The environment in which companies operate has changed in a profound and rapid manner. Regulatory pressure has intensified significantly in the last few years. Political cycles have been accelerated and the centres of power are found today more fragmented than ever. To this we must add some social expectations regarding the behaviour corporate which are becoming increasingly more demanding and critical. In this new scenario, there arises a need to evolve towards the Corporate Affairs.

A structural change, not a fad

It is essential to make it clear from the outset that the role of Corporate Affairs is not merely a passing organisational trend. Nor is this simply a change in terminology for what we have always done. This is not a break with the past, but rather a natural evolution of the role played by the communications director. It is a structural adjustment that enables companies to manage their relationship with an increasingly complex political, regulatory and social environment.

The main limitation of the model of traditional public affairs has not been its lack of professionalism, but rather its biased approach. For too long, this role operated in a manner relatively isolated within the company. It focused on the relationship with the administration and the legislature, but remained disconnected from other critical dimensions. I am talking about areas such as reputation, sustainability or corporate purpose, which were previously managed in independent silos. Corporate Affairs is breaking down those compartmentalised silos to provide a vision of the whole.

The new framework for public decision-making

Nowadays, public decisions are no longer made solely in the chambers of parliaments or within government departments. Today, these decisions are also shaped by social debate and public opinion. They take shape in the media, in the courts, within NGOs and in the markets. Furthermore, they unfold in digital environments that are often highly polarised. Regulation no longer comes about in isolation, but is shaped under constant public and reputational scrutiny.

Advocating a regulatory stance without social legitimacy is becoming increasingly ineffective. Reputational consistency has become an essential prerequisite for any institutional action. For all these reasons, Public Affairs alone fall short in their ability to respond effectively. The discipline of Corporate Affairs brings together under a single strategic framework various areas that have previously been fragmented. We are talking about a genuine connection between communication, public affairs, reputation, sustainability and regulation.

An intelligence system for senior management

The key difference with this model is that it is not limited to managing institutional relationships. Corporate Affairs acts as a genuine intelligence and foresight system at the service of senior management. It becomes a nerve centre capable of translating political and social complexity into useful business intelligence. In many companies, this integration already exists in practice, even if it is not always formally reflected in the organisational chart.

The market has not yet standardised its terminology, but the direction of change is clear. One of the major qualitative leaps forward compared to the traditional model is the shift from reaction to anticipation. In an environment characterised by political volatility and regulatory uncertainty, the ability to anticipate has become a key competitive advantage. The most forward-thinking companies analyse trends and develop future scenarios long before a regulation is even proposed.

Risks geopolitical and competitiveness

Leading organisations today view politics as an integral part of the business environment. It is no longer seen as an occasional external threat, but as a constant management factor. This approach of strategic foresight not only reduces risks, but also enables better decision-making. Furthermore, it strengthens the company’s institutional legitimacy in the long term. Corporate Affairs thus acts as a radar that identifies weak signals within the regulatory ecosystem.

There are global geopolitical risks that have a direct impact on economic activity. Disruptions to global trade and fiscal fragmentation are challenges that no management team can afford to ignore. Added to this are technological competition surrounding artificial intelligence and the vulnerability of supply chains. Even demographic and cultural pressures on talent are now a risk that must be managed through this cross-functional role. Ignoring these variables means operating blindly in a global market.

Direct access to the CEO and corporate governance

This transformation has resulted in a profound organisational restructuring. The strategic importance of the function is reflected in its reporting line within companies. According to recent data, 84% of Corporate Affairs executives now report directly to the CEO or the executive committee. This indicates that the management of intangible assets can no longer be disconnected from strategic business decision-making.

There are different implementation models depending on the maturity of each organisation. The integrated model brings together communications, public affairs and sustainability under a single leadership. Others opt for a coordinated model, where the areas retain separate leadership but work through systematic collaboration mechanisms. What really matters is not the job title or the structure of the organisation chart, but the actual function performed. What defines Corporate Affairs is its vision for connecting the business with its environment.

