Delivering bad news: can you believe we don’t know how to do it?
1st March 2006 by Julie Freeman, ABC, APR
Twenty nine of the respondents to a survey in the Nov/Dec issue of CW said that bad news in their companies is delivered by e-mail. That response astonishes me. But if misery loves company, there is some comfort in knowing that the companies where IABC members work are not the only ones who don’t know how to deliver bad news, or so I assume.
IABC sent out press releases on the survey results and generated coverage in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette, the New Jersey Courier Post, Human Resources Management, The Charlotte Observer, the San Francisco Examiner, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and The Boston Herald. When I talked to my networking group (12 heads of small businesses who are not communicators)about the press coverage this survey had received, they all asked to get a copy of the CW article. My conclusion is that there is so much interest in delivering bad news because doing it right remains a mystery to many people.
It seems to me that it is just common sense that when you have to deliver news about job cuts, benefit reductions, sale of a company or any other kind of bad news, that basic courtesy would require doing so face to face, not through e-mail.
Do people use e-mail because they are more concerned about efficiency than showing respect for their employees? Or are they just cowards?
I am interested in hearing from other communicators about how bad news is delivered in your organizations. Have you ever been asked by your leadership to deliver bad news via e-mail? What was the outcome?
March 1st, 2006 at 6:34 pm
Interesting survey. Totally agree that this must be face to face. I have worked for an organisation for whom we designed a communications strategy for managers to deliver news about job reductions to their individual teams. In the past this was done via email or people just simply read about it in the newspaper. We gave managers the tools and training to conduct team briefings and face to face sessions but we found in many cases they did not do anything we asked. There are to many organisations where managers are not made accountable for communications like they are with revenue targets. Comments and suggestions welcome on organisations who have developed specific accountabilities for manager communications and how it has worked
March 2nd, 2006 at 4:47 am
I have often witnessed the same scenario Chris describes. Without accountability, things just don’t get done. This is why communicators must not operate in a vacuum in our organizations. We need to partner with other functions, especially HR, to integrate best practices in communication into the fabric of our organizations. It doesn’t happen overnight, especially if the concept of an integrated communication function is new to the organization, but it’s the only way real change will happen.
March 2nd, 2006 at 7:05 am
It’s been many years since I worked exclusively in internal communications in a large corporation, but I remember vividly the pushback I got when I asked sources for accountability. One manager actually told me that she wouldn’t tell me the deadline a committee had because, if I wrote about it, she’d have to meet it!
I was young, and didn’t push back even harder, but it made me realize that communicators are in the best position to lead the changes we always talk about - and are talking more about - such as integrated communications, brand management, etc. If WE won’t stir the pot, who will? HR? Marketing? The executives? I don’t think so.
If there’s bad news to tell, we should be teaching the executives how to do it. Start with the small stuff, so that you earn their trust, and build up. When it hits the fan, maybe they’ll remember us.
Can’t get a seat at the table in the executive suite? No problem. Be subversive. Know your stuff and be ready to talk to the decision makers in the lunchroom (if they go there), in the hallway or in the restroom! Build alliances with key staekholders at all levels throughout the company. Even when I was young, I spent a lot of time walking around the offices to learn what was going on: even as a communications specialist, I think I was one of the most visible people in the company.
By leading the way, we can help our organizations better tell the good news, the bad news and everything in between.
March 2nd, 2006 at 9:27 am
Mark, everything you say is true (as one might expect from a guy with a name like yours!).
My memories as a corporate communications pup are similar to yours. I think the most important point you make is that it takes time. I believe one reason young communicators today (and even some older ones) don’t do the things you suggest is because often there is no immediate payoff.
Communicators who plant the seeds of change and always expect quick results will end up getting the same results as backyard gardeners who plant those ubiquitous Bradford pear trees that look so beautiful this time of year: Fast growth, a flowery show — and a tree that is dead in 10 years. But being quietly subversive, building alliances, introducing new ideas and educating leaders on the benefits of communication — that’s like planting an oak. It might take some time, but the roots will be strong and the tree will outlive us.
