By Ritvars Mētra, Founder of ReadinessCompassHere is an opening line from a real change email: “As part of our ongoing commitment to operational excellence, we are embarking on a transformation journey that will enable us to leverage best-practice processes across the organisation.”
Twenty-eight words, no information. A reader learns that something is happening, that it is corporate, and that the rest of the email will be like this. Most of them stop there, and they are being rational.
Borrow standards that already exist
Change communications is one of the few areas where a rigorous, public, tested standard already exists and is almost never used. The UK Government Digital Service writes for a population of tens of millions with no choice about whether to read, and its clear language guidance is unambiguous:
- “Plain English is mandatory for all of GOV.UK.”
- “Do not use formal or long words when easy or short ones will do” — buy not purchase, help not assist, about not approximately.
- “Try to split up sentences that are over 25 words long.”
- “Paragraphs should have no more than 5 sentences each.”
- “Use the active voice rather than the passive voice.”
- “Avoid government ‘buzzwords’ and jargon. Often, these words are too vague and can lead to misinterpretation or empty, meaningless text.”
That last clause is the important one. Jargon is not merely inelegant — it is vague, and vagueness produces misinterpretation. “Optimise our ways of working” can mean process improvement, headcount reduction or a new system, and every reader will pick the interpretation their situation makes most likely.
Note also what the guidance permits: specialist terms are fine when you explain them on first use. The rule is not to write simply. It is to write so that a specific reader can act.
Rewrites that do the work
| Typical | Better | Why |
|---|---|---|
| “We are embarking on a transformation journey” | “From 3 November, purchase orders move to the new system” | Date, subject, action. The reader can now decide whether this concerns them |
| “Colleagues may experience some changes to ways of working” | “If you raise purchase orders, three things change for you” | Names the audience so people can self-select accurately |
| “Training will be made available” | “You will get a 90-minute session in the week of 6 October. Your manager will book it” | Passive to active, with a named owner and a date |
| “We are committed to supporting you through this change” | “For the first two weeks, Priya and Tom will be on the floor from 8am” | A commitment that can be checked is worth ten that cannot |
| “Further details will follow in due course” | “We do not yet know how this affects shift patterns. We will confirm by 12 September” | Names the uncertainty and puts a date on it. Silence is read as bad news |
The last row is the one most organisations refuse. There is a persistent belief that you should not communicate until everything is decided. In practice people fill an information vacuum with the worst available explanation, and a dated commitment to answer is far more reassuring than an absence.
Structure for someone who will not finish it
Assume the reader gets three lines in. That is not pessimism; it is how people read anything at work that is not addressed to them personally.
- Lead with what changes and when, not with why. The rationale matters, but it is the second question, and putting it first costs you the readers who needed the first.
- Say who this is for in the subject line. “For anyone who raises purchase orders” outperforms “Programme update — October” by a wide margin.
- One message, one thing. A message covering a system change, a training schedule and an office move will be remembered for none of them.
- Put the action in its own line. If there is something to do, it should not be inside a paragraph.
- Cut the closing paragraph that thanks people for their continued commitment. It is the clearest signal that the message was written for the sender.
Write for one named person
The most effective editing technique is also the cheapest: pick a real person in the target audience and write to them. Not a persona — someone you could name, whose job you understand.
Almost every generic phrase dies under this test. You would not tell a warehouse supervisor that the organisation is embarking on a transformation journey, because you can imagine their face. You would tell them that from 3 November they scan at the bay rather than at the desk, that it will be slower for a fortnight, and that Priya will be there at 6am on the first day.
Then test it. Show the draft to two people from that audience and ask them what they would do differently after reading it. If they cannot say, the draft has failed regardless of how well written it is — which is the same standard that separates communication that reaches people from communication that only reaches inboxes.
More on readiness and leadership communication in the Change Readiness Hub, or read how to brief leaders without change jargon.