What do leaders really want from their comms team?

One of my friends who knows I do a lot of comms healthchecks asked me how she should decide her priorities in developing her new team.

She has just taken over as Head of Communications for a large private sector organisation and she has a team spread around the world. Her problem is that, whilst all the team seem busy and professional, it is not immediately obvious to her where they are adding value.

And perhaps more significantly, she knows cost cutting is coming. What does she need to protect and what can she offer up to the finance team when they come a'slashing?

I often refer back to something I learned from a case study in Strategic Communications Management which Sue Dewhurst and I referred to when we created the old Melcrum Black Belt programme. It covered an audit conducted nearly 20 years ago by Kristin Kelley at Owens Corning when she took over as Comms Director. It’s a very simple approach which informed our audit chapter in Successful Employee Communications and which I often use.

Among a number of things, Kelley interviewed several senior leaders and she posed two very simple questions. She asked the leaders to tell her, of all the things which the communications team did for them, what was important. And what did the team do well?

The result was a 2x2 matrix of importance vs performance.

The important things, done well, need protecting. The poorly delivered, high importance actions, need fixing and the less significant items could be dropped or resources diverted to where they can make a difference.

It’s actually a very easy analysis to undertake and, when I have presented the matrix at the end of an audit, a very animated conversation follows. Often, communications leaders just don’t have the time to reflect on where the value is being added.

This approach has the strength of reflecting what leaders want for their business. By consulting and listening, the chances of giving the organisation what it wants is greatly increased.

However, this is also its potential weakness. If you are working with leaders who have limited expectations of communications and the support it can offer, there is a danger of being trapped in a 1980s model of internal communications or PR. So, when you are applying this approach, be sure to probe quite hard around what is important to leaders and to push the boundaries about potential added value.

If leaders perceive the role of comms as a postal service, they may miss the value of a change partner or an intelligence service.

But with that caveat in mind, I commend this basic audit tool; I’d love to hear what else has worked for you.

In Successful Employee Communications Sue Dewhurst and I set out a few more of the tools and ideas we have found useful in the past...

#CommunicationsAudit #EmployeeCommunications #CommunicationValue