• Bookkeeping
  • Finance Tips
  • Small Business Advice

Most people think poor communication is accidental. Missed emails. Busy schedules. Growing pains.
Sometimes it is. Often it is not.

In many organisations, communication flows in very specific directions, and those directions tell you everything you need to know about power, priorities, and risk.

Communication does not flow evenly by design

Upwards and outwards, communication is frequent, polished, and deliberate.
Downwards and sideways, it is sparse, reactive, or non-existent.

Leaders receive narrative. Clients receive reassurance. Prospects receive motivation.
The people doing the work receive tasks.

This is not a coincidence. It is design.

Silence is not neutral

When information does not flow to the people affected by it, silence does work on behalf of the system.

Silence:

  • Delays challenge

  • Preserves flexibility for decision-makers

  • Shifts risk onto individuals

  • Avoids creating written records

  • Keeps accountability diffuse

A policy change that is not clearly announced still takes effect.
A rate change that is not clearly communicated still applies.
The only difference is who carries the cost.

Knowledge becomes uneven by default

In systems like this, people do not operate with the same information.

Some know because they asked.
Some know because they were impacted.
Some never know at all.

This creates a quiet hierarchy:

  • Those with context

  • Those without context

  • Those blamed for not anticipating what they were never told

The system depends on people not knowing what they do not know.

Individual fixes hide structural problems

When someone challenges a discrepancy and it is corrected “in their case”, the organisation often treats that as resolution.

It is not.

An individual fix avoids addressing the root issue:

  • Why the change was not communicated

  • Who else may be affected

  • Whether consent was ever given

  • Whether the promise still exists in practice

Quiet exceptions protect the system while leaving it intact.

Broadcast communication is not engagement

Weekly emails, updates, or thought pieces aimed at clients or leaders can be well written and frequent.
That does not mean communication is healthy.

Broadcast communication influences perception.
Operational communication enables work.

Confusing the two allows organisations to claim transparency while practising opacity where it matters most.

Outcomes of this model

Over time, predictable things happen:

  • Trust erodes

  • People self-protect

  • Engagement drops

  • Only problems that escalate loudly get addressed

  • Silence becomes normalised as “how things work”

Those who notice early tend to leave.
Those who stay learn to manage around the gaps.
The system survives, but it does not mature.

A simple test

Ask one question:

Would someone doing the work feel informed enough to make good decisions without constantly second-guessing what they have not been told?

If the answer is no, the issue is not communication style.
It is communication power.

And silence, in that case, is not a failure.
It is the point.