In the Briefing Room: SenderOK
In the Briefing Room: SenderOK
We recently took a look at SenderOK, an e-mail sorting and management system. SenderOK uses algorithms to sort e-mails according to a variety of criteria including how often the sender’s e-mail messages are answered, if the e-mail originates from a domain that the user has recently been to, and the recipient’s e-mail reading habits (i.e. deleting without reading or manual importance designation). If a sender’s e-mail is always opened or answered by the recipient or others using SenderOK, then the system will place the e-mail in a folder for important messages. Conversely, if the sender’s email is answered less frequently or often deleted without being opened, then it will be placed into the routine inbox. E-business card information is presented as well for each e-mail, in a box located on the upper right of the Outlook inbox, in a style similar to xobni.
SenderOK also allows companies to insert logos onto e-mail that appears in the inbox. For a monthly fee, a corporate logo will appear as the sender in the inbox, and the e-mail itself will be expedited to the inbox in an attempt to avoid the junk folder. To qualify for the logo, companies will have to comply with the Sender Policy Framework (SPF) and DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM), which assure the recipient that the e-mail is from a reputable source. Simply put, this aspect of the offering is designed to help senders stay out of the junk folder. SenderOK believes that the presence of a logo will dramatically increase the likelihood that the e-mail will be opened, a premise we sincerely doubt. In discussing this, my colleague Jonathan Spira suggested that replacing sender names with logos in the inbox may turn out to be as useful as third brake lights, which were found to be effective only when they were found on relatively few cars. If most e-mail arrives with logos, it will, similar to the third brake light, just become part of the scenery.
SenderOK addresses two different areas: e-mail sorting and management on one hand and adding corporate logos to expedite e-mail delivery on the other. However, we are a bit confused as to which direction SenderOK is focusing on. The most important area of opportunity for SenderOK (in our opinion) is the ability to intelligently sort e-mail and reduce information overload in the inbox. SenderOK shows promise in this respect, analyzing inbox behavior to determine the importance of e-mail and float the most critical to the top is a great idea, and SenderOK’s system seems to work rather well, albeit with limitations (it only analyzes behavior of others using SenderOK for example). Solving that problem for the end user and bringing discipline to the inbox would address a huge pain point in the enterprise. Unfortunately, SenderOK seems more focused on creating a corporate branding opportunity for e-mail rather than solving e-mail overload.
SenderOK also bills itself as a spam reduction mechanism, but we feel it falls short of the effectiveness of an appliance sitting on the edge of the network, such as IronPort. In addition, we think this may be a short lived opportunity, once everyone else figures out how to get their branding onto email, then whatever advantage there was will be rendered moot. SenderOK promises to keep “good” e-mail from being “spam-filtered” but “good” e-mail turns out to be a message coming from a company that is willing to pay the monthly fee. The benefit to users in terms of managing one’s e-mail inbox and spam seems specious at best, a real pity because a tool that actually delivers on what SenderOK promises would be of great benefit.
Cody Burke is a senior analyst at Basex.
March 13th, 2009 05:44
Thank you for the accurate description of the two different areas that SenderOK addresses.
Please note that the programming team themselves have concentrated on the Email overload issue. As a salesperson, I am on the monetization side. That is why my focus seemed divergent.
Perhaps the article could have ended with “maybe there should be a paid-for version of SenderOK that doesn’t give even authenticated corporate logo email a free pass”.
Because, depending on who is willing to pay for it, we have the technology to drastically reduce email overload including that which comes from white-listed corporations already being given a free pass by ISPs.
You identified a potential conflict but there are some points ameliorating your concerns:
1) While we (via a major email deliverability partner) would rescue email from paying customers from the spam-box, that is mostly already happening because firms like SuretyMail and ReturnPath have white-listed paying customers who have also agreed to proper codes of conduct including opt-out procedures. We would not rescue emails with no opt-out procedure for instance.
2) End-users are expected to value the anti-phishing email authentication aspect of the logo service. Phishers cannot buy “third brake lights” in this case. Their email would go logo-less plus, in the future, stand out against the background of authenticated logo email (consider how the Favicon is now expected in the URL header of websites).
3) SenderOK will rescue “good” email from the spam-box regardless of whether this act was paid for or not…and disreputable firms cannot pay our partners to spam through us. That line at the end might have said “some good email turns out to be a message coming from a company that is willing to pay”. The word “some” would make a world of difference in that sentence.
Because the corporations are already white-listed and being sent mostly to the Inbox via a large trusted email deliverability company and the ISPs that trust them, for the end-user, it is definitely a benefit to have their own requested good email rescued from the spam-box while phished email goes the other direction. And, of course, none of the paying white-listed customers are specifically directed toward SenderOK users.
September 28th, 2009 08:04
I would actually like to update the above if I can: the “rescue from spam function” always brings good email back to the inbox because the only people who can pay us to stay out of the spam box are those with whom users would have opted into and who can easily opt-out from. Thus, the above criticism wasn’t meaningful – it was just theoretical. This feature is a big plus. Google confirmed that recently when they said it wasn’t fair for people to click on “This is Spam” for stuff they opted into and can unsubscribe from in two seconds. It is similarly not fair to think of stuff one signed up for and can easily unsubscribe from as spam.
This feature is a major plus because everyone knows the productivity loss that comes from an important email getting stuck in a spam box and not being noticed for days. Confirmation emails often get stuck in spam and cause major productivity delays as a result.
There seem to be two schools of thought: those who feel more in the Inbox needs to go to the spam box and those who feel that it just isn’t worth it for a good email to be caught up in the spam box. SenderOK is the best of both worlds in that it will not prioritize any spam that makes it to the Inbox while it brings stuff you expect to get (and signed up for like Twitter notifications) into the Inbox (or rules folder) where it belongs (stuff that you can unsubscribe from simply doesn’t belong in the spam box).