Many of today’s businesses use e-mail as a primary mode of communication. New users and use cases, however, do not always fit the traditional paradigm of a “one-size-fits-all” messaging network. Many employees in the manufacturing, retail and service industries, for example, still do not have access to e-mail.

IT executives have traditionally cited three reasons for not extending e-mail to everyone. These reasons boil down to employee role, cost and system complexity.

The idea that “some employees do not need e-mail” is becoming obsolete. All employees can benefit from direct communication, and e-mail is an efficient way to deliver information.

Many HR departments have realized this as they extend online benefit portals, many of which require e-mail access for ID or notification purposes. For some companies, the elimination of paper and postage is a key directive that supports company goals and can justify e-mail access.

The issue of cost is another item that warrants analysis. Research suggests that the fully loaded cost of a proprietary e-mail system is around $150 per user/year. These costs are easily justified for “knowledge” workers, as their productivity is directly tied to the collaboration systems. For other workers whose need for e-mail is more casual, however, yet no less important, these costs can be a barrier to entry.

The last point is complexity, which arises as a platform is forced to scale beyond its initial design. Many organizations have designed their e-mail systems for their “power users” but not the entire organization. For these organizations, extending the messaging platform to everyone can be a problem.

An effective strategy for extending e-mail to everyone, while reducing costs, is to embrace the philosophy behind hybrid messaging. Hybrid messaging is founded on the proposition that not all employees require the same level of service. Separating users into groups and providing each with the appropriate tools is an effective way to reduce cost and complexity.

Once an organization realizes that not all users have the same requirements, alternative options can be explored. Open standards e-mail systems, with total cost of ownership figures of $45 per user/year, offer better cost models than proprietary e-mail systems. An organization that moves 10,000 users from a proprietary system to a hybrid messaging system can save $1,050,000 in a single year.

By leveraging a hybrid messaging model, users requiring high-collaboration features stay on the proprietary platform, while others (e.g., call center, customer service, manufacturing and retail workers) move to an open standards-based system. Both e-mail systems can share common infrastructures such as e-mail security gateways, directory systems and portals, while maintaining their respective cost structures

Alan Elliot is director of business development for Mirapoint, Sunnyvale, Calif.

For more information (click here)