It’s the start of the workday. You fire up your laptop, coffee in hand, and before you can even open your first document, Outlook greets you with a wall of unread messages. Somewhere in that pile might be the one update that truly matters—the scanned letter from a client, the urgent filing notice, the critical case alert. But it’s buried among newsletters, meeting invites, and endless “reply-alls.”
This is the paradox of email: professionals don’t want more of it, but they rely on it as the most reliable, trackable, and searchable channel. And nowhere is this tension clearer than in workflows like digital mail.
Each morning, post arrives at a firm and is scanned by the mailroom. The system must then notify the lawyer about the items waiting for them. The notification has to be timely—too late and the lawyer risks missing a deadline or delaying client communication. But at the same time, nobody wants to be bombarded with a separate email for each envelope scanned.
The Paradox of Email
Email is deeply embedded in professional life for a reason. It’s universal, reliable, timestamped, and easily searchable. For attorneys in particular, it carries a sense of permanence and trust that newer messaging tools struggle to match and there is a benefit to having everything in one place. Outlook isn’t just an inbox — it’s effectively the hub where work happens. Access to the DMS, case updates, client communications, system alerts and scanned post all funnel into the same place.
But that strength is also the weakness. The very ubiquity of email makes it a magnet for noise. Too many systems compete for space in the inbox. The result is a constant struggle: users want critical updates via email because they trust the channel, but they don’t want the inbox itself to become unmanageable.
Why Notifications Matter
In environments like law firms, the stakes around timeliness are particularly high. A missed client instruction, a delayed response to opposing counsel, or a late review of scanned post can have real consequences. Email notifications exist to prevent those slip-ups by putting essential information directly in front of the right person, at the right time.
Yet volume undermines this purpose. If every scanned letter generates its own email, lawyers quickly start ignoring them. If notifications are batched into digests, lawyers might not see urgent items until hours later. This tension between urgency and overload is at the heart of the design problem: the more email is used as a notification channel, the less effective it becomes.
Design Challenges
One of the hardest parts of designing for email notifications is figuring out how to balance immediacy with restraint.
On one hand, notifications must be timely. On the other hand, too many individual notifications quickly devolve into noise, and the important messages are once again lost in the clutter.
Digest emails help provide a solution, batching notifications into a single summary. But this creates its own difficulty: when should that digest go out? If it’s sent once a day, a lawyer might wait hours for something they needed immediately. If it’s sent too frequently, the digest becomes just another flood of messages. For a digital mailroom solution, sending the digest at the right time will depend on how long the digitization process takes, and that will depend on how much mail was received and how many recipients received mail that day.
A digest should also offer the right level of detail so that the recipient can triage quickly:
- Is this something I can safely pass over?
- Is this something I should forward or delegate?
- Is this something I personally need to handle today?
Striking that balance is delicate. Too much information in a digest makes it unreadable; too little forces the user to click into every item.
Author
