This is, of course, easy to agree with. Without clear answers to questions like what our goals are, who is our target audience, what exactly do we want to communicate to them... it's practically impossible to effectively execute any business function. And communication is certainly no exception. Therefore, having a clear communication strategy is a basic requirement for any communication project—whether it involves marketing or corporate communication, internal audiences, or even just a larger business event that requires communication support. Company leadership recognizes this quite quickly and often opts for such a step, even if it’s sometimes in a very stripped-down and basic version that lays the foundation but doesn’t address every necessary question. But it's absolutely better than nothing.

‍

Without clear answers to questions like what our goals are, who is our target audience, what exactly do we want to communicate to them... it's practically impossible to effectively execute any business function. And communication is certainly no exception.

‍

More often (and more critically), the real challenge arises during implementation. After the initial enthusiasm that follows the presentation of a communication strategy, one might hear encouraging words like "Let’s go!" and "Full speed ahead!" Unfortunately, it soon becomes clear that it’s more of a sprint rather than a marathon. Long-term successful communication—unless it’s tied to a single small event—is definitely not a sprint. It’s a marathon. And the basic rules here are very similar to preparing for a marathon. Regardless of the desired (time) result, the keys to success will be persistence, systematic effort, and patience. Every run, every training session is important, not just the "key" ones. Every missed training session will show in the end, and shortcuts are (mostly) not an option.

‍

The same applies to effective communication: success, regardless of what’s written and approved in the strategy, is primarily determined by systematic execution. Carrying out planned activities at scheduled intervals (whether daily, weekly, or monthly) over a longer period. Let me highlight an example that is quite common in practice.

‍

A manufacturing company is undergoing an extensive reorganization, affecting a significant portion of the workforce. Management agrees on the proposal to hold regular weekly meetings with employees (using digital communication tools, which have become more familiar in the post-COVID era), where leadership communicates the progress of the reorganization, implemented measures, and key upcoming events. The response is outstanding. Positive. Management is well aware of this. However, after 5-6 weeks, the momentum suddenly slows down and eventually stops altogether. Without explanation or any communication from management.

‍

Every missed training session will show in the end, and shortcuts are (mostly) not an option. The same applies to effective communication: success, regardless of what’s written and approved in the strategy, is primarily determined by systematic execution. Carrying out planned activities at scheduled intervals (whether daily, weekly, or monthly) over a longer period.

‍

We are all human, and it’s entirely understandable that this happened due to the management’s busy schedules, the demands of such intensive weekly communication, and completely objective reasons like vacations, business trips... But how do the employees perceive this? Is it possible that they understand this practice as "When things were on fire, they cared, but now—when it’s still smouldering, and everything is still difficult—they’ve forgotten about us"? Similar to what happens after major natural disasters, where politicians seize the opportunity for handshakes and photo ops on the ground, but then mysteriously disappear, leaving people to deal with bureaucracy, nonsense, and delays? I’ll leave the answer to the reader. Of course, this can seriously damage the reputation and trust in the leadership or those most responsible.

‍

But such situations can easily be avoided, and in doing so, it’s even possible to gain reputation and trust within (and outside!) the organization from challenging situations (such as the mentioned reorganizations...). How? It’s not unusual for the dynamics of direct communication from management (in the case of internal communication) to change, but even such changes must be thoughtful, planned, and announced. In the case mentioned, for example, a gradual transition from regular weekly personal communication to biweekly or monthly communication and the development of an open, two-way communication channel in the meantime. Of course, this also requires the allocation of appropriate resources (both human and financial) to support these activities. Then, of course, we must stick to the schedule and planned frequency of communication.

‍

Tested and proven. Several times. With many different organizations and in a wide variety of situations.

‍

Do you have similar experiences or challenges? Share them with us.

‍

‍

‍