Communication In Employee Engagement

Stop saying, "We need to listen to our people." Start saying, "We need to show our work." Listening alone is a meaningless gesture without visibility. When feedback disappears into the corporate silence, it breeds distrust. The reason for low employee engagement isn't a lack of input—it's a lack of transparent follow-through. Starbucks mastered this by letting customers see which ideas were implemented, which failed, and the clear reasons behind every decision. This radical openness creates buy-in, even when the final answer is a "no." For internal teams, transparency is the ultimate retention tool. When employees know how decisions are made, they feel respected, stay connected, and maintain trust, even when they disagree with the outcome. Your feedback process shouldn't be a black box. It should be a clear window. What is your company doing to turn feedback into visible clarity? Tag a CHRO or People Leader who has built this high-level of organizational trust through transparency.

Transparency Helps Everybody For years, I have maintained a private framework for my own use where I evaluate how organizations support people during layoffs, restructurings, and career transitions. It is not something I publish. It is simply a 1–5 rating system based on thousands of conversations and observations across the industry. The factors include how much support is provided to affected employees, whether career resources and introductions are offered, the level of financial and transition assistance, executive, recruiting, and hiring team involvement, the emotional support environment around the change, and importantly, the level of transparency provided to employees and the broader community. Over many years, one pattern has become impossible to ignore: organizations that score 4s and 5s consistently produce better outcomes for affected employees. People find work faster, fewer people remain unemployed long-term, and candidates report a better overall experience, even in a difficult situation. This should not be surprising. One of the biggest drivers is transparency. I understand the many reasons organizations may hesitate to share information. But I can also tell you that organizations that disclose the size of a reduction, help assemble lists of impacted employees who wish to be identified, and generally make information available create materially better hiring outcomes. More transparency means more visibility. More visibility means more outreach. More outreach means more interviews and more opportunities. This is one reason we created the Games Org Support Post program. We have now completed 141 of them. The value is not a LinkedIn post by itself. The value is the broader system of support around it: introducing resources, walking teams through options, connecting people to help, and getting job-search activity started as early as possible. In fact, the organizations that impress me most are often the ones that arrive with everything already prepared. They already know who is looking. They already have resources assembled. They already have a plan. To me, that signals something much bigger than the post itself. There is a broader culture of support already in motion. On the other side, I occasionally hear about efforts to minimize reporting, conceal numbers, obscure who was affected, or otherwise reduce visibility around cuts. I have even heard about specific things people do to conceal data or engagement from ASGC on occasion. That is always disappointing, not because it affects me or a community program, but because it directly reduces the ability of affected people to receive help. The data I have seen over years points in the same direction: transparency leads to better outcomes, transparency leads to faster placements, and transparency helps people. When people are going through one of the most difficult moments of their careers, helping them should be the priority above all else. Human beings matter more than PR.

One of the biggest misconceptions I see in high-pressure communications: Transparency ≠ saying everything. Transparency = knowing exactly what’s true and communicating it clearly and consistently. Where leaders get into trouble isn’t what they don’t say. It’s when: • The message shifts • The details change • The organization isn’t aligned That’s when credibility starts to erode… fast. The leaders who handle these moments best don’t “wing it.” They’ve already: -Aligned internally -Locked in the facts -Prepared the message So when the moment comes, they deliver with clarity and confidence. That’s not instinct. That’s preparation. If you’re leading in any high-visibility role, this is a MUST-HAVE skill, not a luxury.

Leaders say they are transparent. Their teams often feel the opposite. Because transparency is not sharing everything. It is sharing what matters. Clearly. Consistently. At the right time. But this is where many leaders get it wrong. They communicate late. They communicate partially. Or they avoid saying things until they are “final.” And in that gap, something else fills the space. Assumptions. Rumours. Uncertainty. And trust starts to slip. Not because leaders are hiding something. But because they are not communicating enough. The best leaders understand this. They do not wait for perfect answers. They share what they know. They are honest about what they do not. And they keep people informed as things evolve. Because transparency is not about having all the answers. It is about not leaving people in the dark.

𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗶𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗮 𝗯𝘂𝘇𝘇𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗱. To me, it’s the foundation of trust, connection, and growth. I’ve learned this the hard way. In moments when I held back, thinking it would “protect” my team, I saw confusion and disengagement take root. But when I leaned into honesty – even when the truth was uncomfortable – I saw something incredible: stronger bonds, deeper commitment, and a team that felt truly empowered. Transparency isn’t about having all the answers; it’s about having the courage to share what you know, where you’re headed, and why it matters. 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗲’𝘀 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗜’𝘃𝗲 𝘀𝗲𝗲𝗻 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗺 𝘁𝗲𝗮𝗺 𝗱𝘆𝗻𝗮𝗺𝗶𝗰𝘀: 1️⃣ 𝗦𝗲𝘁 𝗰𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗿 𝗴𝗼𝗮𝗹𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀: Ambiguity is the enemy of motivation. When your team knows exactly what success looks like and why it matters, they’ll rise to the challenge. 2️⃣ 𝗦𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗶𝗴 𝗽𝗶𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲: People thrive when they understand how their work contributes to the mission. Don’t just focus on tasks – connect them to purpose. 3️⃣ 𝗘𝗻𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗽𝗲𝗻 𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘂𝗲: Some of the best ideas come when you create a space where every voice feels heard. Feedback isn’t just a process – it’s a gift. 4️⃣ 𝗢𝘄𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗼𝘂𝗴𝗵 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀: Addressing challenges openly shows integrity. It’s not about being perfect; it’s about being accountable. 5️⃣ 𝗟𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝘁𝗼𝗼𝗹𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘃𝗶𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆: Whether it’s dashboards, check-ins, or team updates, clarity fosters alignment – and alignment fuels performance. Transparency doesn’t mean overloading people with information. It means sharing the right insights, at the right time, in a way that builds trust and inspires action. What do you think? Is transparency embedded in the way you work or manage your teams?

Transparency—Given how organisations and human behaviour work, the most costly news in any organisation is bad news that arrives too late to act. I believe excellence is cultivated when bad news travels at supersonic speed, while good news can arrive by horse and carriage. I call this the “speed of denial,” or the velocity at which reality is sanitised as it moves up the organisation. One of the most dangerous dynamics in organisations is when tough messages get filtered, softened, or delayed as they move up the chain. It creates a gap between reality and leadership's understanding that only widens with time. This time gap between your front line and decision-makers is an essential measure of risk. I've learned that building a culture of transparency isn't just about open communication - it's about the velocity of communication, especially with problems. Good news can wait, but issues that need attention cannot. Too often, difficult messages get stuck in organisational bureaucracy. When they reach senior leadership, the urgency evaporates, and valuable response time is lost. This filtering happens not from malice but from deeply human instincts: People don't want to disappoint. There is hope that it will be fixed even if delayed. Individuals fear being the bearers of bad news. But these well-intentioned impulses create dangerous blind spots at the top. The 'High-Velocity Truth' Organisation always wins, compared to a “Good News-share” organisation. In the former, surfacing problems are celebrated, where leaders respond to escalations with genuine curiosity, and where the speed of bad news is seen as a competitive advantage. We should reward people who are the early problem spotters, always ask in management reviews “what else should we know?” and react to negative news with calm and curiosity without jumping into criticism. The organisations that thrive are where people feel safe escalating challenges quickly and clearly. No sugarcoating. No waiting for the perfect solution before raising the flag.

How transparent should we be with our people insights? This is a question I hear from leaders all the time, and, like any good social scientist, my answer is: it depends. Let’s put aside the non-negotiables—those bound by law or confidentiality. Beyond that, there’s a wide spectrum of how companies handle sharing people data insights, and there’s no one-size-fits-all approach. Here are a few key things I always consider: 1️⃣ Data Source Matters: If employees are giving feedback through engagement surveys or focus groups, it’s crucial to share those insights back with them to increase trust, accountability, and future participation. 2️⃣ Know Your Audience: Even if you’re talking about the same metric, you should communicate about it differently to different audiences. Executives often want to know about the high-level trends and strategic insights while the company at large may want to hear about how it directly affects their day-to-day work. You can also consider sharing the information with leaders first, so they are equipped with extra context. 3️⃣ Consider Sensitivity: If the data touches on delicate issues—like potential layoffs, some diversity metrics, or areas where the company isn’t performing well—it’s essential to approach these topics with care. Consider the risks and who needs to know in order to act on the information. Transparency doesn’t mean sharing everything; it means sharing thoughtfully. 4️⃣ Look at Precedent: Consistency in communication builds credibility. Suddenly withholding information you’ve shared in the past can raise red flags. On the other hand, if transparency is new to your organization, you might start by sharing smaller insights and gradually build up to more comprehensive data. 5️⃣ Clarify the Purpose: Is it to inform, to spark action, or to inspire change? Being clear on this will help you decide how much to share, with whom, and how to frame it. 6️⃣ Anchor to Usefulness: A lot of what we study in People Analytics can be helpful for employees to know. How can managers increase psychological safety? How can employees get higher quality feedback from their colleagues? How can distributed teams collaborate best? Whenever possible, I like to share these learnings with employees so they can benefit from our data-informed wisdom. My default? Lean into transparency. In the absence of data, human nature is to make up a narrative—and the stories we create are often far worse than the truth. When appropriate, sharing our knowledge broadly can empower employees and leaders alike to work with a greater shared understanding of reality. Being transparent doesn’t mean sharing everything with everyone, but it does require being purposeful, considerate, and consistent about what you share.

