Circle of Fellows

Last month, a panel of IABC Fellows shared their observations on the results of a recent AI-focused survey conducted by the Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communication Management (Global Alliance). This month, a fresh panel (with Adrian Cropley returning) will pick up the conversation where the August panel left off, exploring various aspects of the role communication professionals will play as AI continues to evolve, along with the challenges and opportunities it presents to organizations of all kinds.

Joining Adrian and moderator Shel Holtz are Mary Hills, Robin McCasland, and Cyrus Mavalwala.

Catch Part 1 of the discussion.

About the Panel

Adrian Cropley is the founder and director of the Centre for Strategic Communication Excellence, a global training and development organization. For over thirty years, Adrian has worked with clients worldwide, including Fortune 500 companies, on major change communication initiatives, internal communication reviews and strategies, professional development programs, and executive leadership and coaching. He is a non-executive director on several boards and advises some of the top CEOs and executives globally.

Adrian is a past global chair of the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC), where he implemented the IABC Career Road Map, kick-started a global ISO certification for the profession, and developed the IABC Academy. Adrian pioneered the Melcrum Internal Communication Black Belt program in Asia Pacific and is a sought-after facilitator, speaker, and thought leader. He has been a keynote speaker and workshop leader on strategic and change communication at international conferences in Canada, the U.S., Europe, the Middle East, Malaysia, Singapore, China, India, Hong Kong, Thailand, New Zealand, and Australia. He has received numerous awards, including IABC Gold Quill Awards for communication excellence, and his Agency received Boutique Agency of the Year 6 years running.

Adrian is the Chair of the Industry Advisory Committee for the RMIT School of Media and Communication and a Fellow of the IABC and RSA. In 2017, he was awarded the Medal of Order of Australia for his contribution to the field of communication.

Mary Hills, ABC, IABC Fellow, Six Sigma, FCSCE serves as MBA Faculty in Benedictine University’s Goodwin College of Business, teaching brand and marketing management. Her work in marketing, finance and organizational structure and management naturally brings an interdisciplinary perspective to her students.

Mary’s professional career includes work at large, publicly traded corporations in the financial sector and at closely held, middle-market companies.  Her work includes time at Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Whiteco Advertising, NiSource, Northern Trust, Unilever, and Zebra Technologies. As a member of strategic management teams, her work includes research, risk analysis, and strategic planning for product launches, market expansion, and change and crisis management

Mary’s AI work began in 2012 supporting a start-up’s AI product development at Purdue Technology Center and Research Park of NWI. Most recently, she completed AI Usage and Guidelines in Marketing Research for MBA students in her brand and marketing class.

Robin McCasland, IABC Fellow, SCMP, is Senior Director of Corporate Communications for Health Care Service Corporation (HCSC). She leads her department’s CommTech initiative, using AI and emerging technologies to deliver productivity gains and build differentiated communication capabilities that shape business decisions and outcomes. Robin also leads the internal communications team and the employee listening program, demonstrating to senior leaders how employee and executive communication add value to the business’s bottom line. Previously, Robin excelled in leadership roles in communication for Texas Instruments, Dell, Tenet Healthcare, and Burlington Northern Santa Fe.

Robin is a past IABC chairman and has served in numerous association leadership roles for more than 30 years. She was honored in 2023 and 2021 by Ragan Communications/PR Daily as one of the Top Women Leaders in Communication. She’s also received IABC Southern Region and IABC Dallas Communicator of the Year honors. Robin is a frequent presenter at communication and HR conferences. She is a graduate of The University of Texas at Austin and a Leadership Texas alumnus. Robin resides in Dallas.

Cyrus Mavalwala, ABC, MC, IABC Fellow, is a sought-after communication strategist who leads a team of trusted advisors that executives rely on to capture, own, and sustain mindshare with the people that matter most.

After senior roles at global PR agencies, Cyrus founded Advantis Communications in 2002. Advantis’ proprietary frameworks operationalize AI, elevate social media, and integrate video to advance thought leadership and earn relevance, influence, and trust. These frameworks have been cited in news media, industry, and academia. Cyrus helps communication teams apply AI responsibly to improve workflows, increase effectiveness, and amplify impact.

Through Act Like an Agency™, Cyrus leads ALA faculty to elevate communication teams from tacticians to trusted advisors. An operating system for the modern communication function, Act Like an Agency enables in-house teams to operate with the confidence, discipline, and influence of strategic business partners.

A co-creator of the Digital Strategy and Communications Management Certificate at the University of Toronto, Cyrus brings his strategic perspective and practical frameworks to classrooms, boardrooms, and stages across North America.

Cyrus brings deep governance experience through his service with IABC at the local, regional, and international levels. He has judged industry awards and received more than 30 honors for communication excellence across local, national, and international programs.

The post Circle of Fellows #133: AI and the Communication Leadership Moment, Part 2 appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.

Episode 132 of IABC’s Circle of Fellows examines what the newly released Reimagining Tomorrow 2026 report from the Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communication Management means for the profession. The report surveyed 536 communication professionals across six global regions and found a profession that has embraced AI in practice but not yet claimed AI governance in leadership: 95.9% of organizations now permit AI, yet only 8.6% have communication professionals leading the formal governance structure. One in four organizations discloses AI use to no one at all.

Joining moderator Shel Holtz are Bonnie Caver and Adrian Cropley OAM, both Global Alliance board directors and the research partners behind the survey, as well as Mike Klein. (Theomary Karamanis was scheduled to be a panelist but laryngitis prevented her from participating.)  Together, they dig into what the data means for the profession, what it will take to move from adoption to accountability, and what it takes to be a leader in the AI era.

Links from this episode:

About the panel

Bonnie Caver, SCMP, is the Founder and CEO of Reputation Lighthouse, a global change management and reputation consultancy with offices in Denver, Colorado, and Austin, Texas. The firm, which is 20 years old, focuses on leading companies to create, accelerate, and protect their corporate value. She has achieved the highest professional certification for a communication professional, the Strategic Communication Management Professional (SCMP), a distinction at the ANSI/ISO level. She is also a certified strategic change management professional (Kellogg School of Management), a certified crisis manager (Institute of Crisis Management). She holds an advanced certification for reputation through the Reputation Institute (now the RepTrak Company). She is a past chair of the global executive board for the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC). She currently serves on the board of directors for the Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communication Management, where she leads the North American Regional Council and is the New Technology Responsibility/AI Director. Caver is the Vice Chair for the Global Communication Certification Council (GCCC) and leads the IABC Change Management Special Interest Group, which has more than 1,300 members. In addition, she is heavily involved in the global conversation around ethical and responsible AI implementation and led the Global Alliance’s efforts in creating Ethical and Responsible AI Guidelines for the global profession.

Adrian Cropley is the founder and director of the Centre for Strategic Communication Excellence, a global training and development organization. For over thirty years, Adrian has worked with clients worldwide, including Fortune 500 companies, on major change communication initiatives, internal communication reviews and strategies, professional development programs, and executive leadership and coaching. He is a non-executive director on several boards and advises some of the top CEOs and executives globally.

Adrian is a past global chair of the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC), where he implemented the IABC Career Road Map, kick-started a global ISO certification for the profession, and developed the IABC Academy. Adrian pioneered the Melcrum Internal Communication Black Belt program in Asia Pacific and is a sought-after facilitator, speaker, and thought leader. He has been a keynote speaker and workshop leader on strategic and change communication at international conferences in Canada, the U.S., Europe, the Middle East, Malaysia, Singapore, China, India, Hong Kong, Thailand, New Zealand, and Australia. He has received numerous awards, including IABC Gold Quill Awards for communication excellence, and his Agency received Boutique Agency of the Year 6 years running.

Adrian is the Chair of the Industry Advisory Committee for the RMIT School of Media and Communication and a Fellow of the IABC and RSA. In 2017, he was awarded the Medal of Order of Australia for his contribution to the field of communication.

Mike Klein is the Editor-in-Chief of Strategic Magazine, Founder of #WeLeadComms, and a communication consultant specializing in internal and social communication based in Reykjavik, Iceland. A former US political consultant, Mike shifted direction toward internal communication while pursuing his MBA at London Business School.  Since then, Mike has been one of the leading voices for empowering communication professionals, and advocating a focus on internal influence and social connection as drivers of communication, integration and performance. His 2011 book, From Lincoln to LinkedIn remains relevant as organizations recognize that personal credibility and connection are critical to communication success in a world where content volumes are increasing and instability flourishes. Raised in Chicago, Mike has lived and worked in seven different countries, and is also a Fellow of the Centre for Strategic Communication Excellence and the Institute of Internal Communication.

Raw transcript

 And we are live. Hi everybody, and welcome to Circle of Fellows. Uh, I am Shel Holtz. I am an IABC fellow. I am here with, uh, three of my IABC fellow colleagues, and we are going to talk about, uh, the leadership moment in artificial intelligence for the communication community. This is the first of two episodes where we will focus on this topic. This is based on the results of a survey that was conducted by the Global Alliance. Uh, both Bonnie and Adrian are heavily involved with the Global Alliance, and I’ll let them tell you how, uh, as we go around the horn and do introductions. Uh, before we get into that, though, I do wanna let everyone know that we hope that you will participate in this conversation by sharing your questions, your observations, your thoughts in the YouTube chat. I can see them right here in this sidebar panel, and we’ll share them on the screen, and we can bring you into the conversation that way. Uh, so let’s do introductions. We’ll go around, uh, clockwise in the order I see you. Uh, and that means we’re starting with you, Adrian. Thanks for that, Shel. It’s always good to be on the Circle of Fellows. Um, I’m Adrian Cropley. I am the co-founder of the Center for Strategic Communication based in Melbourne, Australia, past IABC chair, and now, uh, director on the board of the Global Alliance, and fortunately, um, a partner in the research. Bonnie has- Bonnie and I have done this now for the last couple of years with the, the Global Alliance, so it’s great to be on here sharing a little bit around that, uh, what it’s telling us about that leadership moment. Terrific. Glad to have you with us, Adrian. Bonnie, you’re up. Hi, I’m Bonnie Caver, and I am in Austin, Texas, and I run a company called Reputation Lighthouse, and that’s my day job. Um, of course, I’ve been involved with IABC a long time, and am the past chair of the Global Communication Certification Council and sat on the board of the Global Alliance where, for the last, uh, three years, I’ve been focused on responsible AI and the way our global profession looks at responsible AI. So anytime we have an opportunity to talk about that, uh, it’s very helpful to me as we’re moving forward to Abuja and the World PR Forum, and we’ll be updating the responsible AI guidelines for our profession. Excellent. Looking forward to seeing the outcome of that initiative. And Mike? Hello there. I’m Mike Klein, and I am an IABC fellow. I am also editor-in-chief of Strategic Magazine, which publishes daily content for communication leaders worldwide. And also, I have my own consultancy focused on internal communication and organizational strategy. And my AI bent is less about responsible use of AI and more about strategic use of AI and our strategic positioning within the AI ecosystem, um, with an, with a particular focus on the second-order effects of AI use in organization worldwide Great. And some of you watching this may have seen the promotional materials that went out announcing that this was going to be happening and saw that Thea-Mari Karamalis was also going to be on the panel. Uh, we miss her. Uh, we were looking forward to seeing her here as well, but she let us know the day before yesterday that she has come down with laryngitis. So I, I suppose she could still be here, she just couldn’t say anything. Uh, so she’s opted to take it easy, and we hope that she recovers well and look forward to having her on a future, uh, installment of Circle of Fellows. So let’s jump into this. We have talked about artificial intelligence on Circle of Fellows a couple of times. It’s hard to avoid the topic. If you spend any time on LinkedIn at all, I swear half of the posts there have something to do with AI. I have started following somebody who is talking just about AI in the construction industry on, uh, on LinkedIn. Uh, she posts some really good stuff. She’s not selling anything other than her own consulting services, so, uh, she’s talking about what different companies are doing, and it’s, it’s, it’s really fascinating out there. Um, I personally subscribe to, I think, 12, uh, different AI newsletters, uh, that come by email. And I use AI to summarize all of those because I can’t possibly read 12 daily email newsletters. Uh, but we wanna sort of look at this from more of a, a 40,000 foot, uh, perspective as opposed to the nitty-gritty applications of AI in communication. What does this mean for communication leadership within organizations, uh, and within the communication profession? So, uh, the survey that was conducted by the Global Alliance, uh, I believe, if I remember correctly, I don’t have it in, up in front of me, but I think it was 600 responses or so. Um, so it was a, a, a pretty good representation, a global representation of, of how this is being used. The report, uh, does slice and dice the data so you can see how it all shakes out regionally, for example. But there were some interesting results. Let me just share a couple of, uh, the data points, uh, here. Um, 95.9% of organizations now permit their employees to use AI. That’s up from 91% last year, so incremental growth. Most organizations are letting everybody use it, but only 8.6 of organizations have communication professionals leading formal AI governance. And one in four organizations, uh, specifically 25.4%, um, discloses AI use to no one. There is no disclosure at all. Uh, disclosure is one of my favorite topics because I don’t think it’s an either/or question. But, uh, that’s Interesting data that’s out there. I’ve seen other data from other surveys. We just did one where I work, uh, so I’ve, I’ve, I’ve got that perspective floating around in my head since I joined this call on the heels of a call with my company’s AI committee. So what does that data tell us? Let’s, let’s look at this from, from a governance perspective. What’s missing, uh, when only 8%, 8.6% of us are, are, are leading governance? Uh I, I mean, I presume that somebody’s leading governance in, in these organizations. So what do companies lose when, when communication isn’t engaged? It’s, you know, it’s a really interesting one. I, I might jump in and, and talk about this one first, ’cause when we looked at the, the survey, it, it, it was kind of a worrying statistic because this, this year’s survey, it’s now the second year that this particular survey has been running. So Bonnie and I have, have kind of led that with the Global Alliance. It means now we’ve got that comparative data. Governance really hasn’t shifted in the, the last two years. We can ask a question around what involvement should communication professionals have in governance, should we be leading it, is probably the, the key question there. But if we’re not leading it, are we, are we part of that? Um, so for instance, one of the, the statistics in the, the survey was 57.3% of us are involved in shaping responsible AI guidelines. Um, but only 13.9 are actually leading in that work as well. So it- it’s part of that government s- governance frame, but it’s quite low in the numbers. Now, I guess there’s, there really is that debate around where we should be positioned as communication professionals and there’s, there’s lots of people that say we really shouldn’t be leading it, it should be dedicated AI, um, executives, um, that have a department that looks at, at AI, and I’m, I’m all for that. I think that’s great. But at the absolute minimum, we have a big role in being part of that conversation, and certainly leading it in areas that support communication within the organization. Um, and I might come back to this later, but the, the latest changes within Claude, for instance, is a reaction to… And, and, and what those changes are is, is digital watermarks saying how much of, uh, AI is, is being used, and it automatically discloses for, for us. We’ll talk about disclosure a little bit later, but it’s worrying that decisions are being made without the understanding of the context of communication and, and our input because it’s not black and white, we used AI or we didn’t, it’s to what degree and how much is the human in the loop. And, and, and, and I’m sure Bonnie will talk a lot more about, um, about the, uh, uh, responsible AI and, and the importance of, of that role. But I think we’re in, we’re in a, a place where we actually need to be starting to be part of that conversation, if not leading in that con- that, that area of governance, ’cause it’s a really good role to be given AI is used in content development right across organizations. I was just gonna add in here that, that really and truly where this governance is coming and where it, it impacts us is in that connection to reputation. And because of the way that we are working as organizations, how we’re governing, uh, it, it increases our risk, uh, exposure. Every time we are hiding something is, or it appears that we’re hiding something because we’re not transparent, we’re not dis- dis- disclosing, uh, when people have questions about how we’re using AI, when there’s any sort of doubt, uh, around, of course, we’ve got all of the AI slop. When we don’t have governance, um, it goes to the patterns that are looked at, um, for our organization and how w- it’s, it’s impacting our reputation. And if you look across the board, um, you know, I, I’ve been in the reputation business for a long time. My, my company is, is, uh, 20-plus years old, and we’ve been talking about reputation for a long time. But it’s interesting to me how many comms departments and how many jobs now say reputation is important, how many, um, organizations are talking about it, how many agencies are talking about it. It’s like reputation is the new buzzword, and part of it is because of this lack of AI governance and the ethical challenges and how we’re not communicating that, and we’re not communicating appropriately, uh, and transparently to our stakeholders, and it’s causing, um, reputational risk Mike, any thoughts? I think the, I think the challenge of, of looking at, uh, uh, I think the challenge of looking at AI, you know, uh, this from a reputational lens is that reputation is hugely important. A huge chunk of a company’s value is based, you know, particularly most of a, a company’s intangible value is based on its reputation. But reputation is a fundamentally defensive discipline, and governance is a fundamentally defensive discipline. And the opportunity that communication leaders have isn’t just simply about leading the defense, it’s also about guiding the offense. It’s about finding the opportunities and seeing beyond the, the, the, the current set of risks. Um, AI isn’t just simply making it easier for people to produce on s- you know, produce content without supervision. AI is also transforming the way people work in organizations, and what organizations fundamentally do and how they do that. And as important as AI rep- you know, as AI governance is, it’s also very intense. It’s very time-consuming, and we could very easily find ourselves sidetracked from even these even bigger opportunities on, you know, on the other side of the organization. Mike, I’d like to just talk about that. I th- I love that you say that reputation is defensive, because I’ve just written a whole book about the fact that it’s not. And everything here is about how- Okay. We’re gonna have some flak Here’s some opportunity r- right, to move it from being defensive to how you do things right and take advantage of the opportunities to differentiate yourself and to differentiate yourself from a reputational perspective, how you create reputational currency. And this is an incredible opportunity to do that. While we’re looking at the risk, um, certainly I 100% agree with you. Let’s switch it and let’s look at where the opportunities are for our leadership and, and really reputation should be embedded in those things that we do, um, in, uh, as a daily basis. And so how do we begin to look at it from that perspective and take advantage? I totally agree with you. Um, it’s time to look at the positive and how we lead on a positive level versus being in this total defense mode. And I think there’s, there’s- It’s interesting- If we look at the role of communication professionals o- over years, we, we love a good defense. We love to get involved when the crisis has happened. We love to get involved when, when issues need to be managed within the organization. So do we automatically put ourselves in the defensive role? Is it time now to start looking at being the proactive role and, and, and the attack role, as, as you said, Mike, which I, I totally agree with, is we need to look at our time. So are we saying that things like governance reputation is time-consuming, and it will become even more time-consuming the more we fall off these cliffs because there is not governance and there’s not order in place when it comes to AI, or it’s being defined for us around how we use AI within the organization. So I think there’s… I think it’s actually about turning it into, as Bonnie was saying, the positive of here is the opportunity now for us to step up. Because if we stay in content creation mode and tool mode and, and learning those tools without stepping into a much more leadership role, then I think we’re missing a huge opportunity. One of the things that Bonnie mentioned that I wanted to come back to was the idea that reputation should be embedded in what people are doing and what organizations are doing. I agree that it should be embedded rather than being, you know, a parallel measurement. One of the big problems that we have in the realm of communication, it’s not just around reputation, it’s also particularly strong around employee engagement, putting my own book on as it happens. And we often look at measurement of reputation and measurement of- employee engagement as parallel metrics to organizational performance. And Bonnie is dead right about saying these are embedded, these are part of the picture. Um, we need to think about reputation, but reputation isn’t an end of, an end in itself. When, when I think about governance, uh, I, I come at it from two levels. Uh, one is the role that, uh, communications and particularly internal communications should play, uh, in any governance, whether it’s AI or anything else in the organization, and that is how are employees gonna react to this? Uh, this is, I think, why we wanna be proactive and, and be in the room and have a, a voice in shaping all of this because we know, uh, intrinsically, uh, how employee audiences are going to react to, to certain things, whether they’re gonna be cynical or upset or, uh, skeptical or if they’re gonna like it. Uh, because if this is built in a vacuum and we’re not involved, uh, they’re gonna send it to us and say, “Communicate this,” and, and we’re gonna look at it and go, “This isn’t gonna fly. Uh, this isn’t gonna work.” I mean, I, I’ll give you a great example out, out of my company is, uh, we, in the communication of the survey results, said, uh, one of the things we’re gonna do is revisit the governance policy. And the guy who’s leading this effort for the company said, “We don’t have to do that. I just checked with our general counsel, and he says it’s still good.” And I said, “Well, you know, this is two years old, and agents weren’t even i-in, uh, in the conversation two years ago.” Uh, I had been reading about companies that are worried about having thousands and thousands of agents that have not been cataloged or inventoried. Nobody knows what they’re doing. Employees create them and leave, and they’re still out there looping and burning tokens. Uh, this has to be addressed with governance. Uh, so at one level, we need to have a say, uh, o-o-on any governance, but at the other level, we need to be able to say, “Hey, what about agents? Shouldn’t that be in here?” And for that, the communicator needs to be pretty well informed on all of this. And I don’t believe that all, uh, I, I wouldn’t even hazard that most are completely up to speed, uh, on the issues that would affect AI governance. Uh, so, uh, you know, should they be leading that effort? Probably not. They should just be looking at the impact it’ll have when it’s introduced into the organization. I, I think one of the really important points that you’re talking about is the difference between AI as tool Uh, even when we talk about Claude or ChatGPT or let’s implement, uh, Copilot, you know, we’re looking at it as a tool. But when we start to talk about it, uh, we start to talk about agents, we’re talking about it beginning to be part of our infrastructure, and we ha- we are already behind because we didn’t put in the governance for tools. Now we’re going to look at it, um, as it, it’s embedded into our infrastructure, it’s embedded into our workflows, it’s, uh, you know, part of the way we do business. We’re moving away from it being a trusted, you know, just a, an, um, a, you know, I’m using these tools, this is my, uh, you know, we used to talk about our stack. Well, now we have an AI stack. We’re moving completely away from that, where AI will be embedded in our organization at such a level, um, that we won’t know where it’s looking at data. We might not know when we’re using third-party tools where it is. So if we’ve started out without the right infrastructure, we’ve started out without the right governance, now when it w- when it moves from being an operating system, from being guardrails to an operating system, how far behind are we going to be? The challenge is the, where it’s going in our organizations is moving so much faster than our governance, uh, that we’re gonna have a day of reckoning, exactly as you said, Shel, when somebody creates an agent and, and it’s just out there running, um, and we don’t even know about it. You don’t even know it’s there. The, uh, I’ll, I’ll, I’ll make a little parable between- You know what? You know what this- … history and, uh, and where we’re at now. And I know when I started in, in internal communications 25, 30 odd years ago, um, and you’ll remember this Michelle, is there was no understanding of what internal comms was, what was involved, how to manage channels, what was good communication. So we were stepping into organizations where we actually had to say, “We need to take stock of this, put some frameworks around it, put some governance, put some structure.” And then as we’ve evolved, we’ve been able to let go of that because people were trained within the framework of, of how they work. And we’re seeing in the report the confidence levels of, of communication professionals around issues like ethics and understanding ethics. Now we’ve got the knowledge of it, but how are we applying that? ‘Cause that’s only one component of responsible AI. But I think in, in any evolution we’ve got, uh, we’ve got an area where we, we have this, this chaos. Sometimes we have to put some very tight guardrails and governance around it, bring everybody into the understanding then of how to use and what’s good practice and, and those things. It’s an educational process, and then we’re able to let it go. The conversations we seem to be having, certainly from a center point of view with, uh, with our clients at, at the moment, is that they’re, they’re dealing with that exact issue of people generating content within their organizations, sending it to them and going, um, “Can you send this out?” Um, exactly what you were saying before. And it’s because there is no understanding of what good communication is in the AI space. We’ve got this great opportunity not just to govern it, but also to educate people of what that looks like when we’re using AI Sorry, Mike, I think you were going to say something to that Well, I just think the, the b- yeah, I had a, I had a couple of things. I mean, I think the educational role of, of the communication person around things like AI ethics and responsible AI is important, but at the same time, we need to be cautious about the extent to which this is seen as a primary role of ours. Because, you know, there are very few of us in organizations. You know, our, our resources are stretched, our remit is stretched. You know, we’re often in, as you say, defensive mode rather than proactive mode. And certainly AI governance is a largely defensive or proactively defensive approach. But this conversation also reminds me of the intranet conversation that we’re having 5, 10, you know, certainly conversation we were having 25 years ago, where there’s lots of stale content out there, and there’s this idea that comms people should be the ones who colle- who do all the tagging and collect all the metadata and screen all of this stuff out. There aren’t enough of us to chase rogue agents. Um, there aren’t enough of us to chase, um, you know, stuff that was created that’s no longer relevant, that’s consuming resources. You know, maybe we can work with AI so that AI can find its own, you know, its own rogue, um… But, you know, there’s only so much we can do without marginalizing ourselves in that process See, interesting. And, and I, and I absolutely get it. It’s, it’s, to me it’s a little bit around the how much role do you play in, um, facilitating the governance role. I think what we need is a really important in defining the governance role from our point of view. Um, but I don’t think we should be the arms and legs of saying we’re going to be the, the organization police around it. What we do need to be is the facilitator of the knowledge around proper use and responsible use of AI, given that the majority of the work that we’re doing in organizations now is about content, and it is about getting that stuff out there. Disclosure, without kind of flipping us onto another topic, has been the hot topic right now, and there’s tons of conversations being happening around what we disclose, how we disclose and, and so on. And that seems to be the hot button now. And we should, in a way, been ahead of that curve in helping our organizations understand what does this mean for the content that we’re producing and putting out there in terms of disclosure. Yeah, and we’ll talk about disclosure in just a second. I know we need to move on to that. But I, I did want to raise one other issue. I, I really liked what you said, Adrian, about the difference between, uh, influencing what the governance is and actually facilitating it. I think that’s an important distinction. Uh, and yeah, I think it’s important that we be engaged in the definition of the, the governance, uh, because ultimately this is gonna have an impact on communication, and I can, I can think of a couple of levels where this is happening. Uh, one is, uh, work slop, where people are using a, uh, an iffy prompt. They’re getting what looks like a polished document. It sure reads well. Uh, and they’re attaching that to an email or, or copying and pasting it into an email and sending it, and they go, “Wow, I just saved two hours. I didn’t have to do the research and the writing on this.” But that saved time on the part of the person who created that has really just been offloaded onto the person who received it, because they have to read this now and go, “Okay, this, this sure reads well, but I’m not getting any substance out of this. Uh, I don’t know what I’m supposed to do with it.” Uh, it’s, it’s not a good document for people to work with, so that affects communication. And then I was just hearing, in fact, I’m on a popular panel coming up next week, uh, with Jenny Field Uh, that is talking about the fact that there are people who are getting internal comms content, uh, for review and approval, and they’re rewriting it using AI because they think with AI they’re now all internal comms experts. Uh, and the communicators are getting this stuff back and they’re going, “This isn’t what I wrote. This isn’t getting, uh, the intent across.” Uh, and yet they think that this is now perfect because they ran it through Claude or ChatGPT. So, uh, one other interesting bit of data that I’m aware of, and that is that people are less frequently getting in touch with their organization’s subject matter experts because they can just go to ChatGPT and get the answer from the engineering team or the marketing team or the sales team. Uh, I don’t need to actually talk to one of our SMEs, I can just ask Claude. Uh, so we’re communicating less with the people in the organization. The second, the second-order effects of all of this are absolutely brutal. It’s not just simply that the, that the receiver of the message is getting a diluted and perhaps worse message. You know, when multiple people are getting that memo, when multiple people are having meetings to discuss that watered-down memo, then the cascading effects of all of this aren’t just simply, you know, content. These are actual second wor- second-order impacts happening in the organization. And when you talked about the offloading of expertise conversations onto Claude, that is wreaking havoc on the organizational social networks of every organization in the world. It’s wreaking havoc on, um, new employee onboarding. It’s wreaking havoc on, you know, really the ability to do coherent internal communication more broadly. And organizations are not willing to do the, the basic organizational network analysis right now to figure out what their current networks look like, so that when the networks get degraded by this use, you know, they’re not gonna be able to take the right corrective action before things deteriorate further. Now let’s move on to, uh, disclosure. Uh, again, looking at the data from the Global Alliance survey, 60.3% see AI as a reputational opportunity, 56.1% see it as increased reputational risk. And I’m not a mathematician, but to me that means there are people who answered yes to both of those questions. Uh, and one in four organizations disclose to absolutely nobody. I, I mentioned that at the outset. Uh, what, what’s being risked? Uh, w- what are the– what, what’s the fallout from this kind of an approach to AI and disclosure? So w- and if I look at this from a general observation, I, I, I’ve been talking to quite a number of communication departments, particularly in internal comms. Um, and A lot of what’s coming back is they’re just not sure about how to disclose. And, and I know that sounds like a really basic issue, but it, it’s do I just say sweepingly AI was used in the, in the development of this content? And does that then impact the reputation because people believe it’s not you, it’s not your intellect. Um, and what we’re really starting to get our head around as, as, as a world le- uh, working in AI is that at what parts is AI playing the role? And I think this is the big thing around disclosure now is the fear of disclosure if it’s gonna have a, a, a negative impact, um, versus what is it we should be disclosing on. Because you go from a spectrum where you go, “Look-” AI really is, is doing to the world what calculators did to the world in mathematics years ago. Um, should we be disclosing every time we use AI to get an idea or a, a prompt or, or should we be having levels of disclosure? And I think that’s where we’re coming into effect where we need to understand what the landscape of disclosure… So for instance, image, if it’s completely, completely, uh, uh, created in, in AI, we should have a disclosure saying, “This image has been created, um, use, with the use of AI.” But when it comes to content and intellect, it is how much of your intellect versus what AI has done. So if it’s just been used to spell-check and edit, then do we just pop that in, in terms of this is what it’s being used for? And I think there’s a drifting towards that what is it being used for. So I think what we’ve had is, and then why the statistics low, is we’ve had this paralysis in understanding the actual landscape of disclosure. I think something really interesting there is, is to, to add in this conversation to transparency. And all of us know that, that, um, people have a different idea of what transparency is. Um, you know, you want your leaders to tell you absolutely everything they are doing, and we’re going to go through a merger and you’re going to lose your job, or you’re going to get promoted or whatever. We want to know everything in this day and age, and reality is it’s, it’s a need to know transparency. Mm-hmm. Um, and I think when we go to disclosure, it gets at that level as well. We have to think about how does this impact the stakeholders, and when is the right time to tell them, and what does that look like, what that level of disclosure. But we also have to look at it as to how as organizations we’re being judged, and AI has now become part of that judgment process. It’s now how, you know, I’m judging you how you’re using AI. I’m judging you based on the products that are coming out. If I’m looking at a consultancy that I’m going to pay millions of dollars, and they have thrown out some AI slop that doesn’t, wasn’t properly researched, that’s hurting their reputation, so now I’m judging them on how they used AI. I’m judging you on organizations, whether you’re governing AI. I’m judging you on how you’re communicating your use of AI. And then I’m also trying to make some decisions as to whether I’m going to, uh, do business with you because I don’t know how you’re going to use my data and whether, uh, I can trust you. And we can even look at governments and it, govern- publics are now re- wanting to know how are, is my government using AI? And when it gets so embedded in our organizations and we don’t even know how AI is being used, we don’t even know what it’s doing, that becomes an issue. So that’s where I see this disclosure and transparency. Um, we’re really looking at it as being visible corporate behavior, and just as you would talk about anything else in your organization, uh, you need to be talking about your use of AI. And I just want to add to that one too, just to bring in the point that Shel made before. When you’re working in the world of agents now, particularly as we’re looking at autonomous agents where AI is in the loop of checking AI, and then we’re putting stuff out there, disclos- disclosure becomes even more important when there really isn’t the human in the loop apart from kind of the, the, the, the deciding the, the, the process in the first place. So it, it, it is becomes a really tricky landscape, and organizations won’t want to put it out there for the fear of diminished reputation. And, and so the rewards versus benefit is a big conversation here and, and this is why I think there needs to be a lot more guidance to help support organizations’ use of AI. It’s, it’s having conversations with your stakeholders. Mm, absolutely. T- cert- there’s a certain brutality level around all of this. I mean, I’m a small business owner, been working in Europe for the last 20 years, and the recent AI regulations from the EU, which, you know, essentially, you know… And, and it’s not the regulations themselves, which, you know, really focus on public awareness and public, um, information about certain specific topics. But the proactive overcompliance, like what we saw with Claude and their digital watermarks, is absolutely crucifying small business here. You know, I have a, you know, I have my own newslet- you know, I, I, I have my own news magazine, basically, Strategic. You know, there’s two of us working on it, um, you know, on a day-to-day basis. I use AI to generate headline images for the articles that we use. I use Ideogram. It’s excellent. I pay 20 bucks a month for it. If I had to say AI content all over that, you know, that would diminish the credibility of what I’m doing. Which, you know, is, you know, i- it’s an unacceptably high cost just because we need to align ourselves with corporate standards for, um, for disclosure. I mean, you g- you gotta wonder about the whole disclosure thing to begin with. If you’ve got a human who’s accountable for a piece of information that goes out, then why do you need to have disclosure regulations, so long as there’s an identifiable human who’s got some finger on that? I mean, if you’ve got AI feeding directly into information systems, then it’s a different ballgame. But it’s like, why should I have to label my, my headline images as AI generated? You know, I can’t afford to pay a graphic artist or Getty Image for, for every, um, for every article I post, and it would make my, the work that I do impossible if I had to do so. It’s a really good example, Mike, of it’s being done for us because we haven’t given the context to the people that are making these regulations. So are, are we actually talking with, you know, the EU to say, “Right, here, here is the, the, the regulation,” or, “Here is our take on what the regulation should be from a communication perspective.” Because you can’t blanket AI versus non-AI use because it is context. And if we look at, you know, IBC’s, um, global standard, context is one of the key principles here that we bring to the table of value to our, our organizations, but the wider world. So we might be getting our heads around it within organizations, but when we see government starting to regulate things, they go in quite heavily handed. And you’re quite right, it has that negative impact on, on the businesses because you’re now made or mandatory doing it. Same with Claude going, “Right, so we’re solving the problem because everybody’s telling us we need to disclose, so we’re now gonna put the digital watermark in place.” Um- Now thankfully there isn’t the, the, the trackers to just, to see whether that, that watermark is working ’cause they haven’t produced that yet. But the reality is we will see the companies going, “Oh, we now need to comply with a greater regulation that’s been put in or imposed by people that don’t actually understand the landscape of use of AI for content.” Uh, well, and that’s my take on it. Yeah. I think- There’s a, there’s a bigger issue with the Claude watermark, and that is that it will, uh, be a positive if it was processed through AI, not necessarily written. You could have written that whole thing bespoke and run it through AI as a grammar spellcheck, and it’s going to incorporate that watermark and will show as a positive when somebody runs the eventual, uh, check on it, uh, that, that Claude, uh, that Anthropic says they’re going to release. But I, I think, you know, disclosure ultimately has to be a question of individual judgment, and our role, um, in the governance part of this is giving people the context they need in order to make a good judgment. Uh, I know what I need to disclose. Uh, it’s, it’s a bit like that, uh, that US Supreme Court decision on pornography that is like, “I, I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it.” Um- … it’s, you know, it’s, it’s kinda like that. I mean, I, I can absolutely see the need to disclose that an image was created with, with AI if I think people would feel deceived if they knew that. On the other hand, I just published an article on our intranet where there was n- there were no photos, uh, there was nothing to photograph. Uh, so I had AI create some conceptual commercial graphics. If I had gone out to an artist, you know, um, 20 years ago for this, I wouldn’t have said, “This art was created by commercial artist Don Weller.” Um, it just would’ve been there with the article. Uh, and I don’t see that I need to disclose that I used AI to create this commercial- you know, uh, graphic, uh, either. Uh, I don’t need to disclose, for example, that I used AI, uh, one of the note-taking tools to record an interview, shared the transcript with one of the large language models and said, “Please strip out anything that isn’t about this topic and then organize this in a nat- natural flow, and then use that to actually write the article based on that interview.” It was a tool that I used in the process, and I don’t feel compelled to disclose that. For me, the rule is if anybody would feel deceived if they knew I used AI, then I need to disclose that. But I have the context to make that decision. I’m not sure everyone in the organization does. I think that’s the, the, the big issue is, is really about organizations understanding around this one, and I think this is a really good role for us, not only to, to give the guidelines, but then help people understand how they might apply that because people are actually confused. Um, I run a number of writing courses for, for government here in, in Australia, and they’re not communication professionals. They’re people that just want to learn a, a skill, and they are completely confused around, uh, things like disclosure and when I can use it. But they’re also very confused on how to use the tool to get good content out of the, the writing that they’re, they’re doing. So it is really about the role you take and then what it is that we need to, to, to look at. And, and, and I’m a big advocate that we didn’t disclose when we started using calculators. And I’m, I’m, I’m of the generation when you went to a- an exam when you were younger, you were not allowed to take calculators in because that was cheating. Now it’s, it’s just a given. Um, and I think we’re, we’re there on some of the things where it’s absolutely a no-brainer. It’s just a tool to help you. And if it’s spell-checking or reformatting or putting it into another style, fantastic. But if it is a significant part of the process I think we need to say where we’ve been able to, to use that in our ability to deliver a better outcome, certainly for our clients. And we’re, we’re now looking at statements certainly within the, the center that’s saying, “So what’s our general policy on use of, of AI?” Uh, and their statement’s around the intellect, the input is from the, the, the professionals that understand this and the expertise. AI is helping us as a tool to help format or re- um, re-look at or do research or whatever those moments are, just so you’re… It’s just, it’s there, it’s transparent, and it’s assumed that’s what you would be doing. Yeah. And by the way, I, I get really frustrated when I hear people say that AI should never be used for writing at all. Uh, because I d- I don’t know if any of you have ever read a memo written by an engineer. Uh, but, uh, if, if AI can make their stuff readable, um, God bless it. Uh, I, I, I will take that. But this again gets to- And it’s if- … the need for having that kind of training where they know don’t just throw in a prompt and have it produce something. You have to give it the good information that you want it to polish into a readable document. But if, if AI does that, then we’re all gonna benefit from it. And as we begin to build, um, our infrastructures within our organization and we’re uploading, uh, our brand guidelines and we’re uploading our narrative and our messages and all of these things, people are gonna come in, uh, and, and use that information. So we’re not necessarily the people that are writing. We’re being the narrative. Uh, we’re, we’re creating the narrative. We’re creating the brand. We’re talking about the stories. We’re showcasing the, the proof points. All of those things that we’ve done forever, but we might not be doing the end product. We may just be setting up our Claude workflows. We may be setting up our agents so that the VP of sales can go do their own presentation, can go do their own sales sheet, but they’re not gonna break my rules. They’re doing it anyway today, right? Um, and then you see it a month later and you go, “Oh my gosh, that wording’s not right. That’s not what we talked about. Um, that’s not our brand.” Now you can put all that in place and in, within your work, work teams, uh, whether you’re in ChatGPT or you’re in, um, Claude or whatever tools you’re using, and then they can’t break the rules, and they have to use the storylines and the things that you say. And that is going to be the way our role’s changing because we might not be writing the end products. Um, we may be a little more on that strategy perspective, and other people are gonna take that and build their own content out of it. Yeah, and, and, and that was, I think, a very interesting development that basically perhaps our long-term role was really as part of the, you know, the guidance and programming team rather than the delivery team. Um- Mm-hmm … you know, making sure that there is internal consistency around narratives, internal consistency around brand guidelines. You know, you know, some of the tools that we’re seeing with, um, you know, AI monitoring, AI, um, media monitoring, those tools can do some of the things that can monitor the internal consistency and the internal prevalence of your messaging. Mm-hmm. So I mean, that’s, that’s, that’s an interesting take on where the profession’s headed. Um, but one thing that just struck me about the whole conversation about disclosure is that if everything is AI, nothing is AI. You know, if ev- you know, ultimately every single piece of that text, whether it’s an email that you’re sending from Gmail that suggests the right word at the end of the sentence to a 360-page book written based on 20 interviews that are fed into Claude, um, everything’s gonna be AI. And so, you know, a lot of this blanket disclosure stuff is gonna go out of the window within, you know, within two, three months because everything will be AI. One interesting, uh, observation that I keep hearing is how new this is. We’ve never encountered anything like this before. Uh, and one of the reasons for that is this is a tool that everybody uses differently based on their role, uh, based on their industry, uh, based on their department. Uh, this is not like Workday where everybody gets trained the same way. Uh, that’s actually kind of useless to train everybody exactly the same way. And, uh, for, for a tool that people are going to be using on their own and have an impact on, on the organization, we have been here before. Uh, and the specific tool that I’m thinking of is desktop publishing. Um, because with desktop publishing before that, uh– And, and we’re going way back, uh, with desktop publishing. The, the first one I used was called Ventura Publisher. I think this was around 1985, so absolutely predated, you know, the internet and, and, and the web and, and, uh, certainly social media and things like that. But before desktop publishing, everybody came to communication and say, “I need people to know about this.” Then out- outcomes Ventura Publisher and then of course PageMaker, uh, and every department was producing their own newsletter and sending them to the mail room for distribution to ev- And everybody was getting 30 newsletters in their inboxes. Uh, and yeah, I remember getting a call from leadership saying, “Make this stop.” Uh, you know, the company I was with at the time. This is– Nobody can consume this much content. There’s no gatekeeping going on, and communicators had to figure this out from a governance standpoint, from a technology standpoint. Uh, so we have been here before, haven’t we? We- we’ve been, we’ve been here actually many times. Um, uh, and those significant milestones, the, the one I, I really love and I, I absolutely relate to where you’re at, and in fact, I used to get my copies in a routing envelope. It all came in printed copies, and you had to sign off that you’ve actually read it. Um, so you had a ton of emails or ton of, ton of printed emails to read, um, through the organization. The one that, that I, I use as an example all the time is, is our journey into social media because the … I, I see some of the similarities in behavior. With, with social media, there, there, there was the few that jumped in, the early adopters. We’re, we’re seeing that certainly from a, a comms point of view, people jumping in there early. Um, I like to feel all of us on this call are, are people that are doing that. Um, but there were the people that resist getting into it, and I think social media, because we’d gone through that, that change, and it changed the landscape and we didn’t We kind of resisted that they were channels of communication. It was a fad. All of those, those types of things. But the reality is it became embedded as in part of what we do. We don’t even think about it now. It’s all part of the mix that we do. However, it, it got away from us when it came to, to any behaviors that we would use in social media. So we kind of went, “It’s a platform. Anybody can say anything, and we’ll put it out there.” And then governments started putting in some, some regulations and changes. And here in Australia, and I know the US are looking at this now, uh, about age limits to, to who can, you know- use certain social media platforms because we’ve now learnt the impacts of that. So I think when we, we look at some of those times in histories where we’ve gone through the change, it is, it’s the change journey. We should actually be stepping in, embracing it, and looking at how we can positively use it, understand when it becomes part of the norm, but learn some of those lessons from the past of the bad behaviors, and do we make sure that we’re being proactive to make sure we are educating people on the proper use of this stuff? I think that’s really one of our roles, um, and our opportunities, is to really help organizations, um, operationalize responsible behavior. Uh, that is something that we really miss the opportunity with social media, and we miss that training opportunity to say, “This is where you can gain trust. This is where you can lose trust. This is where you put in the reputational risks.” We lost all of that opportunity. We lost the opportunity for our narratives. Um, it became an influencer environment, which now is, is, is, you know, AI is now our influencers in many cases. We’re moving away from human influencers in many cases. So there’s a lot of opportunities, I think, for us to g- to guide that, um, responsibility of, of what behavior in AI, and then call it out, uh, this misinformation, this disinformation, um, you know, stand up for the things that are happening out there that aren’t, um, you know, aren’t helping organizations and also aren’t helping humans. But you kind of- It’s interesting that you- Oh, sorry, go on, Mike You know, it’s, it’s interesting that you talk about this being a follow-on from social media. I think there’s something f- that’s potentially fundamentally different between AI and social media. And social media was about the decentralization and disintermediation of knowledge sharing to large groups of people, whether inside the organization through social intranets or publicly through Facebook, Twitter, what have you. AI, particularly if organizations focus on having, you know, some degree of an internal AI platform, whether it’s, you know, and this could be where Copilot actually adds value, providing access to a- Uh, various models, but actually centralizing the data on a platform. AI may give us the chance to help recentralize the narratives, recentralize the, the processes, the principles, the practices, the guidelines for responsible use that were completely lost in the social media era. I think you’re right on the internal side, but on the external side, uh, we don’t have control of that. So how do we, uh, how do we look at it from, uh, both perspectives? I love the fact that we can now take back some of that control, um, on the internal side. But the external side is like the Wild West, and it’d be nice to see how we can, uh, take a little bit of control back for that, and I think we’re gonna have to stand for that from an internal perspective. We’re going to have to s- stand for our narratives, and we’re going to have to argue when, uh, our brand is attacked, uh, when people are, uh, you know, when there are AI influencers that are misrepresenting our organization. We’re gonna have to step out and, and, and change that narrative, and that’s where it will be the Wild West is externally When we look at th- those bigger impacts too, to, Bonnie, just build- building on that is the, the state of trust. And we, I think we have to overlay this with, you know, the Edelman Trust Barometer this year talked about, uh, you know, the new role of organizations being the trust broker. Um, because we’ve got this erosion over time in the landscape of communication in society as a whole. And so we’re dealing with this, this whole people disconnecting because they’ll only connect with the things that they engage with. So people will engage with like-minded people, and our algorithm- algorithms s- kind of help put that on steroids, that you’ll only engage with those people. So that polarization is now there, but how do we start rebuilding it? And I think, you know, AI, AI gives us that opportunity to really start looking at how organizations can now change that landscape of, of, uh, trust and engagement back into the organization from both the internal and the exper- external viewpoint. But it does play into that bigger narrative, and it’s one of the things that the, the, the global alliance that we’ve been looking at that we’ve got responsible AI is really, you know, and the work certainly you’ve been doing, Bonnie, with, with, um, with responsible AI and saying, this has to be a living document and what continually evolves as we evolve as a, a society. And now we’re looking at it from a, a, a total perspective of responsible communication because there’s all this stuff that’s happened in the past that we really now need to go, how do we retake some of that control of what we should and shouldn’t be responsible for as a communication professional? Um, and that’s, that’s the stuff we’re now starting to look at as we head towards the World PR Conference in, um, in, in Abuja, in, in Nigeria in November. And I think to your point, uh, that do, say, are is so important. Uh, what we do, uh, versus what we say versus what we are at the heart of our organization, that will be, that disconnect of that alignment will be so exposed, um, in today’s environment. The more AI becomes embedded in, in the way we live, the more w- will those lines of disconnect will be exposed. And, and, and not only will they be exposed, people will take advantage of that. Um, AI will take advantage of that. So it’s really important in organizations that we’re looking at how we do that alignment between what we say and what we do and what we are at the heart of our company, and that is our role. Well, I, I actually had a couple of questions left, but we’re down to less than three minutes, uh, so I’m not gonna ask those questions. But fortunately, we are, uh, pushing this over to next month, part two of this. I think we can just probably pick up where we left off. Um, that will take place, that will be episode 133 of Circle of Fellows on Thursday, September 24th, same bat time, same bat channel. Uh, be, uh, 6:00 PM Eastern, uh, that’s 3:00 PM for me, and Adrian, it’s tomorrow morning for you, uh, coming to us from the future. Uh, Adrian, you’ll be back for the panel next month. Yep. Uh, you and I will be joined next month by Mary Hills, uh, Cyrus Mavawala, who is one of our new fellows, uh, named this year, um, and Robin McCasland. Uh, so that should be a good panel. Um, in the meantime, uh, this will be available as both the YouTube video replay and the audio podcast. For those who are listening, uh, or watching this on YouTube, go to, uh, subscribe to this, and it’ll just show up in your podcast app, uh, every month just, just like magic. Uh, thanks everybody. I think this has been a great conversation. I really appreciate your, your time.

