Cultural Bias: A Discussion Around ISP and ESP Relations

Originally posted on Word to the Wise here following a discussion themed around ISP and ESP interactions
and communication gaps.

My take…

After reading Laura’s and Steve’s
posts on the gap between the “senders” and “receivers” (both excellent reads I
recommend if you haven’t already done so), it really made me think about why I
do what I do and why I think (hopefully not being too narcissistic here) that
I’m reasonably good at it.

I was formally educated and then broken in after school with the technology
world but have never considered myself a technology purist (I will never author
a C# book or program my own killer app). However, I also enjoy people and
working with (almost) all of them. Traditionally, these two skillsets have not
meshed well in the technology industry to a nontrivial level. So, when I went
into deliverability, I was intrigued by the fact that it is as much of a
technology, business, marketing and people facing genre as any. And, one of the
things I am highly grateful for was that I worked for a sender who really
seemed to get it. Of course there were marketing jerks and revenue driven
bullies there as well, but my management supported me in really trying to do
the right thing by the end email recipient (and in this case, customer).

This helped me shape my view of my role in deliverability and decide which
type I wanted to be. Mind you, I have never worked at an ISP. So, my bias is
towards the senders. If you have a management team that understands that
deliverability is not just a flashy word to throw around, push in prospects’
faces or otherwise excuse away as another service to potentially charge for
when not necessarily needed, you’re in a good place. But, you also have to
decide what you value as important and ethical for yourself. Unfortunately,
there are a lot of folks who are in the deliverability space not because they
like the work and are truly looking out for recipients, but rather (and as
Steve’s post touches) out there to make money doing anything they can to drive
revenue from their perspective without much respect or empathy for the person
on the other end of the mailbox. ESPs have been given a bad name in the
industry as the aggressors, those who are willing to use and abuse the email
ecosystem to get money with no respect to the common rules of “best practices”
or recipient perspective. Unfortunately, a lot of folks in the email receiving
world have adopted this as their stereotype and dismiss anyone trying to triage
a deliverability problem as one who is just wanting to get more emails in an
inbox..to generate more opens…to garner more clicks…and ultimately put more
cash in their pocket.

This is simply untrue. But, there are a lot of senders who do fit into this
category, unfortunately.

The same can be said of ISPs, who seem to be on the defensive all the time
and take every piece of incoming mail as having a negative relevancy score
attached to the intended recipient and make the sender pay (literally in terms
of some accreditation methods) to move towards what they perceive as a positive
and user wanted email. The sloppy ISPs rely heavily on using highly automated
systems to either do binary blocking outright on certain arbitrary indicators
in mail or simply throw their hands up and call anyone not sending a one to one
message from someone’s relative or friend spam. Again, though, this is an
unfair stereotype that doesn’t apply across the board. I work with many ISPs
that do take the time, effort and examination to help recipients get mail they
want instead of just outright declaring jihad on mass senders altogether. If
you pay close attention, these are also usually those who are very technically
savvy (and thus breed a desire to keep the internet a free and open exchange
for ideas to be messaged, including those that are marketing related and
wanted). I enjoy reading the information they post. Our conversations.
Listening to what they have to say. And in turn, I believe they do the same of
me since they know I’m more about letting numbers and actions speak for
themselves as opposed to trying to circumvent any process or “game” them.
Numbers and actions, for me, are about spam complaints being driven down, email
engagement being up, and benefit being gleaned from the messages sent via
whatever method is most appropriate. CNN, for example, sends me transactional
breaking news alerts. I may not read every one. And I certainly am not driven
to purchase or pay into a service as a result. But, I do enjoy getting these
and would be upset if that stream of information stopped. A lot of ISPs get
this – the implied and real value I have as a result of knowing what’s going on
in any facet of email communication when I don’t have a chance to proactively
find out myself.

The rub is that ESPs are paid money to send email (with their hue changing
based on types of email they send, the clients they onboard, adherence to their
own rules, etc.). But, we are paid to send email (notice “quantity” is
intentionally excluded from this sentence). It’s the core product of our
systems…deliver communication via electronic mail. ISPs are not paid to receive
email. Some ISPs are paid for the images or impressions they drop in which are
driven by the mail a user gets being the catalyst for the times they check
their mail. Or, some ISPs charge money for email (so in a sense, they are paid
to deliver within their own confines of what is spam or not to the customer).
Other ISPs just have email as an extension of their existing services (think
cable providers or cellular companies) which ultimately can be ear marked for
revenue.

So, not all senders are bad; neither are all ISPs good (and vice versa).
But, at the end of the day, I can honestly say I don’t have that many problems
when dealing with receivers since I tend to only really have a relationship
with those I believe are trying to do the right thing, like me, in ensuring
recipients get mail they want, need, or otherwise are just glad to have around.
I don’t need to be yelled at as an abuser of the internet because I’ve found a
living in sending email, as much as a mechanic does for contributing to global
warming for putting gasoline burning cars back on the road. Nor, do the ISPs
deserve to have fingers waved in their face either when, usually, they’re
trying to keep their recipients happy and not melt under the deluge of true
spam that technology has brought with it. I’m sure this will inspire some nasty
comments, or at the least, a nonplussed double take, but ISPs are businesses as
well. They are not run on cookies and rainbows. Same with ESPs. Finding a
balance between the two with corporate management pushing down and reinforcing
an intermediary relationship that doesn’t engage in an antagonistic or
adversarial role is what will win every time.

It’s about the people, the personalities, and a new industry that’s evolved
in the aftermath of the advent of spam and marketing mail. But, if your culture
is one which doesn’t fit what makes you feel you’re successful or back your
mores you’ve developed or adopted over the years, you must realize you’re
empowered to make yourself respected and happy. No one else, though. And, at
the end of the day, I think the issues between ISPs and ESPs not communicating
effectively is more about what the company culture is and how well (or not)
they respect and encourage their employees to drive for whatever measurement of
success you both share (be it money, recipient satisfaction, client
satisfaction, just putting in an honest day’s work, or the fact you get to work
from Punxsutawney).

Chris Wheeler
Director of Deliverability at Bronto
@ChrisAWheeler

Last 5 posts by Chris Wheeler

• What the !#$@ do I do with the headers? - April 19th, 2010
• Where the !#$@ are the headers? - March 29th, 2010
• Deliverability Forum: It's a Wrap! - January 11th, 2010
• Future of Deliverability: A Series - November 16th, 2009
• Cox has a Postmaster page - November 11th, 2009