Communicator argues for maintaining control of communication
This is why internal communications departments exist—to generate that loyalty, to bring the workforce onboard, to maintain motivation and momentum—to ensure the messages that are going out are consistent and in line with company strategy and policy. This is why internal comms works hand in glove with external comms—and why all messages go past the external comms (PR) department—because anything said by anyone about your brand or business can impact on reputation. And it’s your reputation that you trade on.
In no company or organization that I know do employees get to comment publicly to an external audience without being carefully briefed and monitored. In many companies and organizations, it is more than their jobs are worth for them to do so.
Why? Because not everyone is as sensitive to the message and to reputation as those employed as guardians of reputation and, time and time again, through simple error of judgment, or naivety, or malicious intent, employees’ comments and actions in a public arena bring a company into disrepute.
Jeremy Probert, writing on Ragan.com, argues that encouraging (or even allowing) employees to engage in conversation about the company is "an idiotic idea." Several have weighed in, including Scott Monty (Ford is mentioned in the column) and me. You should weigh in, too. My own opinion: Probert has it way wrong.
