There is an uncomfortable truth about being a Head of Communications in local government that we do not discuss nearly enough. Possibly at all, at least in public.
by anonymous guest contributors
Many councils say they want ‘strategic’ communications. They say they want challenge. They say they want communications professionals who can shape policy implementation, influence organisational culture, build trust with communities and protect reputation through evidence-based advice.
Yet far too often the reality looks very different.
Comms teams are expected to deliver transformational outcomes with diminishing resources. Strategic advice is sought until it becomes inconvenient. Strategic advice is argued with, dismissed, undermined and ignored by services, directorates, officers and members because – however successful, experienced and garlanded the Head of Comms might be – they know better. Long-term priorities are displaced by short-term demands. Vanity (sometimes literally) projects consume time and attention while fundamental communications challenges remain unaddressed.
When the gap between expectation and reality inevitably becomes impossible to ignore, attention frequently turns towards the Head of Communications.
In football - as we have seen all too often, and sometimes even with the biggest and most successful clubs - changing the manager is often easier than addressing the deeper structural problems within the club. The manager becomes the visible embodiment of success or failure, regardless of how much control they actually possess.
We might suggest that Local Government can fall into the same pattern, where the Head of Communications becomes the person on whom organisational frustrations are projected. Political tensions, leadership instability, unrealistic expectations, underinvestment and competing priorities are condensed into a narrative about individual performance.
Sometimes the signals are obvious. Sometimes they are subtle. Strategic advice is increasingly ignored. Access narrows. Confidence appears to drain away. The role becomes less about leading communications and more about absorbing pressure.
Eventually, many experienced communications leaders find themselves leaving organisations under circumstances that are presented as personal failures rather than symptoms of wider organisational issues.
There is a reason this piece is being written and published anonymously.
As a number of seasoned and senior communications managers we’ve been through it. We’ve been treated like crap because the wind changed, or because we couldn’t polish someone else’s policy or service turd hard or fast enough. We’re anonymous because we don’t want this to look like score-settling, or (and too often this is the trap) to have to out ourselves as ‘failures’, and because we want others to know – you are not alone.
Not. Alone.
And we know the consequences are not confined to merely professional disruption. They are deeply personal.
People who have spent years building expertise, delivering high quality, and getting the challenge right begin to question whether they were ever capable. Highly qualified and experienced practitioners start to wonder whether they somehow fooled everyone who hired them. They internalise criticism that may have far more to do with organisational dysfunction than professional competence.
This is one of the least discussed aspects of senior communications leadership. The emotional impact of these experiences can be profound, particularly because those involved often feel isolated.
The three of us writing this have all been through it to varying degrees. More – we’ve all spoken to many, many others who will very quietly share that they have too. “That exact same thing happened to me at…”
Even then, many assume that what happened to them was unusual. But, our conversations across the profession suggest otherwise.
Talented Heads of Communications across local government have experienced remarkably similar patterns: unrealistic expectations, insufficient resources, contradictory demands, shifting goalposts and, ultimately, being held accountable for problems they neither created nor possessed the authority to solve.
None of this is an argument against accountability. We wouldn’t make the case for our own ‘perfection’. Under pressure, and sometimes just because it happens, mistakes get made. Communications leaders should be accountable for the quality of their advice, the effectiveness of their teams and the outcomes they influence.
But accountability only works when it is matched by honesty.
If an organisation wants strategic communications, it must genuinely value strategic communications. If it wants transformation, it must invest in the capacity required to deliver it. If it recruits experienced professionals for their expertise, it must be prepared to hear uncomfortable truths.
Most importantly, organisations should resist the temptation to turn structural problems into individual failures.
Not every departing Head of Communications was a victim of circumstance. Some genuinely underperform. Some are the wrong fit. Some make poor decisions.
But neither should we pretend that every departure is evidence of individual inadequacy.
Sometimes the problem is not the manager. Sometimes the club needs to take a good, hard look at itself.
If any of this feels familiar – if you’ve been there - maybe consider adding your weight to this article, confidentially. Tell us ‘I’ve been there too’ (we’ll keep your name private) so we can help others get a feel for the numbers.
Tell us your story if you feel able, and we’ll try to find a way of taking the learning and creating learning for employers. Because we accept that they sometimes don’t know what to expect, how to respect the profession, what really matters, or even that they’re being unreasonable.
Sometimes they’re just not good people, though.
The profession talks frequently about resilience. Perhaps it is time we also talked about the organisational conditions that make resilience necessary. Let’s think about pulling together the tool kit – for us and our employers – that starts to enable that.
If you are in this right now, please know you are not alone. The story you have been telling yourself about what happened may not be the only story available. And it may not even be the most accurate one.
It really isn’t just you. Chances are, it isn’t you at all. For the comms leaders currently questioning their own capability after a difficult experience, it may be worth considering an alternative explanation.
If you’re currently experiencing this situation:
• Get the union in
• Talk to a lawyer
• Find a buddy or a mentor or talk to peers outside your organisation. Be open with those you feel able to be open with
• Keep a written record of significant decisions and advice
• Seek independent professional mentoring
• Remember - organisational outcomes are rarely determined by one individual
• Resist the temptation to assess your entire professional worth through the lens of one ‘difficult role’ or one crap culture
Most importantly, please know you are not the only person who has experienced it.
If we get enough understanding and support for what we’re saying, we could look at a support space. Not to relive old grievances, but to better understand this is probably not an isolated phenomenon but a horribly recurring feature of communications leadership in local government.
There are lessons for all concerned and maybe we can start lesson planning.
*If you have a similar story you would like to anonymously share here please contact Darren
*Sign up for the comms2point0 eMag*
The comms2point0 eMag features exclusive new content, free give-aways, special offers, first dibs on new events and much, much more.
Sound good? Join over 4.3k other comms people who have subscribed. You can sign up to it right here
AND if you’re an in-house comms pro you can join the comms2point0 comms lifetime WhatsApp group here.
.jpg){kind=link}