Processing email

Lesson overview

Objective: Spend more time processing email to spend less time in email

Summary: This lesson introduces a more intentional approach to processing email that creates space for focused work, reduces anxiety, and helps you maintain the mental clarity needed for meaningful academic contributions. While quick email replies typically feel productive they often create more back-and-forth message threads, taking up time and wasting cognitive energy. Spending more time on processing your email thoroughly allows you to spend less time in your inbox.

Key habits:

• Spend extra time upfront understanding what each email truly requires: Take the time to identify the real goal behind the message
• Provide complete information in your responses: Close loops immediately by giving recipients everything they need
• Either handle it in two minutes, archive it, delete it, or move important information into your proper workflow: Your inbox is not your to-do list
• Remember that your inbox isn’t a to-do list: Extract actionable items into your task management system

Introduction

Email can feel like a constant tide of demands, each message creating a ripple of anxiety that makes deep, meaningful work harder to achieve. Most academics find themselves caught in a cycle of rapid responses, using their inbox as a makeshift task manager and feeling compelled to stay constantly connected.

Process-oriented email offers a different path. While it requires more upfront thought per message, this approach isn’t just about efficiency – it’s about creating the mental clarity and calm you need for scholarly work that matters. By understanding what each email represents and handling it thoroughly once, you reduce both the time spent in your inbox and the mental weight of unresolved communications.

By putting more thought up front into what’s really being proposed by the email messages that flit in and out of your inbox, you’ll greatly reduce the negative impact of this technology on your ability to do work that actually matters.

Cal Newport

Process-oriented email

When you take time to understand what an email truly represents, you can respond in ways that minimise future back-and-forth exchanges. While quick replies feel efficient, they often generate follow-up questions that keep you tied to your inbox. Process-oriented email takes more upfront effort but reduces the total time spent managing your messages.

The key principles are:

• Identify the true goal behind the email thread
• Provide complete information in your initial response
• Move actionable information into your workflow system
• Close loops immediately where possible

Think of email as an input to your work, not the work itself. When you process messages thoroughly, you create the mental space needed for meaningful academic work. This approach builds a protective boundary around your deeper thinking time, ensuring email serves your scholarly goals rather than derailing them.

This may initially feel slower, but it’s an investment in your ability to disconnect from your inbox with confidence. It’s about making deliberate choices that support calm productivity, rather than letting reactive email habits fragment your attention throughout the day.

Putting process-oriented email into practice

The best way to understand how process-oriented email can transform your workflow is to see it in action. Here are three common academic scenarios where spending more time upfront leads to better outcomes and fewer emails overall. Each example shows both a typical quick response and a process-oriented alternative that helps close loops more effectively.

Meeting coordination

Initial email: “When can everyone meet to discuss the curriculum review?”

Quick response: “I’m free most afternoons next week.”

Result: Triggers 5-10 more emails as people compare schedules, suggest times, and deal with conflicts.

Process-oriented response: “I’ve checked my schedule for the next three weeks. I can meet:

• Tuesday Feb 11: 2-4pm
• Thursday Feb 13: 1-3pm
• Monday Feb 17: 3-5pm

I suggest we use this Doodle poll [link] to find the best time. Given the curriculum review deadline in March, we should aim to meet within the next two weeks. I’ve reviewed last year’s curriculum documents and suggest we focus on the assessment changes - I can prepare a brief overview of the key issues if that would be helpful.

If these times don’t work for most people, I’m happy to look at early morning slots in the same weeks.”

Result: Clear options, context, and next steps that move the project forward with minimal back-and-forth.

Collaboration enquiry

Initial email: “Your recent paper on academic workflows was fascinating. Would you be interested in collaborating on a similar project?”

Quick response: “Thanks, that sounds interesting. Tell me more about what you have in mind.”

Result: Several vague emails exchanged before the real discussion begins.

Process-oriented response: “Thank you for your interest in collaboration. To help us determine if there’s a good fit, could you:

• Share a brief outline of your proposed project (2-3 paragraphs)
• Indicate your intended timeline and any funding/resource considerations
• Clarify what specific aspects of my workflow research you’d like to build upon

For context, my current research focuses on [specific area] and I have capacity for new projects starting from [date]. I’m particularly interested in [specific aspects], so please let me know if your project aligns with these areas.

I’ve attached a recent presentation that outlines my current research direction, which might help inform your proposal.”

Result: Sets clear expectations and provides structure for a meaningful discussion about collaboration.

Student assignment query

Initial email: “I’m struggling with the literature review format for the final assignment. Could you clarify what you’re looking for?”

Quick response: “Check the assignment guidelines and we can discuss in class.”

Result: More students email with similar questions, or students remain unclear and submit poorly formatted work.

