The area of cascading can be a very perilous area for communicators at the moment.
Many of us in the internal comms business see both the fallacies behind reliance on cascading, and the power, ease and flexibility of replacements which supplement hierarchical communication with social communication.
But many of the people we report to, be they clients or bosses, aren’t particularly switched-on to current theories discrediting cascades, and some simply aren’t interested.
Cascading continues to have a seductive appeal. Many management-types believe it offers seamless and consistent delivery of important corporate messages. Far more importantly in some cultures, cascading reinforces and strengthens perceptions of hierarchical power.
What does that mean? It means cascades are not yet going away.
But because of the problems that can happen with their delivery, cascades represent a huge risk for the internal communicator–not surprising the likelihood of delivery gaps feeding rumor mills, feedback influenced by implicit or explicit intimidation, or managers improvising and injecting own messages (even with letter-perfect delivery, a manager using “air quotes” can completely undermine the intent of a cascade). While cascades give the appearance of total control, for the most part they are impossible to control.
Nevertheless, you’ll probably be on the hook for some soon. So, I’ll propose some guidelines to keep you from being called on the carpet:
1) Strive to do no harm. Cascades are not places for shock and awe.
2) Never force the manager to speak with the “corporate voice”–structure so he/she can deliver in her own voice instead of the “corporate we”
3) Focus on underscoring, reinforcing and contextualizing already-delivered messages and policies, and absolutely minimize delivery of new information.
4) Give a fixed (and short) time period for delivery and ensure delivery is reported back immediately to allow real-time tracking
5) Offer multiple confidential and open feedback channels, and encourage their use in the structure of the cascade, and after it’s completed across the business.
If you’re in doubt, seek help. Communicator credibility is inordinately tied to the success or failure of cascade processes in many organizations. A record of successful delivery using these principles may be just what you need to get the permission to use more modern social and conversational techniques to drive the real communication.
Mike Klein is a Brussels-based communications pro focusing on networked approaches to organizational communication. He can be reached through http://intersectionblog.wordpress.com
