I love my day-job, but I do have to edit internal communications that has been created by folks who do not have a writing or design background. The teacher in me usually enjoys helping them to understand how to improve their work.

But the teacher in me sometimes just sighs and rolls my eyes.

Yesterday, the head of our Employee Activities Committee (EAC) forwarded a draft communication from another employee regarding an upcoming treat for employees. Let’s just say that the rough draft was more rough than usual:

If I TRIED to pack as many grammar and punctuation problems as possible in a three-line communication, I would be hard-pressed to top this.

I would be even more challenged to write a persuasive statement linking a) the national holiday that commemorates the deaths of millions of armed services personnel with b) the consumption of hot dogs (or Hot dog’s) in the company cafeteria.

The creator of the above email attempted to make the connection by including two images side-by-side: A hot dog with many trimmings (minus ketchup) and a soldier facing a military cemetery, with the U.S. flag superimposed behind the words, “Memorial Day.”

Yes, looking at those war dead makes me salivate in anticipation of the hot dog that awaits me!

I assume that the head of the EAC thought about editing this email, then threw up her hands. Her transmittal note to me was the kicker:

“May I please”? Okay, it’s time to stop complaining and to earn my pay.

May you please comment on the quality of writing you come across in your role?

“I know I didn’t put a lot of effort into this but I am stuck for good ideas, please help.”

The team manager’s entreaty was sincere…and all too common. I’ve received countless written and verbal requests like this over the years, as have most of you, if you are a communications professional.

One possible response would be to allow myself a smug smile, and then to craft a well-written and designed communication piece. A harsher response would be to tell the team manager that I’m swamped, and leave him or her to create and send a communication that would provide the information they wanted to convey, just not as cleanly and clearly as they would want. A middle-ground approach would be to tell the team manager that I don’t have time to create the email, but I’m providing the general structure for the email, along with ideas for graphics and a headline. Then the team manager could get practice putting the pieces into place.

Which would be the “correct” response? They all could be “correct,” depending on other factors. However, I think a better question would be, “What is the team manager’s communication objective, and is this email an appropriate tactic to accomplish that objective”?

The team manager confused “good ideas” with “creativity.” Communications is part art and part science, as we use proven methodology to determine and measure the most appropriate communication objectives, and art in the writing and design of those communications.

This team manager wanted a creative communication that would grab employees’ attention. What he needed was to better understand that the best “good idea” I had to offer was to help him achieve his communication objective–although he would first have to be shown how to do that.

In the course of my work day, I get more opportunities than I could comfortably accept to enlighten coworkers about effective communication planning. I get many more requests to “pull a communication rabbit” out of my tactician’s hat.

I piloted a communication education course at work that I developed. The participants gave me top marks for my delivery and grasp of the content. They clearly saw me as a subject-matter-expert. They did want more time spent on the “how-to” part of communications.

In summary, I have many opportunities to share my communication experience and skills. But most of the people who have met with me to discuss a communication challenge or project don’t want to learn how to do it themselves; they either think they already know what to do, or they have thrown up their hands and want me to do it for them.

So I ask some questions, and use their responses as the basis of a conversation that probably won’t give them the immediate satisfaction they desire. Yet it will benefit them, and me, the most in the long-run.

Anyone who has ever worked in an organization knows about the “grapevine”—the informal rumor-mill where fact and speculation mix together to breed various strains of truth, half-truths and outright misconceptions.

Strategic, open communications can reduce the grapevine’s activity and influence. This is even more apparent, and important, as companies and their stakeholders (including employees) engage more in the range of communication channels powered by social media tools and platforms such as blogs, Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook.

Companies today are looking to join in the conversations occurring within and outside of the company walls. Those conversations can change and move rapidly, which makes it more difficult for company “spokespersons” (either formally designated or ad hoc) to be a trusted participant if they haven’t spent time engaging with others.

Some of the bigger challenges occur in times of change, when information may be less available or less readily shared, and the unknown can seem more apparent and more ominous. Does that describe the situation at Hewlett-Packard, following the sudden resignation on Friday of Mark Hurd, HP’s chairman, chief executive officer and president? (Read more in my previous post.)

A few HP executives have been quoted in articles appearing online. For example, in the U.K., a Guardian newspaper’s online article quoted HP’s general counsel Michael Holston as stating that Hurd engaged in a “systematic pattern” of submitting falsified financial reports to hide a “close personal relationship” with a former HP contractor.

The official HP blog, Data Central, on Saturday offered scant information other than a retread of the corporate statement published on Friday. It stated that “Comments are closed for this post and will not be published.”

Let’s hope that the communications internally at HP were much more transparent. After all, Hurd was not universally loved within HP for his tough business decisions that led to thousands of job cuts over the years. How will HP’s communications staff manage this time of change?

That was exactly the topic of a session led by HP communicators Robin Andrews and Desiree Sylvester in 2005. It was titled, “Keeping employees focused and engaged in times of change,” and it was delivered on the day before Hurd accepted the IABC EXCEL Award at the IABC International Conference in Washington, D.C.

Much of what Robin and Desiree shared in that presentation could hold true today, such as the “communication challenges”:

• Balance focus on delivering day-to-day business vs. change
• Manage leaks in the media
• Everything said internally was expected to be shared externally—very difficult to give employees additional or advance information

Check out the presentation and then let’s see what surfaces from HP’s employees. Will they feel like their feelings and opinions have been heard?

Another more minor observation. I had noticed that on Friday, the day of the Hurd resignation announcement, the HP site was not completely updated. Although the press release was posted under HP’s News Releases section, the company leader page still indicated that Hurd was in charge.

From the HP website on 8-6-2010, the day Hurd's resignation was announced.

On Saturday, the site was updated to indicate that Cathie Lesjak
was named interim chief executive officer and would remain chief financial officer.