BARRIERS <br> TO BETTER <br> COMMUNICATION
Overcoming common internal communications challenges.
Humans sure do love to put things in boxes. People. Pigeons. Business functions. Categorisation plays an essential role in determining which things we see as similar, and which we see as unique.
And for this reason, there are two things that should never be put into the same box:
Internal communication and brand & marketing*.
Unfortunately, though, they often are.
One of the biggest challenges faced by the leaders we work with — one of the most significant roadblocks to great initiatives, engagement and impact — comes from their internal communication function. And this failure tends to be a result of treating these two unique functions as similar.
They aren’t.
Oh my gosh, they certainly are not. Sure, both involve communication, but their business objectives and audiences couldn’t be more different.
This is a topic that’s close to our hearts at Everyday Massive. Communication comprises the crucial touchpoints between the organisation and its people, and can make or break the employee experience, as well as directly impacting business performance**.
So here are four common issues we’ve seen in medium-sized enterprises all the way to the Fortune 50, and suggestions for how leaders and organisations facing these challenges can overcome them.
Problem 1:
The organisation structure hinders effective internal communication.
A systemic problem in many organisations is combining internal communications with other functions — typically brand and marketing, or HR — as well as a shortage of communication specialists.
HR-led internal communications have the advantage of being people focused, and great people and culture professionals understand the role of communication in building culture and creating great employee experiences. However, they still tend to lack the specific communication knowledge and technical skills needed to execute effectively.
Conversely, marketing-led internal communications often have more communication experience, yet tend to apply external communication tactics. Leaders in these organisations frequently find themselves confounded by rigid style guide constraints, one-size-fits-all solutions, and communication that completely misses the mark with the intended audience.
Neither organisation structure is conducive to great internal communication, yet restructuring is rarely a viable option. Instead, there needs to be a more collaborative approach, with plenty of trust and identifying gaps in capability.
In an HR-led function, it might mean hiring a communication expert or engaging an external communication specialist to help execute on campaigns and co-create a communication strategy. Leaders working with these types of function may need to improve their own communication capability or seek external assistance.
In a marketing-led function, leaders will likely need to fight to ensure their unique knowledge of the audience is incorporated into communication, rather than the typical generic brandwashing that occurs in these types of functions.
Marketing, brand, HR and internal communication all significantly contribute to business performance and the bottom line, but each does it in very different ways. Combining these into a single franken-function rarely yields great results without careful consideration.
Problem 2:
The function squanders time and money (or hides a lack of capability) justifying their existence focusing on the wrong areas, rather than offering real value.
We’ve said it before, we’ll say it again: sweating the precise colour value and font weight specified in the external brand guidelines makes fuck-all difference to the effectiveness of an internal campaign. In most cases, it tends to result in low engagement due to looking exactly the same as every other piece of communication.
No — engagement and impact is the result of applying the right message, narrative, language, emotions, among other human-centred communication and design principles, to bring the message to life.
Where capability is lacking, the easy option is to default to the brand guidelines as justification for the function's existence.
An obsessive focus on brand guidelines is also a problem particular to marketing and brand-led internal communications. These types of functions apply the same tactics internally as they would externally, rather than differentiating their approach for the two very different audiences.
When considering internal messaging, internal communications need to stop acting as censors and custodians of The Brand, and start helping leaders make a real difference to their people. Rather than grinding initiatives to a halt by focusing on irrelevant details, they should be the biggest champions of new ideas and bold visions.
Problem 3:
There’s a failure to understand the audience
Good leaders have a deep understanding of their people, which makes them the ideal people to lead communication. Unfortunately, internal communication functions often fail to capitalise on their knowledge.
Internal communications need to stop using brand as an excuse for lazy, generic corporate language and messaging, and strive to understand the people inside their organisation and adapt communication accordingly.
Even better, they can work with other leaders to build an in-depth understanding of each unique segment inside their organisation, then tailor each message and campaign specifically for each group. Yes, this means getting out of the office and actually talking to people — the unmitigated horror.
Problem 4:
The internal communication function is treated as an afterthought
Unfortunately, a common process in many organisations is for leaders to finish a program, policy, or other piece of communication, then ‘run it by comms and marketing’.
Few good things come from this approach.
The problem is that it forces internal communications to take the role of editor. If an editor were required, an editor would’ve been hired. An editor is not required — a communication expert is required. One that can help translate a message or idea into a compelling experience that makes a difference.
The process needs to be collaborative, with leaders sharing their vision and intentions early and internal communications working with them to achieve it by bringing their unique skills and expertise, rather than attacking it with a red pen and a condescending attitude.
Of course, you might be lucky enough to have a wonderful comms team and an org structure that supports communication. But if not, the best places to start is a frank conversation with the relevant people and developing your communication skills.
And if that fails?
Well, get in touch. We’d love to help.
* Also: Samuel L. Jackson and snakes; loneliness and cheeseburgers; sharks and tornados; etc.
** Organisations with good communication show four times higher engagement, a 57 per cent increase in shareholder returns over a five-year period, and are three and a half times more likely to significantly outperform peers. And given the shift towards dispersed teams, remote work and work from home, the importance of communication will only increase.