By Caroline M. Cole
Those familiar with Jane Austen novels have inevitably read about the importance of an invitation. Whether to a private ball, a wedding, or an afternoon tea, invitations were a token of the sender’s esteem for their recipients, prompting recipients to return the admiration by responding immediately—either through a letter or in a verbal message that was conveyed to the prospective host by the one who delivered the invitation. By expressing gratitude for the honor of having been invited and indicating availability for attendance, the recipient’s response demonstrated “good breeding,” an awareness of the civilities and graces of society. And though tempting to dismiss these exchanges as fussy or elitist, such courtesies were not exclusive to the wealthy. Reputations in all social classes were contingent upon the ways a person responded to and interacted with others, creating environments that made RSVP notations superfluous. Yet even today, when invitations explicitly ask recipients to confirm their availability, conference coordinators, wedding planners, holiday party organizers, and hosts of all kinds find themselves anxiously waiting for prospective guests to respond.
Perhaps believing the RSVP reference is a quaint notation that must appear pro forma on the bottom of all announcements, some invitees say nothing upon receipt of an invitation only show up at the last minute—often to the chagrin of the host and to the disruption of the guests who did respond. Trying to stay ahead of drop-in attendees, some hosts have resorted to using the phrase “RSVP, regrets only,” only to find themselves stuck with excess food and expense resulting from myriad no-shows. The latest trend is for hosts and event sponsors to send out “save the date” announcements and to distribute invitations earlier than they might have otherwise; attempting to build in opportunities for a host to call the invitees who have not replied, these well-intended efforts likewise waste resources and further muddle the meaning of an RSVP.
An abbreviation for “Réspondez, s’il vous plaît,” RSVP literally means “respond, if it pleases you” or, more colloquially, “please reply.” As such, an RSVP requires a response from those who plan to attend, as well as from those who must decline, yet many invited guests continue to act as if responses are optional.
Some people wonder if the growing trend to bypass RSVP requests is a generational problem, claiming that Gen X, Gen Y, and Millennials have not been raised with the manners and social niceties of their elders; this argument loses credibility, however, in light of the fact that members of other generations are also unresponsive to invitation requests. Others suggest that we have become so overwhelmed by social events and opportunities that it’s impossible to respond to every request in a timely manner. Others claim that cellular devices have transformed us into a culture of complacent procrastinators, allowing us to act as if we can text someone with our last-minute decision or change of plans. Some suggest it’s a Fear Of Missing Something (FOMS) that makes us afraid to commit to anything, lest a better opportunity be on the horizon. And for some, it is simply a lack of familiarity with the protocol.
Whatever the reason, silence is neither a courteous nor a neutral response to an invitation. In fact, one need only hear or read comments by event sponsors, wedding coordinators, and party planners to understand the impressions left by prospective guests who do not reply to invitations; in countless forums, these individuals are referred to as inattentive, lazy, selfish, clueless, disorganized, unable to prioritize or commit, dismissive, and arrogant.
Considering that most people work to avoid such labels, this discussion focuses on how to minimize what Letitia Baldrige, public relations expert and executive manners specialist, referred to as the disease of social selfishness and, in the process, build our reputation through our responses.
* * *
Individuals and organizations that host events assume the responsibility of engaging all participants in a way that ensures their comfort and enjoyment. To succeed in this effort, hosts must know how many individuals plan to attend their meeting, wedding, ceremony, party, or other sponsored event in order to arrange for sufficient space, seating, food or beverages, and other contracted services. Yet, because hosts should neither presume nor infer guest availability—even when those guests are friends or family—an RSVP works to secure this information by asking guests to explicitly confirm or decline their attendance. Therefore, upon receipt of an invitation, we should check our schedule, prioritize any potentially conflicting events, decide where we will be, and pass that information along to the host in a timely manner. The information below explains how to do so in ways that enable others to succeed in their role as host and, simultaneously, enhance our reputation.
• Respond. According to a 1929 addition of Vogue’s Book of Etiquette, “the letters R.S.V.P. are not necessary between good-mannered people. It is understood that one answers a dinner invitation and, in general, any invitations that ‘request the pleasure.’” Yet while the hand-delivered invitations of yore made replies inevitable, invitations that have been delivered through seemingly more efficient and convenient modes—such as the Postal Service, telephone and, now, social media—have struggled to obtain a 100% response rate.
Online invitation and social planning website Elite, for example, boasts a 63% response rate, which is substantially higher than the estimated 50% response rate that paper invitations receive today. But what does it say when 37% or more of a guest list remains silent when a family member, friend, colleague, or acquaintance extends an invitation?
Responding is courtesy in action, so we should work on the premise that a response is necessary for invitations to gatherings in which we know the host. To that end, if the invitation provides an RSVP date, we should give our response by the designated deadline. If the invitation requests a response but does not list a reply date, we should respond within 24–48 hours or, depending on the date and type of event, within a week of receiving the invitation. If an invitation does not specify the need for a reply, we should respond anyway within 48 hours. Such replies confirm receipt of the invitation, convey our enthusiasm for the event, and allow the host to finalize the guest list.
