The past four years have seen significant change in the communications environment, particularly as it relates to the role and remit of the communications executive.
Following the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic and the rise in prominence of social justice issues initially motivated by the death of George Floyd, communications and corporate affairs executives stepped up to counsel the C-suite on stakeholder responses – including broader guidance around pandemic-related concerns and stances taken on racial justice and other social issues. An array of issue-based pledges and commitments put new scrutiny on corporations in the public arena, putting communicators in the hot-seat when it came to steering company leadership.
The pendulum has since swung back on social issues. Political polarization in the U.S. is at an all-time high, and increased public pressure from conservative activists like Robby Starbuck has made C-suite leaders more cautious on social issues. Employee activism has increasingly been met with a firm hand from corporations, and leaders have taken a harder stance on return-to-office mandates. In our work as counselors and advisors to the functional structure of the communications organization, we had one overarching question: Where does this environment leave the communications leader?
We spoke anonymously with a dozen large-company communications leaders with an eye toward assessing the change in scope, role, remit, function, and design for the communications organization associated with the myriad changes observed since 2020.
A natural straw man hypothesis for our research was that communications leaders might fade back into the background under a more cautious posture from their leadership. Instead, what we found was a more nuanced position, both more valuable and vulnerable than ever before. The past several years have heralded closer alignment between corporate communications and the rest of the C-suite. As their role has become more elevated, communications leaders have nonetheless been dependent on the CEO for position and influence. This piece has not changed: Specifically, many reported a refocusing on the “nuts and bolts” of the business, with fewer calories burned on issues and pledges, but more dialogue on the long-term advantage of purpose-based initiatives.
Our interviews revealed a shifting CEO agenda dictating changes to the communications function. Our interviewees pointed to a more complex regulatory environment, which has drawn the C-suite more deeply into the political environment under guidance from a broader corporate affairs function. They pointed to the pace of change, particularly as it relates to the rise of artificial intelligence, as a key mover on functional and structural organization. They called out the centralization and consolidation of businesses, and a broader trend toward efficiency and supply chain resilience, as driving factors both in their own organizations and in those they serve. And they spoke at length about the role of employee activism, particularly around core labor issues – pay equity, hours and working conditions, bargaining rights – which dictate new considerations and questions about the role and accountabilities of corporate leadership.