Fast answer isn’t always appropriate

DEAR MISS MANNERS: From the perspective of a retired business executive, I do not find complaints about delays in hiring decisions unusual.

As things go, a job is offered to the winning candidate, and the employer waits for that candidate to accept before posting the job as filled. Should that candidate not accept or fail the drug testing, etc., the employer then has candidates two, three and so forth to fall back on.

I firmly believe that many of today’s young men and women are so impatient that they expect immediate gratification on so many fronts. Society has taught these folks these bad habits and that behavior is, unfortunately, rampant.

Just look around the dining room during your next meal out and witness all of the patrons who are preoccupied with their texting, emailing, etc., during a meal. Disgusting!

Has the advent of instant messaging changed the time allowed to respond to business or personal correspondence?

GENTLE READER: Certainly. An American gentleman writing to his tailor in London in the 19th century had to be content to wait the months it could take a letter to reach its destination. Technology today makes it possible to respond almost instantaneously, and this has indeed shortened what is considered to be an acceptable wait.

But that is not the only factor. As you note, some delays are dictated by considerations other than the speed of the delivery service. A lady may wish to consider before accepting a proposal of marriage. If she requires an unusually long period for reflection, Miss Manners suggests she send an intermediate communication naming the time at which an answer may be expected.

The same rule may be applied to business correspondence.