Anne Gregory

The virtuous circle

Figure 2.3 The communication process

Agree/own the message

Feedback 50% of communication Target

is listening Tailor

Test

Deliver

Primary tools (Face-to-face)

Secondary tools (Paper, videos etc)

BP Oil developed, in consultation between management and the communication professionals, a virtuous communication circle. This is shown in Figure 2.3.
At the top is the word ‘own’. That is a strong message to management to be consistent so that they speak as one voice. Next is the imperative to target the message, tailor it to the appropriate audience and (this is after all an oil company) ‘road test’ it with a sample audience to see if it works or needs tweaking.
Then comes the delivery. BP Oil emphasized the importance of face-to-face delivery of a crucial message, citing this as the primary communication tool as the attitude survey revealed. All other tools are secondary, to be used to back up the primary communication by management.
Like many companies BP Oil uses a variety of communication tools. These include meetings where management tells a large audience of employees what is going on to the smaller, more intimate, ‘brown bag’ lunches. Local ‘teach-ins’ on various aspects of the business help employees learn about aspects of their business outside their immediate areas. Regular meetings of senior managers from around the world provide them with the main management messages they need to cascade, in their own style and to their own timing.
The secondary tools used to complement and reinforce them include local house journals, video and audio programmes. House journal editors have the option to carry a centrally produced feature on, say, the results. They tend to use these features because first they are relevant, second they are simply written and therefore easy to translate and tailor to local audiences, and third because they do not have to: it is their choice. Video and audio-tapes are made on specific business issues and, increasingly, are used by team leaders to set the scene for a discussion on an issue of the day. Then there are award schemes, to focus people on ways of improving performance. These include the chairman’s awards for excellence in health, safety and environment activities.
One successful example of a consistent and coherent piece of communication was the delivery of the ‘performance’ message. It was the subject of local team briefings, a scene-setting video, an audio-tape, house journal articles on the results and feedback survey.
Feedback is the final link in the communication loop and arguably the most powerful. The need for feedback was perhaps the hardest concept for line management to take on board. For some it sounded too much like policing, back to the bad old days of second guessing, with head office checking up on local management to trip them up and see if they really were doing what they had said they would do. These were the managers empowered to operate with a high degree of autonomy.
Yet while senior management was reasonably relaxed about providing the umbrella, the framework for communication and then casting its bread on the waters, it did need to know three things.

Is the message getting across?
What do staff think of it?
What is concerning staff right now?

The feedback process was put in place. What helped was the assurance that no results would go to the top management team until they had been seen and discussed locally, by local management with their staff. A further help was the agreement to limit the feedback surveys so that actions arising from one were identified and carried out before the next survey. Staff, just as much as management, dislike being over-surveyed. And management, just as much as staff, can find it frightening to open up and listen to what their staff are saying, and saying about them.

Содержание