Saturday, October 10, 2026
Saturday, October 10, 2026
Caroline Cubbon-King:
I’ve recently completed two comprehensive communication audits – one for a UK charity, and another for a public sector organisation. The purposes were completely different, and the organizations couldn’t be more distinct. As I laid out the recommendations for both side by side, something striking emerged. Around 80% of the recommendations were remarkably similar. Not just similar to each other, but similar to the many other audit reports I’ve written as a Communication Consultant, and similar to the issues I was grappling with as a practitioner well over 20 years ago.
My first reaction was frustration. Are we really still struggling with the same fundamental challenges after all these years? But then I realized that predictability isn’t the problem. It’s an opportunity. If I can predict 80% of what an organization needs to address upfront, that means we can move through those fundamentals quickly and focus our energy where it really matters, on the unique 20% that could be genuine game-changers for that specific organization.
Take line managers who are part of nearly every communication audit I conduct. Twenty-eight years into my communication career, I can quickly identify whether an organization has recognized how pivotal this group is or whether they’re treating them as a dumping ground, expecting them to cascade messages, embody culture, coach performance, and manage change while juggling expectations from multiple stakeholders, most of which are actually setting their KPIs.
Because this is such a common challenge, I can rapidly assess the situation and get to work on solutions. But here’s what makes it urgent. The line manager role is evolving dramatically. Spans of control are widening and simultaneously, work is accelerating with AI adoption, creating more decisions that need to be made faster. These forces are reshaping the manager role.
And here’s the opportunity. Much of what managers spend their time doing, administrative tasks, routine updates, information gathering, is being automated. This creates space for the manager role to fundamentally shift from control to communication. Organizations that recognize this transition and equip their managers accordingly will have a significant advantage. This is where understanding the common challenge helps us implement solutions faster, freeing up time to focus on the unique aspects of how this plays out in each organization’s specific culture and structure.
Another pattern I consistently see is communication teams hesitant about AI adoption. As a practitioner, I’m curious and open-minded about experimenting with new tools, but many teams are still too cautious. Understanding that this fear is widespread helps me address it systematically rather than treating it as a unique problem each time.
What’s interesting is the contrast I’m seeing globally. In resource-constrained environments, teams have adopted AI faster because they have no choice. They’re trying to do so much with limited investment and resources. This teaches us something valuable, necessity drives innovation. By recognizing this pattern, we can help better-resourced teams learn from those who’ve been forced to experiment.
Similarly, measurement challenges appear in nearly every communication audit. Too many teams still judge themselves by activity metrics – articles written, event attendance, email opens. Even when discussing ‘outcomes,’ they often default to sentiment and engagement. These comfort metrics make teams feel productive but don’t demonstrate whether employees can identify organizational priorities or connect their work to them.
And for the teams in question, how can they translate their significant hard work into tangible business results and impact? This isn’t unusual. But because it’s a common pattern, I can quickly help teams shift from activity tracking to effectiveness measures. This frees up capacity to focus on the unique strategic questions – What specific outcomes matter most for this organization? How do we embed communication in this organization’s particular decision-making workflows?
Here’s where the real magic happens. Once we’ve rapidly addressed the common 80%, we can focus our energy on the 20% that’s truly unique to each organization. This is where transformation occurs.
The unique 20% includes the specific cultural dynamics that are often outside of the control of many communication teams but make or break communication effectiveness. These include power structures, decision-making patterns, leadership personalities and organisational pressure points. These are the factors that determine whether communication becomes strategic infrastructure or remains peripheral.
Without quickly addressing the 80%, organizations can’t hear recommendations about the 20%. They’re still struggling with fundamentals.
Understanding this 80/20 split creates a significant strategic advantage, both for auditors and for the organizations we work with. Instead of treating every communication audit as if we’re discovering new territory, we can move efficiently through common challenges and invest our expertise where it creates the most value.
For in-house teams, this means you can benchmark yourselves against the common 80% and self-diagnose where you stand. Are your line managers equipped for their evolving role? Have you moved beyond activity metrics to effectiveness measures? Are you experimenting with AI or paralyzed by it? If you’re struggling with these fundamentals, you know what needs addressing. The good news is that solutions exist and they’re well-documented and tested across multiple sectors.
This frees up your strategic capacity for what really matters, understanding your organization’s unique dynamics. The specific cultural factors that shape how communication happens. The decision-making patterns that communication needs to support and the operational pressures that create both constraints and opportunities.
For consultants and auditors, explicitly acknowledging the common 80% builds credibility. Organizations can see that we understand the landscape and aren’t wasting time ‘re-discovering’ what’s already known. This creates space for deeper, more valuable conversations about the unique factors that will determine success or failure.
After 28 years in this profession and countless audits, I’m more optimistic than I’ve been in a long time. Not because the challenges have disappeared, but because I can see a clear path through them.
The common 80% isn’t a failure of our profession but a foundation to build on. These challenges persist because they’re genuinely difficult and require sustained organizational commitment. But we don’t need to keep reinventing approaches to them. We can implement proven solutions systematically and quickly.
This efficiency creates capacity for what internal communication should really be doing which is helping organizations navigate their unique strategic challenges.
The communication teams that will thrive are those that can move confidently through the common 80% – addressing fundamentals without getting stuck in them while investing their focus and energy in the transformative 20%. This is where internal communication shifts from support function to strategic infrastructure.
The opportunity is right there. The question is whether we’re ready to seize it.
—
Caroline Cubbon-King is a Fellow of the Institute of Internal Communication (IoIC) and a Chartered PR Practitioner. She has 28 years of experience working as a Senior Communication Leader and has supported and advised hundreds of global communication teams as an Independent Communication Consultant. Caroline works with Communication Teams and Business Leaders to help them build smarter, more effective ways of working that deliver meaningful impact.
© 2026 Stratpair Ltd., trading as Strategic. Registered in Ireland: 747736
