Email workflow outlines the steps for communicating a request or concern to the project team, as well as the mechanisms in place to address it, including who is included in the distribution list, response timeframes, the chronological relationship between emails and formal requests, etc.
In well-managed projects, email workflows have a regular, predictable structure. Informal emails are employed when questions arise in the field, and RFIs are utilized when a formal response is needed and has cost or time implications. Emailed reviews and comments get circulated as a draft, and when the formal response is logged, change order discussions take place primarily by email, and the final officially executed document is sent only after most of the substantive discussions have occurred in the email system.
Email workflows tend to break down due to distribution issues, not content. For example, someone is left out of an email string who should have been included, which impacts that person’s work. Someone buries the answer to a previously asked question in a long email thread with many reply messages, and the original questioner and affected parties do not see the answer. A firm commitment is made in an email communications system, which is not logged in the formal system, and even though it was agreed to, it cannot be enforced.
There are a few bad habits that tend to crop up when people get rushed. These include getting around to documenting important verbal or informal agreements; consistently CC-ing the right people; and taking the time to reconcile what has been discussed across a thousand emails with what has been documented in the project systems, as disputes usually arise from a divergence between what was communicated and what was actually documented.
Firms that successfully navigate this situation usually implement rules that give email and other written communications formal weight and define the communication channels for each type. Field agreements are always confirmed with an email; schedule concerns are communicated and formally logged within a stipulated time frame. RFIs are never used in place of formal communications when a concern or request has cost or schedule implications.
This is a best practice that people should adopt more broadly. Any email that communicates a decision should include a summary of what was decided and what was committed. This solution would almost certainly help participants in email communication to understand the decision made.
