Confirm that E-mail was read.

Here is the senario.

1.) Supervisor sends out E-mail to 50 managers.
2.) Managers read E-mail
3.) Supervisor checks to make sure all managers have read E-mail and calls
those that have not.

I am doing #1 from Access and sending the E-mail through Outlook and keeping
track in Access as to who the E-mail was sent to.

Managers read the E-mail.  They are all on the same network.  How can the
managers confirm to the supervisor that they read the E-mail without the
supervisor having to go through 50 replies?

I thought about putting a link in the E-mail to an access form (on the
network) that would check off that they had read it.  If I do that. how do I
include the person replying in the link?  OR is there a completely different
and better way to accomplish this?


0
bobh9793 (5)
4/8/2005 3:47:36 PM
outlook 87535 articles. 11 followers. Follow

19 Replies
543 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 53

Are you using Exchange?  If yes, then you can configure Outlook to send a 
read-receipt when mail is read.

--�
Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]

Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact.  Due to
the (insert latest virus name here) virus, all mail sent to my personal
account will be deleted without reading.

After furious head scratching, Robert Harrison asked:

| Here is the senario.
|
| 1.) Supervisor sends out E-mail to 50 managers.
| 2.) Managers read E-mail
| 3.) Supervisor checks to make sure all managers have read E-mail and
| calls those that have not.
|
| I am doing #1 from Access and sending the E-mail through Outlook and
| keeping track in Access as to who the E-mail was sent to.
|
| Managers read the E-mail.  They are all on the same network.  How can
| the managers confirm to the supervisor that they read the E-mail
| without the supervisor having to go through 50 replies?
|
| I thought about putting a link in the E-mail to an access form (on the
| network) that would check off that they had read it.  If I do that.
| how do I include the person replying in the link?  OR is there a
| completely different and better way to accomplish this? 


0
MillyS (3228)
4/8/2005 4:37:51 PM
Robert,

Interesting scenario. There are customized, off the shelf, *workflow*
software that does this, although they are usually expensive.

Here's an quick idea (just off the top of my head, after reading your post).
I'm sure others will chime in. Since you're already integrating Outlook into
your Access application (i.e. storing a list of your managers' email
addresses, creating the email messages to them), maybe you could embed a
unique *code word* and *date* in the subject line of all the email going to
the managers. You could then write a procedure in Access to examine your
Outlook inbox and search the subject lines of all messages for this unique
code. You can then tell who has responded, who has not.


Immanuel Sibero



"Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message
news:4256a358_1@newspeer2.tds.net...
> Here is the senario.
>
> 1.) Supervisor sends out E-mail to 50 managers.
> 2.) Managers read E-mail
> 3.) Supervisor checks to make sure all managers have read E-mail and calls
> those that have not.
>
> I am doing #1 from Access and sending the E-mail through Outlook and
keeping
> track in Access as to who the E-mail was sent to.
>
> Managers read the E-mail.  They are all on the same network.  How can the
> managers confirm to the supervisor that they read the E-mail without the
> supervisor having to go through 50 replies?
>
> I thought about putting a link in the E-mail to an access form (on the
> network) that would check off that they had read it.  If I do that. how do
I
> include the person replying in the link?  OR is there a completely
different
> and better way to accomplish this?
>
>


0
goahead1 (1)
4/8/2005 4:41:34 PM
Thanks for your idea.  The only problem with this idea is I really need to
have the manager DO something to confirm that the E-mail was actually read
by threm, not just displayed on the screen.


"Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]"
<MillyS@donteventhinkaboutmailingmeatmvps.org> wrote in message
news:%2390sOlFPFHA.3296@TK2MSFTNGP15.phx.gbl...
> Are you using Exchange?  If yes, then you can configure Outlook to send a
> read-receipt when mail is read.
>
> --�
> Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook]
>
> Post all replies to the group to keep the discussion intact.  Due to
> the (insert latest virus name here) virus, all mail sent to my personal
> account will be deleted without reading.
>
> After furious head scratching, Robert Harrison asked:
>
> | Here is the senario.
> |
> | 1.) Supervisor sends out E-mail to 50 managers.
> | 2.) Managers read E-mail
> | 3.) Supervisor checks to make sure all managers have read E-mail and
> | calls those that have not.
> |
> | I am doing #1 from Access and sending the E-mail through Outlook and
> | keeping track in Access as to who the E-mail was sent to.
> |
> | Managers read the E-mail.  They are all on the same network.  How can
> | the managers confirm to the supervisor that they read the E-mail
> | without the supervisor having to go through 50 replies?
> |
> | I thought about putting a link in the E-mail to an access form (on the
> | network) that would check off that they had read it.  If I do that.
> | how do I include the person replying in the link?  OR is there a
> | completely different and better way to accomplish this?
>
>


0
bobh9793 (5)
4/8/2005 4:53:11 PM
I would have thought that the easiest way would be to get the supervisor to
email directly from Outlook, and to 'track' the email.

hth

"Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message
news:4256a358_1@newspeer2.tds.net...
> Here is the senario.
>
> 1.) Supervisor sends out E-mail to 50 managers.
> 2.) Managers read E-mail
> 3.) Supervisor checks to make sure all managers have read E-mail and calls
> those that have not.
>
> I am doing #1 from Access and sending the E-mail through Outlook and
keeping
> track in Access as to who the E-mail was sent to.
>
> Managers read the E-mail.  They are all on the same network.  How can the
> managers confirm to the supervisor that they read the E-mail without the
> supervisor having to go through 50 replies?
>
> I thought about putting a link in the E-mail to an access form (on the
> network) that would check off that they had read it.  If I do that. how do
I
> include the person replying in the link?  OR is there a completely
different
> and better way to accomplish this?
>
>


0
ted3030 (3)
4/8/2005 4:55:23 PM
Thanks, I'll look into that option.