The post Circle of Fellows #132: AI and the Communication Leadership Moment appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.

Local newsrooms keep shrinking, journalism schools keep closing their doors, and the reporters who remain are stretched thinner than ever. For organizational communicators, that shift changes the math on media relations. It’s no longer enough to know how to write a pitch. You need to understand who’s left to receive it, what standards still govern their work, and how to build the kind of relationship that gets your story told well instead of not at all.

Circle of Fellows #131 features four IABC Fellows with deep backgrounds in journalism and media relations. Moderated by Shel Holtz, SCMP, the panel discussed what’s changed in the newsroom, what hasn’t, and what it means for the way communicators do their jobs.

The panel dug into what that means day to day for communicators, including:

About the panel:

Diana Degan, IABC Fellow, ABC, CAAP, BAAJ, is the founder of Diana Degan & Associates. Diana is an award-winning communication leader, educator, and strategic advisor whose 35-year career has strengthened communication practice, elevated professional standards, and advanced human-centered communication across Canada and beyond. She has led work spanning the full spectrum of the profession, from strategic planning, brand development, and integrated marketing communications to crisis communications, stakeholder engagement, internal communications, and accessibility-focused communication design.

Edward “Ned” Lundquist is a retired U.S. Navy captain with 43 years of professional public affairs and strategic communications experience. His company, Echo Bridge LLC, which provides outreach and advocacy support to government and commercial clients. He served on active duty for 24 years in the U.S. Navy as a surface warfare officer and public affairs specialist. Captain Lundquist was a Pentagon spokesman with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, Director of the Fleet Home Town News Center, and director of public affairs and corporate communications for the Navy Exchange Service Command. His last tour of duty was commanding the 450 men and women of the Naval Media Center. He is an accredited business communicator and award-winning communicator who served as president of IABC/Hampton Roads and IABC/Washington, director of U.S. District 3, and chair of the International Accreditation Council. He was named an IABC Fellow in 2016. Captain Lundquist received the Surface Navy Association’s Special Recognition Award in January of this year, for his service on SNA’s executive committee and chair of the SNA communications committee. He writes for numerous naval, maritime, and defense publications and chairs and presents at communications, naval, and maritime security conferences around the world.

Martha Muzychka, ABC, MC, speaks, writes, listens, and helps others do the same to make change happen. Martha is a strategic, creative problem solver seeking challenging communications environments where we can make a difference. She helps her clients navigate competing priorities and embrace communication challenges. Martha offers strategic planning, facilitation, consultation services, writing and editing, qualitative research, and policy analysis. Her work has been recognized locally, nationally, and internationally with multiple awards.

Jennifer Wah, MC, ABC, has worked with clients to deliver ideas, plans, words and results since she founded her storytelling and communications firm, Forwords Communication Inc., in 1997. With more than two dozen awards for strategic communications, writing, and consulting, Jennifer is recognized as a storyteller and strategist. She has worked in industries from healthcare and academia to financial services and the resource sector, and is passionate about the strategic use of storytelling to support business outcomes. Although she has delivered workshops and training throughout her career, Jennifer formally added teaching to her experience in 2013, first with Royal Roads University and more recently as an adjunct professor of business communications with the UBC Sauder School of Business, where she now works part-time to impart crucial communication skills on the next generation of business leaders. When she is not working, Jennifer spends her time cooking, walking her dog, Orion, or discussing food, hockey, or music with her husband and two young adult children in North Vancouver, Canada.

