IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/infosf/v13y2011i5d10.1007_s10796-010-9242-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

You’ve got email! Does it really matter to process emails now or later?

Author

Listed:
  • Ashish Gupta

    (Minnesota State University Moorhead)

  • Ramesh Sharda

    (Oklahoma State University)

  • Robert A. Greve

    (Oklahoma City University)

Abstract

Email consumes as much as a quarter of knowledge workers’ time in organizations today. Almost a necessity for communication, email does interrupt a worker’s other main tasks and ultimately leads to information overload. Though issues such as spam, email filtering and archiving have received much attention from industry and academia, the critical problem of the timing of email processing has not been studied much. It is common for many knowledge workers to check and respond to their email almost continuously. Though some emails may require very quick responses, checking emails almost continuously may lead to interruptions in regular knowledge work. Managing email processing can make a significant difference in an organization’s productivity. Previous research on this topic suggests that perhaps the best way to minimize the effect of interruptions is to process email frequently for example, every 45 min. In this study, we focus on studying email response timing approaches to optimize the communication times and yet reduce the interruptive effects. We investigate previous recommendations by performing a two-phase study involving rigorous simulation experiments. Models were developed for identifying efficient and effective email processing policies by comparing various ways to reduce interruptions for different types of knowledge workers. In contrast to earlier research findings, results indicate that significant productivity improvements could be achieved through the use of some email processing policies while helping attain a balance between email response time and task completion time. Findings also suggest that the best policy may be to respond to email two to four times a day instead of every 45 min or continuously, as is common with many knowledge workers. We conclude by presenting many research opportunities for analytical and organizational IS researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Ashish Gupta & Ramesh Sharda & Robert A. Greve, 2011. "You’ve got email! Does it really matter to process emails now or later?," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 13(5), pages 637-653, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:13:y:2011:i:5:d:10.1007_s10796-010-9242-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10796-010-9242-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10796-010-9242-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10796-010-9242-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Joseph Barjis & Ashish Gupta & Ramesh Sharda, 2011. "Knowledge work and communication challenges in networked enterprises," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 13(5), pages 615-619, November.
    2. Jean-François Stich & Samuel Farley & Cary Cooper & Monideepa Tarafdar, 2015. "Information and Communication Technology Demands: Outcomes and Interventions," Post-Print hal-01507888, HAL.
    3. Chulhwan Chris Bang, 2015. "Information systems frontiers: Keyword analysis and classification," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 217-237, February.
    4. Edstrom, Anne & Ewald, Jennifer D., 2019. "Characteristics of effective auto-reply emails: Politeness and perceptions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:infosf:v:13:y:2011:i:5:d:10.1007_s10796-010-9242-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.