✅ Why communication functions are misunderstood inside their own organisations
A new study shows most colleagues still don’t know what communications does. Here’s how to fix the gap.
It’s one of the enduring ironies of corporate communications and public relations practice: the teams responsible for building clarity and understanding across an organisation are often misunderstood.
A new study of more than 1,100 people across large companies in Germany, conducted by researchers Jana Brockhaus, Ansgar Zerfass, and Antonia Rüth, from Leipzig University and BI Norwegian Business School, sheds light on this contradiction.
The project finds a persistent gap between what the communication function delivers and what internal stakeholders understand or value. There’s a widespread knowledge gap about what corporate communications is, what it does, and why it matters, from C-suite executives to frontline employees.
The study has direct and immediate application for practice.
What the study found
Here are the headlines:
Only 57% of employees and 80% of middle managers say they know the goals of their communication function. That means nearly half are working without a clear understanding of what communications is trying to achieve.
Operational work is better recognised than strategic contribution. Most respondents saw the communication function as a content machine, but few saw it as a strategic advisor or business enabler.
Middle managers are the most sceptical. This is the group least likely to rate communications as competent, helpful or worth the investment. And yet they hold the budgets and influence that could make or break its role.
Proximity drives perception. The more someone collaborates with the communication function, the more positively they view it. Invisibility equals irrelevance.
C-level views are more positive. Senior executives talk a good game, with 97% rating communications highly compared to other functions. But only 53% think it’s competent, and 66% believe it needs to do a better job explaining its value.
Why this matters
Internal perceptions affect everything: from budgets and headcount to whether you’re invited to the strategy table or sidelined when decisions are made.
Middle managers, the group with the most day-to-day influence over operational priorities, are not convinced. They don’t see the connection between what communications does and what they need. And that’s a problem.
If communications functions want to be taken seriously as value creators, they must start by building that value internally with the people who matter most.
Where we go from here
This study is a wake-up call for internal positioning. Communications teams must treat internal influence as a strategic project in its own right and engage in their own promotional communication.
Here are three immediate takeaways for practitioners:
1. Make your value visible
Stop assuming your work speaks for itself. Create internal narratives that explain what communications does, why it matters, and who benefits. That means case studies, internal roadshows, and strategic storytelling.
2. Get closer to the sceptics
Middle managers hold the keys to internal credibility. Engage them, support their business goals, and treat them as clients, not obstacles. The closer the collaboration, the better the perception.
3. Position communications in terms of value creation, not just a functional activity
Show how communications drives strategy, culture, innovation, and leadership visibility. Use business language and not communication jargon.
Source
Brockhaus, J., Zerfass, A., & Rüth, A. (2025). Between cluelessness and (dis)satisfaction: What C-level executives, middle managers and employees know and think about corporate communications in their organisations. Journal of Communication Management.
Over the summer, hundreds of you contributed to my PhD study on how corporate communications and public relations support management. Thanks to your involvement, we’ve built one of the UK’s largest datasets describing the strategic contribution of our practice.
Ups and downs, uncertainty, insecurity and jeopardy are part of the PhD journey. I’ve shared them all with you via social media. But the signals and the stories from the data couldn’t be clearer.
There are six very clear areas of insight.
High performance - the conditions and skills required for excellence in practice. Best practice occurs in around a fifth of organisations, and we know exactly what it looks like.
Contribution and value - the areas and conditions where practice excels and is called upon by management.
Structural challenges - issues with reporting lines, investment, and integration within management and other functions.
Capability gaps - the areas where practitioners excel and where they don’t; no surprises that planning and measurement are high on the agenda.
Cultural barriers - misconceptions about public relations, corporate communications, the role of organisational communications, and its potential.
Professional preparation - the uptake and impact (or lack of) of qualifications, continuous professional development, and formal means of accreditation.
This work could not be more timely or relevant to theory and practice in management. The Leipzig University and BI Norwegian Business School address many of these issues, including contribution and value, structural challenges, and cultural barriers.
My next stage is a series of interviews with senior practitioners and the managers who set their objectives and budgets.
I now have no doubt that this project will make a significant contribution to corporate communications and management knowledge and practice. But more than that, I hope it contributes to interventions and policy change to shift the elevation and value of the corporate communications function and public relations practice.
Thank you for your time, your insights, and your trust. This work exists because of you, and I look forward to sharing more.