"Immanuel Sibero" <goahead@getlost.com> wrote in message
news:eBuh6iFPFHA.3372@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Robert,
>
> Interesting scenario. There are customized, off the shelf, *workflow*
> software that does this, although they are usually expensive.
>
> Here's an quick idea (just off the top of my head, after reading your
post).
> I'm sure others will chime in. Since you're already integrating Outlook
into
> your Access application (i.e. storing a list of your managers' email
> addresses, creating the email messages to them), maybe you could embed a
> unique *code word* and *date* in the subject line of all the email going
to
> the managers. You could then write a procedure in Access to examine your
> Outlook inbox and search the subject lines of all messages for this unique
> code. You can then tell who has responded, who has not.
>
>
> Immanuel Sibero
>
>
>
> "Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message
> news:4256a358_1@newspeer2.tds.net...
> > Here is the senario.
> >
> > 1.) Supervisor sends out E-mail to 50 managers.
> > 2.) Managers read E-mail
> > 3.) Supervisor checks to make sure all managers have read E-mail and
calls
> > those that have not.
> >
> > I am doing #1 from Access and sending the E-mail through Outlook and
> keeping
> > track in Access as to who the E-mail was sent to.
> >
> > Managers read the E-mail.  They are all on the same network.  How can
the
> > managers confirm to the supervisor that they read the E-mail without the
> > supervisor having to go through 50 replies?
> >
> > I thought about putting a link in the E-mail to an access form (on the
> > network) that would check off that they had read it.  If I do that. how
do
> I
> > include the person replying in the link?  OR is there a completely
> different
> > and better way to accomplish this?
> >
> >
>
>


0
bobh9793 (5)
4/8/2005 4:55:41 PM
"Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message 
news:4256b2bc_1@newspeer2.tds.net...
> Thanks for your idea.  The only problem with this idea is I really 
> need to
> have the manager DO something to confirm that the E-mail was actually 
> read
> by threm, not just displayed on the screen.


So what is the difference between showing them an e-mail on their screen 
and they "reading" that e-mail.  They have their eyes open long enough 
to open the e-mail but then close their eyes while trying to figure out 
how to close that e-mail so they don't see it?  Opening the e-mail marks 
it as read.  If the recipient is playing games, so what?  They are still 
responsible for their e-mails, especially if required by company policy. 
These managers really have lifetime guaranteed positions where they 
cannot be fired for failing to do their job?

Yeah, you could add voting buttons to the e-mail which would require the 
recipient perform an action, but the recipient already did perform an 
action: opening the e-mail!  They could easily just click on a voting 
button, too, and never bother to actually read what was displayed on 
their screen when they opened the e-mail.  If they are responsible for 
reading their e-mails and acting upon them then make it so.  You sound 
like the mommy that repeatedly threatens the kids that she is going to 
spank them but never does; i.e., a worthless threat.  Time to get daddy 
who actually does what he says; i.e., enforce the policy (but, at least, 
HAVE a policy to enforce).

-- 
____________________________________________________________
** Post your replies to the newsgroup - Share with others **
For e-mail Reply: remove "NIXTHIS", add "#VS811" to Subject.
____________________________________________________________

0
Vanguard
4/8/2005 5:41:42 PM
Don't assume too much.  These managers are responsible for several
handicapped people, if they open an E-mail and one of the people goes into a
seizure, they very well may not read the E-mail and not get back to it for
several hours.  If I assume that they read it at that time, it could cause
very serious problems.  The current procedure is to actually call every
manager on the phone to make sure they get the message.


<Vanguard> wrote in message news:FeydnV4PoofLX8vfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
> "Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message
> news:4256b2bc_1@newspeer2.tds.net...
> > Thanks for your idea.  The only problem with this idea is I really
> > need to
> > have the manager DO something to confirm that the E-mail was actually
> > read
> > by threm, not just displayed on the screen.
>
>
> So what is the difference between showing them an e-mail on their screen
> and they "reading" that e-mail.  They have their eyes open long enough
> to open the e-mail but then close their eyes while trying to figure out
> how to close that e-mail so they don't see it?  Opening the e-mail marks
> it as read.  If the recipient is playing games, so what?  They are still
> responsible for their e-mails, especially if required by company policy.
> These managers really have lifetime guaranteed positions where they
> cannot be fired for failing to do their job?
>
> Yeah, you could add voting buttons to the e-mail which would require the
> recipient perform an action, but the recipient already did perform an
> action: opening the e-mail!  They could easily just click on a voting
> button, too, and never bother to actually read what was displayed on
> their screen when they opened the e-mail.  If they are responsible for
> reading their e-mails and acting upon them then make it so.  You sound
> like the mommy that repeatedly threatens the kids that she is going to
> spank them but never does; i.e., a worthless threat.  Time to get daddy
> who actually does what he says; i.e., enforce the policy (but, at least,
> HAVE a policy to enforce).
>
> -- 
> ____________________________________________________________
> ** Post your replies to the newsgroup - Share with others **
> For e-mail Reply: remove "NIXTHIS", add "#VS811" to Subject.
> ____________________________________________________________
>


