|
|
Internal communications: a business case approach
How often have internal communications teams complained of being the 'poor relation'? Compared with PR and with MarComs, internal communications departments tend to have smaller budgets and seem always to struggle to persuade senior management of the value of their activities. They take it as given that communicating with staff is important and yet their colleagues often seem only to pay lip service to this. Why is this state of affairs so common?
One reason is that internal communications departments are all too often inward-looking; they use the jargon of internal communications and focus purely on achieving communications objectives. They pre-suppose that internal communications has a proven case for expenditure alongside other business activities. And rarely do they present their proposals - or demonstrate their results - in the language of business. The challenge for communications departments is to get ahead of the game. Our message to them is: |
|
|
align your communications strategy with your company's business objectives: this is obvious stuff, but thinking through how internal communications can support, reinforce and help to deliver your company's goals is critical to winning the funds you need to do your job; |
|
|
prioritise and then cost your activities: top of the list should be those activities which will have most impact on your company's objectives; |
|
|
think carefully about the objectives of each of your activities and work out which measures will adequately demonstrate that these objectives have been met; |
|
|
know the rules of the financial game and know how to use them to the advantage of your department. |
|
It is at this point, with the thought of understanding some of the finer points of company finance proving unappealing, that it is all too easy to fall back on the assumption that communications benefits cannot really be measured or proven and that expenditure in all cases is a leap of faith. But, with every communications conference or booklet nowadays demonstrating just how much can be measured this is a lame excuse. Equally, communications staff should not fall into the trap of believing that it is only they who have difficult business cases to mount. Spend on updating building décor or on training for instance, is equally difficult to justify but it is done - often far more successfully than in the case of internal communications. There is an art to all this. It is not difficult, but it requires such things as: |
|
|
|
knowledge of how to get an expenditure case approved; |
|
|
understanding the difference between capital and revenue and the company's conventions on these matters; |
|
|
knowledge of the procedures for the carry-over of funds from one financial year to the next; |
|
|
a good record of cost control within the department; |
|
|
a good relationship with the finance department; |
|
|
knowledge of the structure of the communication department's budget and how this fits into the budget for the corporate centre as a whole (so that there is an appreciation of the company's spending priorities). |
|
Evaluation of expenditure proposals - and choosing between competing claims for scarce funds - depends on cases being made in a systematic and business-like way. This is as true for proposals for expenditure on internal communications as it as for major capital investment. Such a business case should: |
|
|
|
explain how the project will contribute to meeting bottom-line business objectives; |
|
|
set specific objectives, in ways which allow subsequent achievement to be measured; |
|
|
set out clear cost and timetable projections, with alternative options and variant analyses; |
|
|
demonstrate the projected financial benefit; |
|
|
set out the proposed regime for measurement, evaluation and review |
|
The benefits of a business case approach
A business case approach to all aspects of internal communications confers credibility on the communications team and makes it easier for their colleagues and peers to judge their activities. Not only will this approach raise the level of debate about communications investments and allow decisions to be taken on the same basis as other business investments, but it may in addition add to the credibility of the message the communicators are trying to get across. It is for instance, difficult for communicators to get over to staff the message that they have to be more business-focused if they themselves are perceived to be less than rigorous in their own use of, and attitude towards, funds. Managing by example is a well-known technique - communicating by example should also be second nature. In recent years we have, in many internal communications departments, witnessed relentless cost cutting. This often implies that the department has not succeeded in communicating to their toughest audience - their senior management. By thinking in terms of the language of the Board (costs and benefits, payback periods, measuring performance and delivering bottom line benefits), by planning their internal lobbying like any other campaign and by being willing to apply the rigorous tests and hurdles applied to other investments, communications departments can succeed in winning backing for exciting and innovative communications projects. |
|