6 Change Communication Don’ts: Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them

1. The Flash-in-the-Pan Effect: Momentum Fades After Go-Live

The biggest and most common mistake does not occur at the beginning of a change project, but somewhere in the middle. When communication is involved early on, commitment is usually high at first: considerable time and effort go into planning, and a well-designed communication programme is developed and launched around go-live. And then – precisely when it would be most important to keep going – communication drops off. The relief that the change is finally underway becomes a signal to disengage.

The result: the change fails to become sustainably embedded in day-to-day operations and instead fizzles out – like a flash in the pan that burns brightly for a moment and then disappears.

• Don’t let communication budgets and resources end with go-live; plan explicitly for follow-up communication.

• Clearly assign responsibility for the post-go-live phase – otherwise, no one will own it.

• Don’t mistake relief for completion: go-live is a milestone, not the finish line.

2. Leaders Communicate Poorly – Because They Can’t or Won’t

Leaders are expected to drive change communication – yet in practice, they are often its greatest weakness. This is also confirmed by the Porsche Consulting Change Management Compass: in a survey of executives from Germany’s 100 largest companies, inadequate communication (77 percent) and insufficient leadership (73 percent) were the most frequently cited reasons why transformations failed to achieve their objectives.

Why is this? In our experience, one reason is a lack of skills: some leaders simply have not received sufficient training in the communication aspects of their role. The other is a lack of willingness: some see communication as a distraction from the “real” issues or assume that someone else – Corporate Communications or HR – is responsible for it.

Both become particularly obvious in one highly visible format: the CEO video. Lines read from a script, stiff body language, a speech lacking conviction – few things undermine credibility as quickly as a leader who clearly does not stand behind their own words.

• Make communication training an integral part of leadership development rather than an optional extra.

• Adapt formats to the individual leader – someone who is uncomfortable on camera does not need a video, but perhaps a more personal format with a smaller group.

• Make communication an explicit leadership responsibility rather than treating it as an optional add-on.

3. Communication Is Treated as an Add-On, Not Given a Seat at the Table

Although much has changed in this respect, we still encounter companies that regard communication as an add-on to the actual change project – something to be brought in at the end, once the concept and timeline have already been decided.

It is far more effective to involve communication as an equal partner in the steering committee from the outset: not merely as an implementation function for decisions that have already been made, but as a voice that helps assess the communication implications before those decisions are finalised.

• Don’t just invite Communications to the steering committee; give it a genuine voice in decision-making.

• Make the communication implications of decisions a regular agenda item – rather than considering them only after the decision has been made.

4. There Is No Sense of Urgency: No One Understands Why Now

According to John Kotter’s classic analysis of failed change initiatives at Harvard Business School, failing to establish a sufficient sense of urgency is one of the key reasons why transformation efforts fail – even before specific communication mistakes come into play.

From a communication perspective, this means that if the message does not explain why the change is necessary now, it will have little impact – even if it is factually correct and well presented.

• Explicitly explain what is driving the change – not just what the desired outcome is.

• Describe the concrete consequences of not taking action instead of focusing solely on opportunities.

• Be honest and measured when communicating urgency: manufactured alarmism loses credibility just as quickly as a lack of urgency.

5. Those Affected Hear About It Last – or From the Media

“Internal before external” is a fundamental rule of communication. Sometimes we adapt this to “internal = external” when the dynamics of a transformation – or a crisis – leave no other option. But it should never be the other way around: external before internal.

And yet this mistake still happens. An employee of a DAX-listed company once summed it up perfectly in a conversation with me. When asked about internal communication regarding an upcoming change, he replied:

“Well, we have the newspaper. I’m sure we’ll find out from there.”

When employees assume that external sources will inform them more reliably than their own company, internal communication has already lost its most important function: being the first and most credible source of information.

• Communicate internally before communicating externally – or, in exceptional cases, at the same time.

• Position internal communication within Corporate Communications rather than HR.

• Ensure a robust internal mix of media and channels that actually reaches employees.

6. Promising More Than You Can Deliver

One particularly risky communication mistake is promising more than can ultimately be delivered – for example, because the effort involved has been underestimated or costs turn out to be higher than expected. What initially sounds like committed, positive communication quickly becomes a credibility trap when reality falls short of the promise.

Every broken promise has a greater impact than a promise kept: once trust has been disappointed, it is twice as difficult to rebuild as the transformation progresses.

• Promise only what is genuinely within your control – communicate timelines, scope and outcomes realistically rather than optimistically.

• Be transparent about uncertainties instead of covering them up with sweeping promises.

• It is better to underpromise and overdeliver than the other way around.

The 6 Don’ts at a Glance

Frequently Asked Questions About Mistakes in Change Communication (FAQ)

What are the most common mistakes in change communication?
The most common mistakes are: communication drops off after go-live; leaders communicate unconvincingly or are unwilling to communicate; communication is involved too late or given too little importance; there is no sense of urgency; employees hear important news from the media rather than from their own company; and promises are made that cannot ultimately be kept.

Why does change communication fail despite good planning?
Because planning often focuses primarily on the initial phase leading up to go-live. The real challenge is maintaining communication afterwards. Without a clear roadmap for the post-go-live phase, communication tends to fade as soon as the immediate pressure to act subsides.

How does poor change communication affect employees?
Information gaps are filled with assumptions – usually sceptical ones. Trust in leaders and the organisation declines, while resistance and rumours increase. Both are much harder to overcome in the next change project than they would have been to prevent in the first place.

How can you prevent a loss of trust in change communication?
Above all, by ensuring consistency between what you say and what you actually do: only make promises you can keep, inform employees before they hear the news from external sources, and remain visible and communicative after go-live rather than going silent.

What should you do if leaders are unwilling to communicate?
Make communication an integral, non-optional part of the leadership role, provide formats that suit the individual leader – which do not always have to be the most elaborate ones – and offer targeted training rather than relying on talent or willingness alone.