Raw Transcript

 Uh, hi everybody, and welcome to episode number 131 of Circle of Fellows. Uh, this is the monthly panel discussion featuring usually four fellows of the International Association of Business Communicators talking about topics of interest to communicators, especially those pursuing certification or looking to, uh, further themselves along their career paths. And we have a topic that should resonate with a lot of communicators today, especially those engaged in media relations, uh, and that is the shifting landscape of media, uh, and media relations, and have four great panelists to discuss this. Before, uh, we get to their introductions, I’ll let you know who I am. Hi, I’m Kjell Holst. I am senior director of communications at Webcor, a commercial general contractor headquartered in San Francisco and operating throughout California. Uh, I’m also the vice chair of the Global Communication Certification Council, which explains that little SCMP that you see after my name. And, uh, if you are watching live, I hope that you will participate in the conversation. The best way to do that through YouTube is just to, uh, use that live commenting feature. I’ll see it here, and I will be able to share that on the screen, and always nice to be able to digress, uh, to answer a question from somebody who’s watching in real time. Uh, and with that, let’s meet the panel, starting with Diana. Hi. Hi, Kjell. Thanks for having me today. Thrilled to be here with my illustrious, uh, group of, uh, other people, f- other fellows. So I am an IABC fellow. I am a, a IABC Canada Master Communicator. I’m based in Guelph, Ontario, um, just an hour west of Toronto. I am the founder of Diana Deegan & Associates, and I am also a professor at Conestoga College, teaching, um, a number of different, um, communications and, um, public relations and marketing courses. Great. And a special welcome to you, Diana. You are a member of the 2026 class of fellows. I am. I am. Thank you very much. So exciting. So exciting. Martha, you’re up. Hi there. Thanks for having me. It’s always a pleasure. I’m actually the, in the far east of Canada, in Newfoundland and Labrador. I run my own consultancy in strategic communi- communications and policy research, and I also teach communications and writing skills with the local business center at the university, Memorial University of Newfoundland Thanks, Martha. Ned? Uh, good day, everybody. Uh, I’m Ned Lundquist. Uh, I’m an accredited business communicator and an IBC fellow. I’m a retired naval officer, and my wife likes to tell me that I’m retired, period, at this point. Uh, I still have, uh, a few clients. I still do some writing. Uh, just attended a conference on maritime security and safety in, of all places, St. John’s. And, uh, Martha and her husband, John, scooped me up and, uh, I got a whirlwind tour of, uh, the far eastern segment of Atlantic Canada. It was fascinating. So, uh, Kjell and I and, uh, Jennifer go way back. Diana, uh, is, uh, a new colleague that I haven’t connected with, but, uh, as a fellow fellow, I’m sure we will going forward. So Kjell, thanks for doing this, and thanks for having me. Well, thanks for being here, Ned. And Jennifer? Hi. I’m in North Vancouver, Canada, and I’m pleased to be here today on a warm summer day. Um- Mm … I’m also an SCMP. Uh, I’m proud of that certification, and, um, really happy to have some listeners here who are pursuing certification. Uh, I specialize in strategic storytelling as a consultant, and, um, like, like many of you, also teach at the Sauder School of Business, uh, business communications to, uh, to business school students. I love that intersection of business and communications, which is, of course, something we’ve all, we’ve, we’ve all been working toward and uplifting for a long time. Looking forward to today’s discussion. It’ll be a great discussion, Jennifer. Thanks. And, you know, um, in, in my early days doing media relations, uh, whether it was for an employer or after I moved into consulting, uh, for a client, it was pretty routine to hear somebody say, “I want the front page of The Wall Street Journal,” or- “I, I wanna be here,” or, “I wanna be there.” And that was the remit, right? That was what you set out to do, at least to get them good coverage that could show them that they moved the needle. And you had built relationships with reporters at the various, uh, mainstream media publications and trade publications and the like. Uh, and you knew how to pitch, you knew how to do a targeted press release distribution, and you got that coverage. Not so easy today with these media outlets constricting, uh, considerably and, and many of them vanishing. Although it was interesting, I just read that I think it’s The New York Times is opening a local newspaper in Minneapolis, so we may see a new model emerging here- Wow if there’s revenue, uh, that they can derive from that. But, uh, for now, uh, it’s a challenge to earn that third media coverage. Third media or, you know, uh, earned media coverage is, is critical, uh, if we’re going to show up in AI search results, the, the overviews and the research results and the like, uh, because, uh, I’ve seen data that says 85% of what, uh, the AEO and GEO engines are producing come from earned media, only about 12 or 13% from a, a, a, a brand website. So we have challenges in front of us. So let me, let me start by asking you, you know, what’s changed most fundamentally? When we, when we say that media relations has changed, which change matters most? Is it, is it the loss of journalism, journalists? Uh, is it the collapse of, of newsroom business models? The, the fragmentation of audiences? Something else? What are you seeing out there? Well, I’ll jump in. Uh, my, my feeling is that, uh, we’re, we’ve lost a whole segment of, I’ll call it local media. Uh, small town papers, small town dailies and weeklies, uh, sec- sec- uh, supplements, uh, with local news in the large papers. Uh, so I’m not exactly sure where people go for that news. I know there are online sites that provide local news, but I, I just think we’ve lost a whole tier of connectivity to connect citizens with, with government, with business, uh, uh, with things to do. I, I don’t think that people are going to the web to fi- uh, to these new, uh, sites. They’re, they’re just browsing and, and finding what they can anywhere, kinda hit or miss. I agree, Ned. It’s been a huge loss to see the decrease in the small town papers, because one of the best things I found with my media relations work was connecting those editors with local people on the issues that I was trying to promote. And being able to provide local content, local contacts, um, and that local context was really critical, uh, to the success, because you don’t want to always just having, coming from head office or the principal city, because, uh, sometimes there are resentments that all the news gets funneled one way. And, uh, it also meant that people could see in different areas how the story could play out depending on that regional context Yeah, I would, I would agree. Um On the, on the community news reporting, uh, element of things, uh, we had a tragic event here just in, in my community, which is not a small town, uh, this week, and what I noticed was that in the absence of, um, hyper-local reporting, so in other words, metro-wide reporting was existing, that nuances around the community that I live in were… went missing. So, you know, the name of the shopping center where the, where the tragedy happened, um, the, uh, you know, even the way that streets were referenced and businesses were referenced. Those kinds of things became slight inaccuracies that added up to a broader sense of, you know, if you’re in that community, kind of go, “Okay, well this doesn’t feel… This doesn’t pass the sniff test.” Um, right through to, uh, you know, important things like traffic reports and, um, and, and those kinds of things. We, a local, I’m sure as in, as in many markets, uh, we had the news a couple of weeks ago of, um, several local radio stations shutting down that are all serving local, local markets. And, um, so that amalgamation and consolidation continues to really shape the way our communities and, and the way our communities show up and the way we show up with each other. I was gonna bring up that point, Jennifer, and um, and it was all the r- it was five Rogers stations across Canada were shut down, and at one of them was the Kitchener station, which is right next door to where I live and, and has a huge impact on this entire area because it was a major radio station, and the outcry locally was huge. So many of the community members were so upset that this station had closed down because it had been around for a very long time and had a very, um, long history in the area, and everybody was outraged. And this goes to how the business model has changed for so many of these, uh, for the media, um, and how that, uh, corporately is changing journalism, right? And that the reason these, I mean, it was so coincidental that this happened the day after Rogers announced that they were buying back a lot of the stock and taking over the Rogers entertainment and sports, uh, franchises. And so, well, look at that. They do this one day, and the next day all of these stations are being closed. And you can’t look at that and go, “These, this is not an isolated situation. These are tied together.” And so there was a lot of outcry going on because of the effect that it has on the daily lives of a lot of these people because of the communication, because of what is, um, the role that these network, uh, networks, that the papers, that the radio stations all play for the communities that they’re in. My community, Guelph, does not have a, a printed daily paper anymore, and we’re not a small community. What had d- has cropped up in the meantime are two online newspapers. Um, what is interesting is that this week, um, because I’ve got my eyes open because we were talking about doing this podcast today, Village Media, which is based, uh, out of, uh, northern Ontario, um, announced that they’re launching 15 local newspapers in the United States along with the Knight Foundation. So they’re taking this model of being online, and they’re now taking it into the United States because it has done so well here in Ontario. So that was really interesting because it is a not-for-profit organization, a charitable organiz- that is providing the funding, and they’re going into, I think it’s three states, uh, Wisconsin being one of them, in, in the US. Um, because they’re recognizing that a lot of these smaller communities don’t have anything anymore. The media are being pulled from these communities. Uh, so it is, there’s a lot of changes that are happening that are robbing the communities of the information that they have traditionally had. I’d like to just add to that when we’re talking about radio stations, and I think it’s true for TV and, and, uh, and print, but particularly with radio, there are companies that are buying up. There’s no restriction, uh, for how many, uh, media outlets you can own anymore in the United States. So we have companies that are just buying up all the licenses, uh, and they may be converting them all to, uh, the same format such as the K-LOVE format, which is now virtually in every market. And, uh, this has really had an impact on local jour- journalism and local programming i- uh, for, for, uh, radio, TV and, and print. Yeah, yeah. When the funding for public radio, public media was, was cut by Congress in the US, it didn’t put an end to NPR and PBS. What it did was it shut down, uh, small local, uh, stations, and a lot of those were in news deserts. It was the only access to local news that people had. And we have a comment from Brian Kilgore, uh, and, and he makes the point that wh- when, when you look at what space is available in the publications, a lot of it’s being fill- filled with what he says is, is repetitive politics. Uh, I, I subscribe to our local newspaper, the East Bay Times, uh, here in the San Francisco East Bay, and as I flip through it, it’s AP and it’s Reuters and it’s other wire copy. Uh, it’s from their affiliate partners with the, the New York Times and, and the Washington Post, which means that we’re not learning about what happened at the zoning commission. We’re not learning what happened at the school board, and I think that stuff is important. I don’t know how important it is from a media relations or a corporate communications standpoint, but, uh, yeah, I think from a democracy standpoint, uh, it’s, it’s, it’s absolutely critical. Um, I’ll tell you what I’m doing is I have, uh, s- set up, uh, a, a skill in Claude, the AI large language model, that scours all of the local government websites for both upcoming meetings and what they’re going to be talking about in the minutes of past meetings, and it builds me a little newspaper, uh, that I can read every day. It also covers things like where there’s gonna be street closures around me. Uh, it does a little police blotter. Um, I’m- I keep tweaking it, and one of these days I’m just gonna set it up so it automatically publishes to the web, not just to, uh, my Claude implementation where, where I can see it, uh, so that there is a local newspaper here that, that does cover that stuff. Um, just, you know, because I can. But y- it, with, with this introduction of, we’ve now heard of two, uh, Diana, what you mentioned and what I heard about The New York Times doing, it’s, it sounds like there’s a bit of a resurgence underway. Are, are there parts of the media ecosystem that are still healthy or, or at least healthier than, than people assume? You know, Shel, just to build on what you’re talking about, I do think this, uh, perhaps, um, uh, responsive rise in citizen, citizen journalism, uh, is probably the wrong terminology in this particular case, but what you’re describing. I mean, uh, like many of you, um, I’ve switched to following a lot of independent journalists. Um, and while that’s in response to shifts in the media, the media landscape to do with what you were talking about, Ned, that kind of broader ownership issue and the influences and independent thought, et cetera. I like the varied and diverse tone that that brings to my understanding of issues in a way that, um, in a way that is, uh, perhaps more insightful than I might have had previously. Now, is that sustainable? I have no idea, honestly, how some of these, in some cases, very well-respected, um, high-profile individuals are funding their independent ventures. But, um, but I do think it’s, uh, it’s not an unhealthy shift in terms of, again, that, uh, diversity of, of, um, presentation of thought. Uh, Shel, I just wanna add something to what Brian said. Thanks for listening, Brian. I know you’re our, our, our, our best patron. Uh, y- an, uh, a news hole abhors a vacuum, and so they’re gonna fill it with something. Uh, that’s why I’ve always said, uh, give ’em something, uh, ’cause sometimes they, they just need to plug a hole. But, uh, you’re, we’re all right. Th- there, there’s no longer the local, uh, budget, uh, going around for, for covering things like the school board and the city council and those types of things that… And, uh, that, that was a, a mission for local, uh, journalism for decades You know, and I’m saying, and h- that was always the reason for, um, local media, right? Like it was, they were always the reason th- why we had the local reporters and the local papers, was to make sure that they were there to cover off what was happening locally for politics, locally for, um, what was going on in your city so that you knew what was happening. My 85-year-old mother constantly talks about the fact that she is not computer literate, and quite frankly, I don’t want her on a computer because she’s been the victim of fraud several times now. Um, and I just know if she was on the computer it would be so much worse. Um, and sh- but she’s constantly saying, “I don’t have access to the news. I, I am not, I don’t know what is going on.” So she’s getting it through me, um, because there is no other way for her to get any information, um, because we don’t have a, a local newspaper anymore. And, um, because of that she’s not getting the information that is coming out about what’s going on in our city. Um, and there are a lot of other, um, vulnerable people in our society who are not getting the information ’cause they don’t have access to getting anything online because they don’t have, um, internet or, or what have you. And, you know, and that is a sign of democracy within, uh, a community and within our countries. Um, and if you don’t have that, how are you getting that information, right, about what is going on in your city? And nowadays it is so important to be making sure that you are getting true information, truthful information, and not misinformation. Um, and when you’re not getting that provided, how are you ensuring that what you are getting is proper information? Um, now the other side of that as well is that, um, there… When I’ve been doing media relations over the last couple years, one of the big changes that I have found is that publications that were always, um, you were able to talk to to get, uh, information to work with with your clients now all of a sudden are wanting money. You know? They are wanting advertising. You can only get a story if you are going to b- be buying advertising, and that has been the other change that I have found that, uh, shocking in some ways, um, because that was not what was happening prior. Um, and so that has been another business model shift that I have found that has happened. And Dia- Diana, you’re 100% right about that because, a- and, and when you have a publication that goes to pay to play, uh, I personally- Uh, view it as just a big, uh, publication of press releases, and I think a lot of other people do. So I think the journalism still has a place for professional journalists And, and it was not even, um… And it’s not because that’s not what they look like. If you’re reading it as a consumer, you would not know. I mean, there’s certain publications you look at and you go, “Okay, they’ve paid for that spot.” These are not publications that when you look at, and traditionally they were never that way, and when you’re looking at these publications, you’re not looking at it going, “Oh, they’ve paid for that, that placement.” Right? Uh, and it’s so disheartening to see that that is now what is happening. Um, and interesting enough as well, I was, um, scrolling through my Instagram, uh, on the weekend and came across, uh, She Would Be a Beauty Editor, and she had put a post up about how often now she is running into, um, PR people, um, from product companies saying, “Where’s my coverage? I sent you product. Where’s the coverage for the product I sent you?” And she’s going, “Hey, hey, wait a second here. You don’t automatically get coverage because I sent you… Because you sent me product. That’s not the way it, it works.” But this is a change with these expectations now because of social media. So, uh, it’s interesting, uh, th- how social media and influencers and have changed this dialogue as well. I, uh, I thought that was a r- really interesting comment to come from an editor, uh, at a, um, a beauty magazine as well with these expectations too. I would, I would say to them, “You gotta, you gotta give me more than just product. You gotta give me a real story with, you know, has news value.” Well, and it was interesting ’cause she actually said, “You don’t just get by sending me product. There actually has to be a reason. There has to be, you know, I actually have to try it. I actually have to like it. Um, you don’t just get.” Like, it, it was… Uh, and I actually responded to her, um, and said, “Yeah, there has just been this change.” Um, and these, these like, you know, and, and, and it’s one of these things like, okay, I, I remember the… Like, I feel like, you know, my grandmother now. Like, “I remember the days of, you know, when we walked in snow and it was 15 feet high.” You know, it, it, it, you know, it’s like I’m now, I’m now of that era, right? But because, uh, it, th- just the way the expectations have changed because of social media and influencers, and you give me something, I’m gonna say something, right? And it’s gonna be nice, right? Well, yeah, yeah, there’s also the expectation that you’re gonna pay for play, uh, not, uh, uh, in a more traditional context. I’ll give you an example. About a week ago I got a call from a production company. They’re under contract to CBS News. So I mean, CBS News is embroiled in its own stuff right now. Uh, but it’s still one of the major news outlets, uh, am- among the broadcasters. And they’re doing 35 segments around the America 250 theme. Uh, and each segment’s about four minutes, and they wanna do one on construction. They wanna come out and highlight our company. I’m on the phone 20, 25 minutes with this guy, talking about, you know, what we could talk about and what we’re doing in, in sustainability and, and things like this that would be of interest to an audience. And the producer is, is getting very excited and, and we’re starting to make arrangements and, and then, and this is, this is a, a classic example of bearing the lead. He says, “By the way, there is a $60,000 buy-in.” Uh, yeah. It’s like, “I thought you were under contract to CBS?” Well, yes, they’re under contract to produce the items, but they have to raise the money to handle the costs of production on their own. So you’re seeing more and more pay to play like this in order to play in traditional mainstream and, and, and trade media I’ve been approached by two different publications since I’ve become a fellow Um, for, you know, the story. Um, and my qu- you know, and it’s like I’m now asking the question of, “And is there a cost to be involved?” Because I’ve- Yeah … you know, we’d like to- You gotta- … feature you. Yeah. Right? And it’s like- Gotta, gotta start with that. Well, exactly. Yeah. Right? I clicked in pretty quickly. Um, and it’s like, lovely opportunity, what’s the cost? Right. Right? Um, which is unfortunate. I think a really big question here is we need a broader conversation about ethics when it comes to media coverage, when it comes to communicators. Um, our association, we have a code of ethics. Um, there are a number of news agencies. CBC, for example, has the JSP, which is standards and principles, journalism. And, you know, a number of news organizations and practicing journalists, for example, have been working with, uh, mental health agencies on how they can, uh, cover appropriately, uh, news stories in which, uh, individuals have died by suicide and what can be done. And often now you see at the end of these stories, um, a link to mental health resources. So there’s a, a conversation happening around how we can approach conversations ethically. And the other side for me about, um, the changes we’ve seen in, uh, media ownership and how stuff is covered, um, the flip side of shrinking organizations means that you have a loss of triangulation. So as a social policy researcher, I try to collect information in different ways. What are the studies that have been done? Can we do a survey? How about testing some of those results in a focus group? What about consulting and holding public meetings with key informants? So that you can test what you find. And the loss of multiple media services means that ourselves as consumers of media, we don’t have the ability anymore to test what we learn against other sources. And when you have media influencers, when you have, um… And I’m not talking about the journalists who are doing really interesting work on their own and publishing that through Substack or other means. But when you have people who say, “Oh, I’m gonna whip out a phone and cover this and tell you the real truth,” to provide the hot take on issues, that’s not necessarily grounded in knowledge or evidence-based, uh, information and research. Um, w- we have a deficit of critical thinking and analyzing because we also lack all those sources in which to, um, assess. And so in my work with media relations is I try to connect people with different kinds of sources, so at least within a piece that results- Um, there can be multiple sources of information about the issues from reliable, trustworthy contacts. And I think that’s part of the bigger conversation when we encounter pay-to-play, because then we’re only getting single source, uh, information I, uh, I’d like to add something to what you said, Martha. I’m so glad you brought up the IBC Code of Ethics, because it really does underpin everything we do. Uh, and, and that is, uh, when we’re dealing with the media, whether we’re an editor dealing with, uh, one of our journalists, uh, or a source, or we’re a journalist dealing with, uh, uh, sources or readers, uh, it all comes down to trust, and trust has to be truth-based. Uh, when, when we, uh, are writing or we’re reporting, uh, we’re consuming information and sharing it, it all has to be based on the truth. And that’s where a, a, a lot of media have, uh, gotten away from fact-checking and gotten away from, uh, uh, ensuring sources are legitimate. Uh, but, but as a communicator, uh, dealing with our bosses a- and, and dealing with our, uh, consumers, our readers, writers, uh, viewers, uh, uh, listeners, it’s, uh, it’s gotta be truth-based and we, we gotta build trust with our, with our, uh, constituents, and we, uh, you have to keep earning it all the time. If you lose it, it’s, uh, it’s, it’s something that’s extremely hard to, to restore. Right. And when we put that, our own professional communications code of ethics, when we use that as our, um, as our, as our filter, as our, our compass, et cetera, in these discussions about, um, the media landscape and, um, the value of ethical communications and, and journalism as it relates to that, uh, really that can, that can help guide us in a kind of a, a, a, a more meaningful way than even some of the tactical, uh, examples some of us are discussing, right? So pay-to-play, for example. Um, uh, you know, I think our code of ethics gives us some guidance about that. And, uh, and that will be, you know, you’ll need to… Will each of us need to figure out how to apply that within our organizations, uh, uh, whether they be educational, um, corporate, not-for-profit, uh, et cetera. Um, so yeah, I think we, we have that guidance within us. And Martha, as you say, and I’m sure all of us speak to students about this, you know, I say like fi- if whatever community you find, whatever path you choose, there will be a code of ethics. So it’s not just ours, it’s, it’s, um, it’s the journalistic code of ethics. It’s all of those things that, that keep us true to the truth. Yeah. Uh, um, Jennifer, you and Martha both raised something I want to talk about for a minute, and then we have a comment from a listener. Uh, but, uh, you, you, you both talked about what journalists are doing, uh, if they don’t want to be associated or affiliated with a mainstream publication anymore, or if they have been let go. A lot of them are starting their own media companies, uh, or they’re just starting to crank out a Substack. Uh, they’re continuing to employ the practices and principles of effective journalism. They’re just doing it, uh, through a different channel. And I, I haven’t checked, but I don’t think that Cision and the other PR services companies that are configured to help you reach journalists are making this transition and identifying all of those newsletters on Substack and Ghost and all of the other platforms that are available for this, uh, all of the YouTube channels that are being set up a- a- as media outlets for some of these journalists creating their own media outlets. Uh, and it, it, it seems to me that it would be a lot of work, uh, to identify those. Um, you know, where I work, uh, we are trying to shift, uh, the perception in the marketplace of the kind of markets where we are active, because that has pivoted. Uh, so that wasn’t that difficult, you know, 10, 15 years ago. It’s a nightmare now. How do you find those? And how effective is it if you pitch one journalist with their Substack newsletter as opposed to the journalist who’s in the publication that’s being read by for- far more people And that is why we do a lot of work. That’s the relationship building part of what we do, right? Um, and that is, that’s what we do. That is, that is what media relations, um, that’s our job if we’re doing it well, is to stay connected and to find out, uh, who is doing what and where people are, and to, to build those relationships, and to understand the areas that we are working in and who is doing what in any given, you know, at any given time. It has always been part of our job to understand who is where, because they were always moving around, always changing, um, and they were. Um, people within the media, uh, were moving from beat to beat to beat within, um, you know, newspaper or TV or whatever at any given time, and it has just become, m- you know, more complex and more compounded and more fragmented than ever before. But as you are doing, you know, building those relationships, and that is, that is what we have to do today. We have to maintain those relationships, and we have to stay on top of that, and we have to, um, understand who is where so that we can, um, be the type of person, um, um, who makes the journalist’s job easier. Um, so that we can have those relationships, foster those relationships so that we can do our jobs. And one of the things I used to do, Diana, when I handled media and communications for a public health organization here in the province, is I tracked the issues that might, uh, attract attention. And so one day I, I… well, I’ll sign up for different Google alerts for different topics to see, A, what’s being said and how they’re writing about it, or how it’s being covered, or what are the kinds of things that people are latching onto. And, you know, came across my, my email that there were, uh, there was a report from out west in Canada of a type of a vaccine that they were experiencing some shortages with, and it was a vaccine that’s used often in the schedule for children, uh, aged one to five. And so I thought, “Oh, this is interesting.” Um- I’ll go and talk with the medical officer of health. And so I went and I said, “Hey, um, you know, this came across my desk. Are we having any issues?” And he said, “Where’d you hear that?” And I said, “Well, it was a reliable report from CBC up in the western part of Canada.” And he said, “As a matter of fact, we just got an update, um, about the shipment of vaccines and how it’s gonna be rolled out because of the supply chain issues.” So I said, “Oh, well, very good. You’re on top of it. No worries.” Anyway, two hours later, I get a call from a local reporter who does this exact same thing, but from a different perspective as a journalist, to call me up and say, “Hey, Martha, I read this story on our sister website. Um, are we having any issues here in this province?” So there are ways that you can use, and, and this is one of the things that I think is positive, um, about search engines and subscribing to updates, is that it can do the work for you of trawling a number of sources so that you can then take time to evaluate and say, “Okay, I regularly want to receive information from this person because I’ve reviewed their content and they’re a reliable source.” And so there are tools that we can use. Um, and as Diana said, one of the things I would always do is also get to know the people in your neighborhood, and sometimes move out of the neighborhood, and sometimes new people move in. So you have to cultivate those relationships and see what their understanding is. And I’ve never had an issue cultivating a particular reporter with an aspect of a story, because different reporters are intrigued, attracted, uh, drawn into a story for different reasons. And so being able to provide multiple angles that might serve my multiple journalistic audiences, uh, was always a helpful approach, because people like something that’s different. They don’t want to be sharing the same information, uh, as their competitor. And, uh, it’s an advantage for you, and it’s also a plus for them. Martha, you raise such a great point about that reporter who called you. Uh, he called you because he trusted you. Uh, and also, and ’cause you already had a trust- a trusted relationship. Yeah. But also, uh, if you hadn’t heard that, that could’ve been the first, uh, information you had received about this, and you could have gone to your boss, who may not have heard about it as well, and become the bearer of this information that came from someone who’s connected with the issues, uh, and, and contacted you as a reporter because he or she trusted you. Um, Kjell, I wanted to just quickly come back to your initial question around, um, you know, where do we as communication professionals focus our time in this, in this new landscape with a lot of independent and, um, perhaps sing- more singularly focused, uh, journalists? Um, do, do you, do you nurture the relationship with someone in their Substack audience or do you look to more mass-market, uh, media choices? And like everything we do, I would say that needs to be audience-driven. So it’s about finding where our audiences are for our particular message, in your case, construction. Um, I used to do a lot of work in healthcare media relations and, um, nurtured some long-term relationships with reporters who were looking for very specific health research stories that I, you know, over a period of time, uh, they would, they would learn to come to me and say, “Okay, it’s, um, heart, a heart month. Um, you know, what have you got?” Or I would have come to them kind of thing. Um, but it is a, it is building, building the trust and also from an organizational perspective, knowing how, what the best channel to my audience is. Yeah, as some of you may know that I am a podcaster and have been for a long, long time. Uh, and I probably get six or seven pitches a day for guests to appear on my podcast. Uh, generally they’re at least somewhat on topic, sometimes completely off topic. Uh, every now and then we’ll actually respond to one that looks good. Uh, I would say probably one out of 50, uh, we’ll, we’ll respond to. Uh, are you- pitching podcasts? Uh, have, have you heard of other communicators doing it? Because I’m doing it now. I’m trying to get our subject matter experts and our thought leaders onto the appropriate podcast. One of the, uh, markets that we’re active in is aviation. We do a lot of work at airports, uh, building terminals and things like that, and, uh, we want to have the, the people who understand what it’s like to be doing construction airside with the security and the safety issues there. Uh, we wanna get them in front of the people who are making the decisions about who are we going to invite to bid on this project. Uh, and, you know, trying to find the aviation podcasts that they might listen to is a bit of a challenge. Uh, AI is, it has been helpful. Uh, but I’m out there actively pitching, uh, podcasts. Is, is that something you’re hearing about? I’ve been building some media lists, um, and I’ve actually been sort, trying to find some podcasts as well, uh, some very specific podcasts. It is on my radar because, um, the, you know, some of the podcasts may be small, um, but they are the target audience that I’m trying to reach very specifically. So again, I think it’s, we’re trying to h- I think when you’re doing, um, the job of media relations, um, that we want to do, uh, you’re trying to get to your audience, right? And I think podcasts are one very specific way to do that Um, and I think, you know, it, it getting to, um, I was looking at Cision’s State of the Media report that was done this year. Um, and it’s interesting the point that you just made, Shell, about, um, whether or not the pitches that you’re getting are the right pitches. Um, and in the, in the report, it said most journalists say that less than 25% of the pitches that they’re getting are actually relevant to them, and so that’s really key. Um- Yes … right? So, uh, and n- not that that has changed, ’cause I think that, that is what most journalists have said for many, many, many years. I think that’s one of their pet, pet peeves. Um, and so we always have to keep that in mind. And I, I just wanted also to point out that, um, 80- in the same survey, that 84% of the journalists actually said that they wanted, um, media communicators to reach out to them via an email and introduce themselves before they ever pitched them, and, um, start a relationship with them ahead of time- Yeah before they actually ever started pitching them. Um, and to start that relationship, introduce themselves, um, and to put some context around why they might be reaching out to them. Um, and so it’s all part of that relationship building ahead of time. So yeah, you know, identifying who you could be reaching out to, you know, and if that’s ca- uh, that podcast is the right source for you to be, um, connecting with the end audience, then that’s the right way to go It’s, uh, a- as, as a writer, I, I write for a lot of trade professional journals, and, uh, if you have a relationship with an editor, they, that they know that you’re gonna write something and send it in that’s gonna be, uh, pretty good and pretty close to on time, uh, th- then they, they don’t say, “What is it? Just send it along. I, I got a space for it.” Uh, but if you don’t know that editor, uh, it’s very hard to crack, uh, crack the nut. You, you really have to send all kinds of clips and, uh, examples of, of things that you’ve done and, uh, answer a lot of questions about what you’re gonna write. Uh, so, so b- getting that relationship, once you’re there, uh, it makes all the difference in the world. I think that’s the absolute key to having a, a successful media relations, uh, component to your communications practice. It’s connecting with the people and understanding what their needs are. They get hundreds of emails, and lots of them get funneled into the spam folder. Um, they don’t have time to read, uh, a pitch from someone who’s just sent out 1,000 emails hoping something will stick or catch somebody’s eye. And- Pray and pray … respecting their time is critical, and also understanding how they want to receive information. I once got a comment from a journalist who said, “You know, I can’t actually do anything with your news release.” And I said, “Oh dear, you know, what did I do wrong?” And he said, “No, this is exactly how I would write it as a story, but I can’t just run it 100% as is.” And I was thinking, “Well, okay, that’s pretty cool. I haven’t lost my journalism training,” ’cause that’s, I did go on to do a journalism degree after my undergrad. But, um, being able to present the information in the way that they can use, and so I do a lot of work supporting people who want to write op-ed pieces. Um, and space is a consideration, and word count is a consideration, and being tight and concise and focused is huge. And sometimes people call me up, and they’ve got 1,500 to 2,000 words, and I said, “Guys, no one’s gonna publish that,” right? Even though there is a market for long-form journalism, and there’s been some really incredible work done, but when it comes to an editorial piece or a commentary, you need to be really tight. And so being able to work with people who know that the stuff I’m going to send them is going to meet their specifications is already a step ahead in, in being able to achieve that coverage. ‘Cause then if it attracts the attention of the op editor, then they can move into, “Oh, well, maybe we should pursue this in the news section.” Um, and sometimes I’ve done that, and I’ve pitched that and say, “Hey, you know, this person has written this piece. It’s being published on Wednesday. But there are other nuances or aspects to the story that you might wanna consider as a separate standalone news piece.” So being able to cultivate those relationships, to have the trust, but also to respect their time and what their needs are is, is super important. Just to go back to the podcast thing, Shel, for a second, um, I will say that, uh, at least in my observation of the next generation of, of business leaders, communication professionals, and, and our audience frankly, in other words, the, the students I’m seeing in the classroom, when I ask them about channels, you know, “How would you get… If you were, if you were in, imagine you were working for an organization, how would you get your message out?” I would say podcasting would, would be, the vast majority of them would, it would be in their top two or three, if not their number one, in part because that’s their, they have a more intimate relationship with podcasts and podcasters than perhaps previous generations have had. And so in fact, there’s this, um, there’s this, uh, new form of, of connection and trust that is built between liter- listeners and audiences and, and podcasters, uh, that I think needs to be taken into account in the ways that we show up as communication professionals. I’d like to add to that, Jennifer. You know, we, we’re Luddites, right? Uh, if you’ve been around long enough to be considered to be a fellow, you’re, you’re, you’re entrenched in, in the old ways. Uh, except for Shel. Oh, come on, Dan. Speak for yourself. He’s always… So I, next, I’m sat next to this w- young lady on a plane. She was an influencer. She had millions of followers on Instagram and, uh, and Facebook, and I’m watching her and she’s going like crazy with her thumbs. And I, I said, “How do you do that?” She said, “What do you mean?” I said, “You go so fast with your thumbs.” And she goes, “Well, how else do you do it?” And I said, “Like this.” And she gives me the, she gives me the, “Okay, Boomer” look, you know? Right. Yep. Uh, yeah, the other thing to think about with podcasts is, is that they do end up getting quoted now in the mainstream media. It’s, it’s, uh, sort of the, the new man on the street. Uh, you, you end up seeing so-and-so said on a podcast. Uh, in fact, I’ve started listening to some podcasts because they get referenced, “Oh, you need to listen to this interview with this guy on this podcast,” said Paul Roetzer on his podcast, right? So, uh, I, I think there’s a, a way to get amplified if, if you’re on a podcast. Uh, I do wanna share a couple of the comments that we got, starting with, uh, Mirko Pecevic, uh, who says, uh, yeah, basically kudos to me for my little local online initiative. Uh, he does say that it doesn’t fill the gap of critical reporting, and, uh, it, it absolutely does not. Uh, it’s, it’s just finding facts and, and publishing them. Uh, what practices can comms pros adopt to support local reporting? And I’ll, I’ll turn that over to all of you in a sec, but I, I do wanna direct people to Alabama News Center at alabamanewscenter.com. It was started by Alabama Power, uh, because they saw a vacuum in local reporting where they could get their own stuff out. So you’ll see a lot of Alabama Power coverage in here, but you’ll see coverage of other things. Business, community, innovation, food and drink, and weather, uh, are the categories they have. There’s no politics addressed here, but, you know, if there’s a, a parade, I, I’m looking at a, a story here that, uh, you know, Run for the Wall motorcyclists stopped in Tuscaloosa, Alabama to honor veterans. Uh, those types of stories. So, you know, this is, is one model is if you’ve lost the local media outlet that you relied on to get information to your stakeholders, start your own Uh, all news is local, and if you can find a way to find someone in your organization who’s, who’s, uh, achieving something, accomplished something, uh, has an interesting story to tell, uh, that localizes your, uh, main messages a- and, and gets you some opportunities in, in more local media. Uh, some of, uh, in, in an earlier lifetime, uh, in the Navy, I was responsible for the fleet hometown news center, and we sent 1.13 million individualized press releases a year to local media, to, uh, radio, local, local newspapers, high s- uh, college alumni associations, uh, about the accomplishments of someone localized or, uh, someone who went to that school, who lived in that town. Uh, these are their parents, uh, and this is the accomplishment. They, they won an award, uh, they graduated from a special course, a- and this was local news. And the vast majority of our newspapers, our editors, uh, used it because it was local, and people will look for something that they can connect with locally The problem becomes now that the end source to be able to put that into something is now gone, right? So- Yeah … right? ‘Cause I, I know exactly what you’re talking about, and now those papers or those places are no longer existing. So where do you send something like that, right? Um, and they’re just not there. They’re just not there anymore. Um, it’s funny ’cause Martha was just talking about, um, uh, news releases that, you know, they can’t run them anymore. Now, I, I actually wrote a news release for becoming a fellow, um, and I actually sent it to the local, um, online newspaper, and they actually ran it word for word. Um, so y- you lo- you gotta love it, right? It’s always, it’s… Y- you love it when they actually run the, the news release you wrote word for word. Um, and they actually ran it in the online, um, local newspaper that I had become a fellow. Um, and so it is that same kind of local story. Um, and they, you know, so them doing something like that, but there’s a lot of places that just don’t have, um, the capacity to actually be able to do that anymore. Um, I have seen a number of, uh, as a judge for the Gold Quills or, uh, an evaluator, I have seen a number of, of submissions come through where corporations or companies are actually including in their, um, corporate newsletters, uh, places where they’re talking about what is going on in their local cities. Um, and so there are companies that are, are taking up that gauntlet and including information about what is going on within their company newsletter, so that’s always nice to see. Um, um, doing something like that. It’s a good way to humanize your organization. Yeah. People like to be seen. People like to be recognized, and organizations that have, uh, departments or divisions or teams, um, in different parts of the country or, or their provinces or states, um, do well to include those perspectives rather than always seeing it come from head office. Um, it’s a challenge in Canada where a lot of the media outlets in terms of national coverage are concentrated in central Canada. Um, it means that the local voice gets lost, and it’s a bigger challenge if you want to, um, really get some national coverage. And I work with a, a company in Ottawa, and one of the things that we have found is that the, uh, what media wants is something that will connect the issue to the people in the area that they are servicing, um, in terms of news, however it is, in terms of the web or an actual publication, a radio broadcast or a podcast. And sometimes you’re finding crossover where some former newspaper outlets are now including, uh, video coverage in their stories so that they can show the progress of a news conference. Um, so being adaptable and responsive, I think, um, is challenging when that funneling thing is happening with centralization of news sources. But if you can connect people to other people in their different regions, then it, from an internal communications perspective, it really does build solidarity, uh, and humanizes, as Ned said, the, the workplace because people see that their employer recognizes that unique aspect of them in terms of if you’re in the south or the north or the west or wherever. Let me, uh, get this last comment in from Brian Kilgore, and h- this is fascinating, and I, I don’t disagree with this at all. Uh, this is looking at this from the other angle. Sources at the decision-making level won’t talk to reporters or appear on camera, and instead only issue statements. I remember a few years ago, I, I read a, a piece, uh, I think it might have been in, uh, the Columbia Journalism Review or, uh, the, the Nieman Labs or, you know, one of the journalism reporting outlets, uh, that said that, uh, The Washington Post had approached a big company, I think it was Clorox, about participating in a, a report that they were doing, and the response from Clorox was, “No, thanks, we don’t need you,” to The Washington Post. Uh, if coverage is important, how do we convince our, our, our leadership that we need to be doing this even as, as, as we see the erosion of the, the media landscape? Well, I think, uh, it’s funny, I had, uh, I had coffee with a journalist friend yesterday morning and, um, she was talking about an article she was working on for The Economist, so, you know, pretty high-profile piece. Um, and she approached a, um, a federal cabinet minister whose, whose, um, purview it was, it is to, to, um, uh, who is a subject matter expert and, um, and his office, uh, said, “We’ll provide a statement.” And she said, “This is The Economist.” Um, “I think I can … I th- I, you know, I think an interview is warranted.” Um, to which they agreed, uh, but it sort of took that ri- reminder. But what I, something related to this, Shell, that I wanted to mention is the, is this kind of, um, dissemination of responsibility for sharing the news, which we’ve been talking about in a, in a variety of ways, that comes to us as organizational communicators, but it also ne- it also takes into account the weaving, the new, the new look of the, of the media landscape. Um, the, uh, the same journalist friend is, runs a major journalism program here in, in British Columbia. It’s a recognized program across Canada, and they’ve stopped intake of their journalism program and are reevaluating its, um, its role, its relevance, its purpose, et cetera. However, one of the really interesting things she’s been talking to us about is the, is the distribution, the desire to ensure that the distribution of those skills continues at the s- at the school. So in other words, um, they still want, uh, uh, to ensure that students have good writing skills, uh, critical thinking skills, all of those things. So where this comes back to your question about the executive level presence is the, is the reminder that we are, uh, like with many roles, we’re wearing many hats, uh, and executives need to see themselves that way, um, need to see themselves as part of, um, not just a contributor to or an observer of or a bystander of the news cycle, but an actual participant in the news cycle, which we as communication professionals are in a new way as well. We’re partners with journalists. Many journalists are working in communications. Um, and, and so I think we can bring a re- a refreshed understanding of the way that landscape works in a way that means we build trust and community within each other to get those important messages out. Uh, uh, no, no other thoughts on Brian’s point? Well, I think we’re seeing more of it. Sometimes it’s because people have less time and it’s easier. They feel that way they can control the message because it’s the statement, so the statement gets quoted. Um, and I think it’s interesting what Jennifer said because there is still a lot of fear in terms of how you might get treated by the media and how your words may get used. And so I think people see it as the easy way out to say, “Okay, we have, um, a statement. Um, they have a photo of the person who’s speaking. They can run with that.” And so I work with media relations coaching and performance presentation, and getting people over that fear, uh, is one of the things that comes up every single time. And I had to throw up on the screen a comment that we got from Diane Chase saying, “Yes, Jennifer.” So. Thanks, Diane. We are about out of time. Uh, less than 90 seconds left. Uh, so I do want to let everybody know what’s coming up in August on Circle of Fellows. Episode number 132 will take place at 6:00 PM East Coast time. Uh, the time shifts based on who’s on the panel, and this time on the panel, uh, we have Adrian Cropley, uh, from Australia, so the time has shifted to accommodate his participation. I still think it’s gonna be a, a, a very early hour for Adrian. But, uh, we will be talking about artificial intelligence issues in communication, notably pivotable, pivotal points for the profession. Um, and I’m, I’m not gonna guess what we’re gonna be talking about in a month because the whole landscape could change again, uh, in, in, in 30 days. I mean, you look at the news just recently and it’s all about open weight models from China. Um, reading Chris Penn saying, you know, y- y- you can’t block them because they’re the only ones that people can use to develop their own models, uh, even if it’s a US, uh, research company. Uh, so I mean, all kinds of interesting things that, that we can talk about. That panel, in addition to Adrian, uh, will include Bonnie Caver, uh, Pia-Mary Caramanis, and Mike Klein. So it should be a great panel. And to Diana, uh, Martha, Jennifer, and Ned, thank you so much for your participation today. I think this has been a great discussion. Uh, just a, a, I, I think a sign of what a really good conversation does. I didn’t get off question one on my list of- … of questions. It just kind of snowballed from there, and we had a, we had a great conversation. Uh, so, uh, until next month. See you all later, everyone. Thanks, Sal. Always a pleasure.

The post Circle of Fellows #131: The Evolving Media Landscape and What It Means for Media Relations appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.

In the second of our special Circle of Fellows discussions, Brad Whitworth moderated a panel to discuss the remaining three chapters of the book, “The 7 Cs of the New Communication Compass.” The book’s author and editor, Dianne Chase, joined Brad, along with the IABC Fellows who authored the three chapters:

About the panel

Dianne Chase helps organizations and leaders harness the power of strategic communication to navigate crises, build trust, and drive positive change. With over two decades of experience in journalism and corporate communications, Dianne has developed a unique approach for training and consulting clients that combines crisis management expertise with the art and science of business storytelling. Dianne is an award-winning media, journalism, and strategic communication professional with profound expertise in communication disciplines, most notably crisis communication, issues and reputation management, media training, and executive communication. She is one of two people in the world accredited in the powerful GENIUS Business Storytelling methodology, created by international communications thought leader, Gabrielle Dolan. She is former chair of the International Association of Business Communicators, and author/editor of The 7 Cs of The New Communication Compass.

