agenting · Meet An Author · querying

QueryManger and Queries

When I joined D4EO agency it gave me the opportunity to very excitedly switch over to QueryManger instead of using an email inbox. QueryManager will be known as Qm from now on and no that lack of space in the middle of the name is not a typo. The software is named QueryManager and if you don’t believe me check their website. Qm is how the logo shows up when I use the software. I’ve been with several agencies between interning, assisting, and agenting and I’ve seen many different query inbox systems. Qm is by far my favorite. However I get a lot of confused messages from authors about Qm, and so I’m going to discuss how I use Qm as an agent and clear up some confusion, including the fact that no, you can’t add indents to your query since it uses block formatting. The amount of messages I received about that when I first switched over to Qm surprised me.

What I love most about Qm is how organized it is. And since it has all my queries and requests, it keeps everything in one place instead of getting requests lost beneath dozens of other emails. Qm also hides my email and uses it’s own to send from, which cuts down on submission emails to my agency email and keeps my amount of emails under control. I think it’s important to note Qm is not designed to be messaging back and forth with authors, something I learned from experience. It’s set up to make it easy to reject or request and once we know we want to offer it’s assumed we will switch to email, which is what I do. Unfortunately that also makes it hard to respond to questions from authors so please just follow the submission guidelines and if you have questions about representation save it for when/if I offer since we will have a chat when I offer. If I have questions I will shoot you an email.

Qm allows me to save answer forms to use whenever I want to request or send a rejection, which means I can make sure everyone gets a response since it’s as easy as a click of a button instead of copy pasting or writing each individual rejection, which I don’t have time for.  I can even have queries automatically flagged based on certain info and see past queries the author sent to me or other agents at my agency who use Qm. This makes it easy to track those who spam me with their project. There are also filter options galore for queries that I make good use out of whether it’s filtering by genre, tags, or my maybe pile. The organization and filtering options of Qm beats email inboxes by a long shot.

So what do I see when I log in? Unlike email where I have to rely on the subject line for important info, Qm shows me the title, author’s name and email, genre, and word count and any flags or tags I’ve added. Then if I click on the query I can see everything else. This set up makes it easy for me to read through specific genres or tell if there is a word count issue right away. I have a flag system set up (we have four different colors to choose from) to automatically flag anything over a certain word count that I use as a “hey, this might be too long” warning to myself. I can also use this system to mark a genre that I’m dying to find a client in. I can assign tags as well. So if I requested from a pitch party I can mark those queries so I know they came from that pitching event to make them easier to spot and read through.

Having the input fields for everything from author info to the query and sample pages means I have a higher chance of getting all the information I want versus email queries where a lot of important information including word count was often left out. Plus Qm makes it super easy for me to send full manuscripts to my kindle to read, which I love. Qm also cuts down on the amount of queries I get for genres and age groups I don’t represent, but I still get authors trying to sneak them in under other genres and categories, especially middle grade. I set my rejection emails as allowing no response to cut down on angry replies. In my experience most authors don’t want to take the time to hunt down my agency email to complain about the rejection, but they’ll be quicker to send an emotional response if they only need to hit the reply button.

Unfortunately I still have the same problem as email when it comes to authors wanting to send an updated version or a new query. I get a lot of queries and alerts from authors who realized they made a typo and resent a new version. I have to track down the old query myself and by the time I reach the new one the old one may have already been rejected. I’m not going to reject a project based on one or two typos, so please consider carefully whether the mistake requires being fixed or not. I’d rather an author let a small typo or two rest rather than send a new query. Plus sending a whole new query brings more attention to the mistakes.

Overall I love Qm and I hope to see more agents switch to it. I think it helps cut back on no response rejections. The option to give someone else access to a Qm account also makes it easy to include interns and assistants. Unless something happens to Qm, I plan to continue using it for the foreseeable future.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “QueryManger and Queries

Leave a Reply to John McMullen Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s