The most common projects I am hired for are change communications:
- Acquisition by a competitor, PE/VC firm, or holding company
- Major exec or leadership changes
- Merger or acquisition of another company
- Layoffs, outsourcing, or other major labor force shift
- Rebranding roll-out
Basically any situation that has the potential for major disruption internally and externally.
(Honestly, those are the projects I like working on because communicating well through change is so important and enormously costly if done poorly.)
But in all my years in comms, the most detrimental thing I’ve done and seen is letting leaders slide on something to spare their feelings or because I was unrealistically optimistic about their communication skills.
There is a desire to believe that leaders can handle change situations well, or that they’ll be fine even off-the-cuff if necessary. It even feels rude to imply that they won’t. But the reality is most people are not good at leading through disruptive change. It’s a skill that takes experience and practice, and often it’s the communicator’s job to push leaders to shape up in this area.
I’m not saying be an asshole, but I am saying:
- Insist on the rehearsals and practice answering tough questions.
- Confirm that the hard conversations have happened and alignment actually exists.
- Push leaders to work through their own discomfort before that plays out in front of employees or customers.
You can theoretically understand communication best practices and a desired narrative and still choke when you’re facing your team. It’s like learning to speak a new language – you have to practice actually talking.
It’s also tempting – in an effort to be ‘nice’ and ‘likeable’ to give it the ol’ “let me know if you want help!” I’ve done this a lot, but if I’m being honest – I know immediately when an exec needs the help. Wishing they’ll take up the offer rarely pays off. You have to force the issue sometimes.
Maybe it’ll be awkward. Maybe an exec will resist the help, but comms leaders need to hold firm and temporarily wound an ego if it avoids larger-scale harm later or reputational damage to the leader.