Although Zora Artis began her career outside the communications field, she has had an outsize impact on the profession since entering it more than 20 years ago to as an account director and then strategic planner with branding and integrated marcomms agencies. Since then, she has led her own brand and communications consultancy and served as CEO of a 20-person creative, digital, and strategic communication firm. In 2019, formed her current management consulting practice bringing together strategic alignment, brand, and communication expertise. She has received five Gold Quill awards. Her significant contributions to the profession and the body of knowledge include her original research with IABC colleague, Wayne Aspland, on strategic alignment, the role of communications and leadership – the first substantial research effort for the reconfigured IABC Foundation – and co-authoring a subsequent white paper, “The Road to Alignment,” supported by 27 senior communicators from five continents. Zora has also researched the correlation between strategic alignment and experiences and the impact on stakeholder value and brand. This has led her to develop her own proprietary Alignment Experience Framework. She has also examined gender equity, perceptions, and bias in organizations, and wrote a chapter on this topic for the Quadriga University e-reader, Women in PR. Since joining IABC a decade ago, she has impacted IABC as a volunteer, including roles as chair of the IABC Asia Pacific Region and IEB director; she currently serves as the chair of the 2022 World Conference Program Advisory Committee. A certified company director, as chair of the IABC Audit and Risk Committee she introduced proper risk oversight to the board’s processes. Zora has been honored with the 2021 and the 2015 IABC Chair’s Award for Leadership and was named IABC’s 2020 Regional Leader of the Year. She is also a Strategic Communication Management Professional, Fellow of the Australian Marketing Institute, and Certified Practising Marketer.

Cindy Schmieg is an award-winning strategic communicator. Her 30+ years of corporate, agency, and consulting experience focuses on making the communications function strategic within an organization. Cindy now teaches online in the Communications Master Degree program at Southern New Hampshire. She has served in many IABC leadership roles and is today a member of the IABC Audit/Risk Committee and Pacific Plains Region Silver Quill Award Committee, as well as assisting on the IABC Minnesota Annual Convergence Summit.

Shel Holtz, SCMP, ABC, is senior director of Communications at Webcor, a commercial general contractor and builder based in San Francisco. He is a member of the Global Communication Certification Council and will become vice chair of the Council in June 2026. Shel has written six communication-themed books, and his seventh, “On the Same Page,” a practical framework for implementing internal communication strategies, will be published later this year. He co-hosts the 21-year-old communication-focused podcast, “For Immediat Release.” Shel served for six years on IABC’s executive board and has also been president of the IABC Los Angeles chapter, along with other IABC roles. He has led communications at two Fortune 400 companies and had his own consultancy for more than 21 years before joining Webcor in 2017.

Brad Whitworth, ABC, SCMP, IABC Fellow, is a pre-eminent thought leader, lecturer, and author in organizational communication. He has led global internal and executive communication programs at HP, Cisco, Hitachi, PeopleSoft, AAA, and MicroFocus. He holds an MBA from Santa Clara University and undergraduate degrees in journalism and speech from the University of Missouri. Brad lives in California, a wine country, and he grows Pinot Noir on his property. A former broadcaster, Brad has made more than 300 presentations to executives, communicators, and university classes worldwide. Brad is a past board chairman of the International Association of Business Communicators and a Fellow of the association. He is one of the authors of The IABC Handbook of Organizational Communication and the new IABC Guide for Practical Business Communication: A Global Standard Primer. He chaired the Global Communication Certification Counsel in 2021.

Raw Transcript

Speaker: Well. Greetings and welcome to our monthly Circle of Fellows. This is episode one hundred and twenty eight. That means we’ve been at this for ten and two thirds years if you’re doing the math. Um, and today we’re talking about a new book, The Seven Seas, the New Communication Compass. And this is part two of our exploration of that book. And we’ll be diving into that. My name is Brad Whitworth. I’m your moderator, and I’m filling in for Michelle Holtz, whom you just saw for a moment. Your regular host, shell, is one of the contributing authors to that book. So he’s here as a panelist instead of the moderator, and he’s joined by two other contributing authors, Cindy Schmieg and Zora Artis and the lead author, Diane Chase. And I’ll let them introduce themselves in a moment, just to set the stage for what it is that we hope to accomplish in this next hour. And don’t forget that if you’re watching, you can jump into the conversation at any time. throws your comments or questions into the chat, and we’ll put them up and talk about them with the conversation. Amongst these four great contributors, the seven seas of communication, the new communication compass, um include collaboration, connection, compassion, cohesion, community congruency, calibration. And in episode one twenty seven, we did cover the ideas behind connection, compassion, congruency, and collaboration. So today it’s chapters one, three, four, and five. And just for the record, I’m the contributing author for chapter two. So we got one, two, three, four, five, all right here on the screen. But I’m going to introduce them one at a time and let them tell you a little bit about themselves and where they’re coming to you from today. And we’ll start with chapter one. Um, Cindy. Hi, I’m Cindy Schmieg. I’m typically in the Phoenix, Arizona area, but today I’m in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Okay. And chapter three is the lead author, Diane. Hello. Hello. Diane Chase from Charlotte, North Carolina. At the moment where it’s gray and rainy, but happy to be here. We’ll bring some sunshine and Zora Artis. Well it’s good. It’s good morning from me in Melbourne, Australia. And it is almost light. And it’s definitely gray and raining as well. Chapter five is Shell Holes. I’m coming to you from Concord, California. Uh, where this morning it was great and rainy. Yeah. Since we’re doing the weather report. Yeah. And I’m in California wine country, where we’ve got some big puffy white clouds and some blue sky and a little bit of sunshine. But we had some rain this morning as well. So, um, before we dive into those chapters, I’d like at least Diane to give a little bit of an overview of the new Seven Seas, and I talk about them as being new because I can remember listening to, um, a past iabc fellow, the late doctor Don Ranley, talking about the seven seas that were designed to gain credibility in writing and included clear, concise, complete, consistent, coherent, creative, and correct. Um, but Diane, it seems to me that the, you know, you really up leveled the game for all of us. We’ve gone from sort of very tactical communication, skill set worries of writing, which is still important. But now we’re talking about communication strategy and how teams and leaders behave. So why the seven seas and how did you pick them? Well, you know, I, I have been thinking about the seven seas as, as of communication, as core leadership competencies. And in our uncertain, volatile world, uh, across many, many areas, it’s really more important to elevate and empower and lead communication in a new way. And I feel like these seven C’s underpinned, again, some of the leadership competencies that are necessary in today’s world, not just in today’s world, but in in the future. Our AI driven future. What is that doing to the way we connect as human beings? And that is more imperative than ever. Because if we can’t build relationships through our strategic, authentic, trustworthy communication, we’re going to be subject to whatever AI determines that we do. So I just feel like a new mindset, a new approach, new thinking, and new empowerment for communication professionals and leaders writ large actually is really important. Well, I think it takes it to another level as well. I mean, it’s not just the tools and the channels and the communications that get put into those channels is really creating the communications environment in which all of these pieces come together. And I think communications people are up to that challenge now. So, um, what I love about the book and where you took this was that we’re talking at a whole new level about a whole different set of communication leadership skills. Absolutely. It really does underpin any successful organisation. Having communication leadership have it as a fundamental in your strategic plan, your business plan, your goals, and it it really drives a purpose driven organisation, especially because it’s how you engage people and you’re going to have greater results, greater loyalty, certainly greater productivity for the long term, if you’re able to connect with people through your communication skills as a leader. And I think it also parallels what’s going on on a number of campuses. I know both at Stanford and Cornell, so sort of from coast to coast in North America, um, communication skills are being taught to up and coming MBA students who before they get turned loose on the world or at least being exposed to the you better master this skill set as a leader and use communications as part of, um, everything that you know, besides finance and legal and all the other sort of functional areas. Um, Diane, I’m going to come back to you to dive a little bit deeper into your chapter three compassion. We did talk about it on the last episode. So people can go over there but don’t want to skip you over. What I want to do is sort of go through the book from the front to the back, and we’ll start with Cindy to talk a little about your chapter on collaboration. And I know, um, maybe you could just start with sort of what’s your definition of collaboration as you wrote about it? Well, I think that’s a good place to start, Brad, and to set up collaboration as a leadership skill is another element of the book. But I think collaboration is more than just sharing information or coordinating details, because it’s about building relationships and understanding multiple perspectives and creating outcomes or results. And to achieve these things, you really need a plan, systemic approach to collaboration. And that’s how you can create collaboration as a leadership skill is through that planned approach. You know, I shared a story in the book about I ran into a guy in a restaurant who was talking about, he got an award for collaboration and he worked at a global consulting firm. And I asked him, oh, what did you do to get that award? And he said, well, I don’t know. Now. I said, well, what was on the award? What did it say? And he goes, it didn’t say anything. It just said collaboration. And I just thought that that organization missed an opportunity to create a planned approach to collaboration, where you could bring employees up together to work on collaboration in the system systematic way. Right? So then through that, collaboration becomes a strategy and you hear companies using collaboration as a value and it can be a value. But without that approach and planning for collaboration, it’s not, it really isn’t going to go anywhere. So that value doesn’t mean a lot. Um, so if you have the approach bringing the employees together, you should get better results. And I know Brad mentioned earlier when we were prepping for the call about collaboration tools such as Zoom, Slack teams. And there definitely collaboration tools. But remember, it requires people to initiate the collaboration on all of these. So we need a human approach to collaboration, where we are all working together and creating that environment or culture that is collaborative. Um, and so you say, why would you need this now? Well, collaboration has always been needed, but there is still that continuing return to the office. So we really need to retrain employees on how to collaborate. I guess that really gets to the gist of what was talked about in the book. And of course, I’ve shared a lot of, uh, points that would help build collaboration, you know, through better team building and getting to know each other, relying on each other to, um. So did the time of Covid help or hurt collaboration? I mean, we have new tools to be able to collaborate and we’re able to have different communities that extend in different ways that didn’t exist. But is it a plus or a minus or jury’s still out? I think it’s going to be a plus, but I think there’s a lag time. We have to learn to use those tools better. And we also have to learn to put the human systems back in place to help us become better collaborators. So when we’re using systems like team, there’s a lot of information. There’s a lot of ways to connect people to people. But the value of the human side of it, you know, building the trust, the relationships, the reliance on other people, gaining all the multiple perspectives that has to come back into play when using those tools. Yeah. Um, Meg, go a little bit out of order here because I want to pull in Chelle for a second and have you weigh in because if anybody knows software and platforms and tools and technologies, it’s shell holds. I mean, you are the go to guy on all this stuff. Are you seeing anything sort of in this collaboration space that’s got you excited or scared? Uh, nothing terribly new. I mean, you know, we’ve seen during Covid the rise of Zoom, which is definitely a collaboration tool. Uh, we see Slack and teams which have been widely adopted, uh, they can, uh, under the right circumstances with the right guidance, be very effective collaboration tools. I think nothing beats face to face, but that’s not always practical. In fact, in bigger organizations, it’s rarely practical. Uh, what I’m seeing is, is AI, which worries me a little. Um, I shared with you all a little earlier an article from Business Insider that talked about the fact that employees are now entering, uh, a question into a prompt box rather than getting up and going to talk to somebody who knows these things. So even within the office, when people have come back because of a return to office mandate, they are still isolating, uh, and interacting with a model instead of each other. And, uh, there has been a noticeable and precipitous decline in collaboration happening in some workplaces. You know, shell going back to a different podcast that you were on and you were talking about AI as more of a hybrid, um, partner or employee at work. And I can see that happening because when I was putting the chapter together, I thought, boy, wouldn’t that be slick if you had a bunch of people sitting around a table or somewhere where you were collaborating on a project and there had you have your AI speaker there, and you could just say, hey, wait a minute. What was the results last year when we ran this ad? What happened then? and you could get that real time information. So to help boost the collaborative results. Yeah, I think that would be great. I have not heard a lot of instances of that. Mhm. That use case, but I’d love to see more of it. Me too. Uh, especially as people start talking to their AI more instead of typing to it. I’ve been experimenting with a tool called Whisper Flow that allows you to engage in that conversation more easily with all of your AI tools. So do we have to speak up? Yeah, you can speak up. Okay. But but it will hear you if you whisper for those open office environments so you’re not disturbing the person next to you. MM. Hence the name. Great name. In terms of the collaboration. Chapter two. What I love Cindy is, is the mindset that this offers opportunity for co-creation, which leads to greater engagement and buy in for whatever it is the initiative, the project, or, you know, the business success overall. Yeah, I see these collaboration tools also following the business model anyway. I mean, at one point, we did have the notion that an organization was bringing people together. And what we’ve seen is sort of a satellite version as companies are sort of exploding the value chain and outsourcing different component pieces and sort of shattering that oneness that used to define an organization. Um, you know, somebody outsourcing their manufacturing or they’ve outsourced their R&D or production or sales is being handled by distributors. Um, it used to be a vertically oriented structure to things in which communications was paramount. I think in some ways this, um, sort of new set of collaboration tools. um, sort of represents the way the environment is changing for organizations out there. So, um, there’s some parallel paths there, but I think what you’ve hit upon so well in the chapter is talking about the human side of it. Um, let’s not put aside these tools, but let’s make sure that we in them along with human behaviors as well. And maybe that ties into sort of the chapter three and compassion. And I want to come back to Diane to talk a little bit about that, because I’m seeing a lot of books that deal with that human side of leadership and management. There’s a one that you guys may have seen out there, love and Work by Marcus Buckingham, uh, a best selling book. And our, uh, iabc friend David Grossman has one called The Heart Work of Modern Leadership. So, Diane, maybe you could sort of talk a little bit about, uh, how did caring and compassion disappear from organizations. And why do we have to write books to remind people that that’s part of the equation? Isn’t it interesting, Brad, how, um, you know, historically in a lot of organizations, it’s been personals personal professionals, professional, never the twain shall meet. There’s a firewall, you walk into the office and you leave your humanity at the door. Those days are gone. And when we are engaging with Gen Z and especially upcoming Gen A, they have no time and they will not tolerate that approach in their work and in their personal lives as well. So again, back to the age of AI, when there’s a loss of human to human connection for a lot of people in their work and even in their personal lives. I know we’ve all seen the research about the unbelievable growth in loneliness that people are feeling, especially younger generations. There’s a there’s an isolation that happens, which is not healthy for across any level. Um, in our work, in our personal lives, whatever it might be. So compassion is, is really, I’m so glad to see it elevated as a core leadership skill and an imperative for working in today’s society. So to me, compassion is action. It’s empathy in action. And it’s, it’s something that takes thought. It takes some skill building in terms of we hear about active listening and, and that sort of engagement, but it really takes caring about another human being, whether it’s caring about why maybe they’re, they’re slacking off in their productivity or their engagement, much less, hopefully not getting to the point of undermining the organization’s goals. That happens as well with disgruntled employees. So being compassionate just means elevating the the critical nature of connecting with another human being in the workplace, as well as outside of the workplace. And it takes that idea of, um, sort of employees are our most valuable asset and said, you better walk the talk. It’s not just the words that are important, it’s the actions that take place. And, and you do see some of that in some places. But I think, um, one of the thought I had was, you know, years ago, it was like, don’t worry, the company will take care of you. Um, and there was a little bit more concern and there was a little bit of sort of, um, motherhood and apple pie kind of stuff wrapped around it. Um, and then it seemed to have disappeared where people were distant and it became more businesslike. And nobody I actually had an HR person said, I can never afford to have anyone as a coworker, as a friend, because I might have to take an action against them. So I distance myself from people and I thought, what a shame that they don’t know who their coworkers are and want to be close. Um, wow. You mentioned in the book the Covid period. Um, and maybe you could just explain a little bit of how that may have, uh, sort of opened our eyes to the human side of some people that were more remote and more distant. Mhm. Well, um, back to that disengagement and that isolation piece, which is impacting mental health and, and just productivity, feelings of well-being, personal and professional success. I think again, um, it was kind of a double edged sword in a way, because it created that sense of isolation for a lot of people. introverts were in heaven. But at some point that’s not healthy either. You have to have relationships. You have to connect with another human being. It’s really important. And, um, so the other side of that is that people were beginning to say, you know what? I’m not really going to spend my time and my effort and my talents with an organization that doesn’t see me as a human being and value me as a human being, appreciate what I do and who I am, not just in the workplace, but outside of the workplace. I’m coming to my work with my own set of experiences, my current challenges, and I want to feel I mean, the old, you know, cliche understood and heard and supported. So, I think Covid elevated compassion because of that. And I work for a company that actually measures, um, whether employees feel known, feel loved and feel proud to work for the organization. So the fact that this is a metric that’s sort of being looked at on a regular basis and how leaders are being judged sort of says, yeah, there is room for that in the workplace these days. Um, let me move on if I can, to chapter four and Zora. Um, and I think the sort of the intro to your chapter that sort of like, am I reading about the same Richmond or not? There are many of us who got hooked on TV’s Ted Lasso, and we quickly discovered it really wasn’t a show about sports or Premier League football. It was really about leadership. It was about communication. It was about caring for people. And it all was revolving around this fictional team called AFC Richmond in the UK. But your chapter is about cohesion, is about a real team. Um and it’s the Richmond Football Club. So same sort of name. It’s based there in Melbourne with you and it’s part of the Australian Football League. So different version of football because we do have different versions of that around the world. We have different rules. Um seventeen thousand kilometers away from Ted Lasso’s fictional team. But maybe you could explain how this case study that you have done for this book is about shared leadership and organizational transformation that you describe in the chapter. And what’s, what’s the story behind this case study and what makes it so relevant to this conversation we’ve had about leaders and comms professionals? Thanks, Brad. And I love the fact that your organization does that, that metric as well, because I think that’s something that Richmond Football Club would actually do as well, although I’m not quite sure, but the word love was mentioned quite a bit when I interviewed the CEO. The Richmond Football Club, which is also known as the Tigers, is is a a rules football team. It’s one of the oldest, most supported clubs in the country. And it’s, you know, over one hundred years old. And by twenty ten, the club hadn’t won a premiership, which is what you would call a championship. And in, in in thirty years, they had a huge debt. They had a declining membership down to about thirty, zero zero zero, a fractured culture. And they had this reputation for moving on coaches really quickly because they they weren’t delivering results. So it’s very it was very much performance focused leadership. And it was known for not being a finals contender. And most people had written them off completely. So what happened over the next decade was totally remarkable. And I’m going to admit, like I am a huge fan of this club. However, I looked at it with immense pride and I rode the waves with them for decades. So I had that sense of feeling. And those who are members and supporters of this club had been through that roller coaster of emotion. So for so long. So over the next decade, they had they had set out this huge vision, a really big vision that by twenty twenty, they would, um, win three premierships. They would eliminate all their financial debt and they’d grow their membership from thirty five to seventy thousand. So by twenty twenty, they had won three premierships in four years. And the final one was in twenty twenty. They grew their membership to over one hundred thousand. They eliminated all their debt, and they built what is probably one of the most admired organizational cultures in Australian sport. And then, just as importantly, they face a significant transition where their key leaders and their players moved on and they had to start to rebuild from the bottom of the ladder in twenty twenty four. But what was really interesting, in twenty ten, the CEO created this amazing strategic narrative that he it was a rallying call to the the club, to the organisation, to the players. And he put it out there. And I’ve included that narrative, which he wrote himself in the book, and it’s really quite powerful. And of course, the narrative leaked at some point. And he was just the media just went to town on him. They basically attacked. They said in an interview, one one of well known media commentator said, aren’t you embarrassed? And the CEO said, no, I’m not embarrassed. I’m proud. We have a vision to come to compete and to be the best on and off the field. If we’re not locked into that, we might as well pack up and go home. And he was incredibly passionate. He never let go of that. And that was quite amazing. Um, but what I want to really focus on here is that this is not just a story about sport, it’s about how organizational transformation can happen and how you can, and how you can create that alignment and the cohesion that you need. So it’s not a story about a visionary CEO, although he absolutely was. And he was there for fourteen or fifteen years. It’s not a story about the brilliant coach. And he, he was amazing. Uh, and they stuck with him even though they were losing for the first six years. They were showing improvement, but still losing. And they had a determined president. And the president, um, Peggy O’Neal, was from the South in America, and she had migrated to Australia and wanted to connect with Aussie. So she found herself a team, and that was Richmond. And she became the first female president of an Australian rules football club, which was quite incredible. So all three were really exceptional. But what Brendan Gale, the CEO, was determined to say was that the whole story is actually about shared leadership and that ownership and the accountability that’s distributed across the whole organisation, the vulnerability and the trust that they’ve built really quite deliberately and carefully, the love and the commitment that they had for each other. And they talk about love. And it was for it was that commitment to something bigger than themselves. And they had this incredibly deep connection to their members, to their partners, and to their community. And then they also have that financial and organizational foundation that they built that was made that performance possible. Um, so it’s a story that about any team or organization that needs to perform, to endure and to fight back when things get hard. Well, in your chapter, one of the other things that you do include is this idea of a cohesion cycle that shows organizations are not static. They, they move. And, um, there are four phases and maybe leaders know about them or maybe it’s not even taught in schools, but, um, could you say what these four phases are? And I think one of the things you point out is that a lot of organizations get tripped up and one of them that they tend to go wrong on and, and it has a cost that goes with that not knowing about cohesion cycle. Mhm. Well, when I was, when I was working through the story and looking at what what is happening with cohesion and performance and having that winning culture, but having a healthy culture as well. Uh, and looking at how Richmond went through the fight, through it. It occurred to me that cohesion is absolutely, absolutely not linear. And so I created this cycle because it’s very much cyclical and it’s got four phases. So the first one is creating that shared meaning and momentum. So getting people genuinely aligned around purpose, direction and moving forward, moving as one, building the cohesion and the culture. So establishing trust, uh, the behaviors and the ways that they were going to work today, work together and then sustaining that high performance, which is really maintaining alignment and avoiding complacency. And then the final, um, part of the cycle is the dynamic realignment and the renewal. So it’s adapting when the circumstances change, while you’re still staying grounded in your values, who you are. And that last phase is what I think is where most organizations struggle, because that renewal is asking something different of leaders and the people. It’s asking them to let go of, of what has worked and to sit with that uncertainty and to rebuild. And a lot of organizations don’t necessarily have the patience because it’s about speed or potentially even the self-awareness of where they’re really at. And so the cost of that is quite real. So they’ll either cling to something that made them successful or trying to protect that past rather than focusing on that future, or they might panic and make really reactive decisions that undermine those foundations that got them there. Right. So you’ll see them lose their way to a degree. So when you’re in uncertainty, you need to be able to work through what’s shifting around you with things that aren’t, that aren’t within your control. You need to be able to manage and move with what’s emerging. And that’s that added adaptation and the resilience, um, that Richmond has been putting in place. And it shows what that looks like. So once cohesion fractures under that pressure, rebuilding is a much, much harder task. Um, and when I spoke with the CEO and also with the, their high performing psychologists, high performance psychologist, doctor McLeod, it demonstrated that it’s really hard for them, but they have the real belief and they know what it takes. And the psychologist, doctor McLeod, she actually mentioned that it was really important for the team to learn how to fail. Well, because all the others who weren’t in the championships to date knew how to do that better than them. So they had to relearn things and I had to learn from that failure. So it’s a story that’s really telling you about how you can rebuild as well. And so everyone’s on board. They told their story. They’ve been telling their story well since twenty twenty four. They hit the bottom of the ladder. They’ve been rebuilding. Everyone’s on board with them within the organization, their community, their members, the players, everyone’s on board. So as they’re going through that phase, that ugly scrutiny that they used to get in there, the earlier years of the transformation just isn’t there anymore. So as comms people, what you can learn is that you can have a clear, honest narrative about where you are in that cycle, and that changes how people experience that journey, uh, with you as they move through that with you. Oh, and you’re going to have to keep us posted on the comeback. And I’m sure as a fan, are you a member? I am. Okay, well, send us the scores and keep us posted. And maybe there’s a new chapter, a new book in that. And then for those of us that are, we’re stuck with Ted Lasso. There is a new season of Ted Lasso coming. In case you haven’t seen all the sneak previews that they’re running. Uh, Ted goes back to the UK to lead a women’s football team. So, um, more or less, with the excitement going on there, and this Richmond Football Club has a has introduced a women’s team as well. All right. Well, maybe they’re, maybe they’re borrowing some storylines from your part of the world. Perhaps. Yeah. Um, let’s turn things now to shall. We’ve heard a little bit from you about some collaboration technologies and a few other things, but your chapter was focused on community. And I think you start out by sort of going, you know, there’s this standard standing belief out there that the reason companies exist is to create a profit, to make money. And some might argue that if you don’t have a profit, your company’s not going to be around very long. So it’s not really a nice thing. It’s really a good thing to have, but it’s not the only thing. And maybe you could explain where you’re coming from and how that sets up what’s coming in the rest of the chapter. Yeah. Well, I’ve heard this from a number of CEOs. When talking about a corporate purpose. They say our purpose is to make money. Our purpose is to return a profit to the investors, to the shareholders, to the owners, whoever they may be. Uh, and my answer to that is this is every company. How does this differentiate you in the marketplace? How does this help people understand who you are and what you do? And this is why we have statements. We’ve all heard about value statements and vision statements and mission statements and purpose statements. And I think a lot of organizations go through these as rote exercises without planning on taking them very seriously. I think the smart organizations are the ones that recognize that the profit is an outcome of living their mission well and living their purpose well. If they do that well, they’re going to make gobs of money, along with effective strategic planning and financial controls and the like. Uh, but if all you want to do is make money, you’ll do just about anything to make that money. It doesn’t focus you on audiences on customer segments, uh, or on marketplaces. So if we look at the profit motive as an outcome of, you know, primarily the organization’s mission, uh, then it’s a lot easier to define the approaches that we’re going to take to, to making that profit. And you talk in the chapter also about communities. And you take a sort of I mean, one of the cuts you looked at was this whole notion of generational differences and how they impact, um, the definitions of community, but also sort of the way we go about communicating with these different segments. Yeah. And in fact, it’s a very timely topic. Giving an email thread I was reading just this morning from among Ibcs fellows, uh, and there was an interesting, uh, contribution from one of the fellows who noted that they were no longer participating here in Circle of Fellows. Uh, because the younger demographic, the ones in their twenties aren’t going to sit and watch an hour long panel discussion. And we’re not going to appeal to that segment with, with this show. Now, I feel that that’s not mutually exclusive that the this Circle of fellows panel discussion, um, has value. Uh, even though we do need to find better ways to communicate with the younger demographic, but, uh, especially these days, given the influence of digital media and social media, uh, and the tendency to watch snackable content, we used to call it, uh, maybe ten or fifteen years ago, uh, bite sized content. I was just reading, uh, within the last couple of weeks. I didn’t know these existed before this. Their clip forms, uh, these are companies that pay freelancers to take long form content and create short thirty, forty five second clips out of them that the owners can then post to YouTube shorts or Instagram reels or, uh, wherever TikTok, uh, and monetize those clips. And I was talking at work about this with somebody who said, yeah, I never watched Saturday Night Live. I just watched the clips that get posted. Um, so it’s a real thing. Uh, the attention span is very short. And, uh, one of our new fellows who was in the classroom was saying in this thread that it’s hard to keep the students attention for more than a couple of minutes, that they’ve got their phones out. Uh, and they’re consuming this, this bite sized content rather than paying attention to, to longer form content. So as we look at connecting with communities, whether it’s internal or external, I think that demographic cut is, is really important. And by the way, Brad, um, since I think I’m the one who can see this, we have a comment from, uh, Mirko coming in. Yeah. It says, do you have any suggestions for prompting genuine conversations between colleagues of different generations? Because in my experience, chit chatting about Taylor Swift isn’t enough to bond. Yeah, that’s a fascinating question. Uh, and what if it’s the Grateful Dead? I mean, we can all bond there, right? That appeals to generate. I mean, there are new Deadheads coming on the scene all the time. Uh, Bob Weir believed that it was, uh, that they’d be listening to this music in three hundred years. So, I mean, I think that’s a fine way to, to bond with, with people. Uh, no, I think it’s important that there be some resources available in the organizations to help generations understand each other. Uh, there was a book many, many years ago about communicating with generations. And they had a, a series of, of matrices, uh, that, that explained exactly what the influences were from each generation and what their communication preferences were and the like. Um, I think, you know, updating that and making something like that available. Doing some training, uh, having some opportunities to connect with people from different generations, uh, is important, uh, by and large in the workplace though. Um, I think there’s, there’s more that the generations have in common than, uh, distinguishes them or sets them apart. Uh, and I think when we’re working on a team, when we’re working toward common objectives, it becomes less of an issue and less of a challenge. Yeah. I’ve said oftentimes when I was doing some global communications work that you get people together from all different parts of the globe, and there would be sort of like, you don’t understand us. You don’t speak our language. You don’t know our culture. Um, there’s no hope for you. And it’s like, we’ll get that out of your system because yes, we’re all different. Uh, I think that is not just different countries from which we come. It’s also we’re all wired differently. We’re made up differently. But get out of the system and let’s focus, as you said, on the things we share. And usually the list of what we have in common is, um, a whole lot longer than the, what is different about us because we are all humans. Um, so I think the other one that I would love to ask you about is that some of the values that you talk about in the book that are sort of, there’s the old school corporate values of things like quality and customer service and value for money that tend to show up as objectives for an organization. But they’re also being they’re not being thrown aside, but they’re being joined by others that are as important, if not more important, to other generations. Is that a way of sort of shaping what it is you said? Yeah, I think it is in some organizations. Uh, some are sticking with the old types of values. And then there are those where the values are just words on the wall that have no bearing on the reality in the in the workplace and lead to a lot of cynicism. Uh, employees, uh, but in organizations that take it seriously, I have seen a shift toward the adoption of, of values like trust and community. In fact, uh, community is one of the values of the company where I work. And it’s taken very seriously, both internally in terms of the community of employees and, and sort of the subcommunities that exist within that population, but also the communities in which we work. Uh, you could also look at the marketplaces we’re in as a kind of community, but, uh, if, if you have a value and you know, what do we mean by values? It’s basically, uh, these are the things that we believe that are going to drive our behaviors and our decisions. They’re our are core beliefs as an organization, and if we believe the community is important, then we are going to make decisions around how our decisions affect those communities. We’re going to bring the communities in to some of those decision making processes, and we’re going to support employees in their embrace of those communities, both internally and externally. I think if you believe in communities internally, you’re going to support the creation and the sustaining of employee resource groups. Those those sub communities can come together and engage with each other, but also be a resource to the organization about, you know, our needs, our differences, what we can contribute, what we’re looking for out of the organization, um, as well as providing the time and the resources to go out into the communities where we work. Um, and, uh, make a difference there. Uh, so yeah, I think the same applies to, to things like trust and some of those other values that, that we didn’t see, uh, twenty five, thirty five years ago. You mentioned the word trust there. And I know that Cindy had sent me a note earlier saying that one of her observations from looking at all the chapters and, uh, the whole book was that trust seemed to show up in all seven of the C’s. And maybe, Cindy, you could sort of, you know, how did you see this and connect the dots across the chapters and maybe after you have a chance to talk about it, we could get the lead author of the why did she trust all of us? Right. Well, as I tell my students, trust is needed in every relationship. And we always talk about trust is the ultimate value that communication can bring to the company. Because from there, like shell said, profits result in that in in terms of communication and collaboration, though, if you trust each other, you are much more likely to share information. So you better collaborate and you also want the other person to succeed more likely. So I think that that’s where the core of it comes in is that that trust is so important because it is the top of the pyramid in getting something accomplished between people. And Diane, did you see that as, uh, a subtheme coming through? Doesn’t trust doesn’t start with C, so we couldn’t include it. But, um, how key is it? Absolutely, absolutely. The future of communication depends on trust now more than ever. So trust is just fundamental to success. We are in an age of such a dearth of trust across our relationships in business and outside of businesses. And I think that stems somewhat from Covid. Um, the whole, the whole fake news and all of that really started to spiral spiral, um, this, this lack of trust. And that’s why there’s so much fear. And I believe so much polarization because we’re not trusting each other and we’re not actually communicating with each other in a way that opens up dialogue. We’re coming with our opinions and trying to, to get people to believe what we believe without first understanding where they’re coming from, why they care about what they care about. And back to the whole community building thing. What is it that we can do to find out the motivators we each have Uh, in our lives and build on those and, and build that trust, which is going to lead to all kinds of positive outcomes. Mhm. Can I jump in here, Brad? Please? Um, a couple of things. It occurs to me, and I’ve said this numerous times when I’ve run, uh, when I’ve worked on facilitating workshops with, with organizations about building, uh, culture and values and defining the behaviors and all that sort of thing. And when trust comes up as something that they want as a value, I push back on them. Because to me, trust is something that’s earned through someone’s experience. Um, with, with you, whether it’s as an organization, as a leader, as an individual. It’s not something it’s, it’s that person is granting that to a degree. So it’s not a value per se. It’s an Outcome and the behaviors, uh, it’s what makes you trustworthy. So, you know, are you, have you got that? Are you behaving with integrity? Um, you know, with congruence? Uh, is it, uh, are you accountable? Responsible, all these sorts of things. Do you deliver what you say you’re going to do? So it’s, you know, going back to Jane’s chapter, for example, that is that’s quite foundational. So I would, I would push back on that. And at the moment, what we’re seeing is there’s a huge gap in organizations between leaders and employees, and trust is breaking down. And when trust is breaking down, the employees don’t hear what the leaders are saying. They don’t listen. And so you have to really work on creating the right conditions for people to trust you. If I go back to my chapter in the book, uh, there was an Example of in at the end of twenty sixteen, uh, that football club had again was, you know, deteriorating performance and everyone started to jump on the bandwagon and attack them. Uh, instead of getting rid of the coach, they, he had gone, he had been sent to Harvard to do, um, some work on leadership. He came back and he did the triple H sessions with them. So he increased. He created an environment where he started first and he they shared stories. So they did three stories each. Every single leader in the in the team did that as well as every single player. And then that spread through the whole organizations. So they shared a story about a hero who shared a story about a hardship, some sort of defining challenge, and they shared a highlight for them. So some a moment of joy or an achievement. And they shared that with each other and that vulnerability, that space to be to share something about yourself that’s quite personal, that means a lot to you really created this environment of trust. And that’s where they lifted. And it did that through the rest of the organization. So and it just helped them work better together. They were able to collaborate better. They really had that sense of belonging and community. So trust is fundamental and Cindy is absolutely spot on. It is the common thread that runs through the whole thing. Now we have touched a little bit about on AI, um, artificial intelligence. And um, I loved what film filmmaker Guillermo del Toro famously said a while ago about this. He said, I’m not afraid of artificial intelligence. I’m afraid of natural stupidity. Um, which okay, there’s a lot of that going around these days. What I would love to know is a little bit about, um, you know, we’re now putting things into prompts. Are we going to start putting the seven seas into prompts to help us solve some of these issues that we’ve been talking about across our organizations? And do leaders have instant, you know, if I just give it to copilot, it’ll take care of things for me. Or is AI not a help in things that are so close to human? It could be a thinking partner for you across the seven seas, but at the at fundamentally what we’re talking about is fundamentally human, basically. So, you know, it’s built like a lot of the stuff that we’re talking about, whether it’s, um, collaboration, connection, cohesion, um, compassion, all of that is built through conversations. And that’s very much human, not necessarily the conversations with the AI. It can help you, but it doesn’t give you that it’s not that nuanced. That’s something extra. That’s something that’s unexpected, that will come through a conversation. I mean, people come into the workplace and into relationships because everyone is is unique and different in their own way. No two brains are the same. You know, you’ve got, you know, we’re all built on our own lived experiences, our cultures, our biases, all of that sort of stuff. And we’re bringing that into the conversation. The AI is not going to predict that. Absolutely. That’s that’s back to the human to human connection that still is going to be the differentiator. And humans will really still be driving creativity and innovation. They’ll bring judgment. They’ll bring relationship building that an artificial intelligence platform cannot just just spitballing here. Uh, I could see, uh, just theoretically Taking a PDF of the entire book and training my model on it, and then launching an agent internally to look at the email, uh, archive and look at what has been happening in Slack or teams and other collaboration platforms to identify trends that either, uh, support or, uh, represent examples of the opposite of what is presented in the text of the book so that the humans in the organization can take action on that. But, you know, it provides the context for identifying issues, uh, things that you might be able to leverage, things that you might be able to correct, but you wouldn’t know about them if it didn’t have the context to identify those trends. Uh, based on the principles of the book, just one idea of how that could work. Isn’t that the C in calibration? Yeah, I love celebration authors. Not here. Yes, I would like to add a point to that, that if leaders are going to lead authentically, they can’t rely on the AI to do it for them. They can rely on AI for the background, the information as well described, but they still have to put themselves out there to lead authentically. MM. Is there. Interestingly, I, Neville and I just did an episode of our show about a study that found that increasingly, leaders are delegating decision making to AI, which makes you wonder why they’re getting paid, what they’re getting paid, if they’re not bringing their experience and their thought leadership to, to bear on, on decisions and just delegating them, um, abdicating them to a model. Well, that depends on the type of decision, doesn’t it? Yeah, yeah, yeah. Um, is there a place that one can go besides reading the book to learn how to Navigate the seven seas and how do we get leaders to behave that way? Are they teaching this in schools? Are there classes besides reading? What else is there? I listening to this podcast. Yeah. There you go. I think, um, I think this is a massive opportunity in our world today for, for decision makers across an organization, not just communication professionals, but especially communication professionals to step up to lead. And this is where we can get traction with all of the wisdom from this work, with the thought leaders in our profession and communication to, to really take the strategic approach and underpin that with some tactical keys that can be implemented inside organizations. So, Diane, you have to be happy about this launch in the book and and the impact it’s had so far. It’s your first book. And I know it was not an easy process to get it out and about, but you did reach that number one spot in the Amazon leadership training category. Um, if one is if people want to get a hold of the book, how do they do that? And then any plans for a follow on? Oh great question. Well, you know, the ever present Amazon is the place to go to get it quickly. I, I will be in Toronto at IBC World Conference with some copies for anyone who would like to. And I’ll actually be giving some away at the crisis SIG on Sunday. So if you can be there for that. Um, I have several to give away there. Um, so Amazon there certainly reach out to me on LinkedIn. That’s kind of where I, I live most of the time. And yes, a second edition is rumbling around in my head because I know, um, all of you have had thoughts since since creating your chapters about how even in this short amount of time they have evolved, your topics have evolved somewhat. So, um, stand by. I’m going to, I’m going to give away a couple of copies in my, um, session on the Monday when I’m speaking. So, um, hopefully people come along to that and they can grab one of these awesome books. Okay, we need to get autographs from one another when we’re in Toronto because autographing doesn’t work well. Remote control. Oh, you could auction off a copy of the book that had all our autographs on it. Oh, that would be an achievement. I think there’s an auto pen that does that, right? It could be a collector’s item, for sure. Yeah. Put it on a baseball. Yeah. I’m delighted to have had a chance to converse with all of you and sort of probe a little bit more into what’s in the book. Certainly would encourage anybody to pick this up. And one of the things that I always like to put a plug in, it’s the conversations that take place in the circle. It is books like this that you, if you’re looking at doing certification, um, through the G, triple C for your career, these are the kinds of topics that you need to at least be aware of. And, you know, this sort of discussion and listening to people who’ve been at this for a little while are going to help prepare you for that next step in your career. So a little bit of a plug for, um, the global communication certification, uh, Council and for the book. Um, and with that, I think I would love to just thank you guys. Cindy Schmieg Zoro, artist, Shell Holtz, um and the lead author Diane Chase for taking part in this wonderful conversation. Our next episode of The Circle of Fellows will be taking place in June. Stay tuned. We’ll get you the exact time and date and watch the normal channels. One twenty nine is the episode number. Shall. We’ll be back in this seat, and it’s going to feature members of the new class of twenty twenty six Iabc fellows. Um, and they’re actually being introduced at IVC World Conference. So give them a day to decompress after that and then they’ll be on the program. We also have to thank Anna Willy, who’s our executive producer and our chief fellow herder. Um, and I want to also thank you guys for joining us and, and watching through this session and for the Iabc Circle fellows. I’m Brad Whitworth. Hi. Thanks all. Thank you. Thanks, Brad. Thank you.