0
bobh9793 (5)
4/8/2005 6:15:58 PM
"Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message 
news:4256c628_2@newspeer2.tds.net...
> Don't assume too much.  These managers are responsible for several
> handicapped people, if they open an E-mail and one of the people goes 
> into a
> seizure, they very well may not read the E-mail and not get back to it 
> for
> several hours.  If I assume that they read it at that time, it could 
> cause
> very serious problems.  The current procedure is to actually call 
> every
> manager on the phone to make sure they get the message.
>
>
> <Vanguard> wrote in message news:FeydnV4PoofLX8vfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
>> "Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message
>> news:4256b2bc_1@newspeer2.tds.net...
>> > Thanks for your idea.  The only problem with this idea is I really
>> > need to
>> > have the manager DO something to confirm that the E-mail was 
>> > actually
>> > read
>> > by threm, not just displayed on the screen.
>>
>>
>> So what is the difference between showing them an e-mail on their 
>> screen
>> and they "reading" that e-mail.  They have their eyes open long 
>> enough
>> to open the e-mail but then close their eyes while trying to figure 
>> out
>> how to close that e-mail so they don't see it?  Opening the e-mail 
>> marks
>> it as read.  If the recipient is playing games, so what?  They are 
>> still
>> responsible for their e-mails, especially if required by company 
>> policy.
>> These managers really have lifetime guaranteed positions where they
>> cannot be fired for failing to do their job?
>>
>> Yeah, you could add voting buttons to the e-mail which would require 
>> the
>> recipient perform an action, but the recipient already did perform an
>> action: opening the e-mail!  They could easily just click on a voting
>> button, too, and never bother to actually read what was displayed on
>> their screen when they opened the e-mail.  If they are responsible 
>> for
>> reading their e-mails and acting upon them then make it so.  You 
>> sound
>> like the mommy that repeatedly threatens the kids that she is going 
>> to
>> spank them but never does; i.e., a worthless threat.  Time to get 
>> daddy
>> who actually does what he says; i.e., enforce the policy (but, at 
>> least,
>> HAVE a policy to enforce).


And clicking on a voting button won't work, either, because it is 
possible they click on the button before reading the e-mail but they go 
into a seizure before reading the message.  Even if you use 
HTML-formatted e-mails with a link or button control at the end with the 
idea that they would have to read through the e-mail beforehand, they 
could still just scroll to the bottom and click the link or button to 
perform the acknowledge before reading the e-mail (but never get around 
to actually reading the message), much like the vast majority of users 
that check the box and click Continue when the EULA appears when 
installing software.  You cannot prevent a bomb from blowing up the 
building right after someone opened an e-mail.

E-mail is not a guaranteed communications medium because it is not an 
immediate or interactive *two-way* communications medium.  If you are 
using e-mail for critical scheduling, you're in for disappointment and 
limitations.  Also, it doesn't take being handicapped to get 
interrupted, dealing with an emergency, or other reason that prevents a 
recipient from reading an e-mail.  I doubt you are sending out 50 
e-mails and having 50 recipients all having seizures the moment they 
open their e-mails; otherwise, stop using those seizure-inducing 
graphics in your e-mails.  Even with non-handicapped recipients, you 
will still end up having to contact some of them that refuse or forget 
to click the voting button or to otherwise reply.  If that is too much 
work, you're stuck using read receipts to let you know only that they 
opened your e-mail.

-- 
____________________________________________________________
** Post your replies to the newsgroup - Share with others **
For e-mail Reply: remove "NIXTHIS", add "#VS811" to Subject.
____________________________________________________________

0
Vanguard
4/8/2005 6:29:41 PM
If you're using Exchange Server with Outlook, it may be easier to send this 
to a Public Folder that has been set up for this. The folks in the Exchange 
newsgroups could help you better with this. As far as sending the message 
goes, this may actually simplify thing because you would send it to just one 
address, the email address of the public folder.

-- 
Wayne Morgan
MS Access MVP


"Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message 
news:4256a358_1@newspeer2.tds.net...
> Here is the senario.
>
> 1.) Supervisor sends out E-mail to 50 managers.
> 2.) Managers read E-mail
> 3.) Supervisor checks to make sure all managers have read E-mail and calls
> those that have not.
>
> I am doing #1 from Access and sending the E-mail through Outlook and 
> keeping
> track in Access as to who the E-mail was sent to.
>
> Managers read the E-mail.  They are all on the same network.  How can the
> managers confirm to the supervisor that they read the E-mail without the
> supervisor having to go through 50 replies?
>
> I thought about putting a link in the E-mail to an access form (on the
> network) that would check off that they had read it.  If I do that. how do 
> I
> include the person replying in the link?  OR is there a completely 
> different
> and better way to accomplish this?
>
> 


0
4/8/2005 6:49:27 PM
Please, if you don't have anything constructive to add, let someone else
respond.

