In the Feb 25 edition of Ragan.Com, internal communicator and long-time Ragan contributor Amy Gooen floated the idea of replacing the corporate internal communication function with an “independent” alternative operating under “journalistic” principles of “objectivity”, with an eye towards providing staff with information they would view more credibly.
While I have no doubt that Gooen’s intentions are good, it has often been said that the road to hell is based with good intentions, and the hell such an idea would create would make the flame-broiler at the average Burger King seem like a cool breeze off Lake Michigan in September.
For me, the ‘problem’ with internal communications is not one of whether what we deliver is seen as credible. It’s whether what we deliver makes it easier for the people who pay us to get the results they seek, preferably in a way that doesn’t undo those results later for corners being cut or through stakeholders seeking redress or vengeance. Bringing in a layer of communicators who place “objectivity”, or, worse, the appearance of objectivity, could wreak havoc on organisational cultures with no obvious upside with the exception a few statt ‘feeling bettter’ about what they read.
Moreover, it is important to recognise that at a basic level, everyone in an organisation (manager, staff, communicator or flat-out peon) is to some degree an internal communicator…and no one to any degree is fully objective about it. Internal communication needs to do more to embrace that reality, and fighting that reality may be the worst idea of all.
