Emoticons in the Workplace

Platonic writes "According to the New York Times, the Emoticon has become much more than something the kids do after school. The little guys seem to have found their way into the workforce: being used by stock brokers and even the U.S. Military. From TFA: 'I mean, it's ludicrous," said Ms. Feldman, 25. "I'm not going to feel better about losing hundreds of thousands of dollars because someone puts a frown face to regretfully inform me.'"

Comments

Shocking!

[UncleWilly]

:-O

The world is not yet ready! ;[

[HitekHobo]

I can only speak for myself, but I always get the feeling that I'm dealing with the lowest possible tier of CSR when I start getting emoticons or excessive punctuation in my communications.

Very true.

[Rob T Firefly]

This display of unprofessionalism is most upsetting. As a result, I've sent out a memo to the office banning the use of emoticons in work-related matters. It's written in Comic Sans MS.

Reintegrating RL Cues

[andrewd18]

Quite frankly, a large majority of what we understand in face-to-face conversation comes from body language. A smaller section are the vocal cues and intonations we pick up on. The smallest part of what we understand in a conversation is the actual words. Since e-mail is only words, and completely lacks the body language/intonation cues we're used to in real life, can you really blame someone for trying to add some of those cues back in?

Apparently yes. I, for one, welcome our "naïve tweens on AOL Instant Messenger finding out after-school soccer practice is canceled" overlords.

imagine my surprise

[friedman101]

After the market damage from last week my broker sent me this

IM IN UR PORTFOLIO
SHORTING UR GUGULS

Re:Emotions are not mutually exclusive from work

[AKAImBatman]

Smiling, at its most basic form, is a signal that something is not a danger, and acts as a tool for bonding.

I don't know about bonding, but I've found myself using emoticons on Slashdot more and more often. The problem I found was that too many people were reading an ultra-serious-- or even accusatory! --tone into posts that were intended to be light-hearted and friendly. Sprinkling the post with :-), :-P, or :-/ here and there can help get the correct tone across, even if it looks kind of lame. :-/

Of course, there will always be those who either miss the purpose of the emoticons or willfully ignore their purpose in communicating tone, but I have found that it clears up the majority of misunderstandings before they occur.

Not always about being "cute"

[Lockejaw]

One of the biggest flaws of text-only communication is that it doesn't include the "side-channel" of body language. A sentence sent as an instant message or email might fit well with many different tones of voice or facial expressions, and that can affect both the meaning and the likely reaction to it.

Re:Meh.

[SatanicPuppy]

I think sarcasm is by far the best reason to use an emoticon. Without one, you have to hope the person on the other end has a sufficiently refined sarcasm detector and won't get offended...Not something you want to count on in a work environment.

Re:Informal usage only

[dj_tla]

"Sir, I am absolutely flabbergasted that you would insult my intelligence with such incoherent dribble."

Formal:
"I should hope you mean drivel, good sir, for I am neither slobbering like a hound nor partaking in a rousing game of basketball!"

Informal:
"lol, lern 2 english"

Re:Meh.

[imadoofus]

But with bad news, it would help convey a sense of understanding or empathy. For example:

Mr. Johnson,

Your employment here at MegaCorp is terminated, effective immediately :-)

Director,
Human Resources

Re:Emotions are not mutually exclusive from work

[Chysn]

Take Chernobyl as an example. Discussing the actual number of deaths is an emotionally charged issue. Simply stating that the actual death count was vastly exaggerated by the media and that only a few dozen people died will get you a response to the effect of "you heartless bastard!" before you can even get to the issue of the thousands of victims who had to be treated for thyroid cancer. "Softing" one's speech to the point of clinical analysis combined with with a "warm" understanding of other's feelings can help you get farther in a discussion of the issue than immediately offending them, unintentionally or otherwise. Let's take that concept for a ride:

The actual death count at Chernobyl was vastly exaggerated by the media :-D . Only a few dozen people died :)

Re:Emotions are not mutually exclusive from work

[AndersOSU]

Clearly you're right. There is no possible way to convey sarcasm in text without including an emoticon.

Re:Emotions are not mutually exclusive from work

[AKAImBatman]

Here's what I just typed out:
An... amusing take. :-)

Now let's see that again:
An... amusing take.

And again:
An... amusing take. :-/

Once more:
An... amusing take. :-(

Interesting how it goes from light, to dry, to wry, to negative, isn't it? ;-)

FWIW, I was thinking more along the lines of:

"One of the key issues to understand about Chernobyl is that the media greatly exaggerated the death rate. Make no mistake, there *were* thousands of people who contracted thyroid cancer, but the vast majority were treated and are still alive today. According to the international research body setup to study the effects of Chernobyl, the actual death toll was (thankfully) closer to only a few dozen individuals. :-)"