I have been seeing a theme in my work with teams and clients lately and find myself saying over and over again: In the absence of Information, we create our own Narrative. Ever notice how quickly our brains fill in the blanks when we don't have all the facts? A delayed response to an email becomes "They are mad at me." A cancelled meeting turns into "They don’t care about me." Silence from leaders means "they are hiding something." As humans we are hardwired for stories. It's how we've remembered facts, shared lessons, and it allowed us to survive, learn, and build cultures from the beginning of time. As leaders, we have two critical responsibilities to our teams and organizations: 1- Seek information before jumping to conclusions about our team members' behaviors, motivations, or performance. 2- Share information, especially during uncertain times, transitions, or delays. Why? The cost of silence is a team filled with anxiety, distrust, and misalignment. The gift of transparency is a team that has clarity, psychological safety, and trust. When you lead with transparency and curiosity, you replace assumptions with truth and along the way you create connection and build relationships. Information fills the gap before imagination does. Give people the truth before they write their own version of the story. Commit to finding the truth before creating your own.

The quickest way to destroy morale? Lack of transparency. At first, people assume there’s a reason. Confidentiality. Timing. Strategy. They tell themselves leadership must know something they don’t. They give you the benefit of the doubt. But when information keeps getting filtered or withheld, something shifts. Here’s what it looks like and what you can try at each stage 👇 1️⃣ “I’m sure they’ll share when they can.” People wait patiently. ↳ Share what you can share. Even partial context builds trust. 2️⃣ “There must be more to the story.” Employees fill in gaps with assumptions. ↳ Replace ambiguity with clarity. Say what’s known, what’s not, and what’s next. 3️⃣ “I’ll just stay out of it.” Curiosity turns into distance. ↳ Invite questions openly. Don’t punish skepticism. 4️⃣ “Why are we finding out this way?” Information arrives late or sideways. ↳ Communicate early. No one likes learning about change through rumors. 5️⃣ “They’re not telling us everything.” Speculation spreads faster than facts. ↳ Address the elephant. Name what people are likely thinking. 6️⃣ “I need to be careful what I say.” People become politically cautious. ↳ Model openness. Admit uncertainty. 7️⃣ “Decisions are already made.” Engagement drops. Input feels performative. ↳ Involve people before outcomes are finalized. 8️⃣ “What’s the point of giving feedback?” Participation declines. ↳ Close the loop publicly. Show how feedback changes direction. 9️⃣ “This doesn’t feel aligned.” Values start to feel like branding, not behavior. ↳ Align messaging with action. If trade-offs are necessary, explain them honestly. 🔟 “I’m just here to do my job.” Morale turns transactional. ↳ Reconnect people to purpose. Transparency is respecting adults as adults. 1️⃣1️⃣ “I don’t see a future here.” When trust disappears, so does commitment. ↳ Have real career conversations. Don’t wait until exit interviews. 1️⃣2️⃣ “I’m done.” They’re still employed. But emotionally, they’ve already left. ↳ Listen without defensiveness. Transparency rebuilds slowly, but it can rebuild. Morale doesn’t collapse overnight. It erodes in the gaps between what’s said and what’s withheld. Your people can handle hard truths. What they struggle with is silence. Tell the truth and let people handle their own emotions. You're not their parent. You're their leader. - If this resonates, I work with leaders and organizations to rebuild engagement, trust, and ownership. You can learn more about my programs at anandaexperience.com