The Con in Comms

Why your people don’t trust your messaging and how to fix it.

Effective communication or just another trick?

"Effective communication." I go full poker face in silent skepticism every time I hear it. That phrase gets tossed around in corporate lifelike confetti in mission statements and town halls and recycled in HR and leadership emails. Let’s be real: if you keep hammering a message home, it probably isn’t landing. Neither are Slack and Teams pings, reply-all email chains, and hour-long meetings with no clear solutions. And these playing in loops:

“We encourage a culture of communication.

”We ensure effective communication across all departments.

”We expect employees to communicate at all times.”

These aren't strategies. They’re slogans hiding misalignment and silencing feedback. Let’s break down the illusion and discuss what communication looks like when it works.

1. The elusive Open-Door Policy

Companies often claim to value open communication, inviting employees to share feedback, speak candidly, and raise concerns. However, open-door policies only work if someone is actually listening and acting. Instead, what employees usually hear are brush-offs:

"We'll circle back on that."

→ I'll never think about this again.

"We'll consider your feedback."

→ Welcome to the Employee Feedback graveyard.

"Let's take this offline."

→ I'm exiting this conversation. Fast.

Bottom line

Openness requires a response, not just access to the door.

________________________________

2. The Email Blitz for Clarity?

The noble intent is to communicate clearly across teams. But in practice, a flood of emails blurs more than they clarify. Quick question? Email. Big update? Email. Dodging a hard conversation? Email again. It’s the default for everything. But email flattens tone. Kills nuance and adds noise. Then comes the Reply-All spiral. A carpark notice turns into a 20-message thread no one asked for. More messages don’t mean more clarity.

The real skill is knowing what not to send and making the ones you do count. So, what’s the alternative? Start with intent. What’s the goal? Are you aiming for alignment, a decision, or just visibility? Then, pick the right channel. Need quick input? Use chat. Big news? Say it live, then follow up in writing. Sensitive topic? Talk, don’t type.

Bottom line

Email isn’t clarity by default.

___________________________________

  3. The Endless Alignment Spiral  

Discussions about alignment often mask a more significant issue: no one is making real decisions. Instead of moving forward, we get a series of meetings. Here’s how it plays out:

• A pre-meeting to prep for the meeting

• The meeting where nothing is decided

• A follow-up email summarizing the lack of clarity

• A one-on-one to "align" on the alignment

It feels like progress, but it's not. It's motion without movement. What makes this spiral so tricky is that it looks like effective communication. People are talking. The calendars are full. Everyone seems engaged. But underneath it all, there’s no clarity, commitment, or real direction. That’s the trap: teams keep communicating, but no one’s deciding. The hard conversations get delayed, softened, or skipped entirely. Alignment becomes the goal instead of the means. But alignment isn’t communication—and it isn’t action. It’s just one step on the way to decisions.

Bottom line

 The alignment spiral: where clarity goes to die.

___________________________________

4. The Jargon That Pretends to Be Communication 

They claim, "We're committed to clear and effective messaging." But internally, teams are stuck wading through jargon soup. Buzzwords take over when people want to sound like they're saying something smart without committing to anything real:

"Let's leverage synergies to streamline our cross-functional communication."

"We need to optimize strategic touchpoints to drive engagement."

"We're enabling scalable, results-based storytelling."

It sounds important but means nothing. Jargon provides cover for vagueness, and when everyone is speaking in code, nothing gets done. If your message requires translation, it's unclear. It's a performance.

Bottom line

 If you have to decode it, it’s not communication. It’s camouflage.

___________________________________

 5. The Spin That Replaces Transparency  

Companies love the line, "Transparency is one of our core values," until something goes sideways. Then, the language gets soft, slippery, and vague. When things get hard, here's what employees hear:

• "We're redefining our strategic priorities."

  → Layoffs.

• "We're entering a new phase of leadership evolution."

  → A leadership shakeup just happened.

• "We're navigating a challenging business environment."

  → Revenue is down, and cuts are coming.

This isn't transparency. It's corporate PR with a friendly face. Trust doesn't come from dressing up lousy news but from saying the hard thing clearly and directly.

Bottom line

If you can’t say it straight, don’t pretend it’s transparent.

___________________________________

What Communication Is

It’s not jargon. It’s not spin. It’s not endless alignment. It looks like this:

• Clarity over noise. Say what you mean. Ditch the fluff.

• Active listening. Ask for feedback and act on it.

• Unvarnished transparency. Share the uncomfortable truths, not just the polished ones.

• Channel discipline. Use the right medium for the message. Don’t hide behind email when the moment calls for a conversation.

  
  

Communication isn’t about how much you say. It’s about how clearly, honestly, and decisively you say it. Some of the most trusted leaders don’t rely on polish or spin. They answer tough questions in plain language, in front of their teams, with nothing scripted. They don’t always have perfect answers, but they show up with honesty. That’s what builds trust. Until companies communicate with clarity, honesty, and intent, “effective communication” will stay a corporate magic trick. Impressive but meaningless.

If you’re ready to fix that, we can help. Fewer meetings. Clearer messages. Better work. Let’s talk.