Subscriber OnlyWork

Pilita Clark: The dos and don’ts of the email introduction

Sending an email to save yourself time while landing a colleague or acquaintance with extra work does no one any favours

Always check with both parties to make sure they are happy to be introduced before linking them by email. Photograph: iStock
Always check with both parties to make sure they are happy to be introduced before linking them by email. Photograph: iStock
Pilita Clark's picture
Pilita Clark
Mon Nov 04 2024 - 06:00

Out of the blue earlier this year a man I have known for years sent me an email introduction to one of his work contacts that was such a striking example of the genre that it has stuck in my mind ever since.

In the space of a few charming words he conveyed the brilliance of the contact, who was copied into the mail, and larded his description of me so lavishly that I barely recognised myself.

He promised both of us we would have much to gossip about and would undoubtedly hit it off, all of which proved to be true when we duly caught up in person. This, I thought later, did exactly what an email introduction should do. Produce a meeting that is useful, mutually beneficial and fun.

So why are so many email introductions so dismal in comparison and why are some still utterly woeful?

READ MORE

One answer is obvious. Far too many break the basic rule that an introducer should almost always check to make sure both parties are happy to be introduced.

I say “almost” because, in the cheering example I’ve just cited this rule was not obeyed. It didn’t matter in this case because the introducer knew me well enough to be sure that a) I would like to meet his contact and b) I had met said contact briefly in the past. But these conditions cannot be taken for granted, which is why the check-first rule is vital.

The perils of ignoring it were once memorably spelt out by the US organisational psychologist and author David Burkus, who early in his career began to follow some ghastly sounding networking advice to introduce two people every week.

As he wrote in the Harvard Business Review he was soon firing off emails, including one in which he introduced a friend to a fairly well-known author with whom Burkus had once collaborated. The author promptly fired back his own message: “Not cool. Please reach out first for permission to share my contact information.”

I can think of many occasions when it would have been in order to send an equally cutting message to would-be introducers at much later stages of their careers who gaily break the check-first rule.

The worst offenders are those who receive a request to do something dull and time-consuming from a contact they want to keep on side. Instead of politely declining they shoot back a reply, copying in a hapless colleague or acquaintance who they disingenuously declare would make a brilliant replacement.

There really is no excuse for lumbering others with this sort of time-wasting stuff without checking.

Likewise if someone outside your organisation asks you to introduce them to an overburdened colleague so they can burden them further with a favour here’s what not do to: dash off a reply, copying in the unsuspecting colleague while assuring the requester that this person will be thrilled to hear from them.

There may of course be times when things work out. But it is obviously always better, for both requester and requestee, to check beforehand.

The reason this so often fails to happen is simple: it takes time that busy people never have enough of. In fact as I type these words I cannot be 100 per cent sure I have never committed these sins myself.

I’m also aware of how easy it is for people with relatively secure jobs in big organisations (like mine) to ignore perfectly reasonable requests for help from outsiders. I am reminded of this every time I go on LinkedIn, a seething hotbed of random networking introductions that heavy users tell me can be difficult to navigate.

Still, this is what LinkedIn is for. The clue is in the name. Speaking of which, I have failed to mention another aspect of email introductions that for some reason causes great consternation: the best way to reply to both an introducer and a stranger. Do you address both people at the start? Or just the person you’re being introduced to? And how long do you keep the introducer in the email chain?

An entirely new column could be written about this but it would basically say it is pretty much fine to do whatever feels best in each situation. Just remember to never do anything to anyone that you wouldn’t like done to yourself. – Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2024

READ NEXT

Business Today

Business Today

Get the latest business news and commentary from our expert business team in your inbox every weekday morning