercooler, devjournal
Published: 2023-05-31 11:55:46

## Learning from sending thousands of emails

Lately, I’m writing fewer emails [at work](https://dev.to/solidi/what-is-an-engineering-manager-anyway-4and). To me, email authoring can be torture. It’s the time-sunk cost of carefully crafting the message. And when I do send an email, I avoid *Reply All*. If possible, I would like the conversation to be **between just us**.

Over the years, my perception of how to use *Reply All* has changed. Earlier on, my understanding of its intoxicating power invoked a sense of urgency to all those addressed. But after being scrutinized in these exchanges and me targeting others, it has soured. Mix this in with selectively adding in authoritative figures; I now ***consider it harmful*** for the outcome of the ask and the long-term relationship for those involved.

## You and I But Rarely Anyone Else

While participating in *Reply All* threads over the years, I’ve learned the concept of a *directly responsible individual* who is accountable and owns a possible outcome. And when replying all, this can muddle who is [directly responsible](https://twitter.com/LazMattarus/status/856501596099940352) for the ask. And suppose the message is poignantly addressed to a particular person. In some business cultures, the receiver may find it combative, comical, or downright ignore the ask while having an *unfamiliar* audience watching them. The perception of resistance is real when trust does not exist between them.

*Reply All* has the potential to ***scorch-the-earth***. For select email clients, it is a dangerous default function. I’ve seen it become the *nuclear button* when context-sensitive information was released to an unattended audience. While I won’t reveal the example to protect the innocent, exposure to sensitive information clearly destroyed trust through teams and leaders. The result: potential sales loss, team members distrust, and leadership perceived as evil. It had been inadvertently misused in a downright embarrassing way. Yikes.

But it’s not all bad. There are good points to *Reply All* that are helpful and effective. An essential function of *Reply All* is to broadcast information, not directed to the individual but the group interested in the information. Where there is a call to action, this is acceptable if all recipients are a trusting team.

And job roles that require the use of the tool extensively, connecting disparate groups or gathering more *perfect* information that is useful for business outcomes. But in my opinion, these moments in time are rare. They are better served elsewhere, such as in physical proximity, a direct instant message, and thoughtfully crafting a *smaller* target audience for a higher percentage of success.

## When I use Reply All

I’ve summarized when I typically use *Reply All*. While **it is a tool I avoid**, there is utility.

- When the information is vital to a broad audience without commitment to a call to action.
- When a call to action is essential to a trusting group of individuals.
- When urgency is needed to a critical item that requires escalation in good faith.

## When I Avoid Use of Reply All

More importantly, here are my reasons why I do not use *Reply All*.

- Avoid detailed information being released to an unintended audience.
- When the information is essential, a call to action is required, but the directed individual is not trusted.
- When urgency is needed in an unjustified or repetitive matter.
- Removing someone's voice by *prematurely* adding high-level authority to a fresh unresolved matter.
- Replying to a long threaded email to obtain visibility without adding value.

I’ve sent many emails in my career, and now *Reply All* is one of those tools reserved for exceptional cases. I **prefer to defuse**, whereas I understand *the individual* who can help myself, my team, and the project and product. I continue that conversation *privately*. [Once we have closure](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Getting_to_Yes), it’s fused back into the *Reply All* as broadcasted information.

While this may seem like common sense, this was a long journey for me to understand. I’ve reflected on my abrasive *Reply All* exchanges. Whether it’s a company of hundreds of thousands of people or just a startup between two, *it’s always a conversation with another person*. To me, it’s better to discuss with the individual to build a relationship and obtain results with time privately. And then give them chances to do their craft before the proverbial balloon is popped. The people I work with have come to respect this approach.

And for those in the past who have suffered from my nefarious *Reply All* dealings, I’ve learned to do better.