Raewyn and I have a consistent disagreement. She believes every email should be answered, even if just by acknowledgment. I myself, would prefer to choose what I spend my time on, not have it dictated by those who email me.

First of all, let me confess that there have been many times that I haven't answered emails when I should have. In fact, there's one guy at church who now emails his ideas to Raewyn instead of me because she does answer him. (I always read his emails and took his point of view on board, but did not update him personally on just where his thoughts fitted into my plans)

Please note that if that sounds like I didn't appreciate his input, it wasn't the case. It's just that if I answered all the emails that give me advice, with a reasoned response, at my typing speed I'd never get anything big actually started.

Now I see a post from Michael Sampson that I'm going to claim supports my side. Actually, it calls for a better way to communicate rather than giving permission not to answer emails, but don't tell Raewyn that!

Lately, I've introduced two additional methods of communication at my church (SAJ).

The first is a news blog that people can subscribe to by reader or email. This seems to work really well and ad hoc feedback has been positive.

The second is the use of a private blog to use as a workspace for a sub team of strategists. This is in its infancy at this stage, so I await the jury's verdict in due course. I suspect a wiki might be useful for specific discussions the strategists would have, but I don't know enough about the concept to use one at this stage.

Here's the question... Can we reduce wasted time in the workplace by reducing email clutter through better use of advanced communication tools and software?