Ever since Cerb4 was a secret wink shared between me and my keyboard I’ve had this nagging feeling that notifications sent in e-mail about new e-mail seemed rather silly.  I originally tried to get away with only providing RSS notifications in the beta versions, but the community was quick (and right) to defend the existence of “e-mail about e-mail”.

The main distinction between notifications and watchers is in how they really fill two completely different needs:

  • Watcher functionality, which consists of automatically sending copies of incoming or outgoing mail to separate addresses, is especially useful for managerial oversight, quality control, training, archiving/backups, or synchronization.  In these situations the copied e-mail isn’t primarily prompting someone to visit the helpdesk because there’s new mail.  It’s just more efficient for these activities to deal with a stream of e-mail to another mailbox (especially with something like oversight) than it is to click into every single ticket from a search or report.  In these situations a full copy of each e-mail message is the most useful content to deal with, opposed to a line of text saying “There is a new message!”.
  • Notifications, on the other hand, are specifically intended to “ping” a worker to return to the helpdesk because there is new content that needs their attention.  This is the situation where I have usability and ideological problems with “new e-mail about new e-mail”.  RSS, while less familiar to your average user than e-mail, is specifically designed to syndicate events like a news feed.  A huge benefit of RSS is that it’s in a different context than e-mail, and you can also receive updates about non-email events at the same time.  You aren’t mixing up these RSS “pings” with your typical e-mail; nor are they contributing to the e-mail overload that Cerb4 is supposed to be taking off your shoulders in the first place.  While I’ll likely do another write-up with RSS tips, I consider the most important tip to have two different tools for reading blogs by RSS and receiving status updates by RSS.  For blogs I use Google Reader and for status updates I use Vienna (MacOSX) or FeedDemon (Windows).  When you’re working you don’t want a notification ping every few seconds because you’re watching 300 blogs.  You don’t want to learn to ignore the notifications completely (another reason to separate notifications from e-mail).

There is a subset of the community that uses the watcher functionality to circumvent the browser-interface and reply from handheld devices or traditional e-mail clients like Outlook.  That’s fine.  We designed the system so that was possible; the headers are proxied (in other words, your personal e-mail address is rewritten so the client receives your replies from the helpdesk and your direct contact information is protected) — but that’s not the main reason the watcher functionality exists.

A quick digression: a lot of the confusion between both situations comes from the fact we lump our original watcher functionality in with a plugin called “E-mail Notifications”.  The purist in me likes to pretend that e-mail notifications still don’t exist.  We really should rename that specific functionality back to “watchers”.

Food for thought!

-Jeff@WGM

[Slashdot] [Digg] [Reddit] [del.icio.us] [Facebook] [Technorati] [Google] [StumbleUpon]


5 Comments to “The difference between e-mail watchers and notifications”

  1. Cerberus Helpdesk - Blog » Blog Archive » Turn your team into a well-oiled machine with Global Worker Notifications | November 25th, 2008 at 2:38 am

    [...] all these status updates through e-mail.  I started to elaborate in depth here, but my thoughts ballooned into another post in their own right.  The short version is that Cerb4 tries to reduce your e-mail workload instead of mindlessly [...]

  2. Geoff | November 25th, 2008 at 10:55 am

    The biggest shortcoming of Cerberus is that it doesn’t handle html email.

    What is the extent to which the email watchers could be used so that workers could handle tickets via Outlook instead of using the Cerberus interface?

  3. Jim Aazam | December 3rd, 2008 at 8:54 am

    Hi Jeff,

    When we started using Cerberus, we loved version 2. It was simple to use. Users started using it heavily and bombarded us with emails and did not pay attention to ticket numbers and the Support Centre.

    Not having time for training, etc., we finally pushed ourselves to version 3. We could not use our helpdesk@chs.ca as before because of joining the private network of the Ontario health system. So we decided to concentrate on using a an email/notification method revolving around the Support-Centre. We, the Helpdesk workers, could send (no-reply) emails to all our users, explaining solutions. Users had to use the Support-Center to communicate with the Helpdesk. Users who would receive notifications from the Helpdesk had to go to the Support-Center and reply through the facilities there. This happened to reduce emails. Users who ignored the Support-Center in version 2, now had gotten used to going there and replying to tickets or review old stuff. We are currently using this method.

    We have had no chance to upgrade to version 4, because we have had no time to think what other consequences we will have to face.

    I just started looking at version 4 and I came across your “ideological” debate. I thought, I put in my two-bits. We are a very small organization of 500 users spread all over Ontario, Canada. As much as we love Cerberus, but at times we find our hands tied to move to new versions quickly. We always need an “overlap” period where ourselves and our users could get trained for a new environment. We are just trying to move forward.

    Thanks

    Jim

  4. Nick | January 13th, 2009 at 2:29 pm

    Hi,

    I agree with Geoff, Cerberus should handle HTML. Is there any chance that this will be added later on some time?

    Nick

  5. Jeff Standen | January 15th, 2009 at 12:39 am

    Hey Nick! I’ll write up a post on my/our thoughts about HTML e-mail and we can start up the community convo again. We’re not adamantly opposed to it, we just don’t see the value compared to most things we can be working on. HTML mail introduces more problems than it solves, and if you’re doing pretty newsletters there are far better apps to send mail fun. Either way, it should be fun to talk about again. -Jeff@WGM

Leave a Comment