The managers are not the handi-capped ones, they are responsible for them.
At times the supervisor needs to contact these 50 managers and make sure
that they get the message within say 4 hours.  The manager may not even be
at the location where he gets E-mail.  He may be taking clients to the
doctor, hospital, etc, etc.  On a normal day, the E-mail would reach about
40 of those managers with no problem and the READ function would work.  The
other ten would then have to be called.

The SERIOUS problem comes if we assume that a manager has read an E-mail
that he has not.  Of course if he responds that he has when he really didn't
read it, then he is gone.  But blaming him when he opens an E-mail and can't
read it immediately, (which would happen quite often) is not fair to him and
not acceptable to the organization.  So I have to have POSITIVE, ACTIVE
confirmation from each manager that the message was read, not a PASSIVE
action that tells me that the E-mail was opened.

My question was how to make this efficient.  Making 50 calls is not
efficient. Checking for 50 individual replies is not efficient.  I need to
send the message in bulk, (which I can do), but I need to be able to get a
quick report as to who has not READ the message, so that they can be called
within the appropriate time frame.




<Vanguard> wrote in message news:Afqdnas2nPwLUMvfRVn-uQ@comcast.com...
> "Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message
> news:4256c628_2@newspeer2.tds.net...
> > Don't assume too much.  These managers are responsible for several
> > handicapped people, if they open an E-mail and one of the people goes
> > into a
> > seizure, they very well may not read the E-mail and not get back to it
> > for
> > several hours.  If I assume that they read it at that time, it could
> > cause
> > very serious problems.  The current procedure is to actually call
> > every
> > manager on the phone to make sure they get the message.
> >
> >
> > <Vanguard> wrote in message news:FeydnV4PoofLX8vfRVn-pQ@comcast.com...
> >> "Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message
> >> news:4256b2bc_1@newspeer2.tds.net...
> >> > Thanks for your idea.  The only problem with this idea is I really
> >> > need to
> >> > have the manager DO something to confirm that the E-mail was
> >> > actually
> >> > read
> >> > by threm, not just displayed on the screen.
> >>
> >>
> >> So what is the difference between showing them an e-mail on their
> >> screen
> >> and they "reading" that e-mail.  They have their eyes open long
> >> enough
> >> to open the e-mail but then close their eyes while trying to figure
> >> out
> >> how to close that e-mail so they don't see it?  Opening the e-mail
> >> marks
> >> it as read.  If the recipient is playing games, so what?  They are
> >> still
> >> responsible for their e-mails, especially if required by company
> >> policy.
> >> These managers really have lifetime guaranteed positions where they
> >> cannot be fired for failing to do their job?
> >>
> >> Yeah, you could add voting buttons to the e-mail which would require
> >> the
> >> recipient perform an action, but the recipient already did perform an
> >> action: opening the e-mail!  They could easily just click on a voting
> >> button, too, and never bother to actually read what was displayed on
> >> their screen when they opened the e-mail.  If they are responsible
> >> for
> >> reading their e-mails and acting upon them then make it so.  You
> >> sound
> >> like the mommy that repeatedly threatens the kids that she is going
> >> to
> >> spank them but never does; i.e., a worthless threat.  Time to get
> >> daddy
> >> who actually does what he says; i.e., enforce the policy (but, at
> >> least,
> >> HAVE a policy to enforce).
>
>
> And clicking on a voting button won't work, either, because it is
> possible they click on the button before reading the e-mail but they go
> into a seizure before reading the message.  Even if you use
> HTML-formatted e-mails with a link or button control at the end with the
> idea that they would have to read through the e-mail beforehand, they
> could still just scroll to the bottom and click the link or button to
> perform the acknowledge before reading the e-mail (but never get around
> to actually reading the message), much like the vast majority of users
> that check the box and click Continue when the EULA appears when
> installing software.  You cannot prevent a bomb from blowing up the
> building right after someone opened an e-mail.
>
> E-mail is not a guaranteed communications medium because it is not an
> immediate or interactive *two-way* communications medium.  If you are
> using e-mail for critical scheduling, you're in for disappointment and
> limitations.  Also, it doesn't take being handicapped to get
> interrupted, dealing with an emergency, or other reason that prevents a
> recipient from reading an e-mail.  I doubt you are sending out 50
> e-mails and having 50 recipients all having seizures the moment they
> open their e-mails; otherwise, stop using those seizure-inducing
> graphics in your e-mails.  Even with non-handicapped recipients, you
> will still end up having to contact some of them that refuse or forget
> to click the voting button or to otherwise reply.  If that is too much
> work, you're stuck using read receipts to let you know only that they
> opened your e-mail.
>
> -- 
> ____________________________________________________________
> ** Post your replies to the newsgroup - Share with others **
> For e-mail Reply: remove "NIXTHIS", add "#VS811" to Subject.
> ____________________________________________________________
>


0
bobh9793 (5)
4/8/2005 6:54:07 PM
Robert Harrison <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote:

> Don't assume too much.  These managers are responsible for several
> handicapped people, if they open an E-mail and one of the people goes
> into a seizure, they very well may not read the E-mail and not get
> back to it for several hours.

