Preserve Trust by Avoiding “bcc:”
Posted in Interpersonal, Professional on 01. Sep, 2009
Avoid One Careless Mistake That Can Easily Undermine Trust
The blind carbon copy (“bcc:”) option of most email applications isn’t often used–but when it is, the potential harm can often far outweigh the good.
Most of our readers are probably familiar with the idea, but for those that aren’t: The blind carbon copy option provides the ability send an email without disclosing all the recipients, and people listed in the “bcc:” address box receive a copy without anyone else knowing that they were ever included. Think of it as the equivalent of allowing someone to listen in to a phone conversation by picking up another receiver on the same line. It’s easy enough to do, and there are plenty of reasons it might be tempting–but when people find out, it’s bound to cause problems.
The biggest single reason to avoid using the bcc: option is that is has a tremendous potential for undermining trust–something that takes a long time to develop but only a moment to damage irreparably. There are two distinct ways this can happen:
- You can get caught. Email has a way of taking on a life of its own, and messages that you thought were private never seem to actually be so. All it takes is for one of the hidden recipients to forward the note–perhaps even with good intent–and others can see that you were allowing someone to “listen in.”
- Second, even if you never get caught it can still undermine the trust of anyone who sees you using it (even the person that you’re sending the blind copy to). Think about it like this: If you watch someone talk about others behind their backs, or tell lies to other people, you might not feel personally betrayed–but you’d better be on guard lest the person do the same thing to you. If someone is blind-copying you on messages to other people, there’s a very good chance you’re not the only one receiving letters addressed to you.
So what’s a person to do? Are there really no reasons to use the bcc: option? Not at all–it’s still a great way to send mass emails when you want to respect the privacy of the recipients and make sure that their email addresses don’t get exposed to everyone else. Just make sure that everyone is blind carbon copied, and it’ll be obvious what you’re doing. Including some people secretly comes across as–well, secretive. Using bcc: can also ensure that your recipients’ inboxes don’t inadvertently get cluttered by a bunch of “reply all” responses. Again, just make sure it’s all-or-nothing.
If you’re still tempted to use bcc: on a case-by-case basis, consider the fact that you can accomplish the same thing by simply forwarding an email after sending it. People are familiar with the concept of forwarding, and while it might not be something they like, it won’t cause the same level of outrage should the note end up making any rounds. A forward is pretty straightforward and not typically considered inherently sneaky.
I’m not the biggest fan of Nietzsche, but I can sympathize with his sentiment when he said: ”Not that you lied to me but that I no longer believe you – that is what has distressed me.” No one should automatically assume that their electronic communications are always what they seem–but in the workplace it’s often necessary to make the choice to believe each other, even when it’s a little naive. I’d argue that a work environment built on trust–even naively so–is definitely preferable to the alternative.
-tg
Related posts:
