Market confidence is forged long before a company presents its quarterly results – a temporary reaffirmation of its standing with investors. It is a protective shield built on strategic decisions, fulfilled commitments, convincing explanations and an ongoing relationship with those who analyse, finance and evaluate its activities. Even so, certain companies continue to organise much of their financial communication around one-off events – from results announcements and corporate transactions to shareholders’ meetings or crisis situations. This model is beginning to prove inadequate in the face of the transformation of the capital markets.
The growing sophistication of investors, the prominence of international funds, the pressure on boards of directors and developments in corporate governance rules are changing the communication needs of listed companies. In this context, financial information remains essential. But it is no longer sufficient. The markets demand an understanding of strategy, an assessment of the consistency of management teams, and the ability to anticipate how companies will respond to an increasingly uncertain economic and geopolitical environment.
This transformation requires closer ties between three areas that have traditionally operated at different paces and with different priorities. On the one hand,requires strategic senior management; on the other, investor relations (IR) departments; and, thirdly, the corporate communications and media relations departments. Coordination between them is no longer limited to a mere exchange of messages prior to a significant announcement. In today’s climate, it must take the form of an ongoing dialogue, capable of linking business decisions with the expectations of investors, analysts, business journalists and other stakeholders.
Communication, across each of these dimensions, is moving away from its traditional objective of being the final step in the corporate strategy. Now, it has taken on a challenge of greater substance. It has become an indispensable tool for business management.
The market demands a dialogue, not a schedule of announcements
The evolution of investor relations departments illustrates this conceptual shift. Spanish IR professionals have achieved levels of specialisation comparable to those in Anglo-Saxon markets, with growing influence within their organisations. So much so that their role is shifting from strictly financial areas towards corporate strategy and business development.
This is no coincidence. International capital accounts for around 50 per cent of the shareholding in Spanish listed companies and is increasingly shaping the requirements for disclosure, transparency and good governance. Institutional investors are not content merely to know how revenue or profits are performing. They want to understand investment decisions, operational risks, capital allocation, the composition of boards, and the consistency between stated objectives and actual results. In short, the stakeholders are becoming increasingly demanding, and their channels of communication with the companies in which they hold interests are IR.
This requirement also changes the nature of external communication. A company may post satisfactory results and yet fail to convey a convincing investment case. It may have a sound strategy but find it difficult to explain its implications. Or it may take financially sound decisions which, if poorly contextualised, create uncertainty amongst investors and the general public.
The response to these scenarios requires the development of a shared corporate narrative capable of integrating financial information, business strategy and reputation. The so-called equity story should not be seen as a commercial analysis for investors, but rather as a coherent explanation of how the company creates value, what sets it apart from its competitors and why its decisions are sustainable in the long term.
This ecosystem of market issuers places strategic consistency at the very heart of market confidence. A company that repeatedly fails to meet its financial forecasts ultimately erodes its credibility with investors, even when its business fundamentals remain reasonably sound.
Accuracy and reliability, therefore, do not depend solely on communicating forecasts effectively, but on maintaining a verifiable link between what the company announces, what it does and what it ultimately achieves.
To achieve this, communications professionals need to work closely with those responsible for strategy, finance, operations and corporate governance. It is not enough simply to receive ready-made information and turn it into public messages. They need access to the reasoning behind decisions, to contribute alternative perspectives, to identify possible interpretations, and to be able to prepare explanations before doubts arise in the market.
In the same way, the teams responsible for relations with the media must convey to management the concerns that they identify amongst journalists, analysts and other stakeholders. Strategic communication works in both directions. On the one hand, it must engage with and explain the business decisions; on the other hand, they must help their audience or their interlocutors to understand them.
Activism makes reputation a matter for the board
The ever-increasing prominence of shareholder activism underscores the need for coordination. General meetings can no longer be viewed merely as formal gatherings to approve resolutions. They are moments of particular scrutiny, where financial interests, corporate governance requirements and reputational expectations all converge.
The analyses of the ecosystem of issuers in the market describe an activism that is increasingly more selective and specialised. In an in-depth analysis of the sector relating to 2025, the industry accounts for 23.7 per cent of this growing demand for investment due to access on an ongoing basis to the deliberations of companies, followed by technology, at 16.4 per cent, and the finance sector, at 15.8 per cent. The stakeholders are looking for companies where they can influence strategic decisions, improve operational efficiency or drive changes in the bodies of corporate governance.
Shareholder pressure does not follow a uniform pattern either. In Spain, a more constructive and private form of activism prevails than in the US, focusing particularly on the composition of boards and the alignment of remuneration with market expectations, as explained in reports such as that by Sodali, a global corporate advisory firm. Many disagreements are raised in private meetings, before they reach shareholders’ meetings or the media. Hence the importance of anticipating conflicts and coordinating responses between IR, communications and senior management.
This coordination is essential in the event of disputes regarding remuneration, corporate transactions, regarding the independence of the directors or in matters of sustainability. The response requires strategic sound arguments, knowledge of the expectations of the shareholders and awareness of reputational risks. It also requires an ongoing relationship with the economic specialist journalists that enables the contextualisation of decisions business decisions beyond the press releases and the crisis situations.
Regulation also sets out this modus operandi by establishing new communication responsibilities. European Directive 2024/2810, on structures involving shares with multiple voting rights, makes it possible to reconcile certain forms of market access with the preservation of corporate control, whilst incorporating safeguards for minority shareholders.
These structures raise questions about the distribution of power, shareholder representation and transparency, although their legal legitimacy alone does not guarantee investor confidence. Companies must explain their economic rationale, their safeguards and any potential drawbacks. This task requires communication to be integrated from the earliest stages of corporate decision-making.
From information to strategic intelligence
Companies need, therefore, a stable architecture of relationships between those who make decisions and those who interpret their consequences. Rather than simply reacting to announcements after decisions are made, communications teams should participate continuously in the decision-making process, ensuring context and public perception are integrated from the start. This premise implies overcoming the separation between corporate communication and financial communication, maintaining a dialogue on a daily basis with management and developing an ongoing dialogue with investors, analysts, journalists and other stakeholders.
Specialist communications consultancies bring expertise in the media landscape, the ability to anticipate developments and the experience needed to translate complex decisions into clear, understandable arguments. Their value therefore lies in identifying risks, preparing spokespersons, listening to concerns and maintaining a consistent narrative – even when there are no relevant announcements to make.
Financial reporting is moving towards strategic intelligence methodologies. This is because the markets will continue to assess profits, cash flows and risks, but also companies’ ability to explain their decisions and respond to their stakeholders.
Although results are presented periodically, board meetings are held only once a year, and corporate transactions take place on specific dates, reputation is built every day. This is why the communication that underpins it cannot operate on a quarterly basis.
