Here’s how people usually nag. It doesn’t work.
You send an email to 30 people. “We need [whatever — answers to the auditor’s letter; confirmations for Sarbanes-Oxley reporting; you name it] by October 30. Please respond before then. Thanks.”
A recipient gets this and thinks: “Email. Pain in the neck. Response not due for a while. Fuggedaboudit.” Or, maybe: “Email. Pain in the neck. Might as well get it out of the way now. Respond.”
Context Windows In Legal AI And Why Content Still Determines Quality
Legal teams ask a practical question. If large language models are so capable, why does legal AI still depend on curated content, and why does surfacing that content matter so much?
Two weeks later, the nagger sends another email: “Thanks to those of you who have already responded to my request. To the rest of you, this is a reminder that your response is due by October 30.”
A recipient gets this and thinks: “Email. Pain in the neck. Did I respond to this or not? Damned if I know. Maybe I did. Fuggedaboudit.”
On October 29, the nagger sends the last reminder: “To those of you who have not yet responded, please remember that your response is due tomorrow. Thanks.”
The recipient gets this and thinks: “Email. Pain in the neck. Did I respond to this or not? Damned if I know. Maybe I did. Fuggedaboudit.”
Heading To Legalweek? Come Join Above The Law!
Meet the team in NYC at our Monday night happy hour — 3/9 at 7pm. RSVP required.
The deadline comes and goes, and the nagger can’t figure out why everyone didn’t respond.
This is the way 95 percent of the world nags, because 95 percent of the world doesn’t want to take the time to figure out who has already responded and who hasn’t. And that’s why this kind of nagging doesn’t work.
Look: You know who responded to your request and who didn’t (or you could learn this very easily). And nagging only works when a person knows that he or she is being nagged. So tell a person that you’re not following up with the world generally; you’re talking to the recipient in particular.
Thus, the first reminder email (sent after two weeks) should be addressed only to the people who did not respond to the original email: “You have not yet responded to my request for [whatever]. Please remember to respond when you get a chance, but no later than October 30. Thanks.”
The recipient gets this and thinks: “Shoot! I forgot all about that. It’s a pain in the neck, but I better respond to that thing.”
And the final reminder email should be yet more pointed: “Richard: The other 29 people who we asked to [do whatever] have all responded. You’re the last man standing. Please do respond before tomorrow’s deadline. Thanks.”
That nagging works. The recipient thinks: “Oh, my God! I forgot about it again! And I’m the only one who hasn’t responded. I better answer the damned thing.” And he does.
Presto! Effective nagging.
That’s one example.
Here’s another way to nag effectively: Public shame.
Ask a person (by email) to do something.
He doesn’t, of course.
Nag once, again just to the person you’re asking to do something.
He doesn’t do it, of course.
The next time, copy someone a step higher up in the organization — his boss, or your boss, or both bosses, or whoever, just so the recipient is being publicly shamed: “Richard: I wrote to you on October 1 and 15 asking you to [do whatever]. Our response was due yesterday, October 30. It’s really quite important that we get our collective response in on time. Please respond as soon as possible. Thanks.”
Are you being a little bit jerky? Sure.
But was the other guy being a little bit jerky by not doing whatever you asked (and which only he was able to do)? Also yes.
And you did remind him once, without implicitly telling his boss that he’s a laggard. Now it’s time to get him to act.
So nag. But nag effectively.
If you’re gonna do it, it might as well work.
Mark Herrmann spent 17 years as a partner at a leading international law firm and is now responsible for litigation and employment matters at a large international company. He is the author of The Curmudgeon’s Guide to Practicing Law and Inside Straight: Advice About Lawyering, In-House And Out, That Only The Internet Could Provide (affiliate links). You can reach him by email at [email protected].