Precisely Why Simplicity, Clarity and Purpose Drive Engagement

Communicating more effectively with employees and for the organization

Mary Lou Panzano is a communications executive, coach, leadership advisor, speaker and founder & CEO at Panzano Enterprises LLC

Communication errors are often part ignorance and doing what has always been done and seems smart. Yet, misunderstanding how people think and what aids in comprehension, inspiration and motivation, is costly. It doesn’t have to be that way.

“In times of change, employees are overloaded with information,” Mary Lou Panzano wrote in her LinkedIn newsletter, The Prosperity Project.

She argues that volume of messaging is not doing the work leaders want, need and believe that it is and what is more effective, at the core, is clearer messaging.

Panzano, a communications executive with 35-plus years of experience in employee communications at global companies, assists leaders in guiding strategic, organizational change and she points to a habitual problem she has observed.

“One of the most common mistakes leaders make during transformation is assuming repetition alone creates understanding,” she wrote. “It doesn’t. Complexity creates confusion. Clarity creates movement.”

In her article, she talked about where organizational messaging can go off track.

“When communication becomes overly strategic, heavily layered or filled with corporate language — and Heaven forbid, an alphabet soup of acronyms — employees are left trying to interpret what the change actually means for them.

“That uncertainty slows momentum, weakens trust and increases fatigue.”

As for the reason for this gap between what is being done and what is needed, she explains leadership reality and default behavior.

“Strategy and context need to be shared, no question. However, in my experience, I have found that leaders can get bogged down in long-winded, complicated communications that are laden with corporate speak,” Panzano says.

“For example, ‘We are initiating this program to simplify complexities, reduce redundancies and increase effectiveness, to ensure alignment with the implementation of our strategic imperatives.”

She recognizes that it’s a problem, yet communicators often aren’t recognizing it.

“That sentence is not only difficult to read, it is also challenging to understand,” Panzano stresses.

“Employees with demanding jobs, who are under pressure, don’t have time to read paragraphs of content and waste energy trying to interpret the message, relate to it and discern what it means for them.”

There’s a deeper issue: emotional, psychological and relational. It’s an important one.

“Complicated messages can also make employees feel disrespected, as if their needs have not been considered,” Panzano warns. “It can also seem as though the leader is trying to mask something by filling white space with text instead of simply stating what is happening. That erodes trust.”

She has a recommendation as a proposed solution.

“Why not say, ‘We’re starting this plan to make things easier, cut out extra work and help everyone do a better job so we can reach our goals.’ That, I can understand and relate to,” Panzano says.

Observable experience shows that organizations may not always be communicating like humans to their fellow humans, as much as they would like to do such and are presuming. There are roots as to why this may be taking place.

“There are several factors contributing to the dehumanizing of communications in the workplace,” Panzano says.

“First, leaders and line managers are under extraordinary pressure to perform in what is arguably one of the most dynamic, unpredictable and rapidly-changing business and economic environments we’ve seen in our lifetimes.

“It takes time, thought and energy to pause to consider what your employees’ needs are, not only what they need to know to do their jobs in support of company goals but what their needs are as people.”

There is the human, full-life variable as well.

“Individuals do not leave their hearts and personal issues at home when they arrive at work or log onto their laptops from home or a coffee shop,” Panzano says.

“They are first human beings, then employees. I think leaders sometimes forget this. When they do, over time, it leads to disengagement, disloyalty and can tarnish corporate reputation and that is much harder to restore than it is to build and maintain.”

Technology has clearly impacted how well or not we interact as human beings.

“Second, leaders are increasingly replacing human beings with robots, machines, bots, AI agents and non-human workers,” Panzano says. “Those types of workers do not bring emotions, values, lived experiences and the need for psychological safety and human connection to the workplace. Human beings do.”

She goes deeper to explain how this is interconnected with communications.

“Companies don’t run themselves; people run them. Leaders who undervalue and avoid human connection, do not care about their employees’ needs or make little effort relate to them not only as workers, but as people, will find it difficult to communicate in a way that is understandable, builds trust or engenders buy-in,” Panzano explains.

“These factors all affect productivity and profitability.”

An abundance of people are communicating in the world and in organizations, yet authority is not making the time to do what else is need for effective communication.

“Lastly, leaders are not taking enough time to listen,” Panzano asserts.

“Employees know more than their leaders often give them credit for. They are on the front lines, interacting with customers, doing research, involved in manufacturing or product development and a host of other activities,” she adds.

“If something isn’t working, employees know. If there’s an opportunity to take advantage of, employees know. Leaders who avoid spending time listening to and engaging with their employees miss the opportunity to gain insight and perspectives they may not otherwise hear.”

Again, it goes to the humanness of the relationship.

“Employees want to be acknowledged and heard and when they aren’t, they can become indifferent and often actively disengage,” Panzano explains.

There is an approach to prevent, mitigate or fix it.

“Listening is one of the most important ways leaders can create that connection. And it is often overlooked or underappreciated,” Panzano says. “The most effective leaders and communications professionals I know are excellent listeners.”

She wrote in her LinkedIn newsletter article about the value of clearly communicating the “why” behind transition within an organization.

“Because when people understand the purpose behind the change, they are far more likely to support the path forward,” she said.

She explains why that is the natural byproduct.

“People are looking for meaning and context when they first learn about a change,” Panzano says. “Most people resist change. Our brains prefer predictability and familiarity, while change signals uncertainty and potential danger ahead.”

This presents a challenge to communicators.

“Without the rationale behind the change and a full understanding of what it means for employees, what problem it solves or opportunity it presents, how it will impact them and a clear vision of what the future will look and feel like after the change, employees will be skeptical or even fearful,” Panzano details.

The outcome is unlikely to please organizational executives.

“Leaders will be hard-pressed to gain buy-in and support from employees who are experiencing those emotions,” she warns.

The improvement and remedy is available and not being regularly applied.

“Communicating clearly and simply about what the change is, why it is necessary, how it will affect employees and what will be different when the change takes effect will reduce resistance and help garner support more quickly and effectively,” Panzano says.

The formula is straightforward, as she suggested in her article.

“... ask yourself: ‘What would make this clearer, calmer and easier to understand?’” Panzano advised.

It’s simple, yet proves difficult to remember and apply. However, there is available interaction effectiveness and value within it.

“The simplicity of the question is what makes it challenging for communicators,” Panzano asserts. “Simplifying messages is hard work; it takes time, thought and a deep understanding and appreciation of your audience.”

It’s smart to remember, she adds, that assumptive conclusions come with risk.

“Just because a message is released, it doesn’t mean it is well-understood, if it is read at all,” Panzano says. And, she adds, “That’s not communication.”

She offers what qualifies.

“True communication happens when a message is delivered, received, understood, internalized and acted upon,” Panzano says. “The goal of any communication is to get your audience to understand and engage with it as you or the company intends.

A simple habit and discipline can make a significant difference.

“Whether you are a leader or communications professional, pausing long enough to consider how the message can be more clear, concise and relatable for your audience is worth the time.”

Because, as she explains, “The alternative is to fix the problems that will inevitably arise from communications that weren’t.”

Subscribe for free (or paid, for additional benefits).

Communication Intelligence is an interview-driven publication of analysis and ideas that includes semi-regular insights-and-advisory leader contributions.

In addition to the newsletter, Communication Intelligence offers services to help people clearly, effectively communicate their expertise within and outside of their organization. Reach out to detail your objectives, desired outcomes and the best way to work with you in a business interaction.