What you describe is the desire to know that the mesage was opened, read, 
and understood.  There's no way to automate that.
-- 
Brian Tillman 

0
tillman1952 (16052)
4/8/2005 8:19:00 PM
Robert Harrison <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote:

> The SERIOUS problem comes if we assume that a manager has read an
> E-mail that he has not.  Of course if he responds that he has when he
> really didn't read it, then he is gone.  But blaming him when he
> opens an E-mail and can't read it immediately, (which would happen
> quite often) is not fair to him and not acceptable to the
> organization.  So I have to have POSITIVE, ACTIVE confirmation from
> each manager that the message was read, not a PASSIVE action that
> tells me that the E-mail was opened.

Then your company should publish a policy that says each person must RESPOND 
to the message.  You're describing a behavioral problem and expecting a 
techniological solution.
-- 
Brian Tillman 

0
tillman1952 (16052)
4/8/2005 8:21:43 PM
That's exactly what I am looking for, Brian.  What can I set up so that the
manager can respond when he reads the message, AND the supervisor can pull
up some kind of report that would show who has not responded, so he can
contact them in a different manner.

"Brian Tillman" <tillman1952@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ejDBaiHPFHA.2356@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Robert Harrison <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote:
>
> > The SERIOUS problem comes if we assume that a manager has read an
> > E-mail that he has not.  Of course if he responds that he has when he
> > really didn't read it, then he is gone.  But blaming him when he
> > opens an E-mail and can't read it immediately, (which would happen
> > quite often) is not fair to him and not acceptable to the
> > organization.  So I have to have POSITIVE, ACTIVE confirmation from
> > each manager that the message was read, not a PASSIVE action that
> > tells me that the E-mail was opened.
>
> Then your company should publish a policy that says each person must
RESPOND
> to the message.  You're describing a behavioral problem and expecting a
> techniological solution.
> -- 
> Brian Tillman
>


0
bobnews (3)
4/8/2005 9:20:04 PM
"Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message 
news:4256cf53_1@newspeer2.tds.net...
> Please, if you don't have anything constructive to add, let someone 
> else
> respond.

You want magic.  While software can be adaptive, it cannot overcome the 
decisions and actions of humans using the software.

> The SERIOUS problem comes if we assume that a manager has read an 
> E-mail
> that he has not.  Of course if he responds that he has when he really 
> didn't
> read it, then he is gone.  But blaming him when he opens an E-mail and 
> can't
> read it immediately, (which would happen quite often) is not fair to 
> him and
> not acceptable to the organization.  So I have to have POSITIVE, 
> ACTIVE
> confirmation from each manager that the message was read, not a 
> PASSIVE
> action that tells me that the E-mail was opened.

So what's wrong with my other suggestion of making them use voting 
buttons to report that they performed an additional action (of clicking 
the voting button) after opening the e-mail?  But, as said, nothing 
prevents them from clicking on the voting button and then getting 
interrupted and not reading the e-mail, but the e-mail will still be 
there on their return.  Of course, they could just click the voting 
button and pretend they read your e-mail, and the same for any mechanism 
that does what you've asked for.  Nothing you can put into an e-mail 
client or a message will force the user's eyeballs across the sentences 
in your message and release the clamps holding them into their chair 
until they read it all.

If you cannot get your managers to read their e-mails, click on voting 
buttons, or send a required reply, you have a bigger behavioral problem 
with your managers than just with them not reading their e-mails when 
first opened or returning to them later should they have been 
interrupted.  We've had tornado alerts that forced us to scoot down to 
the basement but that doesn't relinquish our responsibility upon 
returning to our desks to handle e-mails that we might've already 
opened.  Interruptions are a normal work event, not an abnormality.  You 
are trying to make a behavioral change in your managers by throwing 
software at the problem.  These managers are adults, right?

0
Vanguard
4/9/2005 4:47:37 AM
>> maybe you could embed a unique *code word* and *date* in the subject
>> line of all the email going to the managers. You could then write a
>> procedure in Access to examine your Outlook inbox and search the
>> subject lines of all messages for this unique code. 

> Thanks, I'll look into that option.

If you can sufficiently control the Outlook configurations, there are other
options. The "read" confirmation gets sent out when the message gets marked
as being read. In my configuration this happens when I go from that message
to another (not sure this can be changed). So the "read" confirmation
doesn't get sent out when I open the message, it gets sent out when I go to
another message, that is, when I "close" it. Which would avoid the
problematic scenarios you described earlier.

An additional safeguard could be (again if you can control the individual
Outlook configurations), that all Outlooks are configured to ask the user
whether to send out confirmation emails. Then you have, besides the
notification still being initiated when going from the message to another,
an active feedback.

Experiment with Tools | Options | Preferences | E-mail Options... |
Tracking Options... | Ask me before sending a response. Setting this and
then sending yourself messages that require receipts gives you an
information when the different receipts (delivery receipts and read
receipts) get processed.

At least the way it is set up here, it is not possible to accidentally open
an email and have a read receipt sent while I'm away from my computer,
without 1) going from that email to the next (which kind of assumes that I
have read it) and 2) giving my consent that the confirmation message should
get sent.

