NAOMI The C-List LIVE Q2 2026 Executive Briefing

Thanks, Alex.
So I want to talk about a different lens in terms of how we're looking at change and communication specifically and how to de-risk your transformation.
So the absence of one key resource at your executive table could be quietly costing you far more than you realize.
You're planning a major change, a restructuring, system overhaul, new way of working, something that's going to consume time, money, energy, resources.
You call your meeting, your executive meeting, finance is there, ops, legal, HR, tech, every critical function is represented.
But one may not be at the table, and I'm talking about communications.
So we advance to the next slide.
Thank you for your support with that.
Thank you.
So at what point, key question, at what point does communication usually get brought in?
If we had time for more interactivity, I would post, you know, enter your answer in the chat.
But typically when we look at a process or path, and as shown here, this is high level for illustrative purposes.
So we have a trigger, business case, approval, project initiation, implementation announcement, rollout adoption, etc.
At what point in this process, in this path, is communications typically brought in?
Okay, next slide.
So typically in most organizations, it's somewhere here around project initiation or implementation planning.
And that might actually feel early.
And yes, Some communications professionals have really fought for this early engagement.
By project standards, early engagement, the change is effectively decided and then handed over to the project, over to communications.
My thesis today, my argument, that's the gap.
And that gap is where risk enters.
Here's how to recognize that risk in terms of, let's call them warning signs.
Think of this in two buckets, external and internal.
For external, you're going to look at your data, historical data in two categories, external, internal.
External, it's where are there, were there any reputational risks as a result of former changes?
Take a look at your NPS score, your Net Promoter Score.
What is that score looking at in terms of trending?
What were customers saying as it relates to previous change?
And then internally, you're going to look at your internal data.
These are key points such as your employee survey results.
What was the engagement score?
What were they saying?
So what were the common themes that were collected as it relates to managers communicate as communicators and communication itself as it relates to engagement?
And then look at your HR data.
What is the attrition telling you?
What is the story here?
What reasons are people citing for leaving?
Interesting research point.
Research tells us poor internal communication is one of the top 5 reasons.
Number 1 is pay.
There's managers, et cetera.
But it's one of the top 5 reasons.
And then you're going to look at your transformational PIR, your post-implementation review, your reports.
Were the objectives met?
Were there benefits realization?
Was communication effective?
Now, if any of these data points are taking you aback a little bit, If you're not measuring these things, there's an opportunity as well.
So then there's the behavioral signs, right?
Executives describe the change differently.
Feedback from leaders and key stakeholders that they should have been told earlier, brought in earlier.
Managers go quiet.
The same questions resurface even after they were addressed.
So these are typically your signs of resistance.
Next slide, please.
But resistance is not the real risk.
Think of this in 3 layers: the presenting problem, the underlying issue, and the root cause.
So the presenting problem at the surface that we all want to focus on, of course, is, well, people are resisting the change.
The core issue, the issue behind that, the change is not being adopted as intended.
There are gaps, there's rework, and there's stalled rollouts.
But really, what is at the root of this issue and presenting problem?
Communication was not part of the decision.
So communications leader is typically engaged to craft the message, to put the announcement together, communication strategy, the plan, et cetera, but not to pressure test the decision.
And I'm gonna emphasize those words, not to pressure test the decision.
Very different things.
Writing a message, pressure testing.
So when the leader isn't part of the business decision, should we go forward with this change early, no one is asking about strategic communications risks.
Next slide, please.
And the data reflects how consistently this gap shows up.
This is a recent stat.
61% of organizations have no formal change communications approach.
And while 73% of communications leaders want to operate as strategic advisors, Only 18% say they actually do.
32% of leaders say their last change achieved healthy adoption.
32% is strikingly low.
You may be familiar with the, the opposite of that, which is 70%. Now, only 10% of the project budget, not even 10% of the project budget, goes to the people side of change when that benchmark should actually be between 15% to 25% according to Prosci.
Next slide, please.
So we're presented with two risks really, right?
Late involvement and low investment.
Late involvement, low investment together are drivers of change failure.
Now the three figures you see here, so again, for illustrative purposes only, these three figures are the financial expression of how these risks hit your business.
Now these are mid-market a mid-market example illustrated here.
So late involvement shows up as productivity drag, underfunding rather shows up as turnover, resistance, and project overturn.
And these are just some figures, again, mid-size organization illustrated purposes only.
There are calculators actually available for you specifically to input your numbers.
And we also at Consulta have calculators as well related to each of these tracks today.
Next slide, please.
So the fix.
So the fix is a seat at the table, essentially, to pressure test the decision at the very onset.
And I've highlighted here the trigger.
So whatever that trigger may be, it's brought to the business.
This is what we need to say.
The communications leader needs to be at that table partaking in that decision.
Now, there's 3 action steps here I'll highlight.
Early involvement.
So discuss the communication risks along with your financial, legal, operational, and people risks before approval.
And I'll get into some, some clear questions you can ask in support of this first action step.
Second, increase the investment, allocate accordingly, fund the capability, own it, time and budget.
And then measure.
I alluded, if you didn't have those earlier data points I reflected on, It's important to have that measure because then you can have a proactive approach to tracking any kind of early detection signs as you're tracking adoption.
Next slide, please.
Okay, so here are 10 questions to ask before you greenlight any change, and I'll go through, I'll just go through these quickly, but you can take a screenshot of this if you'd like.
So change load.
What else are we asking the audience to absorb?
What is the capacity for more change?
Yes, these are communications questions.
Current sentiment.
What does your most recent employee data tell us?
Historical narrative.
What have we already said?
What have we already said?
That's very, very important publicly or internally that this could contradict the people risks.
Is it in the best interest of our people?
What will it cost?
Manager readiness, downstream implications, downstream implications.
What consequences haven't been surfaced?
Who is impacted and can we engage them early?
Then of course, we want to look at reputation and brand.
Does this align with our values?
Does this align with our values?
External narrative.
Could this become a public scorched story?
So here we're being preemptive, proactive.
Disclosure boundaries.
And then of course, timing and sequencing.
Of course, we have to ask, is now the right time?
Given all of this, is now the right time?
What conditions should we delay, phase, or redesign?
So those are some key questions for you to take away.
Now, if a communications role doesn't exist in your organization, the questions still have to.
Someone must own communication risk in that room internally, or an outside advisor to pressure test the decision before it's made.
Before it moves forward.
Next slide, please.
So to wrap up, communication deserves a seat at the table from the start of transformation, not as a support function that translates decisions.
So I'd like you to think of this as the equivalent of hiring an architect after building, after the building has been framed, and then being surprised when the structure doesn't hold.
So organizations that manage change most effectively recognize communication not as a support function, but as a strategic capability, one that contributes to the business decision behind the change and then how that change is understood, accepted, and implemented.
Thank you.