Performance Communications: No More “Feel-Good” Communication

How communication can make a bigger impact—and earn more recognition from the board—through management techniques, data, and AI.

This article was written by: Jens Christmann

“We had 42 press clippings, a reach of 1.2 million, and a very positive response.” Statements like these are still common in many communications departments. They’re meant to sound solid and professional. But strategically, they’re often worthless.

Because they don’t answer the one question that matters to the board: What concrete benefits has this brought to the company?

This is the problem—and the essence of Performance Communications. Any corporate communications department that wants to be more than just an internal service provider for copywriting, events, and campaigns must stop equating activity with impact.

The Inconvenient Truth: Communication has to prove itself

When it comes to executive management, there are three key factors—and nothing more:

1. Growth and efficiency.
2. Securing the future and risk management.
3. Corporate culture and employee engagement.

Everything a department does within a company must fit into this framework and deliver a measurable contribution. Communication is no exception—even though it has long considered itself to be in a special category. Anyone who fails to clearly derive their communication strategy from the corporate strategy automatically loses relevance. Those who cannot articulate measurable contributions will sooner or later face budget cuts, declining standing, or delayed involvement in decision-making processes. Not out of disrespect, but because of the logic of the system. Performance Communications makes it possible to understand this logic—and to use it to your advantage.

Facts and figures, not gut feelings

A key shift in perspective involves viewing communication as a balance sheet—not as a collection of measures, but as a portfolio of strategic assets and risks. Which initiatives are true assets because they stabilize reputation, enhance employer appeal, or secure political leeway? Where do communication liabilities lie—unresolved issues, inconsistent narratives, blind spots? And what potential lies dormant within the company but is not being leveraged through communication? These questions are uncomfortable. They create friction because they also expose internal weaknesses. Yet they are necessary for professional work and the commitment to continuous improvement. Both are crucial for lasting success and genuine teamwork.

Three goals – otherwise none

Another structural problem with many communication strategies is that everything is prioritized equally. Thought leadership, sustainability, employer branding, social media, change management, CEO positioning, internal cultural initiatives—everything is important. So everything gets prioritized.

The result is operational overload coupled with a lack of strategic clarity.

Performance Communications draws a clear line here: a maximum of three key objectives. Three themes that communications should focus on by the end of the year. Three contributions that management associates with the function. This streamlining may seem radical—but it is essential for ensuring manageability. No CEO manages six strategic initiatives simultaneously with the same level of intensity. Why should communications do so?

The real challenge isn’t in setting goals, but in cutting out activities. Performance starts with a “stop-doing” list.

Awareness isn’t enough

A particularly ingrained reflex in corporate communications is the fixation on attention. Reach is still touted as a measure of success. But attention is merely a prerequisite for success. Without follow-through, that energy fizzles out. Performance marketing has long understood that every touchpoint requires a next step: a call to action—that is, a transaction. Corporate communications, on the other hand, often remains stuck in “publication mode.” The sustainability report is online, the event was well-attended, the press release has been sent out. And then?

If you want to make an impact, you have to think in terms of stakeholder journeys. Don’t just inform—inspire action. Don’t just produce content—influence behavior. Ultimately, every interaction is about selling something. In communication, that means a narrative, a perspective, or an argument. Marketing, sales, and communication aren’t really that different.

This also means structuring content differently: in a modular, clear way, with clear opportunities for follow-up. It means accepting that not every message has the same impact—and that testing and failure are not signs of uncertainty, but of professionalism.

70 percent for the trash?

Experience from projects reveals a recurring pattern: a relatively small portion of the content generates the majority of the impact. The rest remains virtually invisible—both internally and externally. This is not a matter of individual failure, but a structural problem. Without a performance-oriented mindset, content is produced simply because it’s on the annual plan or politically desired—not because it has an impact. Transparency makes this imbalance visible. And that is precisely why it is often avoided. Measurability creates comparability. Comparability creates pressure. But it also creates legitimacy and persuasive power.

Those who can demonstrate which measures reduce recruiting costs, which narratives mitigate regulatory risks, or which formats boost employee engagement will stop playing defense.

AI changes the rules of the game

With the rise of AI-powered search, the landscape is shifting further. Visibility no longer depends primarily on a website’s user experience, but rather on structure, clarity, and relevance. Content must be machine-readable, precisely worded, and technically sound. FAQs are gaining importance. Plain language becomes a strategic advantage. SEO isn’t dead—it’s becoming a prerequisite for algorithmic visibility. At the same time, AI opens up new possibilities: simulating perspectives, testing stakeholder viewpoints, and refining narratives. Personas can be developed with greater nuance, messages can be iteratively improved, and lines of argument can be tested in advance.

But the same applies here: without clear strategic goals, any tool is merely cosmetic.

The real problem: having the courage to take control

Why isn’t performance-based communication the norm yet? Because it’s uncomfortable at first.

It forces us to prioritize where everything used to be important.
It makes impact measurable where intuition used to suffice.
It reveals what isn’t working instead of sugarcoating it.

And it prevents communication from hiding behind hard work.

But that is precisely where the opportunity lies.

From broadcaster to management role

Corporate communications is at a crossroads. It can either remain a producer of content—or evolve into a strategic management function with a clearly defined value proposition. Performance Communications is not a toolkit for controllers. It is an attitude: impact over volume. Focus over diligence. At a time when budgets are being scrutinized, strategies sharpened, and efficiency demanded, this attitude is not a luxury, but a matter of survival.

Those who truly understand this difference transform the role of communication within the company. And in doing so, they make a direct contribution to the company’s success. It’s a great feeling—and a boost to one’s own personal growth as well.

OTHER BLOG ARTICLES