The post Circle of Fellows #128: The 7 Cs of The New Communication Compass, Part 2 appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.

The next two “Circle of Fellows” episodes will offer something different from our panels of the last several years. We welcome Dianne Chase, a veteran communicator and former IABC chair, to the discussion. While Dianne is not a Fellow, she did recruit six Fellows to write all but one of the chapters for her new book, The 7Cs of the New Communication Compass. (Dianne wrote the seventh chapter.)

The book, which has five stars on Amazon, “offers both a guiding framework and a practical roadmap for mastering strategic communication in complex environments,” according to its description. “If you are a leader, manager, educator, public official, influencer, or anyone striving to make an impact, this book is an essential and thought-provoking read. It distills communication excellence to foster collaborative results and organizational effectiveness.”

The book’s Cs include Collaboration, Connection, Compassion, Cohesion, Community, Congruency, and Calibration.

For the first of these conversations, Dianne will join Shel Holtz, Ginger Homan, Jane Mitchell, and Brad Whitworth to discuss Connection (Brad’s chapter), Compassion (Dianne’s chapter), Congruency (Jane’s chapter), and Calibration (Ginger’s chapter).

Join us for this very different “Circle” at noon EDT on Thursday, April 23. Participants in the live stream can ask questions and share comments, observations, and experiences, and become part of the discussion. If you’re not able to join us, you can listen to the audio podcast later or watch the YouTube replay.

About the panel:

Dianne Chase helps organizations and leaders harness the power of strategic communication to navigate crises, build trust, and drive positive change. With over two decades of experience in journalism and corporate communications, Dianne has developed a unique approach for training and consulting clients that combines crisis management expertise with the art and science of business storytelling. Dianne is an award-winning media, journalism, and strategic communication professional with profound expertise in communication disciplines, most notably crisis communication, issues and reputation management, media training, and executive communication. She is one of two people in the world accredited in the powerful GENIUS Business Storytelling methodology, created by international communications thought leader, Gabrielle Dolan. She is former chair of the International Association of Business Communicators, and author/editor of The 7 Cs of The New Communication Compass.

Ginger Homan, ABC, SCMP, IABC Fellow, counsels senior leaders seeking to bring out the best in their people and brands. Her award-winning communication model for driving transformation has been used to change behaviors, align cultures, and build thriving communities worldwide. Her work with senior communication professionals has enabled them to align their department goals with business goals, achieve measurable results, and expand their influence. Founder of Zia Communication, she is a seasoned speaker, coach, and workshop facilitator. Her clients include Walmart, the Walmart Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation, T.D. Williamson, CITGO Petroleum, Phillips Seminary, and MOSAIC. IABC, PRSA, and SMPS have honored Ginger’s work on the local, regional, and international levels. A past chair of IABC, her volunteer work has been honored with three IABC International Chair’s Awards for leadership, and she is a recipient of the Leadership Tulsa Paragon Award for work in her local community.

Jane Mitchell’s career began at the BBC in London on live TV programs. She moved on to producing award-winning films and videos for public- and private-sector organizations and to developing groundbreaking employee engagement programs. Since 2006, when she formed her own consultancy, she has guided organizations (some of which have experienced cultural trauma) in embedding values and ethics by understanding culture and leadership, and their link to high-performing, sustainable organizations. She has worked with Top 100 companies worldwide and is a regular conference speaker. Jane has been a member of IABC since 2008 and has served on local, regional, and International IABC Boards. In 2021, she was Chair of the (virtual) World Conference and became an IABC fellow in 2022. She is based in the UK and now spends the majority of her professional time as a Non-Exec on company boards and Employee-Owned Trusts.

Brad Whitworth, ABC, SCMP, IABC Fellow, is a pre-eminent thought leader, lecturer, and author in organizational communication. He has led global internal and executive communication programs at HP, Cisco, Hitachi, PeopleSoft, AAA, and MicroFocus. He holds an MBA from Santa Clara University and undergraduate degrees in journalism and speech from the University of Missouri. Brad lives in California, a wine country, and he grows Pinot Noir on his property. A former broadcaster, Brad has made more than 300 presentations to executives, communicators, and university classes worldwide. Brad is a past board chairman of the International Association of Business Communicators and a Fellow of the association. He is one of the authors of The IABC Handbook of Organizational Communication and the new IABC Guide for Practical Business Communication: A Global Standard Primer. He chaired the Global Communication Certification Counsel in 2021.

The post Circle of Fellows #127: The 7 Cs of The New Communication Compass, Part I appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.

The days when a crisis communicator could simply reach for a dusty binder and follow a pre-scripted, linear checklist are gone — and they aren’t coming back. In the “good old days,” a crisis was often a contained event with a predictable lifecycle; crisis teams could address them by checking off items on a checklist. Today, we face the era of the polycrisis, where economic instability, geopolitical friction, and a 24/7 social media cycle collide, creating a torrent of simultaneous challenges. This new reality has effectively obliterated the traditional news cycle, replacing it with an always-on environment where a single viral post can tarnish a brand before leadership even knows there is a problem.

Thriving in this volatile landscape requires a move away from rigid manuals toward a more fluid, strategic approach. Rather than a step-by-step rulebook, modern practitioners need logical scaffolding — a flexible framework of principles and values that provides a foundation for action while allowing for real-time adaptability. It is about preparation, not just prescription. As the boundaries between internal and external perception continue to erode, the ability to maintain transparency and connection through these multifaceted disruptions is no longer a luxury; it is table stakes for organizational survival.

Four Fellows of the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC) shared their perspectives in this episode of IABC’s Circle of Fellows.

About the Panel:

Edward “Ned” Lundquist is a retired U.S. Navy captain with 43 years of professional public affairs and strategic communications experience. His company, Echo Bridge LLC, which provides outreach and advocacy support to government and commercial clients. He served on active duty for 24 years in the U.S. Navy as a surface warfare officer and public affairs specialist. Captain Lundquist was a Pentagon spokesman with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, Director of the Fleet Home Town News Center, and director of public affairs and corporate communications for the Navy Exchange Service Command. His last tour of duty was commanding the 450 men and women of the Naval Media Center. He is an accredited business communicator and award-winning communicator who served as president of IABC/Hampton Roads and IABC/Washington, director of U.S. District 3, and chair of the International Accreditation Council. He was named an IABC Fellow in 2016. Captain Lundquist received the Surface Navy Association’s Special Recognition Award in January of this year, for his service on SNA’s executive committee and chair of the SNA communications committee. He writes for numerous naval, maritime, and defense publications and chairs and presents at communications, naval, and maritime security conferences around the world.

Robin McCasland, IABC Fellow, SCMP, is Senior Director of Corporate Communications for Health Care Service Corporation (HCSC). She leads the company’s communications team and the employee listening program, demonstrating to senior leaders how employee and executive communication add value to the business’s bottom line. Previously, Robin excelled in leadership roles in communication for Texas Instruments, Dell, Tenet Healthcare, and Burlington Northern Santa Fe. She has also worked for large and boutique HR consulting firms, leading major communication initiatives for various well-known companies. Robin is a past IABC chairman and has served in numerous association leadership roles for over 30 years. She was honored in 2023 and 2021 by Ragan/PR Daily as one of the Top Women Leaders in Communication. She’s also received IABC Southern Region and IABC Dallas Communicator of the Year honors. Robin is a graduate of The University of Texas at Austin and a Leadership Texas alumnus. Her own podcast, Torpid Liver (and Other Symptoms of Poor Communication), features guest speakers addressing timely topics to help communication professionals become more influential, strategic advisors and leaders. She resides in Dallas, Texas, with her husband, Mitch, and their canine kids, Tank and Petunia.

George McGrath is founder and managing principal of McGrath Business Communications, which helps clients build winning corporate reputations, promote their products and services, and advance their views on key issues. George brings more than 25 years in PR and public affairs to his firm. Over the course of his career, he has held senior management positions at leading strategic communications and integrated marketing agencies including Hill and Knowlton, Carl Byoir & Associates, and Brouillard Communications.

Caroline Sapriel, founder and Managing Partner of CS&A, brings over 30 years of specialized expertise in risk, crisis, and business continuity management to the table. A Fellow of the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC) and a recipient of the Gold Quill Award for her “10 Commandments of Crisis Management,” Sapriel is a recognized authority in providing high-level, results-driven counsel to senior leaders across the energy, pharmaceutical, and aviation sectors. Her deep academic roots as a lecturer at Antwerp, Leuven, and Leiden Universities, combined with her authorship of Crisis Management – Tales from the Front Line, underscore a career dedicated to transforming systemic vulnerabilities into robust reputation management strategies. Fluent in five languages and possessing a multi-disciplinary background in International Relations and Chinese Studies, she offers a uniquely global perspective on the evolution of stakeholder engagement during high-stakes disruptions.

The post Circle of Fellows #126: Communicating in the Era of the Polycrisis appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.

The 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer reveals a troubling shift from polarization to grievance to insularity—a progression in which stakeholders aren’t only divided or angry but also withdrawing into tight circles of “people like us” while viewing outsiders with suspicion. In this Circle of Fellows conversation, our panel will examine the strategic and practical implications of a world in which employees trust their CEO and neighbors more than external sources, domestic companies enjoy trust advantages over foreign competitors, and income divides deepen distrust across organizational hierarchies. The Fellows will explore how communication professionals can position themselves as trust brokers within their organizations, helping bridge the executive suite, front-line employees, and diverse stakeholder groups while navigating generational differences in how people experience and express grievances. From Gen Alpha’s focus on external blame and politicized “whataboutism” to the role of AI governance in building institutional credibility, this fast-paced discussion will provide frameworks for communicators to remain centered and effective even as insularity and grievance reshape the landscape we navigate daily.

Episode #125 of “Circle of Fellows” was recorded on Thursday, February 26.

The next episode of Circle of Fellows, which will focus on the new realities of crisis communication, is scheduled for noon ET on Thursday, March 26. Mark your calendar and watch for details!

About the panel:

Priya Bates is a senior communications executive who provides strategic internal communication counsel to ensure leaders, managers, and employees understand the strategy, believe in the vision, act in accordance with the values, and contribute to business results. She is president of Inner Strength Communications in Toronto and previously served as senior director of Internal Communications at Loblaw Companies Limited.

Alice Brink is an internationally recognized communications consultant. Her firm, A Brink & Co., works with businesses and non-profits to clarify their messages and communicate them in ways that change people’s minds. Her clients have included Shell Oil Company, Sysco Foods, and Noble Energy. Before launching A Brink & Co. in Houston in 2004, Alice honed her craft in corporate settings (including The Coca-Cola Company, Conoco, and First Interstate Bank) and in one of Texas’s largest public relations firms, where she led the agency’s energy and financial practices.  Alice has been active in IABC for over 30 years, including as chapter president, district director, and Gold Quill chair.

Jane Mitchell’s career began at the BBC in London on live TV programs. She moved on to producing award-winning films and videos for public- and private-sector organizations and to developing groundbreaking employee engagement programs. Since 2006, when she formed her own consultancy, she has guided organizations (some of which have experienced cultural trauma) in embedding values and ethics by understanding culture and leadership, and their link to high-performing, sustainable organizations. She has worked with Top 100 companies worldwide and is a regular conference speaker. Jane has been a member of IABC since 2008 and has served on local, regional, and International IABC Boards. In 2021, she was Chair of the (virtual) World Conference and became an IABC fellow in 2022. She is based in the UK and now spends the majority of her professional time as a Non-Exec on company boards and Employee-Owned Trusts.

Jennifer Wah, MC, ABC, has worked with clients to deliver ideas, plans, words and results since she founded her storytelling and communications firm, Forwords Communication Inc., in 1997. With more than two dozen awards for strategic communications, writing, and consulting, Jennifer is recognized as a storyteller and strategist. She has worked in industries from healthcare and academia to financial services and the resource sector, and is passionate about the strategic use of storytelling to support business outcomes. Although she has delivered workshops and training throughout her career, Jennifer formally added teaching to her experience in 2013, first with Royal Roads University and more recently as an adjunct professor of business communications with the UBC Sauder School of Business, where she now works part-time to impart crucial communication skills on the next generation of business leaders. When she is not working, Jennifer spends her time cooking, walking her dog, Orion, or discussing food, hockey, or music with her husband and two young adult children in North Vancouver, Canada.

The post Circle of Fellows #125: Communicating in the Age of Grievance appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.

The communication profession is currently weathering a perfect storm of tectonic shifts, from the promises of AI to the messy realities of hybrid work, and we are languishing in denial if we think traditional, one-way “career advice” will save us. In the January 2026 Circle of Fellows, our panel will move beyond the clichés to examine mentoring as a pragmatic, strategic tool for institutional knowledge transfer and professional resilience.

High-impact mentoring fosters the “trusted advisor” mindset, helping practitioners navigate the minefield of ethical leadership while bridging the gap between academic theory and high-stakes business execution. Whether you’re a senior leader looking to cultivate the next generation of strategic thinkers or a rising professional seeking to future-proof your career, this episode provides actionable frameworks for building the kind of meaningful, two-way developmental relationships that drive both individual growth and organizational success.

The panel was recorded on Thursday, January 22, 2026.

About the panel:

Dr. Amanda Hamilton-Attwell, accredited by both IABC and PRSA. She is Managing Director of Business DNA, based in South Africa, which provides strategic research and consulting, including communication audits, customer service, and women’s leadership topics. She is licensed in Adobe Connect and WebEx, using these to conduct virtual professional learning and education sessions. and other focused research and training in communication skills. Her career has also included a 15-year stint as a research manager for the National Productivity Institute.

Brent Carey is an award-winning communications executive and corporate storyteller who has been helping organizations connect with their stakeholders and achieve successful business outcomes for more than 30 years. During his career in corporate communications, he has practiced the complete range of the profession’s disciplines, including internal/HR communications and employee engagement, recruitment marketing, issues management and crisis communications, public and media relations, marketing communications and government relations. Brent is currently Vice President, Communications, at Mattamy Asset Management (the parent company of Mattamy Homes), based in Toronto, where he leads the corporate communications function and a small, impactful team that provides strategic planning and execution across Mattamy’s operations in Canada and the US. Brent has also held communication leadership roles with KPMG International, Deloitte Canada, CIBC, TD Bank and Imperial Oil. In 2004 he earned the Accredited Business Communicator (ABC) designation from IABC and in 2024 was recognized with the prestigious IABC Canada Master Communicator Award, an accolade bestowed upon select professionals who have demonstrated exemplary contributions to the field of communication. Brent graduated from York University in Toronto with a double honours degree in Communications and English.

Andrea Greenhous’s life’s purpose is to improve the world of work. For over 30 years, she has helped organizations improve the employee experience and build workplaces where people thrive. As founder and president of Vision2Voice, an internal communications agency, Andrea and her dedicated team help organizations adopt a strategic approach to employee communications to achieve results. Andrea has led initiatives and transformation projects for Fortune 500 technology companies, large government departments, and organizations as diverse as construction, biotech, finance, and higher education. This has led to a signature approach emphasizing harnessing employee voices and amplifying their insights and ideas.

Andrea is a storyteller, a PROSCI-certified change leader, and Dare to Lead trained based on the work and research of Brené Brown. She is also a certified Fearless Organization Practitioner. She uses the tools and processes developed by Amy C. Edmondson, the Novartis Professor of Leadership and Management at Harvard Business School, to build psychological safety in teams. Andrea has been named one of the top 10 influencers in internal communications and is a frequent guest blogger and speaker at industry events.

Russell Grossman, DipPR, ABC, FRSA, FCIPR, FCIM, IABC Fellow, has been a communications practitioner for 40 years and a UK Senior Civil Servant since 2006. He is Director of Communications at the UK Rail Regulator, the Office of Rail and Road, and recently stepped down after 13 years from his additional position as the head of the Government Communication Service (GCS) internal communications profession. He’s a non-executive director of the “Engage for Success ” movement, which aims to advance employee engagement, and a sponsor for both the GCS Fast Stream and GCS Talent. He is a past International Chair of IABC.  Russell and his long-suffering wife of 40 years are blessed with four children (one of whom also works within GCS) and five grandchildren.

Raw Transcript:

