Completely redesigning the goalposts, not just moving them

Being an internal comms specialist, I don’t mind change – in fact, I enjoy and relish it as it keeps things fresh and interesting. Not changing means standing still.

When it comes to tasks, I like a really clear brief and tend to ask questions, holding meetings if necessary, to clarify what needs to be done. As a sole IC operative, I need to make sure I’ve got it clear from the top before I head off and work on something to avoid wasting time.

So when the scope of a task changes dramatically, it tends to wind me up.

Take a recent example where I’ve been tasked with putting together the presentation deck for some all-staff briefings. The idea was to use a slimmed-down version of the budget presentation so that a) we don’t have to reinvent the wheel, b) we can let people know exactly what is being decided at the top level of the organisation and c) there’s more transparency of information throughout the company.

I met with two senior stakeholders to discuss tweaks which was fine – clearer idea of what was required: check.

This morning, having submitted a version of the deck to one of these senior stakeholders yesterday, I’ve realised from the feedback that an almost complete rewrite and redesign is now required. Like I said, change is fine, but unclear – and quite frankly unhelpful – direction just means I lose time (and hair!) while I attempt version 2 and hope that the goalposts won’t be moved again so dramatically.

Any tips, people?

Too many cooks

I’ve been away for a week and a bit on holiday in France, which was excellent.  I returned to work to find that the Internal Communications function had been managed exceedingly well while I was off, which is both comforting and worrying – am I still needed?!  Thankfully, I am…

There were a few hitches last week, which were covered well but one of them involved a communication to come out from the CEO.  As we all know in Communications, these things are rarely actually written by the CEO, so a few others (including me, having written an early draft) have been involved.

Our Internal Comms function reports into HR and there are pros and cons for IC reporting into HR.  The biggest pro for me is that I tend to avoid getting things technically incorrect when they apply to people; we always need to be careful when writing about things applying to ‘employees’ and not ‘contractors.’  ‘Staff’ is not a word I can use safely, as ‘staff’ is an ambiguous term to use for people working at the company.  ‘Colleagues’ is another word favoured by many IC professionals to make communications more friendly and inclusive, but again, the definition is not clear.

At the moment, this CEO communication is being looked at by people who are speech writers and external communicators.  And that’s where the danger comes in: although they have oodles of experience in writing top-level communications for big presentations to shareholders and investors, they overlook the basics which need to be applied to avoid ambiguity internally.  Using ‘colleagues’ to be make a communication sound less corporate (which, admittedly, it does) causes problems further down the line when contractors, freelancers, etc, claim to be eligible for a certain promotion or benefit.

Internal Communications need to be carefully written by someone with internal communicating experience.  I believe other professional writers can input valuable contributions, but ultimately it needs to be finished off by IC.

Anyone else have too many cooks spoiling the comms?

Rethinking how we communicate with people

I hold a monthly (or as often as I can) slot in our company’s canteen where people can come along and hear from guest speakers from both within the organisation and the outside world.  It’s a great way to get people at the company to hear about parts of the business with which they’re unfamiliar and to get an insight into the workings of where they work.

We’ve had famous people talking about their chosen specialised subject and senior leaders in the business giving an update on what they’re doing and why people should be interested.  The feedback is always really positive.

If I know enough about the subject matter, I chair the event, interviewing the guest speaker and controlling the Q&A session at the end.  It raises the profile not only of the speaker, but also of Internal Communications, as I send out all of the invites and post the event onto the company intranet and brand it as an Internal Comms event.

I don’t know if any of you do the same thing, but it’s a really easy way to get business messages across to colleagues around the company – if you can influence senior leaders to do it.

And that’s the real crunch.

The preparation time for getting this to happen is minimal and the costs are very low – the PA and the cameraman come to around £600 per event.  Getting people to come along isn’t difficult if the guest speaker is famous (like Boris Johnson, the mayor of London) and attendance for internal speakers is also quite straight forward as long as you talk to the right people.

But getting someone from the business to speak about their area of expertise can be tricky.  Getting some of our senior leaders to do ANYTHING is difficult!  Thankfully, I have a pretty good network of senior leaders and can influence them to give updates on the business.

If you don’t do this sort of thing at the moment, give it a try – getting someone senior, who is usually hidden away on an Executive/C-suite floor, to talk to the troops about what’s going on in the organisation and fielding questions from the assembled masses can have a really positive effect.  We all know that being involved and getting closer to the decision-making circle of a company can make people fell more valued, more motivated and, that horrible word, “engaged.”

Let me know how you get on.