This year, we kicked off our Employee Communications Report conversations by naming something that's been quietly nagging at the internal communications (IC) profession for a while: what we called the purpose vs. perception paradox. Since then, the conversation has only intensified—on LinkedIn, in conversations with communicators, and certainly within our own teams. It's a knot that deserves some untangling.
Unlike Finance, HR, or Legal—functions with clearly defined and universally understood remits—internal communication is different everywhere. In one business, it's part of HR. In another, it reports into marketing. In yet another, it's a standalone team but responsible for culture, wellbeing, change, digital channels, events, and maybe a town hall or two. The purpose of internal comms is…whatever your business decides it is.
And therein lies the paradox. If we are everything, are we anything?
If we share everything, do we own nothing?
One of the more eyebrow-raising findings from the 2024/25 Gallagher State of the Sector survey is this: internal communications teams are responsible for seven KPIs on average, and six of those are shared with other functions. That's a staggering overlap.
It raises an uncomfortable but critical question: if IC were to disappear tomorrow, would someone in the business still track and account for those KPIs? Probably. So then—is IC still valuable?
Internal communicators are, by nature, shapeshifters. We stretch to meet business needs, flex our skillsets to solve problems, and adapt our tone and tactics depending on the audience. In fact, the report found that comms is increasingly involved in change management, with 55% of respondents listing it as a highly critical skill. This adaptability is a gift—but without a clearly defined purpose it can feel like a weakness.
Who are we really?
Here's where I want to interrupt the existential spiral with a little hope: we are important. And we don't need to justify our role by claiming exclusive ownership of KPIs.
Our purpose is right there in the name: we communicate. We are the connective tissue of an organization—tying strategies to people, people to meaning, and meaning to action. We don't just deliver messages. We translate, contextualize, and empathize. And yes, we often do this alongside other departments, because that's exactly what makes communication work effectively—it touches everything.
The fact that our KPIs are shared is not evidence of irrelevance. It's evidence of collaboration. It's a sign that we operate in an inherently cross-functional space, and that's a strength. But it does mean we have to work harder to prove our value in a way that resonates with the people who approve our budgets and headcounts.
The trouble with being creative
Here's where the problem gets more complicated. The very thing that makes IC powerful—our connection to emotion, storytelling, and culture—is also what makes us hard to measure. We drive engagement, clarity, trust, and alignment. But what's the dollar value of clarity? How do you chart a graph of trust? Too often, I hear internal communications professionals complaining that our work isn't valued enough. And while I share that frustration, I also wonder—are we trying to earn validation using the wrong language?
When asked to measure impact, we cite open rates and click-throughs—metrics that matter to us because they represent human interactions. However, stakeholders are often looking for something different: measurable impact on business outcomes like employee retention and productivity, or strategy execution.
We must translate our values into a language that resonates with the business, making the intangible aspects of our work visible and demonstrating their impact on organizational goals. This involves clearly articulating our purpose, aligning it with leadership's expectations, and proving our value through a combination of engagement metrics and outcome-based measures.
Findings from this year's Employee Communications Report found strong correlation between success against KPIs, progress towards the stated purpose of communication and an ability to leverage data. But it also highlighted a revealing stat: Respondents with an ad-hoc budget model were less likely to agree they could ‘demonstrate the value of communication' than those who had a dedicated budget. The takeaway? Measurement is key to investment. Investment enables impact. Impact proves value. So, track what matters to your people and your business. Combine those click-through rates with outcome metrics: alignment scores, behavior change, strategic milestones.
At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what you purpose is—if everyone knows what you're there to do, agrees it's right for the business, and sees the impact of delivering on that purpose.
Are we looking at the wrong problem?
The more I reflect on this topic and the discourse surrounding it, the more I think the paradox is not where we think it is. It's not just a clash between how we perceive ourselves and how others define our purpose.
The true paradox is that our most powerful work lives in the emotional, creative, often unmeasurable human realm—yet we must translate that work into the language of measurement if we want the investment and influence to keep doing it.
So, let's keep being the storytellers, connectors, and culture-carriers our organizations need, but let's also get fluent in the business case for what we do. Because when we make our value visible, we make our roles indispensable.
Want more insights? Download the 2025 Employee Comms Report today.