AFAIK, 1) is independent of the Outlook configuration options, kind of
hardcoded into Outlook, and 2) is dependent on the configuration item I
mentioned above.

Gerhard
0
gefiedler (4)
4/9/2005 12:58:16 PM
Bob H <bobnews@tds.net> wrote:

> That's exactly what I am looking for, Brian.  What can I set up so
> that the manager can respond when he reads the message, AND the
> supervisor can pull up some kind of report that would show who has
> not responded, so he can contact them in a different manner.

Nothing in Outlook.  Outlook cannot address behavioral issues.  You need a 
published policy from management.
-- 
Brian Tillman 

0
tillman1952 (16052)
4/9/2005 7:51:43 PM
Thanks for all the suggestions.  None addressed the specific issue I asked
about, so we will continue to use our current procedures until we find some
better solution.  Thanks again.

Bob

"Brian Tillman" <tillman1952@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%230P$T2TPFHA.1268@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
> Bob H <bobnews@tds.net> wrote:
>
> > That's exactly what I am looking for, Brian.  What can I set up so
> > that the manager can respond when he reads the message, AND the
> > supervisor can pull up some kind of report that would show who has
> > not responded, so he can contact them in a different manner.
>
> Nothing in Outlook.  Outlook cannot address behavioral issues.  You need a
> published policy from management.
> -- 
> Brian Tillman
>


0
bobnews (3)
4/9/2005 11:38:30 PM
"Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message
news:4256c628_2@newspeer2.tds.net...
> Don't assume too much.  These managers are responsible for several
> handicapped people, if they open an E-mail and one of the people goes into
a
> seizure, they very well may not read the E-mail and not get back to it for
> several hours.

Well, not assuming too much, how likely is it that a person will have a
siezure in the time between a manager opening an e-mail and completing the
task of reading it? Statistically speaking?

My suggestion? Create a "I've read it" button at then end of the e-mail and
tell them to use it. Call the ones that didn't.


0
Peter
4/10/2005 1:05:15 AM
Thanks Peter,

That's what I want to do.  But how do I compile a list of who did click the
"I've read it" button.  That's my original question.


"Peter D" <please@.sk> wrote in message
news:fZ_5e.944261$6l.473609@pd7tw2no...
> "Robert Harrison" <bobh@wolv.tds.net> wrote in message
> news:4256c628_2@newspeer2.tds.net...
> > Don't assume too much.  These managers are responsible for several
> > handicapped people, if they open an E-mail and one of the people goes
into
> a
> > seizure, they very well may not read the E-mail and not get back to it
for
> > several hours.
>
> Well, not assuming too much, how likely is it that a person will have a
> siezure in the time between a manager opening an e-mail and completing the
> task of reading it? Statistically speaking?
>
> My suggestion? Create a "I've read it" button at then end of the e-mail
and
> tell them to use it. Call the ones that didn't.
>
>


0
bobnews (3)
4/10/2005 3:24:54 PM
Reply:

Similar Artilces:

Looking for an e-commerce / e-store solution interfacing w/ CRM (& GP if possible)
We are a software company (and MS certified partner) which is in the process of implementing Dynamics CRM for our own use. We need to find an e-store package which will interface with Dynamics CRM. The shopping cart requirements are trivial, and credit card processing is very standard. The most important thing for us is that when a customer registers at the e-store to download a demo, their account information should appear in CRM as a lead with an opportunity. It would be a big plus if the invoicing info could be passed on to Great Plains, as well. We willing to do customization ...

POP connector
Hi, I'm a total newbee to Exchange! I've just installed SBS 2003 and configured the POP3 Connector in Exchange to retrieve mail messages from the POP mailbox to my Exchange mailbox. Everything works fine besides that all mail messages get the date from synhronization in stead of the actual mail message date. Can this be configured so the date of a mail message in the Exchange mailbox is the same as the actual date of the mail message in the POP mailbox? Thx, Dennieku On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 08:13:50 +0200, "Dennieku" <dennieku@hotmail.com> hired a team of monkey...

smpt pbroblem: some e-mail addresses get stuck
Hi all, I have got the following problem. For about 95% of our outbound mail everything works fine. But there are e-mail addresses where we cannot send mail to. If I try sending to this accounts by hotmail, the mail reaches the recipient just fine. In SMTP queue the message keeps on retrying and after a while it delivers a NDR to the sender. In de message tracking centre one of the last item is: SMTP: Message Routed and Queued for Remote Delivery. After a while of course the last item is the creation of the NDR. In the SMTP log file nothing is recorded for that message. Does anybody ha...

How can I apply rules on read email only?
I have an extenive list of mail sorts, but I would like them to run only after I have read my mail. I also have screening tools for deletes, and junk mail and presorts for mail that I don't reglarly read. In order to sort the read mail now, I have to manuallly got into rules and turn on the rules for one pass on the mail at the end ot the day to pick up the mail that I have read. It would be nice to be able to "turn on all rules now" or to have them automaically screen the read mail when I start up Outlook. Any workarounds for this? I am just a few months into using Outlo...