March 2nd, 2006 at 3:52 pm
Thanks for the comments guys. I would like to add an additional point that your posts got me thinking about In my experience the managers won’t care less about communications if they are not measured on it and held personally accountable. At the same time, the really good communicators should be given incentives in some way. I would be interested if anyone has any experiences to tackling this challenge
March 2nd, 2006 at 4:28 pm
Now speaking as a student here, and not a seasoned pro, I would say the best way to deliver bad news is face to face. To put it mildly sending a bomb like downsizing, benefit reduction, company sale etc. by email reeks of cowardice and would be best seen in the British series “the Office”. To do it properly I would have members of the organization’s operation committee explain the reasoning behind the the decision in language, free of what I would call MBA speak to each department, in person.
I remember about 13 years ago when I was in home improvement retail, my chain was bought out by Home Depot. The senior management of Aikenheads Home Improvement paid a visit to each store to explain the why and what was going to occur. As an internal communications exercise, it was done right. Granted none of the senior executives lasted a year after the take over but that is another story.
William Smith
March 3rd, 2006 at 5:00 am
[...] Julie wants to hear from other communicators about how bad news is delivered in your organizations. Post your comments at the IABC Communication Commons Employee Forum. March 03rd 2006 Posted to Best Practices, Employee communications, Team Building, Professional Development, pr Trackback Permalink [...]
March 3rd, 2006 at 7:04 am
“Do people use e-mail because they are more concerned about efficiency than showing respect for their employees? Or are they just cowards?”
Just wanted to respond to this that Julie said in the start of this thread. My experience in corporations over 15 years is that people aren’t nearly that sinister–except in some specific cases:-). I find that people in authority of whatever level are very uncomfortable giving any kind of honest news that might not seem positive, much less the kind of bad news we’re discussing. E-mail is a great way to hide from the recipient. Almost like leaving a voice message when you know no one is there. Many leaders simply avoid the practice of ANY frank discussions, so that when the most difficult of conversations happens arises, we shouldn’t be surprised when they are unequipped to deal with with it and run in the opposite direction. This same phenomenon happens in the other direction too, as negativity can take any change and make it the beginning of the end.
As things are rarely one way or the other, most business happens in the middle of extremes, and I find when I’m coaching many leaders, they’re working so hard to find the spin–I think because they think proper business communication is like marketing–that they lose the core truth of the message.
Long way of saying that if you can’t have an honest conversation about business, I would think it’s impossible to expect an honest conversation about bad news. The comms plan and the talking points wear like an ill-fitting suit on the deliverer. I think the readiness plan for bad news should be built into the plan to improve day to day communications, and not stand alone.
March 8th, 2006 at 6:36 am
Without seeing the report, I would wonder if the respondents were saying that e-mail was the only tool used to deliver bad news or was it the first tool, and consequentially, the most remembered?
Knock on wood (tapping my head), I haven’t had to deliver this bad news for several years. But when I did - re-org, downsizing - we issued an e-mail first so everyone had fast access to consistent information.
Managers had Qs and As for when employees came for more info; the CEO had a townhall meeting with staff; there were newsletter articles… All this preceded an intranet.
Cheers.
March 31st, 2006 at 6:32 am
I work for a large company (70,000+ employees). I have worked on several major announcements that involved “bad news” for employees. Over the past 2 years we’ve had to deliver news of centre closures to about 1,500 employees. It was all done face-to-face with plenty of HR support.
Meetings were lead by both the centre manager and senior executive. We trained the managers several weeks in advance about how to deliver the news, what to do afterwards (one-on-one meetings), what HR support was available, etc. (note: they signed confidentiality agreements). It allowed them to work through their personal issues prior to being involved in the announcement to employees.
I think the key to the successful announcements is we gave employees several months notice (in one case up to a year) that their centres were closing, provided a TON of HR support and had prepared them well in advance that the closures were a real possibility. This way they were not entirely shocked when the announcement was made. Employee feedback was that they appreciated being treated with respect and dignity through the process. I give full credit to the executive of this team - she has an open and honest communication style.
March 28th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
http://www.work911.com/cgi-bin/links/jump.cgi?ID=3739
The website above had an article in which it talked about bad news by e-mail being the best way to go because it provided more accurate information and it made it less painful for the messenger. I disagree with the article not only because they researched it on a small scale, but because the research does not take into account the fact that the delivery of the bad news in person or on the telephone will always be distorted when the messenger is a weak communicator. It takes skill and training to deliver bad news of any proportion, and if the training is not there the face-to-face and phone delivery of bad news will always be altered.