Efficiency with internal Communication ??

This short write-up is not about defining or explaining what efficiency is, or what internal communication is. It is simply here to prove that a single aspect of internal communication can destabilize staff’s mentalities about the organization, thereby reducing their overall efficiency levels. There are a plethora of actions, especially from top management that can account for the creation of an environment of instability, uncertainty, and not belonging in staff. One action I will like us to discuss today is staff retention and firing.

Before I go any further, let us have at the back of our minds that executives or creators of projects create organizational norms or organizations who have a vision of where they want the organization would be in a specific timeframe. These norms, irrespective (most often) of what managers or general staff think have to be implemented such that it becomes a culture. The capacity of executives or managers to spread the word effectively and efficiently also depends on their level of belief in these norms. If there is just one ounce of doubt, this will inevitably be seen in their actions, work, expressions, or any other form.

When the organization’s strategy changes and those norms are updated (not necessarily changed) and the establishment is moving towards a new direction (often due to societal changes), some people in the organization are obviously affected by the new ways of working. This impact can be positive or negative, depending on the swiftness, adaptability or profiles of those staff (many other factors can influence this). It can be positive in the sense that the new norms may align with the competencies of some staff, and negatively when others may no more be “fit for purpose”.

In those periods, the organization may go through “restructuring” or “reshuffling”, and this may cause some panic in the minds of those remaining. The uncertainty of not knowing whether you’ll be next, the fear of making a wrong move and are a few of the factors that account for the overall tension that will reign in the workplace the following weeks or months. This may not affect the quality of work for many, but we all know how important it is for employees to be psychologically stable at the workplace, and this can be achieved with an effective internal communications strategy put in place and sometimes tamed to solve the contextual internal crisis, whether visible or not.

A typical example is with a local organization, whose identity I prefer to keep anonymous. After revising their policies and strategies, they automatically plunged into “organizational restructuring” where many competent staff were laid off. Though the leaders may be made prior communications on the new ways of working and the personalities to adapt to fit in, the fact that the above-mentioned negative feelings are proof that these communications were not effective or efficient to make employees feel safe.

It is, therefore, the role of the Internal Communications Manager to ensure they constantly watch people’s behaviors, speeches, and productivities in both formal and informal circumstances to determine what is wrong and what can be done to fix things and avert a future crisis that seems not existent at the moment.

In this context of firing, leaders and Comms managers should know that the simple fact of seeing colleagues leave in a certain among over a well defined period of time can emotionally disturb staff, who share a bond with those leaving and will still do after contract termination. This organization in our case study was undergoing some transformation and this affected many, who will obviously not smile while being kicked out. Colleagues will always discuss between themselves as usual as their share happy stories together as well as frustrations.

The first thing to watch is always keywords used during informal conversations in most often, informal locations (out of office). Mind you, individual staff, depending on their backgrounds, biases, perspectives or recent events in the country, etc., sometimes interpret what is happening in the organization wrongly. Executive’s actions can be interpreted differently and this may even hold back the vision and transformation journey of the organization.

It is, therefore, in the best interest of the internal communications manager to examine the what, which, when, where, why, and how previous communications were made on the said policy change. This, so as to identify the gap, examine current behaviors to spot out what can be done, and then devise strategies to fix the problem and get everyone else back on track. It may not be visible for the moment, but you'l be surprised to see what has been built in ten years. At that time, it may be difficult to identify when or where it all started.

The inefficiency will build over time with the facts that:

• Staff will have different views about their supervisors or leaders,
• There’ll be a change of mindset on the organization’s reputation,
• Understanding tasks and strategies may become herculean,
• The frustration may be contagious, and many more.

So, if you love your organization, and you have observed some silos or new attitudes, you know what to do, which is far beyond what is revealed in this article.

Any thoughts ?