Hi, everybody, and welcome to Circle of Fellows. Uh, this is the monthly panel discussion featuring members of the Iabc fellows cohort. Uh, and we have four fellows joining us today for an, uh, interesting conversation on a topic that we have not tackled before. So I’m really looking forward to this one. Uh, we are talking about mentoring, uh, in today’s session. Uh, this is of particular interest to me because I’ve been on both sides of this, which I’ll talk about a little bit more in a minute. Uh, I do want to let everyone know who is watching in real time, uh, that you are welcome to participate by, uh, using the chat feature in YouTube, uh, to, uh, contribute your questions, your observations, your thoughts, your experiences, and we will share those on the screen and make them part of the conversation. Uh, so, uh, please take advantage of that. We really enjoy, uh, responding to the things that are of interest to you. Uh, hopefully all of our conversation is of interest to you. Uh, and we will jump into that in just a minute. But first, I would like, uh, like you to meet the panel. Uh, and we’ll just go around in clockwise order as I see you, starting with you. Amanda. Um, good day everybody. It is evening here in South Africa. I am talking to you from Pretoria in sunny South Africa. It’s not raining at the moment. It’s not cold. It’s beautiful weather. I am the CEO of business DNA, and I’ve been, uh, that for the past twenty six years now. Um, and, we do all kinds of research and consulting and, uh, strategic planning and, uh, it’s just fun. And, you know, I’ve been a member of the Iabc, uh, for so many years. I don’t even want to mention that. And, uh, I’m still as passionate about the profession, um, as I was when I started this journey many moons ago. So that’s me. And I am ABC, and, um, you know, a fellow. Of course. Of course. Uh, Andrea. Hi, everyone. My name is Andrea Greenhouse. My pronouns are she her. I’m coming from sunny, beautiful Ottawa. Even though it is cold, I run a small internal communications agency, and we’re in the business of helping organizations modernize internal communication changes everywhere. And you can’t lead change without modern, effective internal communication. So that’s what I do. Um, here in my little office with my two dogs. And I’m really excited about this conversation. I’m excited about it, too. Uh, Brent, you’re up next. Hi, everyone. My name is Brent Carey. I’m the head of corporate communications at Mattamy Asset Management in Toronto, Ontario. Also very cold and sunny. Um, uh, Madam Asset Management is the parent company of the more well-known brand Mattamy Homes, which is the largest family owned homebuilder in North America. I’m super passionate as as all my fellow panelists are about the topic of mentoring. Uh, I’ve been a mentor for many years, both within my organization and IBC and, uh, so looking forward to the conversation today. Thank you. Looking forward to it too. And Russell, last but not least, hi there. So I’m Russell Grossman, I’m coming to you from London. That’s London, England rather than London Ontario. And where I’m afraid the weather isn’t too good. But I’m director of communications at the Rail Regulator for the UK, and I’m also one of the senior directors in the Government Communications Service again in the UK. And I’ve been an ABC member for quite a long time. And like Brent and the others, mentoring is something that I’m particularly interested and passionate about as well. I’ve been on both sides of that, and I’m interested to see what we explore in this conversation. Thanks for being here, Russell. Uh, and I should probably mention that I’m shell holes. Uh, I am the moderator of the panel. I am senior director of communications at Webcor. We’re a commercial general contractor and builder operating in California and elsewhere. Uh, and very happy to be here with you all. Uh, I mentioned that I have been on both sides of mentoring, uh, that includes a formal mentoring Entering relationship that I’m in now. This was the result of an Iabc San Francisco initiative. I think it was about four years ago, where they solicited people who wanted to be mentored and people who would be willing to do the mentoring, and then they paired them up. It was supposed to be a one year program, but the the young woman that I was assigned to and I have continued to meet monthly ever since then, and I have found that to be a very beneficial relationship for for the both of us. Um, on the mentee side, uh, nothing formal. Uh, I had, uh, a boss once. Um, who? I don’t know if he would call himself a mentor, but I certainly saw him that way. Uh, he taught me a lot. We spent a lot of time just sitting and talking through the various issues that that I was facing and, and challenges and career growth. And, uh, I feel like I owe him a lot. We’re still friends. He’s in his eighties now and living in Montana, but we still stay in touch. So having been on both sides of this, I see the value of it. So what I would like to start with is a question of, um, what is, in your experience, the best approach to mentoring? Is it a formal program with, with scheduled meetings, uh, and agendas, or is it finding somebody who can just fulfill that role on a day to day basis? What’s what’s your experience been? Can I start off maybe by saying that I think rather like communications. Uh, it depends on your audience. And I think, uh, it very much depends on whether you feel, uh, that the person that you’re mentoring is looking for a formal or informal mentoring relationship. And, you know, I’m sure we’ll come on to this a little bit more, but the way in which the mentoring relationship starts can be very different. Some people may come to you because they know you as a person. Some people may come because you were a name on a list of a number of mentees, and they’ve just kind of put a dart into that piece of paper, as it were. Um, so I think just to just to start off, I think it depends very much on both who the mentee is and of course, your insights and your judgment on that situation. It might be useful also shall, to draw a distinction. And I think one of my colleagues here raised it in the sort of our pre work difference between mentoring and coaching. Right. I kind of view mentoring as, as a more formal arrangement, as you indicated, where coaching can happen anytime, anywhere with with anyone. Yeah, I think that was me. And I think because I try very I’m not a certified coach, so I try very hard to not say that I’m coaching, but I yeah, I have different kind of mentoring relationships with different people. I have formal ones where I’m actually getting paid, helping people, sort of nudging them along, sharing expertise. We have a formal program where we’re, you know, we’re tackling their strategy. I’ve got one coming up tomorrow where I’m, you know, we’re talking about business acumen. Then I have others where I think I have a link on my website where you can just have coffee with me and I’ll share all my failures, and you can learn from those. Then I have my employees that I, you know, mentor more formally. And then I’ve been part of formal mentoring programs. So, um, my experience is that, you know, um, the fact that people confuse mentoring and coaching, uh, often causes the, uh, person on the other side of the table to be confused as well because, uh, you know, it’s easy to confuse them because they both develop mental. But the one is, uh, where you share your experience that’s mentoring. While coaching is while when you actually enable the person to solve the problem himself or herself. So, you know, and it’s so important to when you start this relationship, especially if it’s more a formal relationship that you clarify what what is the situation, what is the primary goal. Because it often, you know, coaching will go into mentoring uh, or mentoring will go into coaching. But it’s important that we understand that there is a difference between the in the the outcome of the situation and not to throw yet another term into the mix. But there’s also networking, right. Which might be the most informal of everything where you you just occasionally connecting with folks and and offering some advice or what have you. Um, so I think they probably ratchet up on the the formality scale as you go from networking to coaching and mentoring. Yeah, it probably pays to define mentoring a little better. Amanda, I’m intrigued by the notion that it is it is focused on sharing your experience. I know that my mentee, Sarah, um, will talk about everything from her career path to how she deals with, uh, a, a, a supervisor who is, uh, problematic is probably the diplomatic way to, to put it, uh, and everything in between. So. So when you talk about mentoring, um, what exactly are you talking about? I think shell, that brings in the concept of trust, what you’ve just mentioned there, uh, and the degree to which the mentor and mentee relationship is one built on trust and the degree to which the mentee is actually prepared to open themselves up and share in a way that, uh, obviously they need to trust you, but also in a way that they probably wouldn’t with people that they know. More, more more, um, than than than you, you know. So I think the, the way in which the mentor is positioned relative to the mentee is clearly important as well. Um, I always think I was interested to hear Andrea talk about your mentoring of your employees. Uh, is that something that they would expect, do you think? Um, so I read something somewhere a few years ago, and it’s stuck in my head that, you know, my business isn’t going to last forever. It’s a small business. Maybe we’ll get acquired. Maybe. Who knows what will happen. But the people in my team, they’ll have long careers. And so a part of my why is because I love internal communications so much and I feel so passionate about it. Part of my why is to help share my knowledge, my approaches, like help them basically carry the torch in the future. But in their own way. Like I have one woman who’s just amazing at client relations and she has a real focus on digital. I have another person who’s a really great strategist, so like helping them grow in their own way. But at the same time, you know, my vision is people who will carry the torch for internal communications for the next, you know, twenty, thirty, maybe even forty years. I’ve always used mentoring as, um, a two way street as well. Right. The best mentoring relationships that I’ve ever had was I learned as much from my mentee as as they may have learned from me. So I love going in into the relationship. Um, looking to get something out of it myself. And and if there’s a selection process, try to, you know, not necessarily go for somebody who’s in the exact same role or, you know, it’s about diversity of thought or age or gender or roles, whatever it might be. Because the the most successful mentor relationships, I think, is when you learn as much as you give. Uh, but I would like to know, you know, how did you see, um, because. Okay, let me start from my side. Um, I see mentoring is where I, the person will come to me and say, I have this, uh, problem with my supervisor, and he or she will tell me the situation. And if I mentor the person, I will say, well, in a situation like this, this is what I would have done or this is what I have done, and that was the outcome. So this is how I solved the problem for me. And you know, my definition of mentoring, that is mentoring. While coaching would be, um, if you look at your, uh, supervisor would why do you think he is responding like that? And then the person will say, why? And then I would say, well, how does your personality perhaps contribute to this problem? And then perhaps, well, how do you see the long term impact of this relationship. And you know, so if I mentor I do all the thinking. I do all the talking while in my coaching role, the other person would do the thinking, the other person will do the talking. And I think that’s that’s important to distinguish between the roles. So, um, you know, uh, I’ve been working with a client for eleven years now. I started mentoring and coaching her when she was a generalist, and she’s now a GM. So every time she gets to this ceiling, we would have this relationship. And for me, that is the the amazing satisfaction that I get from that. Mhm. Don’t you think it also depends on what the person needs and to a certain extent what you need. Like now I have a bigger team and I’ve got different generations. So I need to understand them. So I’m, I’m learning from them as Brian was saying. But it’s also like where are the gaps. Where do they need help? Where do they need support. It’s like really driven by the person, the relation, like the aspects of the relationship. You know, like everybody, you know, you need five different friends, A friend who will go running with you. A friend who will, like, go on a holiday because they’re really great at travel, you know. You know, that kind of thing. You can also say that about husbands or wives, like different people satisfy different things. But my point is it really depends on what what’s needed in the relationship. Yeah, definitely. Amanda, in your in your description that you just had, how would you describe who drives the process? Um, I’ve always thought of mentoring. As you know, the mentee has to own it and is responsible and accountable and and really drives the process forward. So would how do you how do you react to that? Uh, in the mentoring process, the person would come to me and say, um, I have a problem with this, please help me. And so initially, the person will come to me, so the the driver will be the person, but then I will say, okay, now in a situation like this, this is how I responded. So then I would do the thinking, I would do the talking, and the person will ask me questions and I will respond to the questions. So the person will learn from my experience while in the coaching, uh, situation, uh, I want the person to dig into his or her own experience and see if we can perhaps find a solution there. And that is why also, um, like to in a, in a situation like that, say to the person, perhaps we should, uh, think about using this model. Why don’t you read this article or read this book? And then next time when we get together, we discuss this concept. Um, so it also gives the person a Responsibility not only to look at me for advice, but to have this higher level discussion about, uh, emotional intelligence, uh, about, uh, impact players. So how do you become an impact player? So that for me is very healthy. So I drive the advice in that sense. But eventually in our next discussion, the person will again do the talking. I will ask, do the the guidance on applying this in this situation. Yeah, I think you’re right though, Brent, that people need to come prepared to the conversation in terms of what they need to know, what they want from the conversation, uh, from the relationship. I think that’s really important. Like even just the one on ones I have with my team, it’s their meeting, their chance to to talk to me, for me to help them with their career or, or their, you know, their goals, those kinds of things. So and of course, I come prepared as well. And I’m thinking about, well, what do I see? Um, I also get a lot because I own my own business. I also get asked about business advice too. So people who want to start their own, either consulting company or even just a different type of business. So there’s that too, you know? Yeah, I always found that it like the more structured the mentee can make it in terms of maybe topics or, you know, agendas or even setting the cadence for how often and when you’re going to meet, uh, is a great starting point. And then, of course, the conversation as it’s happening is very, um, free flowing and, you know, kind of fewer guardrails on it from that perspective. But I think having the mentee own the responsibility, um, for kind of the logistics side of it almost makes a ton of sense. Yeah, I completely agree with that. I’ve always seen that the process and the relationship is owned by the mentee. I think this is particularly important given that there’s a certain volunteerism about this. The mentee is coming to you voluntarily for assistance, uh, and therefore, uh, what what you owe the mentee for that is to ensure that they are satisfied. And I think part of that satisfaction is to ask the mentee, for example, always, as I as I do, always come to me with a specific issue that you’ve thought through and with specific points that you’d like, you’d like to deal with. So it’s just like any situation be be clear about what our objectives are, because otherwise you could spend a whole of a mentoring session going around the houses, but not actually get anywhere concrete in terms of what the what the mentee either wants or indeed needs. And of course, sometimes what the what the mentee wants and what the mentee needs are not the same. And part of our responsibility, I think, sometimes as mentors, is to eek out what the difference is between the two of them. For somebody who is. I’m sorry. Go ahead. Thank you. You go. Alright. Uh, for somebody who is going to become a mentor for the first time, they’ve agreed to fulfill this role. What can they do to prepare if they’ve never done this before? Uh, I can start. I, I was part of a mentorship program, and I was. I was actually afraid. I’m like, what do I have to offer? Um, and I, I always also wanted to really be like, I’m a helper. I really wanted to be supportive. I wanted to be, you know, the best mentor. And so I did quite a bit of preparation. There’s lots of resources around. But you also to friend’s point, you have to make sure that your mentee becomes comes prepared. Um, but I think listening with an open heart, sharing your experience in an honest way, like I think people will learn more from our failures than our successes. Um, and that, you know, building psychological safety, helping make it a safe space for them to talk and to share your own experience. I think you need to be prepared to be part of an open relationship. Uh, you need absolutely agree with Andrew. You need to be able to prepare to to be prepared to expose some of your own vulnerabilities as an example of where you’ve been, uh, so that people can see the mentee can see that, you know, this is not something that’s unique to them. It’s a problem that many people have come across before. And I think, um, there are probably things that I might discuss with mentees that I may not discuss with many other people. Uh, that, of course, is part of the trust relationship that we that we were talking about earlier. Yeah, I would say the keys for me are, you know, active listening, which of course is way different than just engaging in the conversation and, um, transparency overall. Be vulnerable yourself. Be ready for vulnerabilities. On the other side, I’ve had mentees, you know, in tears, uh, during conversations, I assume. Not because of anything I did, um, just because of the situation. And, um, you know, being able to help them, help them through that. So it, um, it’s very much that, that to a to a street, um, of course, but but active listening, um, and pretty much complete transparency. And as Russell said it that goes to to trust. And so it’s probably not going to happen at the very first session, especially if you don’t know each other. Um, do you ever ask the mentee to sign a document of confidentiality, or do you sign a document of confidentiality? Uh, that is a good question. I think even in the super formal programs that I’ve been a part of, I’ve. That that’s not been a part of it. I mean, you agree to certain, um, parameters as as part of the relationship, but I’ve never actually signed anything that I can recall. Yeah. Now, I just wondered, uh, because I haven’t signed it. You know, anything? Also, uh, except the declaration that I signed with the company, but, uh, otherwise, never. Um, but, uh, you know what? What intrigued me about mentoring is that, uh, at different stages of a person’s career, they need different types of mentoring. And that as a mentor, you should know that if you if you’re mentoring a foundational person, that you should not come from a business strategist framework when you mean to that person, because that my experience is that that poor person would be so scared of, you know, oh my goodness, is that what I need to do in my role? So, you know, aligning your mentor, mentoring input with the level of the person that you are mentoring a little bit higher to let them grow. But also remember that you you must stay, not you must stay on the level and a little bit higher and not more than that. Yeah it’s great. And as with audiences, right? It’s not about you. It’s about them. Yeah, yeah. I also think like helping people see like see the bigger picture and, and look forward because a lot of people are stuck in what’s going on now. And I know there’s a lot of uncertainty in the world and careers are changing. But helping them see the different paths, like we know in our work, employees want to know how they can learn and grow. And so helping them, seeing those different paths, seeing the different options, helping them help themselves in terms of learning, career development and growth, I think is also a really big thing that that, uh, your mentor would appreciate. There’s another aspect, if you’re if it’s a program within your organization, which is how to navigate some of the things that might be particular to your company. Um, you know, whether it’s politics or, you know, um, what the signs of, of good leaders are or what, what to work on to sort of get ahead within this organization, which, you know, we’d need to be more general if if it was sort of, uh, you know, through IVC or some other similar organization where it wasn’t specific to the company. So I think that is where you can be a of particular advantage, particularly in a large organization where you know enough about the organization to be able to to to provide advice and guidance. But you’re not so close to the issues, and you don’t know the people too strongly that it would be difficult to to to talk about, um, across the government communication service. We have a formal mentoring program in which we just put ourselves forward, uh, on a list, as it were. And I find that the people who tend to look me up, and I’m sure it’s the case with other mentees, are those that are kind of at arm’s length, but not so far away. So that that that element of the relationship that I’ve just described where you’re close enough. But but not not not too close allows you I think you, I think allows you to have an effective relationship and effective and an effective solution, uh, and one that, uh, you know, you would regard as successful if when the mentee then comes back and says, actually, thank you for solving that. I didn’t see that that that does lead on actually to how how do we judge the success of a mentoring relationship? Well, for me, was that the progress that this person made in the organization because, uh, I was, you know, I would say I, I coached sixty percent of the time and mentored forty percent of the time because she had to build her confidence that she actually can deal with what is on the table, because that was the reason why she came to me, that she felt helpless and in instead of just saying to her, well, this is how I do this and this and this. I say to her, okay, what what do you think we could do? And, uh, if you if you take the personality of this person, what can you do to convince this person that you can actually do more. So for me, and that is why I keep coming back to coaching because, uh, coaching, uh, in the I’m a certified coach is building the confidence of the person. Mentoring is sharing your experience to give the person an idea of potential behavior. So that’s that’s what I do. I was going to say that I can’t really answer the question, except if you see them succeed. Succeed them. See them happy in their role solving certain problems. But I also wanted to say it’s immensely satisfying, and I think that’s why I love doing it. When you’re mentoring someone, seeing them solve these challenges, seeing them grow, seeing them flourish is is always so amazing. Yeah, I have a bit of a funny story. We had a formal mentoring program in my company that has since evolved, but it began as a retention strategy around, um, you know, uh, retaining high performance in a particular demographic group. And so all the mentees came from that group. Um, we I meant I mentored four people throughout the course over four years. Um, and three of them, you know, promptly left the company after, uh, the mentoring relationship was over, uh, which, you know, maybe, um, unsuccessful at some point because the strategy was around retention. But I viewed it as highly successful because they were able to grow. And yes, it would have been great to to see them flourish within the company. But having helped set them up for success, they go elsewhere. Uh, you know, I’m perfectly fine with that. And it’s, it’s part of the risk of a, of a program that we ran like that. But, uh, so I was one for four, but in my mind I was really for, for, for. I think a lot of companies are developing like formal mentoring programs to as a part of the employee experience. I think it’s really important, especially for marginalized communities or people who may have be at a slight disadvantage. Um, so I hope those high performers, Brent, were also like from disadvantaged groups or whatever, but I think it’s it’s something that organizations really look at. Um, it’s also a way of maximizing the benefit you’re getting from your senior staff and tapping into their experience. Yeah, I remember I remember communicating, uh, a mentorship program for an employer several years ago. And one of the things that I remember about it was that one of the rules of the program was that you would, uh, change mentors. Uh, I think it was every six months, uh, that you shouldn’t stick with the same mentor for the duration. Uh, I’m wondering about your feelings about that. I’ve. As I said, I’ve been mentoring, uh, Sarah now for, uh, three or four years. Uh, and she has no interest in finding somebody else. And I’m very happy with the relationship. Um, and I think about my mentors, and these are just people that I’ve known and worked with. There was no formal program. Um, I think when you hear people say, oh, yeah, he was my mentor, uh, or she was my mentor. These are people that had that sort of an ongoing relationship in a formal mentorship program. Is it important to rotate through different mentors and mentees? I can tell my own personal story. When I was very new in in academia, I had a mentor, and unfortunately I had the same mentor for the whole duration of my tenure, and I fell into what they call the mentor trap. So I became so, um, close to this person that I could. I felt that I couldn’t make any decision before he approved it, before he said, well, this is what I would have done. And yes, that’s the right way. So when he resigned, it was like, in my whole world fell apart and I just couldn’t see myself going on because he also didn’t, you know, um, enabled me to go alone. And I think as a mentor and a coach, that is one of our responsibilities to give the the person wings and not to make him your property and become dependent on you. And, um. Yeah. So, um, I think, uh, it’s two ways, uh, it’s your responsibility to to grow the person. And, you know, not that the person become too attached to you. And, uh, it is sometimes necessary that, um, people change mentors, but I think it can also be disruptive. I also think there’s a law of diminishing returns. Uh, I think you’re probably most effective in a mentoring relationship. Um, after, say, sessions two, three or four, you’re welcome to disagree with this, but I think by the time you get to maybe sessions, I don’t know, eight, nine or ten, if you’re still going that long, then I think there is. Most of the heavy lifting has probably been done by then, and I think there is a danger that sometimes you can over mentor, uh, that you won’t you go into areas that probably are not that necessary for the mentee. Um, but because the mentor and the mentee are in this relationship, neither of them wants to break it off. I think. I think that can be quite, uh, quite disadvantageous to both, to both mentor and mentee, actually. So, um, I would say I think there’s probably to your question, I think you should rotate, actually. Yeah. And some like I agree, mostly because I also think that you, you learn a lot from different people. Like one person, you know, you learn from different perspectives, different experiences. But I also think there’s something really powerful about having a long term relationship, someone who can maybe open doors for you or help you through different, you know, really gets to know you, helps you through different phases of your career. I think that, like, I’ve never had that. And I think I always think that that would have been really helpful or powerful for me. Um, so I can see both sides. Yeah. I was going to say, um, you know, the classic. It depends. And, um, I think my favorite answer to any question. Yeah. Um, I think the key word you raised there was relationship, right? Because. Because it is a relationship based on trust as we’ve we’ve talked about. And that takes time to develop, especially if you’re meeting, say, monthly, right, in a formal way. Um, I would personally, I think six months is is probably a little late. Um, but at the same time, there’s definitely value in, um, in a diversity of, of voice for the, for the mentee. Right. Um, different perspectives, different personality types, different roles, whatever it might be. Um, and I think there also has to be an understanding that, like, listen, if it’s not working for either party, you got to, you got to, um, call it. And, um, that doesn’t need to, you know, last the, the program recommended length or whatever, right. If it’s if it’s not a fit, it’s not a fit. It happens. Yeah. Yeah. I think one of the benefits of this long term relationship mentor coach relationship that I have with this one client of mine is that it is intensely project based. So we will work on a project with her. I will work with on a project with her, and then we will, you know, go through the project and see to its end. And sometimes entries for a call even. And then we’ll start with another project. Or sometimes we work on several projects together. Always things that she works on. And so then we, um, I help her think through things or help her research things. I find research articles for her. Then we discuss the research article. So perhaps it’s not a, you know, typical, uh, relationship mentor coaching relationship. But I do a lot of mentoring, and I, I do even more coaching because she needs confidence. I have a question. Sorry. No. Go ahead. I think it gets back to solving the problem that’s in front of us. Um, and making sure that we tailor our approach to the person that we’re trying to help. Yeah. Yeah. I have a question for Russell and Brent, because you both mentioned that you have, uh, had mentoring programs within your organizations. What was the motivation in the organization for establishing that program? And after I hear from you, I have a follow up question that I’ll throw to all of you. I think in the government communication service in the UK, it was a recognition that we’ve got some six to seven thousand communications practitioners across the whole of you need to understand this is across the whole of every government and arm’s length body that you can, you can imagine, of which there are about five hundred different organisations. Um, and uh, recognition that, uh, that we weren’t really maximizing the potential, the experience, etc., of quite a lot of senior practitioners. Um, and how did we how did we do that? Uh, it was started as a pilot, uh, probably, I’m guessing now five or six years ago. Uh, and, uh, there’s absolutely no, you know, there’s no compunction. There’s obviously no money involved. Uh, it was very much a feeling from some people. I’ll include myself in that, uh, of wanting as a senior practitioner to give something back to the profession. Um, and also, I think many of us also find it satisfying. We’ve talked about this already, a satisfying thing to do. Um, so the the program is self-sustaining. Um, it largely runs itself. It’s very much down to mentor and mentee choosing each other. Um, and we might go on to this in a second, but of course, uh, that, that the choice of a mentee to a mentor isn’t always right either. Um, and, uh, we have a few guardrails around it. There’s a kind of, uh, crib sheet about, you know, how to how to mentor and what to do and what not to do and stuff like that. Um, but that that was the original, original motivation for it. Brent. Yeah. And for, for our organization, I mentioned earlier, it started as a retention strategy around a, um, a particular underrepresented group that had high performers who were leaving the company at a, at a rate that we didn’t feel was acceptable. So this was one of the solutions, um, to retain, uh, high performers within that group. Um, so that, you know, was a fairly manual process at the time, going back several years, uh, where, um, leaders were involved in matching mentees and mentors. Um, but they were cross-functional areas. I think I had two marketing, uh, folks, uh, in the United States, uh, I had a purchasing person and then a project manager. So the, um, it was, uh, a highly successful at the time other than me, I think, because I lost three of them. Um, and then that evolved over time into sort of just opening it up to everybody who thought that they might need a mentor as a bit of an employee experience, um, uh, program. And so now we use, uh, online tools that, you know, upload profiles, and the mentees can, uh, based on their needs and, and whether they want, you know, kind of in person or they don’t want somebody, uh, in this role or whatever. So there’s a whole matching process that, uh, that goes along with it now and, uh, it’s it’s proving to be, uh, you know, quite a good, um, quite a good program. The reason I ask, as I did some research on this topic in preparation for today’s panel, uh, I found that there was some criticism of organizational mentor programs in that they promote conformity. uh, that if you have the current leaders in the organization mentoring the younger people in the organization, you’re just turning them into mini me’s, right? Just, uh, it’s. Sort of the anti-diversity, uh, pipeline. Uh, and I’m wondering, how do you handle mentorship within an organization without that program becoming a pipeline for conformity? I have something to say. Pipeline for conformity, a good idea? Yeah. No, I have something to say like that. Forgets that the mentorship goes both ways. Right? So we are as we’re mentoring, we’re also learning. And like I’ve learned a lot about like from my Gen Z and my millennials about like their expectations around work. And I’ve changed. Like I’ve changed my policies. I’ve changed how I work. Just I’ve yeah, I’ve I’ve learned a lot from them and that’s changed our organization. I think our small little organization for the better. Um, so I think that that’s the missing piece there. Yeah, I would say shell that within our organization in this in our program. It’s certainly true. For me personally, your responsibility as the mentor is not to the company, it’s to the mentee. And so, um, I, I don’t feel the need to not that I coached anybody to leave, but, um, setting them up for success in career and life. Uh, if I can put it that way, uh, is the most important thing based on what they need to do. Not necessarily that we, um, retain them. And hopefully no one from my company is watching this. I agree. I agree. Your responsibility is is not to the organization. It is to the mentee. Um, it it’s also true to Andrea’s point that actually it’s one way that you’re keeping in touch with the rest of the organization. So what can happen, particularly in a large organization, is as the organization demographics, if you like, are changing at the at the lower level, you can keep out. You can be out of touch with that. And it’s one way to just keep in touch with what is happening across the whole organization, from what the mentee is mentoring is mentoring you about in terms of that, that, that, kind of that, that kind of approach. Russell, I once I recently read one of these business philosophers said that any person older than fifty needs a mentor of twenty five. Mm mm mm. Yeah. In our program. Amanda, to that point, you can sign up and lots of people do sign up as a mentor and a mentee. Yeah. Do you have a twenty five year old mentoring you, Brent? Uh, not at the moment, but I you know what? We have actually the kickoff to the next year of the program is in about an hour and a half, and, uh, I may, I may I may take it up on that I may set myself down for as being a mentee. Lots to learn from those folks, right? Yes. Oh, yeah. Tons. Yeah. So it raises an interesting question because there is this concept of reverse mentoring. Yeah. It’s usually brought up in terms of technology, uh, because the younger employees are are more adept at the newer digital technologies that the, the older, uh, more senior people, uh, probably aren’t using because they have admins to, to do that sort of thing. Uh, have you been involved in any of those kinds of mentor programs, and what do you think of them? More informal than formal because they definitely they they say these programs are these platforms are intuitive. I think they’re intuitive for the younger generations, not from my generation. I think that there’s like you can get tutorials almost anywhere. Like the other day, I fixed a problem that no one on my team was able to fix, and I just ai helped. But, um, I think there’s much more powerful ways to use reverse mentoring. Kind of like I was talking about before. Understanding different generations. What can they bring to the table? I wrote an article about because I’m really fascinated about making sure like how to make sure different generations create a better workplace rather than, you know, create friction. And there’s a lot of great studies that show if you harness the power and the values and the perspectives of all those generations, you can really flourish as an organization. So I think that’s where the power is not figuring out where to my, my, um, my conquest or whatever was figuring out how to put page numbers on Canva presentations like, you know, like that’s not to me, that’s not really that powerful. But the power is in the generations and learning from each other. Yeah. Amanda, you’ve talked about the difference between mentoring and coaching. Uh, and I’m wondering about mentoring people on your own team when you’re supposed to be their supervisor, you’re supposed to be supervising them. You’re supposed to be evaluating their performance. You’re supposed to be coaching them. Uh, this is something that I have heard from leaders in my organization is I work in construction, which very traditionally is I tell you what to do, and you do it, uh, and they’re really trying to change that to to coaching. I remember our former CEO talking about, you know, if you think about a coach on a Little league team helping you adjust your swing, uh, this is the type of thing he wanted to see our managers doing with their employees. Uh, should those managers be mentoring as well? Or should they advise their people to find somebody else to be their mentor? I think in some industries, it’s easier to have a mentor and a coaching program, um, as a supervisor, because, you know, I think, for instance, in a construction environment, in a mining environment, especially in the operational levels, I think it is it would be difficult. And I think that a person becomes ready for mentoring, um, and ready for coaching. So I think on the operational levels where you have a team leader, where way. You have a supervisor. I, I think few people at that level have the need for mentoring and coaching as a leader. You have the responsibility, in any case, to mentor and coach these people, uh, during work, uh, you know, team meetings, during personal interactions with them. But that would be unstructured. It would be, um, how are you dealing with this? So it would be five minute coaching, five minute mentoring here and there during the day. So I can’t see that they would that as a supervisor in a construction company or in a team leader in a hospitality industry or a, um, mine that I would coach and mentor these people. I think they’re not ready for that. But in the more the more, um, senior Their levels, they will become ready for that. Now you just solve their problem. I completely agree with that. I think it very much depends on on the the nature of the business that you’re in. Um, certainly I regard my main, my principal relationship with my team as a mentoring one, mentoring or coaching, whichever you want. I do not regard it principally as a supervisory one. Uh, and I think if it was a supervisory one, something has probably gone wrong in the relationship. But that’s the kind of business that I’m in. And I think maybe in construction where safety is first and you do need to do what you’re told for your own safety. I think it might be different. So, um, maybe it’s horses for courses. Um, definitely. I would say that like. Let’s say within my, my team, for example, which is not huge, uh, the, the lines or the definitions of mentoring and coaching are, you know, a little less important, perhaps. Um, uh, it’s just what you do on a on a day to day basis, whether it’s something really specific and they need to be told what to do, or they need some advice about some other potential issue, whatever it might be, that’s just part of the day to day job of a of a manager or leader of a team. I would hesitate to, and I don’t think I would actually take on a member of my, my team in a formal mentoring relationship. I think that’s that’s for somebody else in a different perspective. Yeah. Great. Definitely. Andrea, you mentioned AI earlier. Not in the context of mentoring. It was looking looking up how to do something technically. Uh, but there’s a lot of data suggesting that, especially among younger people, they are turning to AI for this type of activity. Uh, I wonder what you think about that. Uh, as AI as a mentor. I have to tell you, I set up a custom GPT. Um, there are only two of us in our communications department, and I don’t have the budget to work with a consultant. Uh, and there are times that I would like to be able to bounce my ideas or my thoughts off of, uh, a very knowledgeable, senior, experienced, uh, communicator. So I created one, uh, in a custom GPT, uh, and I have to confess, it works pretty well. Uh, I wouldn’t call her my mentor. Uh, just a senior colleague that I can I can bounce ideas off of. But I wonder what you think AI fits into this whole realm of mentorship. First of all, you called your your AI expert a she, which I’m very happy about. Sorry, Russell. No, it is a female dominated profession, so it seemed appropriate and and a different perspective. Right. I think it’s just another tool in our toolbox. Right. It’s just another way of bouncing, like you said, bouncing ideas off, getting direction, whatever. So I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it. Of course, what’s missing is the human relationship we talked about relationship built on trust. Um, um, support, empathy, those kinds of things. And I don’t think you can replace that, but it is another important tool. Yeah. And I agree with you. I think that there is a place to have this, uh, mentor in your screen and to ask them a couple of questions, but eventually, um, people would need people to, to engage with that. It is more, you know, talking about your problem and talking about your need for assistance, that that’s solving half of the problem. Like Socrates said, we all have the solutions. We just need to somebody to ask us the right questions. So, um, you know, either the mentee or the the coach doesn’t matter. But, uh, I think use AI for certain things, but eventually they will be a need for a person. I’m I’m sorry to say I agree with what Amanda just said. I’m sorry to say that if we were asking this question in twenty years time, we would probably concede that the AI was a much better mentor and empathizer and, um, more structured approach had a more structured and professional approach than the human. And that’s really worrying. Um, I think the question you’ve asked is very interesting. Um, shell, uh, particularly young people over relying at the moment on what is basically a machine to provide them with life advice. Uh, and I think that’s, it’s a really I’ve seen a couple of examples of that. And I think it’s really, really worrying. And, um, I don’t know where it’s all headed. Uh, but let’s see what happens when we have this conversation in twenty years time. Well, not only that conversation, not only life advice, but relationships like people like talking about attachments or whatever. So, yeah, that human relationship is just so important. And, uh, yeah, I can tell you, I have made way more mistakes than ChatGPT has ever made. So people are learning from those, right? Yeah. And people will learn from your mistakes. Right? Like, exactly. Just not there yet. That the human element and all the things, the lived experiences that we bring to the table as mentors or to the relationship, um, at the moment can’t be replicated by the machine. Yeah. You know, one of my prescribed books in my early studies said that originally, um, the the church decided to, uh, print the Bible and teach the people to read that they can read, you know, all the mistakes that they make and that they they need the church. But unfortunately, uh, the people also read other books. So it was that unintended consequence. But, um, I also feel that, you know, when books, when advice books, self-help books became so popular, people said, yes, but everybody is now finding solutions in these self-help books. They don’t go to the, uh, the people that they used to go to, which would typically be the mentor or, sorry, the the minister, the parents. And because books books is a problem, everybody, they’re not going to need us anymore. So, Russell, I fear that I don’t agree with you. I think in twenty years time, the people that will sit and discuss this problem would say, yeah, some people you can find solutions on AI, like you can find solutions in books, but eventually people still need. While we are human beings, people still need the right of somebody else’s eyes to just do, to feel cared for and to feel helped. And not this cold thing that you know. So I hope so. I hope, I hope so. I think one advantage AI has if, if, if I’ve had a particularly troubling or upsetting experience at the office, and I want to talk to my mentor and he’s not available, the AI is available. It’s not going to tell me it’s busy. I’m sorry, I’m in a meeting. I can’t talk right now. Uh, we only have a couple of minutes left. I want to go around and, uh, get your your one quick response to the question what can cause mentoring to fail? Chemistry. Chemistry. Oh, the lack of it or the lack of it? Um, I thought we might have touched on this earlier, actually, that, um. Sometimes the chemistry just isn’t right. Uh, I think we talked about trust and everything. Everything in that, in that department. Uh, I think the truth is that as humans, uh, relationships are based ultimately on chemistry, and sometimes the chemistry just isn’t right. And I think you I think you know that after the first, um, interaction, I always say to anybody that I’m taking on as a mentor, let’s have an initial chat and then see where we want to go from there. I never commit, and I would never want a mentor to commit to a relationship from the get go before we’ve had an initial, uh, basically, you know, what what What are we? What do we like to each other? Uh, Russell, I want to take the total opposite. I think another reason why mentorship programs fail is when people become too close. Because the chemistry is working too well, and that eventually you cannot distance yourself sufficiently from that person because you feel too sorry or anything like that. So I think the balance is important. Yeah, that open conversation, I would say a lack of preparation or effort. Okay. And Brent. Yeah, I would say maybe a mismatch of objectives. Right. Like a lack of understanding of what each party wants to get out of the relationship. You have to you have to come to agreement on that. Um, kind of more upfront. Yeah. And let’s see if we can cover this one question that we actually got from Brian Kilgore. Uh, is YouTube a mentor? It certainly tells photographers what camera to buy or how to set up lights, and I can agree with that. Uh, it does, but is that mentorship or is that more something else? That’s instructions. That’s instructions. Resources. I would say it’s an aid mentor. Yeah. Not a replacement. Right. No, it’s I think it’s like the difference between a teacher and a mentor. Um, so AI, uh, sorry, YouTube would be the teacher. I would sit there and look at this video and learn something from it, because I want to learn something from it. So I’ve always seen it as a relationship. Yeah, yeah. I’ve written a little, uh, routine, uh, using one of Google’s lab, uh, tools that goes into the YouTube video, extracts the steps. So I’m no longer having to rewind the video to find the one that I missed. Uh, the steps have all been articulated for me in this tool. So there’s a use of AI. Uh, this has been great. Uh, we’re out of time. I do want to let everybody know that the next circle of fellows is scheduled for the same time, noon eastern time on Thursday, February twenty sixth. We will be talking, uh, to some extent, about the new Edelman Trust Barometer, which talks about, uh, insularity. Uh, last year’s was about grievance, and we’re talking about communicating in the age of Grievance. The panel is Priya Bates, Alice Brink, Jane Mitchell and Jennifer Waugh. So that will be great. Thank you, everybody, for a wonderful conversation today. And for those of you who are watching in real time, uh, appreciate that, Brian. Appreciate the question and see you all next month. Thank you. Thank you so much. Bye bye bye.

