It goes without saying that in today’s progressive and intricate world in which we live, projects have become increasingly multifarious, calling for the engagement of people possessing different fields of expertise. In this vein, a project can only be realized once a team consisting of collaborative, cooperative participants contribute to that, which makes it indispensable for team members to be constantly in touch, either by means of in-person rendezvous or using technological mediums like an e-mail correspondence. While some people might believe that these meetings are better held in a traditional, face-to-face manner, some others stand at the other side of the continuum, citing that e-mails would be sufficient for exchange of ideas. I, however, subscribe to the former group in that there are certain qualities of personal meetings that cannot be found in electronic messages. I will briefly explain the reasons for my stance in what follows.
To begin with, there are intricacies and nuances in one’s gesture that cannot be conveyed via a message. There are not just words being exchanged in a personal meeting, but there are intonations, gesticulations and facial expressions which could be just as important. Moreover, while e-mails tend to be brief and terse, there is no shortage of conversation when it comes to in-person meetings as people are not limited to confine their messages into limitations of a written text. I happen to have an experience which just squares with my claim. I remember I studied my bachelor’s degree at the University of Vienna which is located in Austria’s capital. Being a student of sociology, the department always insisted on prioritizing teamwork and socializing skills over individuality, because of which all assigned tasks were required to be done in constant collaboration with other members of the determined group. I remember once we were to prepare a presentation for an important course. A member of our group, had an emergency and went to Egypt for family matters and he being responsible for a major part of our work, we had to resort to email exchange. Even though we did correspond many times, when the presentation day was due, we realized that there has been a misunderstanding about my groupmate part, which resulted in us getting a mediocre score for that course. Had we not relied on e-mails, we could have precluded from the misunderstanding; which hurt our scores.
Secondly, having a dialogue with group members in person means getting immediate responses, saving time and leaving no room for ambiguity. Contrariwise, sending an email usually requires waiting a great deal of time for an answer, which not only wastes time which is extremely precious for on-time delivery of a project, but also leaves room for interpretation and ambiguity, should one receive a vague answer. An experience of mine could be a compelling one in this case. I remember when I worked in a consultant firm two years ago, I was part of a project in along with other members of a team, led by a senior project manager. In the last day of the deadline, while running a review, I ran into a problem with my part of the project which was beyond my expertise. Consequently, I tried to reach the project manager who only contacted us via e-mail. However, he did not answer my message for half a day and I had to rely on my speculation to solve the problem, resulting in a major flaw in my part which ruined the whole project. Had we had regular face-to-face meetings with the project manager, I would not end up delivering a half-baked work, and the whole project would have been salvaged.
In line with the points mentioned and corroborating experiences of mine, I believe that an e-mail cannot be as effective as an in-person meeting when it comes to team works and projects as it fails to convey prolonged, intricate conversations and it also leaves room for ambiguity because of its succinct and slow-paced nature.
It goes without saying that in
today
’s progressive and intricate world in which we
live
,
projects
have become
increasingly
multifarious, calling for the engagement of
people
possessing
different
fields of expertise. In this vein, a
project
can
only
be realized
once a
team
consisting of collaborative, cooperative participants contribute to that, which
makes
it indispensable for
team
members
to be
constantly
in touch, either by means of in-person rendezvous or using technological mediums like an e-mail correspondence. While
some
people
might believe that these
meetings
are better held in a traditional, face-to-face manner,
some
others stand at the
other
side of the continuum, citing that e-mails would be sufficient for exchange of
ideas
. I,
however
, subscribe to the former
group
in that there are certain qualities of personal
meetings
that cannot
be found
in electronic
messages
. I will
briefly
explain
the reasons for my stance in what follows.
To
begin
with, there are intricacies and nuances in one’s gesture that cannot
be conveyed
via a
message
. There are not
just
words
being exchanged
in a personal
meeting
,
but
there are intonations, gesticulations and facial expressions which could be
just
as
important
.
Moreover
, while e-mails tend to be brief and terse, there is no shortage of conversation when it
comes
to in-person
meetings
as
people
are not limited to confine their
messages
into limitations of a written text. I happen to have an experience which
just
squares with my claim. I remember I studied my bachelor’s degree at the University of Vienna which
is located
in Austria’s capital. Being a student of sociology, the department always insisted on prioritizing teamwork and socializing
skills
over individuality,
because
of which all assigned tasks
were required
to
be done
in constant collaboration with
other
members
of the determined
group
. I remember once we were to prepare a presentation for an
important
course. A
member
of our
group
, had an emergency and went to Egypt for family
matters and
he
being
responsible for a major
part
of our work, we had to resort to email exchange.
Even though
we did correspond
many
times
, when the presentation day was due, we realized that there has been a misunderstanding about my
groupmate
part
, which resulted in us getting a mediocre score for that course. Had we not relied on e-mails, we could have precluded from the misunderstanding; which hurt our scores.
Secondly
, having a dialogue with
group
members
in person means getting immediate responses, saving
time
and leaving no room for ambiguity. Contrariwise, sending an email
usually
requires waiting a great deal of
time
for an answer, which not
only
wastes
time
which is
extremely
precious for on-time delivery of a
project
,
but
also
leaves
room for interpretation and ambiguity, should one receive a vague answer. An experience of mine could be a compelling one
in this case
. I remember when I worked in a consultant firm two years ago, I was
part
of a
project
in along with
other
members
of a
team
, led by a senior
project
manager. In the last day of the deadline, while running a review, I ran into a problem with my
part
of the
project
which was beyond my expertise.
Consequently
, I tried to reach the
project
manager who
only
contacted us via e-mail.
However
, he did not answer my
message
for half a day and I had to rely on my speculation to solve the problem, resulting in a major flaw in my
part
which ruined the whole
project
. Had we had regular face-to-face
meetings
with the
project
manager, I would not
end
up delivering a half-baked work, and the whole
project
would have
been salvaged
.
In line with the points mentioned and corroborating experiences of mine, I believe that an e-mail cannot be as effective as an in-person
meeting
when it
comes
to
team
works and
projects
as it fails to convey prolonged, intricate conversations and it
also
leaves
room for ambiguity
because
of its succinct and slow-paced nature.