may_yong@nus.edu.sg
todate Thu, Sep 27, 2007at 4:26pm
subject Centre For The Arts FOH: Interviews
mailed-by nus.edu.sg
Thank you for interest in joining the Centre For The Arts (CFA) Front-of-House Usher Team at the UCC. You have been shortlisted for an interview next week.
Available Interview Time Slots:
Interviews have been scheduled at 15-minute intervals and are still available at the following times
Mon 1st Oct - Wed 3rd Oct: 4- 6pm (i.e. 4.00pm, 4.15pm...5.45pm)
Fri 5th Oct: 3-6pm (i.e. 3.00pm, 3.15pm... 5.45pm)
Setting Up your Interview Slot:
Please respond to this email with '010207' , followed by your name and contact number in the subject header.
Because of the high number of applicants, please then indicate your top three preferences for interview time slots in the body of your email and we will try our best to match your times ( i.e. 4.30pm Wed 03/10, 4.30pm Thurs 03/10).
Interviews will be held at the University Cultural Centre. We will get back to you as soon as possible with a confirmed time slot, as well as inform you of the assigned interview room. All time slots will be allocated on a first-come-first-serve basis.
If you are unavailable to schedule an appointment in the provided dates but would still like to be interviewed if we schedule more interviews in the upcoming weeks, kindly respond to this email with 'Not Available', followed by your name and contact number on the subject header, and we will contact you accordingly.
We hope to hear from you shortly.
Cheers,
May
May YONG (Ms) :: Management Trainee - Event Management & Operations (Venues) :: NUS Centre For the Arts :: National University of Singapore :: University Cultural Centre, 50 Kent Ridge Crescent, Singapore 119279 :: 65-6516-3784 (DID) :: 65-874-1002 (Fax) :: may_yong@nus.edu.sg (E) :: www.nus.edu.sg/cfa/UCC (W) :: Company Registration No: 200604346E
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an email I received shortly after I applied to join as an Usher for the NUS University Cultural Centre. I will now analyse the letter using the 7Cs.
- Courtesy
The letter failed to address me personally at the opening. Instead of just jumping straight into the letter proper, she should have started off with something like “Dear Ms Ling”.
It however, did use an appropriate tone and positive wording. The necessary details were given without being too long winded or incoherent.
- Correctness
This letter is written in Formal English. There is however a particular grammatical error. From the last sentence of the third last paragraph, “first-come-first-serve” should instead be “first come, first served”.
Certain sentences, like that in the last paragraph, are, however, too long and should be shortened to preciseness.
- Conciseness
Like I mentioned earlier, certain sentences are too long-winded. The last paragraph especially.
There are also redundant words in certain sentences. For example, from the sentence “Because of the high number of applicants, please then indicate your top three...”, “please then” could just be shortened to “please”.
- Clarity
The letter is clear and straightforward. Only the necessary details are mentioned. Ideas presented are concise and effective.
- Coherence and Cohesion
Everything mentioned in the letter was coherent and straight to the point.
However, it did not display cohesion throughout. For the two paragraphs that talked about the interview timeslot allocation, they could be brought together into one whole paragraph. The sentence, “Interviews will be held at the University Cultural Centre.”, should be placed after that.
- Concreteness
The letter is has concreteness in terms of the information given as well as the way it is presented. The sentences used are impactful and effective.
- Completeness
The letter is rather complete since it addresses the main issue and the tone of writing is neutral yet informative. There are, however, some spelling errors and some mistakes made in terms of addressing the recipient.
Hi Shu Ting,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that courtesy was observed in the email although it has missed out on the salutation. This email was probably mass-sent to all the applicants and a salutation like “Dear Applicant” may suffice.
Secondly, this email was rather complete with all the interview timeslots and instructions to guide you in responding to the email. However, this completeness may have led to the email not being concise enough and I agree that some sentences could be shortened. Take for instance, paragraph 6 could be shorten into “we will get back to you by [date] with time and location of the interview” instead of its long-winded manner.
Lastly, despite being on the long-winded side, this email was clear and the recipient can easily understand the instructions and reply accordingly.
Cheers,
wanyee
Hi Shu Ting,
ReplyDeleteYour effort in producing an exhaustive address to the positive and less-acceptable points in the reply is nothing short of a conscientious accomplishment! You have pointed out all the good points as well as taken note of all the less desirable aspects of the reply which enabled readers such as myself to appreciate the layout and the 7C’s in writing a formal correspondence.
The subject was aptly named. Though May did not include a personal touch by addressing you by a salutation and your surname, she congratulated you in being short-listed for an interview in a courteous tone.
The adept use of bold subheadings and underlined details within paragraphs places an emphasis on important points May wanted the reader to note.
As you have pointed out, there was certain awkwardness in grammatical utilization strewn throughout the email. Instead of “Because of the high number of applicants, please then indicate your...”, a more appropriate way is to replace “because” with “due to” and “high” with “large” in order to portray more professionalism in the usage of the language.
In the opening address, May should have said ‘Thank you for YOUR/EXPRESSING interest” as the sentence sounded incorrect with the omission of the capitalised words.
Overall, Shu Ting has provided an elaborate and concise autopsy of the reply.
Regards,
Desmond
PS:did you change the person's name? May Yong sounds rather perculiar when pronounced in chinese!
Hi Shu Ting,
ReplyDeleteThanks for the comment on my blog! At first I thought it was an informal letter until I saw the formal signing off and thought it could qualify as a formal business correspondence. =x
I think you made a very good analysis of this business letter and I actually agree with every details that you pointed out in your 7Cs analysis.
I believe a email can be both informative and concise at the same time. I only find fault with its last paragraph as the organisation of the points is very messy. No correct puntuactions are used and this makes it hard for readers to digest it at first time.
Other than the grammatical mistakes and organisation of points, this letter is straight to the point and does provide clear instructions to applicants.
Hope the interview will turn out good for you! :)
Regards,
Huiwen