Over the last month, I've been toying around with an e-mail tool that works with Microsoft Outlook called ToneCheck. The plug-in claims to "flag sentences with words or phrases that may convey unintended emotion or tone, and then helps you re-write them. Just like spell check ... but for tone." Its tagline reinforces this explanation: Be understood. Clearly.
"These folks are on to something," I thought, struck by the novelty of such design. I flashed through past instances of hastily typed responses that were misconstrued by recipients, or inflammatory e-mails sent in a fit of fury that might have been extinguished had I previously gained access to it. Could this program be a postal panacea for adjusters, too, who all too often face tonality issues in their daily communications?
Eager to see if ToneCheck answered these questions, I installed the program and let it do its thing. (Our company's IT department, I'm sure, feels blessed to have me on staff). The program is an unobtrusive addition -- that is, until you start sending e-mails. As ToneCheck analyzed every outgoing message with efficiency, it inevitably offered up advice for changing the tone of almost every e-mail (or at least every e-mail sent by me). Needless to say, this gambit becomes exhausting after a bit, especially when the same alerts appear over and over again.
For what tonal infractions was I being flagged? According to ToneCheck, I have a knack for sending sad/humiliating/fearful e-mails, as those were the warnings that appeared with regularity in my messages. Was this program telling me something my magazine contributors and coworkers already knew? Am I a cold, cheerless man in imminent need of a Paxil prescription?
In spite of the somewhat disturbing personal questions that ToneCheck raised, I couldn't help but feel like the intent of the program exceeded its means. Much like the relationship we have with a lot of technology at work, there is no substitution for a little common sense, an eye for detail, and the ability to put yourself in someone else's shoes, something that is especially true when it comes to the adjustment process. Apparently it's easier said than done, as noted in an article, "Egocentrism Over E-mail: Can We Communicate as Well as We Think?" which appeared in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology:
"Without the benefit of paralinguistic cues such as gesture, emphasis, and intonation, it can be difficult to convey emotion and tone over e-mail," wrote authors Justin Kruger, Nicholas Epley, Jason Parker, and Zhi-Wen Ng. "This limitation is often underappreciated, such that people tend to believe that they can communicate over e-mail more effectively than they actually can. Studies further suggest that this overconfidence is born of egocentrism, the inherent difficulty of detaching oneself from one's own perspective when evaluating the perspective of someone else. Because e-mail communicators 'hear' a statement differently depending on whether they intend to be, say, sarcastic or funny, it can be difficult to appreciate that their electronic audience may not."
Clearly, there is a market for ToneCheck. However, based on my experience, this tool provided more chuckles than valid adjustments. (That might just be my own "egocentrism" speaking.) Regardless, claim professionals must remember that their tone ultimately conveys their feelings toward an insured and the legitimacy of a situation and claim, and this tool certainly provides at minimum a reminder to re-read what is written before hitting the send button. If you ask me, though, ToneCheck needs to check itself.
