Human Resources News & Insights

Home : In this week's e-newsletter

In this week's e-newsletter

Off-the-record e-mail: Valuable business tool or dangerous toy?

by July 8, 2010 2 Comments

There’s a new software service that allows employees to communicate via a form of e-mail that leaves no electronic trace. Is that a good thing?

By now, everybody’s all too aware that traditional e-mails just don’t go away — even if you’ve deleted them and emptied the trash bin, those pesky missives lurk on company servers. And often, a few ill-chosen words in a forgotten e-mail can come back to haunt an employer in court.

E-mails’ also expensive. It’s estimated that the combined costs of energy, IT staff and storage can run up to about two cents a message.

So now comes VaporStream, a messaging service that describes itself as a form of digital “conversation”. Here’s how it works, according to a company press release:

A VaporStream e-mail conversation does not leave a residual message and vaporizes after it is read.  VaporStream e-mails cannot be cc:ed, forwarded, saved or printed so the conversation remains with the respondents and avoids miscommunication since other people don’t see “just one part” of the conversation.

Point, counterpoint

An interesting idea. A few pros and cons occur to us:

Pros:

  • “Vanishing” e-mail could encourage more candid conversations between employees on all levels, eliminating the fear that what they blurt out in a message could come back to haunt them
  • VaporStream could save IT costs, and
  • The service could help companies avoid the hassles of the e-discovery process — you can’t provide employees’ attorneys with e-mails that no longer exist.

Cons:

  • The lack of the threat of repercussions for rash or inappropriate e-mail statements could lead to, well, a deluge of rash and inappropriate statements — which could mean an increase in workplace conflict
  • VaporStream isn’t free; there’s a charge of $7.50 per month per user, and
  • Isn’t it possible that use of VaporStream might be construed by a judge as a way to circumvent the e-discovery process?

Tell us what you think: Is this form of e-mail a useful business tool? Sound off in the comments section below.

Categories: In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Management
Tags: , ,

Other Posts You Might Like

Subscribe Today

Get the latest and greatest Human Resources news and insights delivered to your inbox.
  • JohnnyHR

    I don’t like the vaporstream idea. I think the lurking threat of permanency keeps some employees in line and more likely to correspond in a civil, business-like manner.

  • Guy

    I have no doubt that this technology has its uses. I assume that Vapor Stream distilled down all possible cost elements to determine the cost of email. However, did they subtract out the costs that would not be eliminated under their program? There is still the email time, whether the emails are saved or not? There is the monthly cost of their service. While some arguments can be made that the storage and other archiving costs are unnecessary, on the other hand, what are the savings gained by having documentation to combat false allegations and disputes?

    Practically speaking, is one required to choose which service to use beforehand – - email that can be saved versus email that cannot? Do we have to click an option? I see another potential disaster if someone fails to click the proper choice. They have been more opinionated than they would otherwise be in their email but erroneously click the standard email choice and the message is forever saved. Better to not have the choice in that case. Alternatively, it would be a similar tragedy if I composed and sent a message intended to be saved with much time and effort spent and it is mistakenly sent as a disappearing email.

    While the vapor stream message cannot be saved or copied, what prevents the receiver from simply photographing the screen before he closes it?

    As we learn too often, as soon as a technological break-through is made, before long a counter-measure is created. In this case, it would be useful for a company to create a means to lift the information from the screen and save it, and sell that technology. I would certainly expect an ambitious computer whiz to tackle that problem forthwith. That creates a headache for Vapor Stream which passes on the cost of the cure to the users. And so on and so forth. This is not unlike having to continually update our anti-virus software.

    If confidential and candid remarks were made face-to-face or by phone, no record would remain and there would be no need for a new chargeable technology. In the final analysis, this is where those conversations should more logically be made.