The post Circle of Fellows #124: The Impact of Mentoring appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.

The communication profession stands at a pivotal moment. Artificial intelligence is transforming how we create and distribute content. Trust in institutions continues to erode while employees demand authenticity and transparency. The hybrid workplace has permanently altered how we reach our audiences. And the pace of change shows no signs of slowing.

In this environment, what does it mean to be a communication professional? More specifically, what will it mean in 2026 and the years that follow?

The December Circle of Fellows panel tackled these questions head-on, bringing together four IABC Fellows to share their perspectives on where our profession is headed and what opportunities await those prepared to seize them.

The conversation explored several interconnected themes, including the evolving role of the communication professional as a trusted adviso,; the new capabilities and mindsets that will distinguish the communication leaders who thrive from those who struggle to keep pace, the skills the next generation of communicators should be developing now;  and how we can maintain professional standards and ethical practice when the tools and channels keep shifting beneath our feet.

About the panel:

Zora Artis, GAICD, SCMP, ACC, FAMI, CPM, is CEO of Artis Advisory and co-founder of The Alignment People. She helps leaders and teams tackle tough challenges, find clarity, and take action, particularly when the stakes are high and the path isn’t obvious. Her superpower is being comfortable with the uncomfortable: aligning people, solving problems, and navigating change so leaders can focus on what matters most and teams can do their best work.

Bonnie Caver, SCMP, is the Founder and CEO of Reputation Lighthouse, a global change management and reputation consultancy with offices in Denver, Colorado, and Austin, Texas. The firm, which is 20 years old, focuses on leading companies to create, accelerate, and protect their corporate value. She has achieved the highest professional certification for a communication professional, the Strategic Communication Management Professional (SCMP), a distinction at the ANSI/ISO level. She is also a certified strategic change management professional (Kellogg School of Management), a certified crisis manager (Institute of Crisis Management). She holds an advanced certification for reputation through the Reputation Institute (now the RepTrak Company). She is a past chair of the global executive board for the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC). She currently serves on the board of directors for the Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communication Management, where she leads the North American Regional Council and is the New Technology Responsibility/AI Director. Caver is the Vice Chair for the Global Communication Certification Council (GCCC) and leads the IABC Change Management Special Interest Group, which has more than 1,300 members. In addition, she is heavily involved in the global conversation around ethical and responsible AI implementation and led the Global Alliance’s efforts in creating Ethical and Responsible AI Guidelines for the global profession.

Adrian Cropley is the founder and director of the Centre for Strategic Communication Excellence, a global training and development organization. For over thirty years, Adrian has worked with clients worldwide, including Fortune 500 companies, on major change communication initiatives, internal communication reviews and strategies, professional development programs, and executive leadership and coaching. He is a non-executive director on several boards and advises some of the top CEOs and executives globally.

Adrian is a past global chair of the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC), where he implemented the IABC Career Road Map, kick-started a global ISO certification for the profession, and developed the IABC Academy. Adrian pioneered the Melcrum Internal Communication Black Belt program in Asia Pacific and is a sought-after facilitator, speaker, and thought leader. He has been a keynote speaker and workshop leader on strategic and change communication at international conferences in Canada, the U.S., Europe, the Middle East, Malaysia, Singapore, China, India, Hong Kong, Thailand, New Zealand, and Australia. He has received numerous awards, including IABC Gold Quill Awards for communication excellence, and his Agency received Boutique Agency of the Year 6 years running.

Adrian is the Chair of the Industry Advisory Committee for the RMIT School of Media and Communication and a Fellow of the IABC and RSA. In 2017, he was awarded the Medal of Order of Australia for his contribution to the field of communication.

Mary Hills, ABC, IABC Fellow, Six Sigma, FCSCE serves as MBA Faculty in Benedictine University’s Goodwin College of Business. Her work in marketing, finance and organizational communication and management brings an interdisciplinary perspective to her students. Mary’s professional career includes serving large corporations such as First Wisconsin National Bank – Milwaukee, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Whiteco Advertising, NiSource, Northern Trust, Unilever and Zebra Technologies. She supported starts-ups through Purdue Technology Center and Research Park of NWI. As a member of senior management, her work includes research, risk analysis and strategic planning for product launches, market expansion, and change and crisis management. In 2009, she co-founded HeimannHills Marketing Group, Chicago and Phoenix, serving as business principal until 2021. Most recently, Mary’s work involves AI’s impact on the role of the communication professional. Her work has been recognized nationally and internationally.

Raw Transcript:

Shel Holtz: Hi everybody, and welcome to episode 123 of Circle of Fellows. I’m Shel Holtz, the Senior Director of Communications at Webcor, a commercial general contractor and builder headquartered here in the Bay Area. We have a great panel today to talk about a really fascinating topic: the future of communications in 2026 and beyond.

I want to emphasize that this is not one of those “lists of trends for next year” that you see flooding social media. I think that has gotten worse since AI made it easier for people to come up with these trends rather than thinking it through for themselves. We will explore where we think communication is headed based on everything going on in the world, including AI.

I’m going to ask the panel to introduce themselves, but before that, I want to take a moment to note the passing of one of our community of IABC Fellows. This happened on April 15th, but we all just learned about it yesterday. The Fellow who passed is Les Potter. Les was hugely influential to more than one generation of communicators. There are likely hundreds, if not thousands, of communicators out there practicing sound strategic communication because of what they learned from Les.

He was a great friend of mine; we spent time together socially, and he will be sorely missed. He was a past chair of IABC, and his passing is a tremendous loss to the community. After leaving the corporate world, he became a beloved professor of communication at Towson University in Maryland. I just wanted to share that for people who may not have heard. I hope he is resting in peace.

With that, let’s find out who is on the panel today. Adrian, starting with you.

Adrian Cropley: It’s great to be with everyone. Thank you, Shel. I am Adrian Cropley in Melbourne, Australia. It is hot today. I am an IABC Fellow and the co-founder of the Centre for Strategic Communication Excellence.

Shel Holtz: Great to have you with us, Adrian. Bonnie, you’re up next.

Bonnie Caver: Hi, I’m Bonnie Caver. I’m in Austin, Texas, and I run a company called Reputation Lighthouse, where we do brand and reputation change management for mid-sized companies.

Shel Holtz: Thanks for joining us, Bonnie. Mary?

Mary Hills: Mary Hills in lovely Scottsdale, Arizona. Our temperature is perfect, as it always is in Scottsdale. I am graduate faculty for Benedictine University, teaching out of their business school, and also on the faculty at the Centre for Strategic Communication Excellence. I am glad to dive into the topic.

Shel Holtz: I have to ask, is the weather going to be perfect in Scottsdale in August?

Mary Hills: It’ll be a little wet and a little hot.

Shel Holtz: Okay. And Zora.

Zora Artis: Hello, everyone. I’m coming to you from Melbourne, Australia, not too far from Adrian. I’m the CEO of Artis Advisory and co-founder of The Alignment People. I work with leaders and executives on tackling tough problems, finding clarity, and taking action. I’m really excited to be here today closing off the year.

Shel Holtz: Thanks, Zora. I also want to shout out Anna Wyllie, our executive producer behind the scenes. In the document she sent to prepare for this, she suggested a potential opening question: What is your one headline for the future of the communication profession in 2026? Let’s go in reverse order, starting with Zora.

Zora Artis: I think as we head into 2026, communication leadership is entering a much more pressured time. This isn’t just because of AI, but because the pace of change is relentless and outstripping people’s ability to make sense of everything. We need to help them move fast and bring them along with us, which is quite daunting, but it puts us in a position where we’re indispensable.

Mary Hills: I would say that so much of the future is not new; it involves things that are maturing and evolving. I don’t think there will be any grand flashes. We have made progress, and we are just going to keep going.

Bonnie Caver: Transformative. We must, as communication professionals, transform ourselves, and we must lead transformation within our organizations and with our stakeholders.

Adrian Cropley: I was scared Bonnie was going to be before me on this one because we think the same here. It’s absolutely about change and transition. But let me add that it will be an exciting time if communication professionals seize the opportunity to grow their value in organizations because the moment is now.

Shel Holtz: I will add mine: I think we are going to have to be laser-focused on building trust. Trust is eroding, and AI is contributing to this. I don’t know if you heard that The Washington Post created AI-generated podcasts that were loaded with factual inaccuracies. If that’s coming from The Washington Post, we’re in trouble. I don’t know who is going to want to be aligned with or engaged with an organization they don’t trust.

Let’s dive into it. What are the leaders of organizations looking for from communicators, and how prepared are we to deliver on those things?

Bonnie Caver: I’ve done quite a bit of research on what leaders are focused on. Profitable growth is on their mind, alongside transformation with AI technology, transforming talent, and the future of work. They also have to protect and govern. As communication professionals, we have to plug in there. We are part of growth, but we must also help lead transformation and address risk, trust, and sustainability. Stakeholders are going to have very different expectations of us going forward.

Adrian Cropley: Shel, you talked about the state of trust, and I think this is critical. Leaders have this opportunity to lead their organizations and employees to buy into what the organization stands for. The reality today, with the amount of misinformation and mal-information on steroids due to AI, is that people gravitate toward what is comfortable.

The role for a communication professional is to give leaders the information, insight, and advice they need. We have to be the “sense maker” more than ever before. There is also a morality role coming into play. When Bonnie and I were working on the Venice Pledge for the Global Alliance, a theme popped up that it is more than ethics; it is about how we engage our world. It’s about home and security.

Zora Artis: I’ve been talking to a lot of leaders this year, and while there is a lot of talk, things are happening in real-time. Strategic horizons have shrunk. We’re constantly trying to outmaneuver the competition to grow and win. Comms professionals need to look at how to make sense of that complexity. We need to look at the system overall—actions taken, decisions made, money invested—and ask: Is this going to reinforce trust or erode it?

There is often a gap between what leaders say and how they behave versus what employees and stakeholders see. Communication professionals have a role in making sense of that and bringing it back to leaders to help them make better decisions.

Mary Hills: I may have a few data points worth considering. Communication professionals must finally become interdisciplinary. They can’t stay in the silo of comms; they have to understand the business, economics, and the value and risk model of the organization.

In communication, we balance the vision and mission of the organization. We represent both the short term and the long term. We have to find that harmonious balance. We also need to apply a rigorous professionalism, including emotional intelligence and behavioral economics, to foster discussion within organizations. Use the PESTLE analysis and attach ethics right to it.

Shel Holtz: Shel, you’re working in-house now. What are you hearing from your organization regarding their expectations?

Shel Holtz: I think they are expecting me to tell them. We are not a massive organization, and most of the leadership team has a construction or engineering background. They expect me to help them figure this out. Even if they don’t articulate it, that is the expectation. Based on Adrian’s thoughts, the first thing that leaped to mind was that we had better get a lot better at listening.

Adrian Cropley: Absolutely. We don’t have the excuse not to listen or measure anymore. This is where I think AI has really helped us. We need to be better at listening and helping our leaders listen to get the insight that informs true connection. Listening has become critical.

Zora Artis: I wrote a piece about this last month. It became obvious that true listening was missing in organizations, as well as the capability among leaders to listen to understand rather than to respond.

I know a Chief Comms Officer in professional services who spends time listening on platforms like Fishbowl, where people talk outside the business. She gathers that information and takes it back to the executive team to explain why it matters. We’re often seeing people skip the listening. If we don’t listen, we can’t counter misinformation or AI bots controlling the narrative because we don’t actually know what our stakeholders believe.

Bonnie Caver: We have challenges today with fake surveys. If you think you’re going to survey your customer base to make critical decisions, but AI bots are participating, it changes your playing field. True listening—picking up the phone and talking to your customers and stakeholders—is more important than ever.

Mary Hills: The one caution I would throw out is that the stakeholder network is tired of irrelevant questions. If we are going to have a conversation, we better have our background research done. They are tired of giving feedback. We need to look at discursive leadership skills: open-ended discussions rather than closed-ended five-question surveys.

Bonnie Caver: The reason people are tired of us asking questions is that communication is not coming back to them regarding how we are acting upon it. We never close the loop.

Shel Holtz: Exactly. There is no such thing as survey fatigue, but there is certainly “bullshit fatigue.” If they see the survey leads to change, they will take surveys all day long.

We have a question from our live audience. Bill Spaniel asks: Regarding the emotional factor of communication and the need for listening, how can communication schools build those requirements into their curriculum?

Mary Hills: We have been doing that for a good eight to nine years. It requires active experience of learning in the classroom. It’s exhausting because you are “on” for three hours, but it reinforces that it’s not just about hearing what was said, but agreeing on the next action item.

Adrian Cropley: We’ve built relationship-building skills and emotional intelligence into the Centre for Strategic Communication Excellence programs. You have to be able to build relationships with stakeholders, not just rely on data. You get data on where people navigate, but you must overlay it with the right context—that is the true listening stuff.

Shel Holtz: Years ago, I read a book called Excellence in Public Relations and Communication Management, and I learned the term “boundary spanning.” It’s almost like surveillance—lurking in the conversations stakeholders are having to glean intelligence. Listening isn’t just asking questions; sometimes it’s just listening.

Adrian Cropley: There is a social awareness aspect, too. If you can’t even connect with people as humans—like saying thank you in a shop—how are you supposed to get context? We need to go back to some of those old skills.

Zora Artis: It’s also about being observant. Observing the people in the room and observing what is left unsaid.

Shel Holtz: Listening strikes me as one of those uncomfortable truths we need to face if we are going to stay relevant. What other uncomfortable truths are there?

Zora Artis: We confuse activity with impact. We are good at producing stuff, but not always good at understanding if it changes behavior or decisions. We need to be relevant rather than busy.

Mary Hills: The Communication Value Circle came out around 2016. It helps us understand how to provide value and assess risk. We have to understand the value and risk model every organization is on. Marketing has a value circle, too. We need to understand where we bring present value and how we protect future value.

Adrian Cropley: Often, the perceived value from leaders drives the behavior of the communication professional—churning out content or tidying up PowerPoints. That value has disappeared because AI can do those things now. We have to educate organizations on what real value for communication is: providing insight and context.

Zora Artis: It comes back to the business side. I remember learning Net Present Value and risk calculations. Comms often skirts around the edges of finance. We need to talk about revenue, productivity, trust capital, and risk exposure in language that matters to the business.

Bonnie Caver: Reputation is huge right now. CEOs say it’s important, but they don’t know how to do it. We haven’t positioned ourselves as being in the business of building and protecting reputation; we often treat it as a byproduct of crisis management. It’s not reputation management anymore; it’s reputation design.

And let’s not forget, AI is now a stakeholder. AI controls the narrative and answers questions about your organization.

Shel Holtz: What else are communicators not focused on that they should be?

Adrian Cropley: Understanding and interacting with AI. I am surprised how many people have not dipped their feet into the water. If we aren’t exploring AI to make our roles more efficient and gain insight, we are missing a huge opportunity. We recently published a playbook for AI into 2026, and a key play is using AI to carve out time to do the higher-value work.

Mary Hills: We treat AI as an agent. You are the owner of what AI brings back to you. It is merely the agent acting for you to get information. We must manage what it gives us back.

Bonnie Caver: We shouldn’t look at AI just to solve problems, but for efficiencies. I was on a panel with an organization that saved almost a thousand hours using AI. They used that efficiency to free themselves up to do transformative things.

Zora Artis: AI creates incredible speed. The problem is alignment. People are moving at speed with decisions, but they aren’t creating clarity around what stays the same and what shifts. Communication professionals need to enable the alignment needed across the organization so they can work at pace sustainably.

Shel Holtz: We have talked about the need to be transformative. However, there are things like professional standards and ethical behavior we don’t want to transform. But now, the people doing the communicating are often not journalists or professionals—they are pastors, barbers, or WhatsApp moderators. How do we maintain professional standards when we have lost the traditional gatekeepers?

Adrian Cropley: We aren’t short of standards; we just don’t publish them well enough. The Global Standard for the Communication Profession is critical. We have to build those standards out to everyone communicating. The work Bonnie did with the Venice Pledge regarding AI usage is a great example. We need to work with governments and agencies to enforce requirements.

Mary Hills: The professional associations are the keepers of the standard. Academia builds the body of knowledge, but associations like IABC bring it to the marketplace through certification.

Zora Artis: I don’t think we ever had control; that’s an illusion. We had influence. We need to double down on the “Do, Say, Be” alignment—making sure that what we do, what we say, and the lived experience are true.

Shel Holtz: We are almost out of time. Let’s do a closing round. In one sentence, what is your boldest prediction for communication by 2030?

Adrian Cropley: Absolutely radical change. We are going to find out we are changing completely.

Bonnie Caver: We’re going to become advocates for ourselves, or we’re going to disappear.

Mary Hills: The natural inclination for communicators to bring human-centric abilities to the forefront will protect our space. We have to be the ones keeping our heads when everyone else is losing theirs.

Zora Artis: Communication should be the essential organizational infrastructure that creates shared understanding to keep strategy, trust, and performance from falling apart.

Shel Holtz: My thanks to all of you for a sparkling conversation. The next Circle of Fellows is scheduled for noon Eastern Time on Thursday, January 22nd. The subject is the impact of mentoring. Thank you all for your participation.

Panel: Thank you. Happy holidays.

The post Circle of Fellows #123: The Future of Communication — 2026 and Beyond appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.

The forward-looking discussion was joined by five seasoned leaders: two professors shaping the next generation of communicators and three senior practitioners traversing today’s real-world pressures. Together, they bridge campus and workplace, theory and execution, to define what readiness really looks like in a world of constant change. Shel Holtz, SCMP, IABC Fellow, will moderate the session.

This episode featured a candid, fast-paced discussion on the skills and mindsets that matter now — and the ones you’ll need next. From AI literacy and data comfort to ethical judgment, change agility, and human-centered storytelling, the panel will share practical frameworks you can apply immediately. You’ll hear how universities are evolving curricula, how employers can cultivate lifelong learning, and how individual pros can future-proof their careers without losing the craft that sets them apart.

You’ll get actionable guidance, plenty of examples from classrooms and boardrooms. Whether you lead a team, teach, hire, or are building your own career path, this conversation will help you set priorities for the year ahead.

You’ll leave with:

A clear, current skills map for modern communicators

Practical ways to integrate AI and analytics—without sacrificing trust and creativity

Playbooks for continuous upskilling across individuals, teams, and organizations

About the panel:

Diane Gayeski is recognized as a thought leader in the practice and teaching of business communications.  She is Professor of Strategic Communications at the Roy H. Park School of Communications at Ithaca College and provides consulting in communications analysis and strategies through Gayeski Analytics.  Diane was recently inducted as an IABC Fellow; she’s been active in IABC for more than 30 years as a featured speaker and think-tank leader at the international conference, the author of 3 editions of the IABC-published book, Managing the Communications Function, and the advisor to Ithaca College’s student chapter.  She has led more than 300 client engagements for clients, including the US Navy, Bank of Montreal, Fiat, Sony, Abbott Diagnostics, and Borg-Warner, focusing on assessing and building capacities and implementing new technologies for workplace communications and learning teams.

Sue Heuman, SCMP, ABC, MC, IABC Fellow, based in Edmonton, Canada, is an award-winning, accredited authority on organizational communications with more than 40 years of experience. Since co-founding Focus Communications in 2002, Sue has worked with clients to define, understand, and achieve their communications objectives. Sue is a highly sought-after executive advisor, specializing in leading communication audits and strategies for clients across all three sectors. Much of her practice involves a strategic review of the communications function within an organization, analyzing channels and audiences. She creates strategic communication plans and provides expertise to enable their execution. Sue has been a member of the International Association of Business Communicators (IABC) since 1984, which enables her to both stay current with and contribute to the field of communications practices. In 2016, Sue received the prestigious Rae Hamlin Award from IABC in recognition of her work in promoting global standards for communication. She was also named 2016 IABC Edmonton Chapter Communicator of the Year. In 2018, IABC named Sue a Master Communicator, the Association’s highest honor in Canada. Sue earned the IABC Fellow designation in 2022.

Dr. Theomary Karamanis is a multiple award-winning communication professor and consultant with 25 years of global experience. She is currently a full-time senior lecturer in Management Communication at the Cornell SC Johnson College of Business and regularly delivers executive education programs in leadership communication, crisis communication, and strategic communication. She has held several professional leadership positions, including Chair of the GCCC (Global Communication Certification Council), Chair of the IABC (International Association of Business Communicators) Academy, and Chair of the IABC Awards committee.

Her academic background includes a PhD in communication studies, a Master of Arts in mass communication, and a postgraduate certificate in telecommunications, all from Northwestern University, as well as a bachelor’s degree in economics from the Athens University of Economics and Business. She also holds professional certifications as a Strategic Communication Management Professional (SCMP), online facilitator, and executive program instructor. She has received 40 professional communication awards, including 12 Platinum MarCom awards, 7 Gold Quill awards, 4 Silver Quill awards, and a Comm Prix award. In 2020, she received the Award for Excellence in Communication Consulting by APCC (Association of Professional Communication Consultants) and ABC (Association for Business Communication). She is the author of several books and academic papers on communication, and she also regularly delivers presentations at international conferences and other business forums.

Leticia Narváez, ABC, is the CEO and Founding Partner of Narváez Group, a consulting firm specializing in Strategic Communication, Crisis Management, Employee Engagement, Communication Training, and Change Management. A 30-year experienced professional, she held top-level positions at Sanofi, Merck, American Express, and Ford Motor Co., among others. She builds communication bridges to the highest standards of excellence. She has developed communication strategies for several employers and clients, including those involved in mergers and acquisitions, diversity leadership, crisis management, and senior executive consulting. Many of these strategies have earned global awards for their proven results and successful impact. She has been a speaker at international forums, is a co-author of several books and manuals on business communication, public relations, and inclusion. She teaches Measurement and Evaluation in the Master of Institutional Communication at the Panamericana University in Mexico City.

Jennifer Wah, MC, ABC, has worked with clients to deliver ideas, plans, words and results since she founded her storytelling and communications firm, Forwords Communication Inc., in 1997. With more than two dozen awards for strategic communications, writing, and consulting, Jennifer is recognized as a storyteller and strategist. She has worked in industries from healthcare and academia to financial services and the resource sector, and is passionate about the strategic use of storytelling to support business outcomes. Although she has delivered workshops and training throughout her career, Jennifer formally added teaching to her experience in 2013, first with Royal Roads University and more recently as an adjunct professor of business communications with the UBC Sauder School of Business, where she now works part-time to impart crucial communication skills on the next generation of business leaders. When she is not working, Jennifer spends her time cooking, walking her dog, Orion, or discussing food, hockey, or music with her husband and two young adult children in North Vancouver, Canada.