From traditional influence to responsible lobbying

The very concept of influence has changed radically in recent years. For decades, personal access to public decision-makers was the main indicator of success. Today, that approach is wholly inadequate and outdated. Real influence is now measured by credibility, consistency and the quality of dialogue. The ecosystem of relevant actors has expanded significantly and includes many more players than just traditional politicians.

Alongside traditional decision-makers, we now see NGOs, think tanks, citizen platforms and digital opinion leaders. In this environment, transparency, ethics and active listening are no longer optional. They have become essential requirements for maintaining social legitimacy. A culture of responsible lobbying is now an unavoidable necessity for any serious organisation. It is about participating in public debate with sound arguments and a narrative aligned with the corporate purpose.

Transparency and institutional openness

More established companies are adopting principles of transparency and accountability as cornerstones of their corporate conduct. Some are already implementing voluntary transparency policies, such as the publication of agendas and specific codes of conduct. These practices not only bolster reputation but also enable companies to anticipate future, stricter regulatory frameworks. In Europe and North America, lobbying regulation continues to advance rapidly.

Countries such as France, Ireland and Canada already have very stringent transparency registers. In Spain, we still face the challenge of developing a clear, consensus-based framework that provides legal certainty. Beyond legislation, active listening has become standard practice within corporate affairs departments. Public perception is no longer shaped solely by communication campaigns, but by genuine consistency between what a company says and what it does.

The profile of the new cross-cutting leader

All this development is giving rise to a new profile of corporate leadership. The head of Corporate Affairs is a cross-functional leader with a high level of analytical skills and social awareness. It is not simply an manager institutional who knows the corridors of power. He is a strategic advisor to the CEO and an interpreter capable of reading the constant changes in the environment.

This profile tends to move away from a single specialisation and seeks a multidisciplinary background. It is common to find professionals with degrees in international relations, law, economics or political science. Key competencies include a cross-functional perspective, forward-looking analytical skills and uncompromising ethical leadership. They are organisational ‘brokers’ who translate the external environment into internal strategic decisions for the company.

Future challenges and measuring the impact

The Corporate Affairs function is now entering a decisive phase in its development. One of the most pressing challenges is to demonstrate its tangible impact on value creation. Unlike commercial departments, results in this area do not always translate into immediate metrics. However, there is a consensus on the need to develop metrics for measuring the return on reputation and institutional influence.

Models such as the ‘social licence to operate’ are useful tools for measuring trust and alignment with the purpose. Another major challenge is the internal fragmentation of the functions related to the intangibles. The coexistence of multiple areas under structures that are not integrated hinders coordination and dilutes the strategic focus. The future of the role lies in building models of governance that ensure a genuine collaboration between departments.

Technology as a strategic partner

Digitalisation offers new capabilities for anticipating trends and managing reputational risks. Automated monitoring tools and sentiment analysis facilitate the collection of large volumes of data. However, the real value still lies in human insight and judgement. Artificial intelligence enhances analysis, but its effectiveness depends on the strategic interpretation provided by the professional.

The full professionalisation of Corporate Affairs requires strengthening training pathways and ethical codes. It is necessary to establish forums for professional exchange in order to harmonise standards across sectors. The year 2026 will mark a turning point for this discipline. Organisations that continue to operate with piecemeal solutions will face increasing costs in terms of consistency and competitiveness.

Corporate Affairs is no longer a distant prospect, but rather a strategic response to today’s demanding environment. It serves as the essential bridge between the company and its complex political, regulatory and social ecosystem. Those who are able to align the company’s voice with the expectations of the wider environment will be the ones who bring the greatest value to the organisation in the coming years.