E Mail Link
I have an organization roster file which includes a listing of E Mail addresses. When I enter an address, it normally displays as a link in blue. If I click on it, the message window opens. Lately, my additions do not display as links. How can I change this. Bernie Beal bquest@optonline.net Is it a display problem--the links still work, but the formatting isn't pretty? If yes, select that troublesome range and format|style|and choose hyperlink Bernie Beal wrote: > > I have an organization roster file which includes a listing of E Mail > addresses. When I enter an address...

Reading one Record at a time till i reach EOF in VC++ using ODBC
Hi, i am working on Vc++6.0. I hve a req where in i need to read one record at a time till i reach EOF from the database.Can anyone tell me how to do this Very urgent Thanks Use CDatabase and CRecordSet classes. // Embed a CDatabase object // in your document class CDatabase m_dbCust; // Connect the object to a // read-only data source where // the ODBC connection dialog box // will always remain hidden m_dbCust.OpenEx( _T( "DSN=MYDATASOURCE;UID=JOES" ), CDatabase::openReadOnly | CDatabase::noOdbcDialog ); CRecordSet rs;rs.m_pDatabase=&m_db...

my error or Windows Mail bug?
I'm running Windows Mail on Vista Ultimate SP2 and have no explanation for Windows Mail's behaviour: - I have three email addresses, all at the same provider. - I had in my Windows Mail (not Live Mail) installed two rules for incoming mails, where the first one deletes mails directly on the server for a list of twelve sender names, and the second one moves mails from a specified sender into a specified folder. - I noticed that a client's mail to one of my addresses didn't receive me. Then he sent a mail to each of my three addresses, and only two received me....

How do I add a location to send/receive mail to?
The error message I get when I try to open my Outlook program says that I need to add a location to send/receive mail to but I can't figure out how to do that. It then asks if I want to open my default File System folder instead -- but if I click yes, Outlook opens with no way to send/receive mail and none of my old settings (folders, contacts, etc.). Does anyone know how to add a location and what that location should be? I feel as though I must have accidentally deleted an important file. Thank you. It's looking for your .PST file -- somehow Outlook has lost its link...

Cancelling Read Receipts
I recently sent out an email to a large distribution list. Unfortunately the read receipt was on at the time. Is there a way to cancel the read receipt. In the meantime, I've put in a rule to remove the emails as they come in, but I'd like to know if there is any way of cancelling the read receipt after a message has been sent. No, it's now controlled by the receiver. -- Robert Sparnaaij [MVP-Outlook] www.howto-outlook.com Tips of the month: -Navigation Pane Tips & Tricks -Create an Office XP CD slipstreamed with Service Pack 3 ----- "Cal" <anonymous@di...

at least one recipient does not have an e-mail error
This error message continues to show up after our upgrade from CRM3 to CRM4: At least one recipient does not have an e-mail address or is marked as "Do Not Allow" e-mail. It happens in emails and appointments that I've noticed so far. It can happen to an appointment when only one user is both the required attendee and the regarding person. I have looked for any missing emails in the user records, and the email is there. The user is capable of receiving emails. I have looked for inactive and active contacts, and open and closed leads to see if there is another object wi...

Outlook Express 6- Compacted, Where has mail gone?
Hi, Outlook suddenly decided, after never doing it before, to automatically schedule a compaction of all my mail files. There is loads of mail I need access to, how can I go about getting it back? Thanks J Try posting this in an Outlook Express news group - this is not one of = them. Outlook is a part of Microsoft Office and is what this group supports. Outlook Express is a part of Internet Explorer and has its own news = groups. You can also find some good Outlook Express information here: http://insideoe.tomsterdam.com --=81 Milly Staples [MVP - Outlook] Post all replies to the...

Re: Emails won't mark as read in public folder
Support-Call answer from Microsoft: Is there a way to have a public folder keep track of Marked as read messages for all users viewing that folder. - example: if 1 user marks a message as read, it will mark it as read for any user looking at that PF message 1. This in not a functionality provided and is by design. 2. It may be possible to write an event sink script. Basically - if the Read/Unread processing is turned off for a folder (checkbox unchecked in 2000 or the PR_DISABLE_PERUSER_READ PTag is set to True) then you will see that any messages going into that folder are always UNREAD. ...

How do I get the summary view of folders under a mail account?
How can I get the summary view of folders under a mail account like I could in OE? Please refer to screenshot: http://i447.photobucket.com/albums/qq194/nanakinoir/OESummaryPanel.png In this summary view, I could change the synchronization settings for all the folders in batch and see how many messages are in each folder. I can't seem to do this in WLM. Sorry, Windows Live Mail doesn't have that feature. --=20 Gary VanderMolen, Microsoft MVP (Mail) http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/default.aspx/profile/vandermolen "nanakinoir" <nanakinoir@discussion...

Reply All Displays My E-Mail Address
When I hit reply all to an e-mail that was sent to me (with addresses in the To and CC list) my e-mail address appears in the address list. Based on my testing it seems to occur only when my name appears in the CC list. In other words, when my e-mail address is in the CC list and I hit the Reply All button, my name also appears in the CC list. I do not want this behaviour. Is there a setting that I can set so that my name does not appear in the cc list ? Still no response for this issue. Has anyone seen this issue ? >-----Original Message----- >When I hit reply all to an e-...