Raw Transcript

00:00:00 Speaker: Hi everybody, and welcome to episode one hundred and twenty two of Circle of Fellows. I’m Shel Holtz, your moderator today, and I am the senior director of Communications at Webcor. We’re a commercial general contractor in California, headquartered in San Francisco. And I’m coming to you live today from our offices across the bay in Alameda. Uh, and I am also a certified, uh, communication professional through the Global Communication Certification Council. And I am delighted to have a terrific panel joining me today to talk about preparing tomorrow’s communication professionals. Uh, that includes some people from the world of academia. Uh, you’ll learn who they are as they introduce themselves in just a couple of seconds. But first, I’m going to give you the, uh, the first of a few reminders that, um, you are welcome to participate in this discussion. You are watching this presumably through YouTube and there is a chat feature. And if you send us a question or a comment or an observation through that chat window, I’ll be able to share it on the screen and we can get feedback from the panelists who will now introduce themselves, starting with Letty. Um. Hi, everybody. Um, I’m Letty Narvaez, I’m based in Mexico City, and I’ve been working on communication for more than thirty years. For the last ten years, I have had my own consulting firm specializing mainly on employee communications, change management, crisis and risk management, and and a lot of training on measurement and presentation skills. And it’s great to to be here. It’s great to have you here, Letty. Uh, Theo. Mary. You’re next. Hello, everyone. Thanks for being here with us. I’m Theo America. I’m based in Ithaca, New York. This is upstate New York. I work for Cornell University, and I teach MBA and executive MBA students. And I’m also very much involved with executive education. So I get to see a lot of executives and leaders across industries and professions. Um, I’ve been in communication for more than I don’t want to say, but I will, uh, twenty five years now. And I started after my PhD. I started in corporate communication. So I had a corporate life. Then I went into consulting. I had my own boutique firm, and for the past ten, maybe now close to fifteen years, I’ve been full time in academia. I’ve been in contact. I always have contact with executives, uh, through my executive education courses and also through my Um, MBA courses, and I’m looking forward to sharing with you some insights about communication professionals and what communication will mean to us, uh, in the future. And thank you so much for inviting me. Uh, thanks for being here. Uh, Diane, you’re up. Hi, I’m Diane Gajewski, and I am on the other hill from Theo Mary, also in Ithaca, New York. I’m a professor of strategic communication at Ithaca College, which is also my alma mater. And, uh, I’ll embarrass myself and say I’ve been there for forty seven years. Um, in addition to teaching, I practice what I preach through my consulting firm, Gaieski Analytics. Um, I mostly focus on new technologies and, uh, trends in both corporate communication and corporate learning. And I teach almost exclusively undergraduates. And, uh, they are very worried about the topic that we’re talking about today, so I look forward to the conversation. It’ll be a good one. Uh, Sue? Hi, everybody. Sue from Edmonton, Canada. Um, I have been in communication for forty three years. And, um, through the course of my time, I have actually been, um, uh, an instructor with MacEwan University, and I have worked with other academic programs as a guest lecturer. Um, but, uh, I think I’m hoping to bring the perspective today of somebody who’s done a lot of hiring, um, over the years and have seen a lot of different folks come through the door for our small agency, which is focused communications in Edmonton. So, yeah, happy to be here and happy to be here with this great group of very impressive women. So thank you. Thank you. Uh, Jen, your last but not least. Excellent. Uh, hello. From Vancouver, Canada. Just over the hill, as it were, from Sue in Edmonton. Um, and, um. And happy Thanksgiving to those who will be celebrating in the next, uh, in the next day or so. Um, I, uh, I’m, I teach as an adjunct professor at the UBC Sauder School of Business. So I teach business communications to first and third year students, which is, um, which is a, um, something I’ve been doing for the last four or five years. Um, I absolutely am enchanted by it and by the students and, um, love being in the classroom with them. And it, uh, I think only makes me stronger as a, as a professional. Um, in my consulting business, as a storytelling consultant for organizations. Um, and, uh, yeah, really looking forward to the conversation today and and echo what, what I’ve even heard so far in terms of what what the next generation of entering the workforce are worried about and how, um, and how we all just need to keep learning. I’ve been doing some rough math as we’ve gone around, uh, at my forty eight years in the profession. I was a newspaper reporter for a few years before that. Uh, and I think we have well over two hundred years of experience on this panel, so you should get some good wisdom. We don’t look a day over one ninety nine, so that’s true. Uh, it’s good. Genes is what it is. Um, so let’s jump into this and I want to share a quick story. Uh, several years ago, uh, I was invited to come speak to the faculty at San Jose State University by the dean of the journalism department. That was Bill Briggs, who is an Iabc fellow. Um, and one of the questions I was asked, uh, really struck me. They said, what aren’t we teaching that we should be? Um. And I thought about it a minute. And this was in the heyday of blogging. Um, you know, the big social networks didn’t exist yet. Facebook and LinkedIn and the like were not around. Uh, but blogging was getting really big. Uh, and, uh, newspapers were starting to close, uh, in some frightening numbers. And I said, I think what you need to be teaching is entrepreneurial ism. Uh, when I went to journalism school, they taught us to work for a newspaper or a news magazine, uh, a news broadcast outlet or a news radio station. And that was it. Um, and I think today, uh, journalists are going to have to reinvent themselves. I mean, look at the number of them that are doing podcasts, like, uh, Jim Acosta, who used to be with CNN, uh, they’re doing Substack newsletters for communicators. Uh, let me ask, what aren’t universities, uh, with, with communication programs, teaching that they should be. Well, I can start if you want. Um, I want, um, I’m in a business school, and of course, I don’t have communication students, but I have the future business leaders, and we teach them communication skills, and I’m really, um, very happy about it. But I think what we do not teach, and we need to start teaching, and I don’t know how is agility, adaptability and the the capacity to take things as they come and be able to, um, confront the challenges and have grace under fire, uh, being calm under stressful situations. So I think that a lot of the preparation that we do is based on the assumption that you know what’s coming and therefore you do the steps and ABC and the stakeholder analysis and all of that. But I don’t think we teach them necessarily, um, how to be resilient and be adaptable when things change. And I could add also that I think it could be very important. We speak a lot about being strategic, but I don’t think that universities really insist on this, on how to be really strategic, how to participate and to design strategic plans and to, um, to get to know the business much better so that we really can advise on how what kind of of communication strategies we should use, how to, uh, emphasize the human connection and to understand and listen to the needs of our audience so we can, uh, respond with our communication according to the, to our audience needs. And another thing is, uh, measurement and evaluation of the communication. I think that very few universities really, uh, really teach the different techniques and the benefits of really measuring the communication and what we are doing in our communication plans. Good point. I was going to add to what you said, Theo. Mary. Um, uh, sorry, Diane. Um, and just, uh, build on that in terms of, in terms of the agility and the resilience. I would say, like I kind of joked in my intro about, you know, that all of us need to keep learning, but I think there is a critical need to bring that beginner brain along with us, uh, especially for the next generation entering the workforce. They will need to learn and relearn skills and strategies and approaches, uh, within different contexts, at a much faster speed than than previous generations. And so I agree, I don’t quite know how to teach that either. That, um, that, um, ability to pivot, that ability to, uh, to, uh, re-embrace and, um, turn a corner and, and, uh, reengage in a whole new way on a regular basis, not just a couple of times over a career. Um, so sorry, Diane, back over to you. Uh, yeah. Great points. You know, I’d like to build on what everybody has said, I think, and I do teach communication students. And what I think we could do a better job of is teaching them business acumen and, um, financial analysis and being able to, uh, understand how businesses and nonprofits really work. Um, I find that my students often avoid that as I talk to them. They don’t understand how the stock market works. They they really have not much sophistication in terms of understanding, uh, how how businesses really get along. And, uh, and to build upon the point of, uh, assessment, I think is a really important one that what I find is because students don’t really understand how businesses make money and they don’t know how to read financial reports. Uh, they will often come in with, um, you know, very proud of some kind of ROI, thinking that they’ve done a great job because they’ve saved the company a thousand dollars or, you know, or they increase sales by, you know, a couple of dollars. And they don’t understand that in the large scheme of things, that is quite literally lunch money. So, um, I think we could do a better job collaborating across communication schools and business schools. Can I just second that? Because what you’re describing is exactly the opposite of what’s happening in business schools. So my students know everything about budgeting, everything about accounting, and they’re just focused on that, but they don’t necessarily understand the value of stakeholder analysis. Audience analysis how to communicate to different people. So I really think that your point, Diane, is very valuable. Uh, we need to just somehow find a way to merge these schools of thoughts and show students that there’s value to both. Like, of course they want to. They need to know the business side, but they also need to know the communication side. Um, I’m not sure how much I can add to this, except I would say, as someone who’s hired a lot of new graduates, um, we’ve always had entry level positions in our firm. Um, the thing that I would like to see schools teach them is how to better value every voice. Um, you don’t know everything when you graduate, you certainly have learned a lot and you’ve gained a lot of skills. But there’s there’s wisdom everywhere. And so how do we invite conversation? How do we invite people to accept constructive feedback and criticism? I feel sometimes, um, especially young employees, they get offended easily if someone corrects their work, and I feel like they just need to be better at understanding that they don’t know everything. They may have learned a lot, but there’s still. It’s a big world. I learned something new every day. Um, so I feel like if we could get them to to just be open to hearing other voices, um, that would go a long way to develop their soft skills around the boardroom table when they eventually get there. Yeah. Diane, uh, my favorite, uh, ROI assertions by by young communicators is when they come in and tell me the ROI was something that has absolutely nothing to do with money. Uh, you know, uh oh, we we we grew our readership. You know, that’s that’s not ROI. ROI is always money, always expressed as a percentage. Uh, it’s a formula. It’s it’s, you know, not negotiable. Um, but, uh, Sue, you mentioned, uh, entry level positions. Uh, one of the things that I’m hearing a lot about the, the threat, uh, to employment that AI, uh, is, is, uh, potentially going to, to bring us, uh, is that if it takes away a lot of the drudge work? Uh, well, that’s what a lot of entry level positions are all about. Uh, so, so what do we do with entry level positions in order to, uh, get people started on their careers in the right direction, doing work that that matters, um, but is still entry level. It’s not, um, you know, raising unrealistic expectations about what? Somebody brand new to the field might be able to do. Yeah. So what we’ve done is we’ve really brought our entry level staff in to things like client meetings and, um, you know, leadership meetings so that they can understand the business of the business. Um, not so much the financial statements necessarily, but we’re a small agency. So there’s, there’s how do you get new clients? What do you do with them? What’s the process? So we’re trying to teach them skills that they can. Then um, they will be the front end part of that of course. But then eventually they will start to manage projects on their own. And having had the experience of, um, you know, being in the, in the room when the big meetings are held, being in the room when decisions are made, they can see the debate, they can see different points of view, and it really helps to round them out. So I feel like that that’s probably something that more organizations can do. Do not put your, you know, new employee in a room by themselves and say, okay, here you go. Um, they need interaction and they need role models. They need people to understand how do I behave at work? Um, what does a what does a board meeting look like? Um, because this is all new experience for them. You can’t just, you know, suddenly be thrown into a board meeting and expected to, um, expected to, you know, swim. You’re probably going to sink if you haven’t had that exposure. So I really encourage people, if you’ve got an entry level position, is make sure you’re teaming them up with mid-level or senior level people so that they can shadow you to important meetings and, uh, see how the assignments are, are managed and how strategy works and how to anticipate things like that’s critical thinking that they can learn by observing. Yeah, that’s a great point, Sue. Um, you know, I, I think we’re running into, uh, almost like a triple threat of problems We still have students coming off a Covid experience. Um, the ones graduating now at least had a much more normal high school and college. But, you know, there was still there was still a lot of disruption. Um, then many organizations are doing more hybrid and remote work and, uh, still pointed out a lot of the entry level jobs are this kind of, you know, sort of routine grunt work which people can say, oh, you know, you don’t need to come into the office. You can do that at home. Um, you know, and then we have, you know, AI, um, stepping in and doing a lot of those kind of tasks. So what are young employees going to be doing? So, um, I, I know that our students are very worried about all of that. One of the things that I’m telling them is that they have I’ve got to kind of get them to the point where I was in my career, fifteen years in, and be much more adept at speaking to executives and understanding their language and holding their own and actually being able to push back. Um, what I’m doing a lot of is having consulting projects with my students. We, you know, always gave them projects, but now I am trying to take on projects where clients will, um, allow meetings to be on zoom in front of my class, and I’ll have the students watch me interact with a client, and we’ll debrief afterwards. And I’m trying to model how to politely push back and understand that what a client or a project sponsor comes in asking may not be at all what they need. And, um, you know, I think they need to learn how to do that in a convincing way, Even though they are young. But the ability to be in the office and have mentors and have that sort of informal learning cannot be overemphasized. If I may interject here, I’m so happy to hear you say all these things. I think that the industry needs and we as educators, we need to understand, in essence, there are no entry level positions anymore because that’s AI. It’s really if you think about it, it’s what we call an entry level position is a sort of a mid-level position because you require three years of experience, you require a master of analytics tools, the ability to manage stakeholders. And that’s a lot to ask. I would agree with both Diane and Sue that organizations and this is not on the candidate, but this is on businesses that they need to maybe rewrite job descriptions and focus on trainable capabilities. So like maybe curiosity, writing fundamentals, critical thinking and learning mindset. So I love that Sue said. Bring them in in a meeting. Show them how it’s done. So shadowing or I hear some businesses have this, um, rotational, um, programs where they go from one department to the next, uh, for training. So I think that this is where we are supposed to go as a, as a society, not even as communication professionals. Yeah. Something else that I think would also contribute to the, the entry level or the or just graduated is, uh, the experience of, of working in a company, in a big organization and also the experience of working for a consultancy or an agency. Having worked myself like for more than twenty years in different companies, you learn many things that you have not learned at the university as the importance of interacting with the cross-functional situation to to learn about the other areas of the company, to interact with all of them. So you can you can advise them on on communication strategies and to support them to to get to reach their objectives and the importance of the human connection, not only not only the communication tools, but what understanding, learning, listening so you can respond to their own needs. Um, the adaptability and then being on the on meetings within the organization so you can learn from other leaders. And also if you work in an agency then how to work with the client, how to respond to a client, how to contribute and advice. So both experiences, I think are very important for for someone who’s just starting in their career. To marry you. You mentioned AI, which it’s it’s inevitable that any panel is going to talk about AI these days. Um, I am reading continuously on LinkedIn professors, uh, saying they don’t allow AI in the classroom. They don’t teach it. Uh, to me, that’s insane, because as soon as they get to the workplace, they’re going to be expected to know how to use it, uh, and apply it in their jobs. Um, how I’m wondering, for those of you who are teaching, uh, what’s your view and how are you employing AI as as part of your curriculum? I’ll start. Since you mentioned my name. Um, You’re very right. Uh, there’s a lot of talk and a lot of backlash in the academia about AI, and I want to recognize that it’s different for different courses. But I will tell you how I am managing this. I’m telling them to use it as much as they can. First of all, AI literacy will be is a skill that, uh, people need, uh, at the workplace. And I think my students need to be able to, to use it. I still tell them that they’re responsible for accuracy of the final outcome, and they should have a unique perspective. So through the prompts, they need to give a perspective to the assignment or to the project that they’re doing. And the other thing is that AI cannot replace the critical thinking of the human. And because I’m in communication, just like all of you, they need to be able to defend it so they get an outcome. Okay, fine. It might be perfect. Can you come in front of me in person and justify it? Defend it, explain it. Um, and give me all kinds of aspects on the specific project. And I think at least with my level of students, because they’re, they’re a bit older, they’re not undergraduates. Um, I think they get it. And a lot of them are working towards that. So how do I use it? Uh, so that it’s very authentic because of course, authenticity is part of what leadership is nowadays. So if you come to me and you feel robotic or you feel like you are AI generated, you do not promote trust. And that defeats the purpose of any organization or any leader. And people are still grappling with that? Um, but I do feel that there’s a need for us to incorporate AI into what we’re doing and still find what is the differentiator, uh, between using AI, everybody will use AI. But what makes you stand out as a leader? What will make you stand out is if you own it, if you have a unique perspective and if you can present it with credibility, empathy and confidence. Just to build on the innovation factor, um, I recently had, uh, students doing a group project and they all each group in, in my class had a different idea, groups of four or five. And they were building that into a group presentation. And, um, I, uh, had them. I also embrace AI in the classroom and in, in, in all the ways that you described the human input in human. In human. Humans at the beginning and end of the process. Um, but I had them ask, uh, AI to take their idea and expand on it in bold and innovative and new ways and and help them consider some ways, some some different, uh, elevated ways of thinking. And they and frankly, I were quite their jaws dropped. These were third year students because, um, because AI returned to them all like five, five or six or eight different ideas in the classroom. And each group got very, very similar responses. And so we had this very robust discussion about originality and, uh, and unique thinking and, and so just to circle back to the last question about entry level positions or whatever we’re calling them, um, I actually think that that original thinking can be part of, of the learning process in workplaces because although they’re coming into the workplace with, with perhaps more, um, mature skills than, than many of us did, they haven’t necessarily caught up, uh, in other ways, especially especially some of the Covid impact, uh, young people. Um, and so they may be, um, you know, they may be looking for a professional maturity and opportunities to grow in other ways, uh, that I think exploring critical and innovative thinking can really, uh, allow them to do so. Um, yeah, I there’s we need the AI fluency. I’m not sending my my students out into the world without that. Yeah, I’m I’m doing the same thing. I require my students to use it in different ways, and not just the large language models to, you know, help them write things. I have them, uh, do at least prototypes using AI generated images and video. So, for example, in an intro PR class, one of the assignments is to do a PSA, a video PSA, and uh, they don’t have time to go out and and shoot it professionally. And a lot of them don’t have those video skills, but I will have them mock something up on AI. Um, I’ll have them mock up things like, uh, posters, uh, or bus wraps. Um, in some of my other classes, I will, uh, have them use AI as a thinking partner, as a brainstorming partner, uh, to help them come up with clever titles for a white paper, for example. Um, and then I also, uh, as they’re writing recommendations, I will have them, uh, ask AI what’s missing in this report, or if I were to deliver this final report to clients, what might their questions or pushback be? Or how might different stakeholders react to these Suggestions? Um, I’m also building some simulations where, um, AI will act as various stakeholders, and they can interview those stakeholders and get different kinds of interviews and feedback on on an issue. So, uh, but you know, what’s really interesting is students are all over the place. A lot of them really don’t like AI. Some of them because they don’t know how to prompt it very well, get frustrated. They, they they work with it. And it doesn’t, doesn’t give them anything that they find as usable. And so we need to work on that. But a lot of them are, um, ethically, uh, very worried about AI. Uh, some of it in terms of harvesting their ideas or other kinds of data or profiles about them and the environmental impacts. Um, Ithaca is a place where there’s a lot of people very interested in the environment from way back, and our college attracts a lot of students who are, um, very concerned about sustainability. And so we have a number of professors and students who really don’t want to use AI because of what they feel are the significant, uh, climate impacts. As, uh, as an employer, I’ll just pop in and say that we use we have our, um, staff use AI not to draft things, uh, to final product or anything like that, but more for research purposes. Uh, I loved your examples, Diane, of some of the things that you’ve asked your students to do. We do the same, you know, read this. Tell me what’s missing. Um, just to prompt ideas. Um, you know, when you’re staring at the proverbial blank page, you know, give me five words that describe space. Um, you know, that kind of thing. Um, we use it carefully at this time. Um. We’re still waiting to see. And I know you can do a whole show on this. We’re still waiting to see where it all shakes out in terms of, um, you know, need for disclosure and all that stuff, uh, that’s happening in the world. So, yeah, I mean, we do expect students to come with some AI, uh, fluency when they show up to work. Yeah. We have a comment. And this is from, uh, Brian Kilgore. Uh, I think he means twenty twenty five here, not twenty fifteen. But why don’t PR students in twenty twenty five have video production skills? Uh, any thoughts on that? I mean, I’m doing video all the time, uh, largely based on the trend of of people paying attention to short form video. Yeah. Our our staff do it with their, with their phones. I mean, they do video production and we have actually on our staff, we have a graphic designer who’s an animator. And so he does animations and that sort of thing. So you can absolutely do Video without having to have the old school, you know, video camera situation happening. Yeah. Our students certainly can do video for social media. But, you know, if you’re asking them to do something that might be like a public service announcement where, you know, they would need locations and actors and all that sort of thing, they’re certainly not up to to that level of production or complexity of logistics. Yeah. There are things where I would still hire a video production company, but on the other hand, for example, for recruiting, uh, I saw a trend of injecting videos into, uh, job listings that have people currently doing that job talking about what it’s like to do that at this company. And I went out and recorded the interviews. I edited it together. I did all the titles and the transitions. I just used Camtasia, you know, if you can use word, you can use Camtasia. And, uh, you know, they’re fine. Um, are they up to the level that I would get, uh, production quality from a professional? No. Clearly not. But, you know, some of these things, uh, as Martin Waxman would say, just have to be good enough. Yeah. From from what I’ve seen, they’re good with video production and tech and using even, like, their own phones to do stuff. I think that the, the script is a gap, like the key messaging, how they’re reaching their, their audience. So I see a lot of good videos, like from a video production standpoint, but I don’t see the background of it that I would have liked to see, you know, like like how do you reach your target audience? What are you trying to say? The key messaging. You know what we did that with, uh, with a few of our staff. We do a lot of videos and, uh, you know, we’ll get new staff or young graduates out of school and we’ll say to them, hey, how’d you like to write a video script today? And we walked them through the process of how you do that, how you do the key messages, how you, you know, make it interesting and engaging, uh, concise, uh, because you’ve got about fifteen seconds these days. Um, you know, if you’re doing it for social media. So again, we need to expose young employees. I say young, but I mean new to the field. Um, you know, right at the beginning, don’t let them, you know, hang out for two years before you let them do something like write a script, model the behavior, show them how to do it. And they’ve been terrific. Yeah, I’ve been, uh, actually doing some, uh. Yeah. Go ahead. Mary, I want to ask a follow up question to Sue because you’re employing people and I hear a lot. So I fully agree with what you said. Uh, the backlash when I give that advice to employers, just, you know, get people engaged really early on, they’re like, oh, they don’t know nothing. So let them just learn first and then I’m going to engage. Engage them. So how do you feel about that? Like how do you would you, um, respond to someone who says they’re not ready? They’re very young. They don’t know what they’re doing. Um, what would you say to that? Well, you don’t learn anything sitting in a cubicle by yourself. I’m sorry. So to say that they’re not experienced, they’re not going to get it sitting in a cube by themselves. So we always bring our staff along, uh, on, on client meetings, both on zoom or out of the office or at the client’s workspace. Um, we did a website for a client. Uh, that was a retail site. So we took the staff there to go and look around and experience it like a customer. So you have to do these things because it’s a real world out there. You cannot just sit at your desk and expect to, I don’t know, learn things by osmosis and waiting two years is to wait. You’re going to lose good people in the short term, because they will go and find a company that will give them those experiences. And arguably, those of us with two hundred years of experience don’t know what we’re doing. So there you go. There’s that. There’s a lot of learning to do both ways. That gets to what I was going to say. I’ve been creating animated videos, uh, which, you know, two years ago I would not have had the budget to do. Now they’re pretty damn close to free. Uh, I watched a couple of YouTube videos on how to do it. Um, I paid the ridiculously low monthly fees for some of these services. And for example, we’re doing one that is, uh, their three minute management tips. And I’ve got a sort of a grizzled, wise old construction manager out in the project trailer or out on the construction project, uh, talking about this particular management issue. And then we do cutaways to scenes that sort of convey the idea, tell the story, and he comes back and says, well, here’s the four things that you need to remember. Um, and so far, uh, they seem to be well received. Uh, they take me about a half a day to to crank one out. Um, which which leads to the question I have. Yeah. Uh, I had to learn how to do this. Um, you know, uh, how do we keep people engaged in learning new things? I find that a lot of the people who speak to that. Yeah, go for it, Sue. Yeah. So we we hired a really talented young guy fresh out of university, uh, a couple of years ago. And, uh, he expressed an interest in learning all about digital media. So we supported him with, uh, training courses, with, um, webinars, with research, anything he needed. And now he is, uh, making incredible, um, advancements for our clients in the areas where they want to either grow their client base or they want more, um, click through to a register for something or what have you. Um, He designed himself for one of our fundraising clients. Uh, he came up with an idea that raised through digital media. Organic? No, uh, no paid posts. Um, he did a little video, he did a little pitch, and he raised thirty thousand dollars in ten days for that client. Just an initiative he did on his own. I’m going back to your question, Shel. I think it’s quite. If we want to future, future proof our communication careers. Precisely. It’s to adopt a mindset of continuous learning. Because technology will evolve. But curiosity, adaptability and ethics will always matter. So, uh, we need to advise to learn one new tool every few months. Seek feedback often. Never stop refining your ability to tell stories that inspire action, because the future will see professionals moving away from manual content creation and focusing more on leveraging creativity, contextual awareness and strategic input. And the winners will be business communicators and agencies that can integrate AI to drive insights, campaign evaluation, and and stakeholder engagement skills. Less susceptible to automation. If I may add to that, I’ll tell you what I tell my students in class and also even in executive education workshops, which is very risky. But I do tell them I give the content and I always tell them what I’m telling you now is probably good and valid for the next two to three years. I don’t know what’s going to happen next. Maybe in three years time we come, you come back and I’m going to tell you something different. So I kind of position, uh, all the content, especially communication based leadership based on the fact that there’s also so many societal perspectives to take into account. What I’m telling you now might not be the same in five years from now, and people need to understand that there’s a dynamic, um, nature into what we teach, at least at least what I do with leadership and leadership communication skills. It’s it’s almost as if, uh, Frank Diaz was listening in. I, I happen to have LinkedIn up on one of the screens here in the office, and he just posted. Are we hiring internal comms roles for yesterday? Uh, three years after ChatGPT launched, ninety one percent of IC internal comms roles are designed as if generative AI didn’t exist. Uh, based on an analysis of one hundred job postings. Uh, he said, uh, ninety percent of roles still demand strong writing skills. Uh, while storytelling is vital, reframing the role around a skill that is rapidly being commoditized. By AI scaling, eighty percent ask for strategic expertise. Yet this is rarely defined. Employers want strategy, but they describe tactics, managing channels, drafting updates and supporting campaigns. And his killer stat only nine percent of roles mention any AI capabilities or skills. Um, I don’t know if that’s worth a comment, but, uh, I thought it was interesting that that scrolled by just as we were talking about this. You know, I will say that my clients on the on the client side of things, from my perspective, um, if I think of my three, say, three top clients right now, like in the last six months, um, none of them are. They’re very they’re slow to AI. And so, um, I do think that the that the hiring organizations are doing right now are not necessarily with that skill set in mind, because the organizations themselves aren’t, um, Um, for various reasons, including, uh, firewall related and and security related, etc.. Um, for various reasons, the organizations themselves are are hesitant or moving more slowly toward that, including for Diane, some of the reasons you talked about from an environmental impact perspective, organizations are getting their their their own strategies around their own strategic heads around that part of it. Um, so I do think that’s worth considering. Like, we’re not it’s not like it’s not like new employees, depending on the industry, are are new to the field. Employees are running to running to catch, uh, running to catch, catch up kind of thing. Um, it might be the other way around. I think what’s also interesting is that AI is rapidly being baked into every kind of platform. So you can’t not use AI in a way, if you use Canva, if you use PowerPoint, you know, Web browsers, I mean, AI is baked into everything. So, um, I think at a certain point it’s not even going to be relevant to mention it. It would be like saying, um, that you have internet skills, you know, so we’re we’re all on the internet, right? It’s kind of assumed, uh, so, you know, I think you have that. And then as others have pointed out, uh, most organizations don’t have their heads wrapped around AI yet either. And they still think of it, especially in terms of the kinds of things that communicators do. Uh, it’s seen as kind of cheating, you know, it’s like, well, you’re having this write it for you. And do you really know how to do this? Do you really know anything? Or are you just having AI do your job for you? Yeah, I guess you could always make the t, I, uh, calculator uh, argument there is, you know, there was great resistance to having a Texas Instruments calculator to do your math for you. And now it’s a given that you’ll do that both in school and at work. Uh, I want to get Brian’s follow up comment in here. Uh, he said there’s no significant difference writing a video than there is writing a brochure than inviting a TV news crew to come to a factory for a business interview. Sue, you have a thought on that? Yeah, I have to disagree. Um, I mean, the video scripts that we write are very strategic, and they’re definitely, um, set to meet the client’s needs with whatever that is, whether it’s, uh, like I say, it could be sales, it could be fundraising, it could be, um, hiring. Um, and so that is very different than, um, just asking a news crew to come. Uh, of course, videos belong in the owned category of media. So you have the right and the ability to control the message and the distribution of that message onto the channels where you want it to be seen. So yeah, I’m not sure I would agree with you, Brian, on that one. Um, the skill level is very different because you have to think both, uh, with words and visuals together at the same time, um, when you’re writing a script. So. Yeah. Okay. Uh, I don’t remember who it was who mentioned critical thinking earlier, but I did write it down, uh, several years ago when I was still an independent consultant. Uh, I had a client who asked if I could, uh, create an online course for his staff on critical thinking because they didn’t learn it in school. Uh, this was an organization that dealt with a lot of scientific papers, uh, generally papers that were, uh, not complimentary to the kind of product that this organization was, an association, uh, professional, uh, business association, not like ABC. It was around a a product type. Um, and they would come up with a response to it that was not based on critical thinking, and he felt it was important for them to learn it. Um, I did develop that training, but I’m wondering, uh, do you find that students have not been taught critical thinking at earlier grade levels? And is it important for students of communication to to learn that before they enter the workforce? Absolutely. It’s it it is quite probably the most critical skill that we can encourage and, and, and teach and insist on and hold to a standard, um, and, you know, uh, like Mary, I teach in a business school. And so I would say that those, uh, qualities are more baked into the business curriculum in general, um, because of because of more, um, um, quantitative analysis Processes that that come with business. Um, and, and so ensuring that we are also bringing that same level of rigor and thinking to communications teaching, uh, I think is, um, is is absolutely essential. And to, you know, that idea, that slow process of, of questioning everything and, and coming to our own conclusions and, and, uh, applying our, our, our own original human and ethical brains, um, to processes. So for me, critical thinking, a huge element of critical thinking has to do with ethics and integrity as it relates to our work and our businesses. Let me add on to that. Critical thinking is a core course, uh, for for our business school. It was not like that. Uh, shout out to my good friend and colleague Amish, who’s amazing at teaching it, but she was the one. She’s a lawyer, uh, by by bye profession, and she was the one to propose it and make it a core course for the curriculum. But what is interesting is that we do a lot of executive education together, like for senior professionals, and sure enough, they get a leadership development program that combines critical thinking, which Risa does, uh, with communication, which I do. So it’s a very important skill. Um, it’s often overlooked, but I do feel that there’s, um, I see a trend, uh, where the industry has really recognized that this is something that people really want. I’m not sure that it’s embedded in undergraduate education, though. It is. It is difficult. Yeah. Sorry. Go ahead. Uh, I just wanted to mention that I think that, uh, if there’s one thing that can differentiate us as communicators, uh, from just, uh, writing or speaking or delivering a message. Is that the skill of critical thinking, uh, adaptability, data literacy, uh, to know how to interpret analytics, understand human behavior, collaborate across functions, and being able to translate complex ideas into human language, I think will will make us invaluable. So I think, uh, that really would be the difference that we can make, uh, in order to be strategic and to give a strategic advice to the CEO and to the executive committee. I think it goes back to those job descriptions, uh, you know, and, and expectations. You know, I see that business leaders say they want critical thinking, but then I also see how they treat communication professionals, especially young ones, and they treat them like order takers and and they want them to be responsive and helpful. Right. And give them good customer service. When really I think what critical thinking implies is to be able to look at a problem from a very different angle and probably reframe things and show, um, the client or project sponsor the person requesting your services to kind of push back or give them a different viewpoint or a different approach to something. And it’s and I think in our job descriptions and expectations, we’re, we’re supposed to be, um, you know, pleasant little order takers who are creative and come up with cute ways, cute words or graphics to kind of make our audience happy. And, and and that’s not critical thinking. So I think there’s two aspects of it, I think especially for newer employees, early career employees. They’re kind of not sure how to employ that critical thinking. They’re not sure whether they’re just supposed to do what they are asked to do and not raise questions, or whether they are supposed to use their brains. Yeah, I think that’s really on the employers, to be honest. They need to, you know, make sure that they’re they’re being open to all of that kind of thinking. I mean, as I said at the beginning, there’s wisdom in many voices. And even if you are like five minutes out of university, you have life experience and cultural background and, you know, whatever, um, that that can inform something maybe we’re working on. So I don’t know why I would discount that just because you’re young or you’re fresh out of school. I mean, that makes no sense. Um, so, you know, I think you’ve really hit on something, um, Diane, that, uh. I think it’s important, but I think the onus is on the is on the employer to be honest. Yeah, I’ve been paying a lot of attention very recently to quantum computing. Uh, there are people who are saying that it is going to be more consequential than AI, uh, and bigger than AI. Uh, I really can’t wrap my mind around how this works. The idea of superposition is, is something that I just can’t grasp. But, uh, I am looking at the fact that these computers, which, uh, should be, uh, ready for businesses to buy in the next three to five years if what I’m reading is right, will be able to do in five minutes what it would take a supercomputer today, uh, a couple of trillion years to do. Uh, it’s going to be remarkable when it comes to things like drug discovery. Um, I wonder how many communicators at the mid level are paying attention to emerging technologies and, you know, massive trend shifts that will prepare them to thrive and be relevant as as they move forward. So what do those mid-level or mid-career communicators need to do in order to be relevant, and how do they impart what what they what they learn and what they do to to those, you know, incoming communicators, they need to take training from folks like the wonderful people on this panel who are educators, uh, with their various universities. So you need to keep up training. You know, I think all of us probably started as I did, which is on a manual typewriter. Big day when we moved up to an electric with an automatic correct button. Uh, everything I know about computing is. And technology is self-taught. Um, I think we’re beyond the ability for people to teach themselves. And so continuous learning. It’s just that simple. I will I will second that and say that everybody, including us, need to do continuous upskilling and especially mid-career communication professionals. And also I think that they the the way that I conceptualize mid-career communication professionals right now is that they would have some, uh, AI fluency and data data literacy, but the differentiator for them would be the ability to frame decisions, uh, which goes back to what Diane was, was saying to guide leaders and how to navigate complexity. And I will confess that in classes, it’s very difficult to teach that. And or we have not been trained as as professors to teach navigating ambiguity or how to, um, do strategic thinking. And I think that we need to reinvent ourselves and how we teach to help young people to go into the into the work with more skills, um, into that direction we have. Go ahead. Um, I was just going to add that I think that part of the upheaval that we’re discussing and talking about and bringing into classrooms, um, is right across the spectrum of all careers. So, again, we are most of us with our two hundred years of experience are, um, are though although I, you know, we are bringing some fresh thinking, we have grown up in a framework that is that is linear, that talks about a early level career, a mid-level career, and an advanced level career. And I think that’s part of the upheaval that’s going on right now, is rethinking what those entry points in the career and entry and exit points and contribution points look like. Um, I, uh, you know, I’m sure for any of us in the classroom, I, I it’s a cliche, but I learn as much from my students as, as I hope they learn from me. And, uh, and, and I would jump at the chance and I tell my clients I would jump at the chance to employ, uh, many of them, um, as business school graduates with strong communication skills and, and, and vice versa. Um, and the same. So I think it comes more to the packaging of and the, the curiosity and again, the ethics and integrity that we bring at afresh in the face of new ambiguities at all points in our career that makes us that is going to make us valuable, that future proofs us. We. I’m sorry. Go ahead. Yes, definitely. I would also recommend just to build that is, uh, evolving from tactical execution to strategic leadership. That is, shift your value from from producing content to shaping decisions, to influence strategy, advise leaders and connect communication to business outcomes. Uh, to build tech fluency but not take of sexual obsession. So you don’t need to be like an AI engineer. But you do need to understand how AI, analytics, automation, and digital ecosystems reshape audiences and reputation and workflows, and but also to strengthen our unique human advantages like judgment, empathy, cultural sensitivity, um, facilitation, storytelling, ethical decision making. I think those those characteristics I think could help also mid-career professional. We have about three minutes left. And I do have a last question and I’ll go around and ask you each to give me a a nice, terse answer. Letty, you suggested this question, so I’m going to ask you first. And that’s what’s one thing you wish you had known earlier about the future of communication? Um, I think, uh, mainly, uh, that I had to develop strategic judgment, uh, becoming comfortable with ambiguity, uh, strengthening my storytelling and influence skills and understanding that trust and not technology is is the real currency. Theo. Mary, how about you? Well, this is, uh, relatable to Letty’s experience, but I’m a very structured person, and I like preparation. And I like the degrees and the studies and all of that. That’s why I have a PhD. Um, but I wish I knew sooner how much adaptability and agility would be a huge skill for the future. I can confess that even now I know it. Cognitively, I know how much adaptability means in this world and how we need to change. Uh, like in real time, even like I’m going into classes and I’m getting interactions I almost have to change every day. And I find that very challenging, very difficult. But I also will tell you that it’s it’s a skill for the future. Agility, adaptability and and resilience. Diane, what do you wish you had known? Boy, um, so I’m kind of a tech nerd. I was a radio and television major undergrad, and so I feel comfortable around technology. I’ve always been playing around with whatever was new. Uh, but what I didn’t realize, and what a very kind client, uh, kind of advised me, was that, um, there are times that when I meet, especially with more senior executives, I need to get my hands off the technology. One. One very nice client, said, Diane. You’re great at setting all this stuff up, but you don’t. You shouldn’t ever do that. Bring somebody with you and have them set all this stuff up. So I guess I wish I knew earlier how to be convincing to upper level management and how to get out of the nerd, uh, technology creator content creator mode and get more into the strategic conversations. Great. Sue. Um, similar to Thea Mary. Um, I wish that I had known when I started my career that change was going to be as rapid as it is today, um, in the mid nineteen eighties, the organization I was with had a major organizational change program, and my goodness, there was a lot of pearl clutching and swooning and the whole thing around. Oh, change, change. What’s that going to mean? And now today, it’s like we’re going to change. People go, yeah, okay, cool. So I wish I just wish I’d known that I had to get comfortable with it a lot faster and just know that that’s the way it is. And what does Jennifer wish she had known how much fun I was going to have. And if you’re not having it and you’re not around people who are inspiring you and and, um, giving you juice, giving you fuel on a regular basis, then, um, look for it somewhere else, uh, because we all got to be having some fun. I couldn’t agree more. Uh, I want to thank the panel. It’s been a terrific discussion. We could probably go on for another hour, but I do need to let everyone know about next month’s circle of fellows, which will be episode one twenty three, uh, scheduled for five p m Eastern time on Thursday, December eighteenth. It will be, uh, morning on December nineteenth for two of our panelists, uh, we have Zora Artis and Adrian Cropley coming to us from Australia and Bonnie Carver and Mary Hills from here in the US, and we’re going to be talking about, uh, something very, uh, related to what we’ve been talking about today. It’s our crystal ball moment, the future of communication opportunities for our profession in twenty twenty six and beyond. So mark your calendars. That’ll be a fun one. Uh, it’s always fun when Adrian’s, uh, part of the panel. Uh, again, thank you everybody. It’s been great. Uh, and see, everybody next time. Thank you for facilitating, Chelle. Thank you for everything. Hey, everyone. Bye. Bye bye

The post Circle of Fellows #122: Preparing Communication Professionals for the Future appeared first on FIR Podcast Network.