*Article written by Daniel Ureña, founding partner and chairman of NITID

La entrada Corporate Affairs, a role that is becoming increasingly more strategic for companies se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

Every 8 March, we reflect on leadership, equality and power. In 2026, perhaps the strategic question for our sector will be different: what role are women playing in constructing the narratives produced and amplified by artificial intelligence?

Because AI does not only automate processes. It also generates content, prioritises messages, segments audiences, and builds reputation. It intervenes, in a direct manner at the heart of the work of communication.

In this new environment, it is not enough to simply be present in the teams. It is important to ask who is leading the technological integration, who is defining its narrative criteria, and who occupies the expert space when it comes to digital transformation.

The technological gap exists and shapes the narrative

In Spain, there are 1,022,600 specialists in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), representing 4.7% of total employment, slightly below the EU average of 5% (Technological Employment Report 2025, 2024 data). Of that total, only 19.6% are women.

The European Union has set itself the target of reaching 20 million ICT specialists by 2030 (1.75 million in Spain) within the framework of the Digital Decade (Digital Decade 2025 Indicators). However, if the proportion of women does not increase in strategic areas—AI, data, cybersecurity—the gap will not only persist but will become more entrenched in areas of greater influence.

This is no minor detail for our sector. If the tools that are redefining communication are designed in predominantly male environments, it is reasonable to ask how they are being trained, what biases they incorporate, and what narratives they prioritise.

Artificial intelligence learns from data. Unfortunately this data will reflect the society that generates it.

AI and women: an impact that is not neutral

The effects of technology on women are not abstract either. More than 73% of women worldwide have been exposed to or experienced some form of violence on the Internet (UN, Combating online violence against women and girls). In the European Union, nine million women have experienced online violence since the age of 15 (European Agency for Fundamental Rights, FRA).

90% of victims of non-consensual dissemination of intimate images are women (Report by the UN Special Rapporteur on online violence). In Spain, 19.5% of women between the ages of 16 and 74 have been harassed at some point in their lives, and 85.8% of the perpetrators are men (European Survey on Gender-Based Violence 2022, Government Delegation against Gender-Based Violence).

Furthermore, 84.8% of the victims of a cybercrime recorded in 2023 were minors under the age of 18 and 96% of those investigated or arrested for these crimes were men (Ministry of the Interior, Report on crimes against sexual freedom 2023).

AI does not create this reality, but it may be amplifying it: sexual deepfakes, automation of image dissemination, algorithmic viralisation of hate speech… The study Violence against women, girls, boys and adolescents in the digital sphere (Ministry of Equality, 2025) shows how these new forms of cyberviolence disproportionately affect women and minors.

How does this impact communication? Algorithms don’t just distribute content: they decide what we see first. And what gets amplified becomes the dominant narrative.

Communication: a feminised profession, but who is leading the transformation?

In Spain, corporate communication, journalism and public relations have a very high female presence at the grassroots and intermediate levels. It is a profession with a woman’s touch.

However, this should lead us to ask ourselves: who is leading the integration of artificial intelligence in agencies and departments? artificial intelligence in agencies and departments? Who defines the ethical standards for its use? Who pilots technological innovation internally? To whom are attributed the contents about AI and digital reputation?

In an ecosystem where artificial intelligence automates newsrooms, optimises headlines, predicts behaviour of audiences and redefines metrics of impact, mastering the tool implies mastering decision-making and, therefore, the narrative will adapt to its programmers.

And therein lies the risk: that in a sector that is predominantly female at its core, the technological layer (and, therefore, strategic and narrative power) will once again be concentrated in male profiles. And this is not due to a lack of talent—which has been more than proven—but rather to the structural inertia that persists.

Sufficient references to lead the positioning

The question is not whether there are women prepared to lead the conversation on artificial intelligence in communication. The question is whether the sector—and the media ecosystem—is placing those voices where they belong: at the centre of the debate. Because when we talk about AI applied to reputation, content generation, process automation or algorithmic ethics, we are not dealing with an isolated technical conversation; we are dealing with a profound redefinition of the corporate narrative. And in communication, narrative is power.