Mail Merge Issue
When I connect my word label template to my excel database, I get the same label (name,address, etc.) on 3 seperate labels. When I open the data file up in the edit mode, while in Word, triplicates, duplicates, etc. do not appear, so I'm confused. How do I correct this please? Thank you. -- Paul ...

Windows E-mail vs Outlook E-mail
I am using Windows E-mail for my e-mails. However, when I want to reply to a link to an e-mail address (eg. help@whatever), it reverts (?) to Outlook e-mail and won't let me send message. It says I need a certificate to sent a message from Outlook e-mail. How do I get it to stop doing that? What is a certificate for Outlook 2007 and do I have to pay for this certificate? Thank you gypsylady wrote: > I am using Windows E-mail for my e-mails. There is no such product. There is Outlook - the topic of THIS newsgroup. There is Windows Mail which is the e-mail client included i...

problems in mailing from word via outlook all 2007
I cannot mail anything from any program, outlook 2007 does not start if i click on send email. Also i cannot mail from word, excel etc. There is no error message. I had the same problem once in office 2003 and had to run fixmapi. I cannot find it on my computer now (vista and office 2007) Is there an other way to rebuild MAPI Thanks Hans hans <hans_jeucken@hotmail.com> wrote: > I cannot mail anything from any program, outlook 2007 does not start > if i click on send email. > Also i cannot mail from word, excel etc. There is no error message. Unless Outlook is running, ...

sending mail from Word to OWA: screenshots gone
Environment: Exchange 2003, OWA, Outlook 2003, Word 2003. We are having issues with pictures in emails. A user writes a text in Word and adds screenshots. He then sends the text, not as attachment but as message body. In Outlook: all screenshots are visible. In OWA: some screenshots are gone. I already discovered a difference: when screenshots are added as inline objects, they are visible in OWA. If they are in front of text (or some other kind of floating layout), they are invisible. Also when this email is forwarded from within OWA, other pictures become invisible. However they are still...

Sending e-mail and mime
I recently downloaded all upgrades to my office 2000 Outlook. Since that time when I send e-mails it sends 2 or 3 of the same message all of which arrive as garbled messages. This does not happen in a staight text meassage only when there is an attachment (word, excel & acrobat etc). I have sent the same messages from Outlook Express and all is well. When they arrive there is a reference to "mime". Thanks John ...

Mail rules with multiple conditions in subject/body (OR vs AND)
Using Outlook 2007. I need a mail rule that runs if the subject contains "apples" AND "oranges" AND the body contains "bananas" (it's okay if bananas is also in the subject). But when creating rules, the conditions automatically become "OR" statements and there seems to be no way to change them to "AND" statements. Does anyone know a way around this? Thank you! You'll have to create additional rules. For an example see; http://www.msoutlook.info/question/220 -- Robert Sparnaaij [MVP-Outlook] Coauthor, Configuri...

Outlook Prompts for E-mail Account and Password Even Though "Save Password" Has Been Checked (XP)
The OS is XP Pro. One user, Adminstrator, password login. I can't recall if it's Outlook 2000 or 2003. Multiple e-mail accounts. Every time he gets his e-mail, Outlook prompts for the account logins and passwords. He checks the "save password" box and it gets the mail. But the next time he gets his e-mail, Outlook prompts for the accountnames and passwords again. Any idea why? Peter, I have had the same problem ever since I upgraded to Outlook 2002. Hope someone has the answer. This also happens on several of my web based email sites. I check the Remember my login and p...

mail zonder inhoud
Soms krijg ik in Windows mail een mailtje zonder inhoud. Letterlijk staat er niks in dus en kan ik hem ook niet lezen. Waar ligt dit aan en hoe kan ik zo'n mailtje "restaureren "? ...

Read OLE Object field to image ?
I have an Access database (images.mdb) that has 2 columns: one is the id of the picture (an integer) and one (column named picture) is a field of type OLE Object which contains an image stored as on OLE Object (it can store jpg, bmp, gif, but I don't know what image is stored inside). I want to retrieve the picture stored in the database and identified by a given id and display it in a web page (.aspx). I write in Visual C# and use Visual Studio .NET, but it does not matter, VB answers are just as wellcome. My problem is that this OLE Object field does not contain just the raw array of byt...

SBS 2003 And Outlook Web mail
Hi I have a SBS 2003 server that is being very flaky with the outlook 2003 web mail. At first I thought that there might be a licence issue, but there are 40 CALs and only 24 users right now. There seems to be no reasoning why some users can and others can't access as everyone is configured the same way. I can access the webmail page without a problem internally and externally. Some users work all the time others only some others not at all. I am getting no Event errors in the Event Logs. There is a large part of the staff that travel and use this so a solution is needed...

Exchange Only mail not going.
Server = 2003 Std Exchange = 2003 Std Clients using SMTP & POP to/from various ISP's, Exchange is the central archive for company. But will eventually be ONLY email. Email addressed via Exchange goes nowhere. Some sit in X400 queue, others just vanish. Email from Administrator account. (No SMTP to ISP, ONLY an Exchange account) just vanishes. Not on any queue, but Outlook claims it was sent. Email To Administrator From Administrator using X400 address vanishes Email To Administrator From Administrator using SMTP address vanishes. Email To working client From Administrator using X400 o...