Email language gives clues to workplace hierarchy

Language used in an email gives clues to workplace hierarchy. No surprises there. We all know that the way one composes an email to one’s superior is different than what one would do for their subordinate.

To this effect, a study, by Prof. Eric Gilbert of Georgia Tech has identified key phrases that can be used to predict if the email is intended for someone higher up in the hierarchy or for someone who reports to you.

Incidently this study was sponsored by Google. Makes you wonder what they are upto. Maybe a better Gmail Priority Inbox that auto-detect if the email is coming from some one higher up in the organizational hierarchy? 

Some interesting findings from the study:

We find that certain phrases are strong predictors, such as the hedge “thought you would” (an upward phrase) and the aforementioned “let’s discuss” (a lateral or downward one). Other intuitively good predictors of hierarchy, like “glad to” or “can be reached,” carry little weight. Surprisingly, and perhaps disturbingly, we also find that upward phrases do not show evidence of active thinking as often as downward or lateral ones.

[M]anagers often employ directives (as might be expected), but also wrap those directives in hedging phrases to make them more palatable to those under them (e.g., “when you have time” as a euphemism for “now”).

Bosses will often inject humor to soften the blow of their words and to build loyalty [12]. They also use collective talk (e.g., “let’s all give it a try”) to build support for themselves as leaders

“weekend” surprisingly suggests an up-ward email—perhaps used to signal how hard the employee works. “sounds good,” on the other hand, unsurprisingly predicts a upward relationship.

Many of the most predictive not-upward phrases relate to checking on a subordinate’s current status, exemplified by “have you been” and “I hope you.” “I hope you” subtly communicates expectations from a boss to a subordinate, whereas “have you been” is more direct.

[The study] reveals a surprising and somewhat concerning finding: people demonstrate active thinking more often to those below them than they do to their bosses. (Depending on your perspective, however, this isn’t surprising at all—perhaps only surprising that NLP can detect it.)

In pouring over our data, we also noticed a seemingly disproportionate number of misspellings in the not-upward emails.

Table 1. The 100 most powerful phrases for predicting that an email message goes up the corporate hierarchy. The table flows left to right, then top to bottom. All phrases are significant at the 0.001 level.				Table 2. The 100 most powerful phrases for predicting that an email message does not go up the corporate hierarchy.
↑ phrases	β	↑ phrases	β	↔↓ phrases	β	↔↓ phrases	β
the ability to	6.76	attach	6.72	have you been	-8.46	to manage the	-6.66
I took	6.57	that we might	6.54	you gave	-6.64	let’s discuss	-5.72
are available	6.52	the calendar	6.06	we are in	-5.44	publicly	-5.24
kitchen	5.72	can you get	5.72	title	-5.05	promotion	-5.02
thought you would	5.65	driving	5.61	need in	-4.8	good one	-4.62
, I’ll be	5.51	thoughts on	5.51	opened	-4.57	determine the	-4.47
looks fine	5.5			initiatives	-4.38	is difficult	-4.36
voicemail	5.43	we can talk	5.41	. I would	-4.34	man	-4.26
tremendous	5.27	it does	5.21	we will probably	-4.12	number we	-4.11
will you	5.17	involving	5.15	any comments	-4.06	contact you	-4.05
left a	5.07	the report	5.04	you said	-3.99	the problem is	-3.97
I put	4.9	please change	4.88	I left	-3.88	you did	-3.78
you ever	4.8	issues I	4.76	can you help	-3.68	cool	-3.54
I’ll give	4.69	is really	4.65	send this	-3.47	your attention	-3.44
okay ,	4.6	your review	4.56	whether we	-3.44	to think	-3.44
to send it	4.48	europe	4.45	the trade	-3.4	addition to the	-3.3
communications	4.38	weekend .	4.35	and I thought	-3.28	great thanks	-3.24
a message	4.35	have our	4.33	should include	-3.19	selected	-3.16
one I	4.28	interviews	4.28	please send	-3.14	ext	-3.13
can I get	4.28	you mean	4.26	existing	-3.06	and let me	-3.05
worksheet	4.15	haven’t been	4.1	mondays	-3.02	security	-3.01
liked	4.07	me . 1	4.07	presentation on	-2.95	got the	-2.94
I gave you	3.95	tiger	3.94	let’s talk	-2.94	get your	-2.88
credit will	3.88	change in	3.88	the items	-2.78	this week and	-2.77
you make	3.86	item	3.84	i hope you	-2.77	team that	-2.75
together and	3.82	a decision	3.82	did it	-2.75	a deal	-2.71
have presented	3.78	a discussion	3.74	test	-2.69	yours .	-2.68
think about	3.71	sounds good	3.65	be sure	-2.65	briefing	-2.6
lot to	3.64	units	3.62	fri	-2.53	notes	-2.51
bills	3.61	you are the	3.61	forgot to	-2.5	funny	-2.48
october	3.57	proceed	3.56	confirmations	-2.45	sessions	-2.43
keeping	3.55	agreement for	3.5	pay the	-2.39	your group	-2.37
anything we	3.49	you have an	3.47	implement	-2.35	resolve	-2.34
don’t know what	3.47	february	3.44	would need to	-2.34	will be making	-2.33
the email	3.43	do we want	3.4	enter into	-2.32	numbers and	-2.28
in the process	3.34	me or	3.32	and i discussed	-2.28	are you	-2.27
head	3.29	, yes ,	3.24	should look	-2.27	calendar	-2.27
be a great	3.21	case of	3.18	helping	-2.26	email	-2.24
be my	3.17	remedy	3.16	doing a	-2.21	to suggest	-2.19
administration	3.15	invite you	3.13	use the	-2.19	the confusion	-2.19
worked on	3.12	conflict	3.11	and I am	-2.17	fyi I	-2.16
is doing	3.11	by our	3.11	months to	-2.15	in charge	-2.15
compensation	3.1	asked if	3.08	look for	-2.13	meeting will	-2.1
candidate	3.08	that night	3.07	fyi ,	-2.09	that we should	-2.06
this afternoon	3.05	listed	3.04	know this	-2.05	sent this	-2.04
thanks a	3.03	excellent	3	confirming	-2.03	give me	-2.03
you may	3	were pulling	2.99	included on	-2	prior to the	-1.99
here’s	2.99	factor	2.96	problem with	-1.9	, I thought	-1.89
change my	2.95	final draft	2.95	location	-1.89	supposed to be	-1.88
looked at	2.95	wed	2.93	you take a	-1.85	. I just	-1.83