The intranet didn't reach the field engineers
A 3,000-person utilities company is moving field engineers to a mobile job-management app. Communications have been three town halls, a monthly email from the programme director, and an intranet page. Survey: 40% can name the go-live date, 18% understand what changes for them, 12% open the email. Engineers say supervisors know no more than they do; a rumour is circulating that 200 jobs will go. HR has not confirmed redundancy numbers. Go-live is in eight weeks. The communications lead proposes more email and a second roadshow.
1. Diagnose why the communication is failing and redesign the approach. Be specific about channels, segmentation and timing.
Read the worked answer
Diagnosis: The mix is corporate, one-way and undifferentiated. Email reaches only 12%, and town halls do not fit shift patterns. The survey shows awareness without understanding: people may have heard of the app but not what it changes in their day. Supervisors are uninformed, so the most credible local channel is silent. The rumour fills the gap.
Redesign:
- Segment: field engineers, supervisors, dispatchers, depot managers and HR. Each needs different content.
- Use supervisors: brief them first with a pack, a short script and an escalation route. They are the main channel, not the intranet.
- Make it concrete: 'a day in the life' demos, job-specific FAQs, what stays the same, what stops.
- Fit the work: 10-minute toolbox talks at shift start, depot drop-ins, peer champions, mobile-friendly one-pagers.
- Two-way: named question route, weekly Q&A digest, feedback from champions.
- Timing: eight weeks out, focus on 'what changes for me'; closer to go-live, focus on access, support and first-week help.
Judgement: More email and another roadshow repeat the failing logic. The channel must match how engineers actually receive information and test it with them.
2. How should the programme handle the redundancy rumour when HR has not confirmed numbers?
Read the worked answer
Do not ignore it and do not invent certainty. Silence lets the rumour become the accepted story, but false reassurance will destroy credibility when numbers are confirmed.
Action:
- Get a single agreed position from HR and the executive: what is decided, what is not, and when a decision is expected.
- If 200 is untrue, say so clearly and explain the actual position.
- If numbers are genuinely undecided, say that, give the decision timetable, and explain how affected staff will hear first.
- Brief supervisors with the same wording and a clear line on what they can and cannot say.
- Monitor questions and correct new misinformation quickly.
Judgement: The communication must be consistent with formal consultation and HR processes. A programme director should not speculate on redundancies. The credible message is about process and timing, not a number that may change.
3. What should be measured to know communication is working?
Read the worked answer
Do not use email open rates as the main measure; they show delivery, not understanding. Use a small set of measures tied to behaviour:
- Awareness: can staff state the go-live date and their first-week actions?
- Understanding: can they explain two things that change and one that stays the same?
- Supervisor capability: do supervisors feel able to answer the top five questions?
- Confidence and sentiment: pulse questions on whether staff know where to get help; track questions and rumours.
- Channel reach: attendance at toolbox talks and drop-ins, not just email.
- Behaviour: login and first-job completion in the pilot or first wave.
Judgement: Measure before and after specific interventions, and act on gaps. If understanding is low among engineers but high among supervisors, the cascade is not working. If awareness is high but confidence is low, the content is wrong.