At times, we might receive an invitation for an event we wish to attend but, at present, cannot give a definitive response. In such contexts, we should convey as much to the host to see what might help with scheduling demands, as the following examples demonstrate:
“Thank you for the invitation to join you and Susan at the convention next week. I may be flying out the night before to connect with a client who’s planning to be on the East Coast at that time. I should know either way on the first day of the convention and could let you know then, if joining the two of you would still be possible… .”
“I am very interested in attending the social on September 15, but tentatively have relatives coming into town that weekend. Could I let you know by Wednesday of next week?”
“Thank you for the offer to meet some members of the Bartleby team for a round of golf and then dinner while I’m in town next month. I have appointments scheduled until 4:30pm that day, but I would be happy to meet up with you after your game, if that works for your schedule… .”
As these examples show, we should not expect the host to revise plans to accommodate our particular needs. Moreover, depending on the nature of the event, the uncertainty of our schedule may require us to decline attendance altogether, but explaining these constraints recognizes the organizer’s effort to include us in the event and allows that person to identify how, or if, modifications would be possible.
To be clear, noting that we cannot confirm our schedule until something in the works has been resolved is not the same as delaying a response in case a more interesting event or opportunity emerges. In other words, we should never treat someone’s invitation as a backup in case something else does not come long. If an event is not a priority for us, we should decline the invitation, rather than suggest it’s of interest only as an alternative to staying home. Ultimately, we may wind up doing nothing, but we allow others to make plans with people who would value the opportunity to participate.
In the same way, we should resist conditional responses. For example, “Who else is invited?” suggests we will attend on the condition that certain people will (or won’t) be present. “I’ll come if…” is equally problematic. Time management gurus suggest that people give their time to people and projects they consider important. Therefore, if a host or an event is a priority, we should be willing to attend without qualification.
If we must decline an invitation, it is not necessary to offer an explanation; indicating that we are unable to attend is sufficient. If, however, the host is a friend, we might offer a brief reason for our absence, privately. Gracious hosts, regardless of their connection to the guest, should never probe for a reason, replying simply that the person will be missed.
By explicitly accepting or declining the invitations we receive, we convey our appreciation for being included among the potential guests and allow the host to finalize plans efficiently and accurately.
• Respond in a like manner. In light of the various modes of communication today, people express concerns about the best way to reply to an invitation, perhaps contributing to their silence. In brief, we should respond in the same manner the invitation was delivered.
Formal, written invitations, for example, require a written response. Assisting in this effort, reply cards with self-addressed, stamped envelopes often accompany formal invitations nowadays. In addition to helping recipients verify their attendance, these cards can help hosts be more responsive to their guests. For example, guests may be asked to note dietary restrictions (not preferences) for events that include meals, thereby allowing the host to make arrangements that would better accommodate a guest and, thus, enhance that guest’s experience.
In the absence of such cards, recipients should write a response that mirrors the language used in the invitation itself. Consider, for instance, receiving an invitation with the following announcement:
Mr. Daniel Hooper and Dr. Janice Tyler-Hooper
requests the honor of your presence
at the marriage of their daughter
Isabelle Grace Hooper
to
Michael David Murphy
on Saturday, the 28 of September 2013
at six o’clock in the evening
The Russian River Resort
129 North Vintner Avenue
Napa, California
R.S.V.P.
Depending on our availability, our response might be as follows for an acceptance, decline, or split acceptance, respectively:
James Bonney and Elizabeth Grainger
accept with pleasure the invitation of
Mr. Daniel Hooper and Dr. Janice Tyler-Hooper
to the marriage of their daughter
for Saturday, the 28 of September 2013
at six o’clock in the evening
* * *
James Bonney and Elizabeth Grainger
regret they are unable to accept the invitation of
Mr. Daniel Hooper and Dr. Janice Tyler-Hooper
to the marriage of their daughter
for Saturday, the 28 of September 2013
at six o’clock in the evening
* * *
Elizabeth Grainger
accepts with pleasure the invitation of
Mr. Daniel Hooper and Dr. Janice Tyler-Hooper
to the marriage of their daughter
for Saturday, the 28 of September 2013
at six o’clock in the evening
James Bonney regrets that he is unable to attend
Responses to informally written invitations, as well as to emailed and verbal invitations, should likewise match the invitation’s method of delivery and level of formality. When informally written invitations provide the option to RSVP by email or phone, invited guests can default to the mode they use most frequently when interacting with the host.
Whatever the method, invited guests should always respond to an invitation. Contrary to what some people suggest, silence is not the same as, “No, I will not be attending.” It simply leaves the host wondering what to do. Similarly, responses must clarify whether the invitation’s recipient will or won’t be attending. Replying “Here’s my RSVP” or “As requested, I’m RSVPing” are not appropriate responses; they merely call attention to the fact that the recipient does not know the meaning of RSVP.
