Real-Life Communication -- Solution
Here is one possible solution:
In the first sentence, the
name of the project should be stated. It is likely that Edward has contracted
out more than one engineer, or is working with several contractors on many
different projects. Also, in the first sentence, Clara says "that we discussed."
It would be helpful for her to state the date the project was discussed with
Edward. Is she referring to a discussion she had in person? Over the phone?
At lunch? And who does the "we" refer to?
In the second sentence, Clara
says we seem to be nearly on schedule. Again, who is "we?" Who is part of
this project? Who is helping her? What does "nearly" mean? Can she pinpoint
a completion date? Could she instead have said, "The project will be delayed
by a week?" What was the original completion date?
In the third sentence,
Clara again uses the pronoun "we." Who is she referring to? The project team?
A specific person helping on the project? How much of the project will this
other person be handling? If this wasn't discussed in the original contract,
a client could get upset.
In this sentence, Clara also uses the very
vague word "problems." What problems? What is her plan of action? Edward is
an important man of business; he may wonder if there is anything he can do
to speed along the progress. If Clara said what these problems were, maybe
he will have a potential solution.
In her last sentence, Clara expects
to solve them. But Edward wants to know how. He wants to know if he is going
to be charged extra for this. Are the problems unforeseen, which would result
in the project price going up?
Clara also mentions that the problems
will be solved shortly, but she doesn't give an estimated delay. What does
shortly mean?
She also doesn't end the e-mail with a contact phone
number, fax number or pager number. Suppose Edward doesn't want to waste the
time with another e-mail correspondence. How will he contact her immediately?
He will have to call his assistant to find the number or dig through his old
correspondences with this company.
This is a sloppily written e-mail
that raises a number of questions. Clara could have been more careful with
a version such as this one:
Dear Edward,
I wanted
to update you on the progress of the 3D camera filter that we discussed over
lunch last Tuesday. I've asked Tom Knutz, a junior developer in the firm,
to help with this project, primarily because Tom has 15 years of experience
in camera technologies. The addition of Tom, of course, will come at no extra
cost to our already agreed-upon project fees.
Tom and I were on schedule
to have the camera ready for testing on time, as per our discussion. However,
the company we normally order from, Cameras Etc. of Chicago, has told us that
they are out of stock on the lens X-155. They are ordering the part from Singapore
and expect to receive the part in 10 working days.
Unfortunately, this
obviously pushes back our testing date by 10 days also. However, should the
part be delayed beyond what Cameras Etc. forecasted, we would have to push
the date back further due to the holidays. Please accept our apologies. Of
course, this does not affect the bottom line, as this is an unforeseen circumstance
beyond anyone's control.
If there are any additional questions, please
feel free to contact Tom or me. I have included both our telephone and pager
numbers below.
Regards,
Clara
Clara Johns,
senior engineer, optics, See View Corp.
Phone: 555-555-6501
Digital
pager: 555-555-6502
Tom Knutz, junior engineer, product development,
See View Corp.
Phone: 555-555-6552
Digital
pager: 555-555-6553