Can I tell you a secret?

I don’t ever assume people will keep secrets.

I know, it’s not shocking. And I promise I don’t have trust issues—but people like to talk.

It’s one of the most important things to keep in mind when you’re planning to communicate big news to different audiences that don’t all need to find out the same thing at the same time.

In my many years of creating communication plans around significant changes, big updates, and generally interest-piquing news, I’ve come to learn that sharing information may look like a slow, s t e a d y drop in the beginning and a quick-quick-quick drip toward the very end.

Here’s what I mean:

Say there’s a big change coming for your organization. There are a lot of impacted external audiences who will need to know about it, but you know they’re not all equal in this scenario. Some may be directly impacted, while others really just deserve the courtesy of being informed.

So what is that information drip to those tiers of audiences, and how do you decide how quickly (or slowly) to run it? I’d say there are three questions to ask to figure that out:

❓When you look at what’s changing, how many “categories” of external audiences do you need to consider? Think about this in layers of impact and relevance. As a couple of examples:

• If you’re in a ministry or nonprofit, you‘re probably going to need to inform your donors about change before blasting an email to everyone who has ever signed up for your email newsletter (and definitely before sharing something on social media).
• If you’re in a church, it might feel like you have one external audience—and that’s anyone who isn’t a member or currently attending your church. But what about other local churches or organizations where connections and relationships currently exist? Would it be beneficial to consider those groups and offer the courtesy of communicating to them before letting news spread outside of the church?

❓How significant is this change, and will it require something of them or change their experience with you? When change requires new or additional action from your audiences, you want to communicate sooner than later. This gives you time to both inform them and equip them to adopt the change and not feel rushed or overwhelmed in the process. It also gives you the benefit of addressing unexpected questions before the change is official—versus having to react on the fly.

❓Is the change sensitive in nature? There comes a delicate balance between honoring different audiences by communicating to them in the right order, and not allowing so much space in between communicating to different audiences that word gets out and gets ahead of you. There have been times in my career where there was so much confidence in the integrity of audiences who had to learn things early that sensitive changes could be communicated to them weeks in advance of everyone else (disclaimer: still a risk).

But more often than not, the odds of things not staying 100% confidential are high.

When the appetite for risk of things getting to certain people too soon is low, it’s in everyone’s best interest to put as small of a gap between audiences finding out as possible. Let me give you an example of what that could look like 👇

Scenario: A nonprofit youth sports ministry is making changes to the age groups it serves, resulting in the removal of programming for some youth who were previously able to participate. Some of the ministry’s staff were directly involved in the decision, and those that weren’t have already learned of the transition and fully understand the why, how and when.

The external audiences who now need to know are:

• Ministry donors
• Seasonal volunteers
• Parents of youth who are currently or have previously been involved in the ministry’s programs
• All other external audiences, including email newsletter recipients

Consider the fact that there are probably a lot of connections between all these audiences—maybe even some overlap. So putting too much time in between communications creates space for a narrative that gets one text/email/conversation-in-the-coffee-shop ahead of you.

While managing change communication internally may have taken place over a few days, it should probably “drip” faster with these audiences. Something like, two days after ministry staff learn (one-day buffer to address questions):

• 8 a.m.: Email to ministry donors
• 12 p.m.: Email to seasonal volunteers
• 3 p.m.: Parents of youth currently or previously involved
• Next morning: Email newsletter to general distribution list

Now—how do you relay that to them in a way that addresses the negative, focuses on the positive, and points toward why the change is ultimately the best move for everyone? Check out [post title] for my thoughts there.