By responding in ways that echo the method and tone of the original invitation, we indicate that we both recognize and acceptance the subsequent, corresponding protocols.
• Resist modifying the invitation. The people hosting or sponsoring an event get to decide who makes the prospective guest list, and who does not. Often guided by the purpose and desired tenor of the event, these decisions may also be dictated by budgets, space constraints, and alliances between and among the various guests who may be in attendance. As such, guests should resist trying to substitute, broaden, or otherwise dictate the participants in someone else’s event.
Some invitations, for example, specify the names of those being invited, say spouses or partners. In such cases, if one of the named parties cannot attend, the other person does not have an open ticket to invite someone of his or her choosing. Because guest lists are often culled several times, members of originally paired guests that suddenly find themselves solo should decide if they are willing to attend the event alone; if not, declining the event would be most congenial as it would open two places the host might be able to fill with those who have been edited from an earlier list.
If the guest would be willing to attend the event alone, the guest should call the host to say the other person named on the invitation is unable to attend. The host may ask if the now-solo guest would like to bring someone else, but that discussion should be initiated by host—not the guest. Guests seldom like this possibility but, unless the invitation says “and guest,” invited guests should resist assuming that substitutions for named invitees are welcome.
Similarly, guests should resist expanding the invitation. Many wedding planners, for example, discuss the challenges of guests who to bring children to adult-only weddings or, worse, simply show up with children in tow. But other events have also struggled with guests who treat the invitations they receive more as guidelines than as host-defined parameters. Those sponsoring or organizing professional conferences, corporate parties, company picnics, anniversary dinners, graduation celebrations, and so on have all experienced invited guests putting them on the spot with requests to add one or more individuals to the list of attendants; others have found strangers simply crashing their events.
Some guests suggest such expansions are no big deal. But aside from additional expense that may arise from invitees commandeering the guest list, other factors may come into play. For example, hosts often finalize guest list with a sensitivity to the relationships between and among those in attendance; last-minute or unannounced alterations to the list, therefore, can unintentionally place acrimonious individuals together in ways the host sought to avoid.
Of course there may be times a host is willing to alter the guest list. For example, if a guest were to respond that she would love to attend but has a cousin coming into town during the event, the host might be willing to accommodate the out-of-town visitor, depending on the nature of the gathering. Similarly, if it’s a casual, pay-your-own event at a local restaurant or other public venue, it may be possible to ask if bringing a friend would be possible. Guests, however, should neither assume nor expect hosts to agree to these alternations, nor should guests embarrass others by putting the host—or even the uninvited guest—on the spot as they try to work out the details at the event itself.
By respecting that it’s the host’s decision to open, and close, invitations, we allow hosts to maintain control over their vision of the event.
• Follow through. Having responded to an invitation, our final obligation is to follow through. In other words, we must show up if we said we were going to attend, and stay away if we declined the invitation. To do otherwise, especially without notice, introduces potentially uncomfortable interactions that may embarrass the host, or even ourselves.
Certainly emergencies rise, which may prohibit us from keeping our commitment to appear, yet being a no-show is worse than telling the host that something has come up—especially if we may have a visible role in the event. Thus, if we find ourselves unable to attend, we should notify the host or event coordinator as soon as possible to streamline any last minute changes.
If we find ourselves in such a situation 24–48 hours before the event, we should call the host and, perhaps, notify the restaurant or reception hall to ensure the message is received. If an emergency happens hours before the event, we should call the host (and maybe text, too, in order to cover all bases) to say we are no longer able to attend but that we will follow up the next day. At this time, we should resist going into detail about the reason, since the host may be starting to welcome guests or otherwise finalizing details for the event; however, we should follow up with the host the day after the event to explain briefly the emergency and apologize again for the last-minute cancellation.
On the flip side, if we have declined the invitation because of something that has since fallen through, we may be able to call the host and, explaining the change in plans, ask whether it might be possible to turn our regrets into an acceptance. The nature of the event, the amount of notice we can offer the host, the reason we declined the invitation in the first place, and our history in accepting or declining invitations can all affect whether the host would be able or willing to make accommodations; therefore, in making such calls, we should not assume or, worse, push hosts to alter their present agenda in order to accommodate our newly revised schedule, for they may have made alternative plans.
* * *
Claiming we’ve become a culture that’s not big on etiquette, people criticize hosts trying to finalize their guest lists as uptight, overly pushy, or insecure. Yet, as many retort, it only takes hosting a formal event once to become more appreciative of and responsive to an RSVP on invitations. But people should not have to sponsor an event to recognize that successful gatherings require respectful exchanges between and among all participants–and some of those exchanges occur before the event itself. Therefore, by replying to invitations in a timely manner and by following through on what we say we will do, we can help others perform their roles and succeed in the venues of their choosing while, indirectly, enhancing our reputation for being respectful of and responsive to others.
Working toward Areté…
What are your thoughts on the RSVP, either as a guest or as a host? Share your thoughts and experiences in the space below.