Process-oriented response: “Thank you for this important question about the literature review format. I’ve created a brief guide that I’ll share with the whole class:

Required structure:

1. Introduction (state your review focus)
2. Main themes (3-5 sections)
3. Synthesis and gaps
4. Your research direction

Key requirements:

• 20-25 papers minimum
• Focus on last 5 years
• Critical analysis, not just summary

I’ve added this to the course site under ‘Assignment Resources’ along with an annotated example. I’ll also spend 10 minutes in next week’s class addressing common questions.

Would it be helpful to schedule a brief meeting to discuss your specific concerns?”

Result: Addresses the immediate need while creating a resource that benefits all students and reduces future emails.

The email processing matrix (see right panel, above) helps you create mental clarity around your inbox by providing a structured way to assess and handle different types of academic emails based on their urgency and potential impact on your work. Of course, this is only a suggestion and you can modify based on your own context.

Common pitfalls in email culture

While adopting a process-oriented approach to email is valuable, certain aspects of academic culture can make this challenging. Here are common pitfalls to watch for and how to navigate them:

The always-available expectation: Many academics feel pressure to respond quickly to show dedication. Remember that thoughtful responses demonstrate more respect for colleagues’ time than rapid replies. Set clear boundaries about email hours in your signature or auto-responder.

Committee email chaos: Academic committees often generate sprawling email threads with multiple decision points. Instead of joining the chaos, try summarising key points and proposed actions in a single, structured response. This often helps refocus the discussion.

Student email avalanches: During key periods (assignment submissions, exams), similar student queries can flood your inbox. Rather than answering each individually, create reusable resources that address common questions and share them with the whole class.

The perfectionist trap: Academic writing habits can spill into email, leading to over-crafted messages. Remember that process-oriented email isn’t about perfection – it’s about providing clear, complete information to move things forward.

Cross-time zone collaboration: International academic work often means emails arrive at all hours. Rather than extending your email availability, establish clear windows for email processing and communicate these to international colleagues.

These challenges are systemic in academia, not personal failings. The goal isn’t to fight the system but to create sustainable practices that protect your time and energy for meaningful work.

Download the template

Pause and reflect

Not everyone in your organisation is going to align their email habits with this process. Taking a process-oriented approach to email may clash with the conversational tone that some colleagues may be used to. It may be worth explaining why you’ve adopted a different approach to email, and how you hope it will help you to be more productive.

Thorough email processing often means writing longer, more detailed responses than might feel natural at first. Colleagues used to quick exchanges might initially find this shift jarring. However, when you explain that your goal is to reduce everyone’s email load while making genuine progress on shared projects, most people appreciate the approach.

You might even find that some colleagues begin adopting similar practices, creating a ripple effect that gradually improves communication patterns across your academic networks. Remember that you’re not just changing your own habits – you’re demonstrating an alternative way of working that prioritises calm, focused attention over constant reactivity.

Activity

Process an email thoroughly

Find an email in your inbox that opens a new loop - perhaps a request for your time or an invitation to join a project. Look for messages that are likely to generate ongoing exchanges.

Instead of sending a quick acknowledgement, pause and analyse the message:

1. Identify all the steps needed to close the loop completely - what is the goal the initial email articulates?
2. Draft a response that provides comprehensive information - include concrete details (dates, times, resources, expectations)
3. Aim to eliminate the need for follow-up questions - you want the loop to close soon after you respond

Process the email based on its type:

• Can be completed in two minutes → Do it now and archive
• No action needed → Archive or delete
• Contains project information → Move to project workspace or to-do list and archive the message
• Requires significant action → Extract relevant details to your workflow system

The goal is to handle each email thoroughly once, rather than creating a thread of back-and-forth messages. This might take more time initially but reduces the total time spent managing your inbox.

Key takeaways

• Process over speed: Quick responses create endless back-and-forth exchanges. Taking time to craft thorough responses initially actually reduces total time spent on email. The examples in this lesson show how this prevents the common cycle of clarifying questions.

• Closing loops effectively: Treat each email as a loop to be closed. Provide all necessary information upfront, including concrete details and next steps, so recipients can move forward without follow-up questions.

• Email as workflow input: Your inbox isn’t your workspace. Treat email as an input channel - extract what matters into your actual work systems, then archive the message. Important content should live where you’ll use it.

• Cultural change: While process-oriented email might feel different from typical academic communication, it can positively influence your colleagues’ approach to email over time.

• Creating mental space: The goal isn’t just email efficiency – it’s protecting your ability to focus on meaningful academic work by reducing the cognitive load of a chaotic inbox.

Resources

• Newport, C. (2016). Deep work: Rules for focused success in a distracted world. Grand Central Publishing.
• Newport, C. (2016). Write longer emails. Study hacks blog.