Communication Channels for Change

A one-way channel transmits a message to an audience that cannot respond through the same channel: a newsletter, an intranet article, a poster, a recorded video. A two-way channel lets the audience respond, ask questions and shape the message while it is being delivered: a team meeting, a workshop, a live Q&A session, a one-to-one conversation.

Two points are often confused:

• Sending the same message through two channels, such as email and the intranet, increases reach, but both channels are still one-way.
• Using two messengers, such as a senior leader followed by the line manager, adds credibility, but it is two-way only if the audience can respond.

One-way channels are efficient for reach and consistency. Two-way channels are slower, but they reveal what people have understood, surface concerns and let the sender adjust.

Most changes need both kinds of communication channel, used for different purposes.

Richard Daft and Robert Lengel proposed that channels differ in their capacity to carry information that changes understanding. They judged richness by criteria such as:

• immediate feedback, so that questions can be answered at once;
• multiple cues, such as tone of voice, facial expression and body language;
• language variety, from numbers to natural, expressive language;
• personal focus, so that the message can be tailored to the person.

Face-to-face conversation is the richest medium because it offers all four at once. Telephone comes next, then personal written messages such as letters and memos, then impersonal written media such as bulletins and general reports.

Their central claim concerns equivocality: when a message is ambiguous and open to several interpretations, richer media help people build a shared understanding. Recorded video and live chat were not part of the original ranking; placing them on the scale is a later application of the theory.

Media richness theory gives change managers a practical rule for matching a message to a channel.

The mismatch works both ways. Sending sensitive news by email is a common mistake: it removes the chance to read reactions, answer questions and show empathy, and people remember how they heard the news. Calling meetings for routine updates wastes time and teaches people to skip them.

Sensitive news is best given face to face, by the person's own manager where possible, and followed by a written summary.

Choosing between lean and rich communication channels starts with how ambiguous and how personal the message is.

At Harbourside Council, a new scheduling system affects office staff and depot crews. A workable mix comes from five questions:

1. What kind of message is it? Routine, complex or sensitive.
2. Who is the audience, and what can they access? Depot crews rarely read email, so their briefings happen at shift start.
3. Does the message need a response? Anything that asks people to change how they work needs a two-way channel.
4. Who is the most credible sender? The sponsor for the why, line managers for what it means locally.
5. In what order? Rich first for anything significant, then lean channels to repeat and record.

The resulting mix pairs team briefings and a supervisor Q&A with a printed one-page summary in the depots and an intranet page for office staff.

A channel mix for change combines reach, richness and the audience's real working conditions.

Media richness theory is simple, intuitive and supported by early studies of managers' channel choices, including Daft, Lengel and Treviño (1987). Its limits appear with newer media and more varied work:

• Mixed evidence for newer media. Studies of email and other electronic channels have not always found the predicted pattern.
• Experience changes richness. People who know a channel and each other well can convey a great deal through lean media.
• Communication has more than one goal. Alan Dennis, Robert Fuller and Joseph Valacich's media synchronicity theory separates conveying information, where lean channels can be better, from converging on a shared meaning, where synchronous channels help.
• Access and preference matter. The richest channel is no use if the audience cannot attend.

Media richness theory is therefore a useful starting rule for choosing communication channels, not a complete one.