In our country, we have renowned female leaders in communications, and it is our duty to highlight their achievements: Luísa García (LLYC); Mónica González (AXICOM); Ludi García and Carlota Marco (SEC NEWGATE); Lucía Carballeda (EDELMAN); Núria Vilanova and Asun Soriano (ATREVIA); Sonia Díaz and Juana Pulido (ESTUDIO DE COMUNICACIÓN); Carme Miró (APPLE TREE); Silvia Alsina (ROMAN); Paula Carrera and Bárbara Navarro (TORRES Y CARRERA); Natalia Sánchez and Raquel Capellas (Weber Shandwick Spain); Ana Picó (Havas PR); Noelia Cruzado and Diana Vall (MARCO); Valvanuz Serna and Lucía Casanueva (PROA Comunicación); Carmen Basagoiti (HARMON); and our CEO and founder, Silvia Albert, among many others.

Interestingly, if we look at the technological layer (areas of AI, innovation, Big Data, or digital transformation), the picture changes dramatically. In several of these organisations that have specific AI departments, those responsible for the technical structures that feed the models, data and automation tools are all men. In other words, female business leadership is visible, but technological leadership is much less so, and when it does appear, it tends to be masculinised.

8M: from talent to technological leadership

This 8M, perhaps the conversation should not focus solely on how many women work in communications (because yes, they are in the majority) but on something more decisive: how many are leading the transition to artificial intelligence.

The digital divide is no longer just a question of access to devices or STEM education. It is a question of technological power within the digital world. of technological power within strategic areas.

Artificial intelligence is redefining how stories are produced, distributed, and evaluated. If women do not occupy central positions in this redefinition, their influence will be limited at the most transformative moment in the profession in decades.

AI is not the future of communication. It is its present. And leadership in this new environment cannot afford to become masculinised again without at least being aware of it. It is not just a question of equality, but of us all working together to build the narrative in the age of artificial intelligence.

La entrada Who designs the data defines the narrative: notes on AI and communication in the context of 8M se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

To the point. As for the keys to this critical and strategic – not exaggerated – decision, here are a number of key recommendations to ensure the right choice.

The first thing to know is whether you or your company or institution need a generalist covering all areas or disciplines of communication or if you need someone more specialised in a particular area: press, internal communications, crisis, IR, ESG, social media, etc. In the latter case, each area requires a unique set of skills and knowledge, so look for a consultant who can demonstrate relevant experience and a successful track record in the function or sub-specialty you are interested in.

In either case, it is very important to have knowledge of the sector of activity of the company/institution or project. And the more the better, as each has its own peculiarities and challenges in terms of communication. A consultant who understands that particular industry will be able to offer tailored and more effective solutions. Make sure they have previously worked with similar organisations: this will have equipped them with crucial contextual understanding to develop communications strategies that impact your stakeholders (come on, stakeholders) and conform to industry-specific regulations and trends.

Creativity and strategic vision.

You are looking for an advisor who is not only able to think innovatively, creatively and, in some cases, even disruptively, but also has a clear strategic vision. The ability to develop original ideas and execute them coherently within a strategic framework is fundamental to achieving your communication objectives. Find out what he has done previously in this regard, with concrete examples, and how his work has been able to contribute to business objectives.

Adaptive capacity, well, resilience one would say now.

Corporate and institutional communication is constantly evolving, driven continuously by technological advances, changes in consumer preferences and unforeseen events, both internal and external, in the roadmap of organisations. It is crucial that your advisor is able to adapt quickly to these changes and, most importantly, to manage potential crisis situations with the necessary peace of mind. Look for examples of how the counsellor has handled sensitive or complex situations in the past and what steps the counsellor has taken to adjust communication strategies in response to changes in the business environment.

And now, a not so obvious tip : choose a consultant who values transparency and open communication in its relationship with you as a customer. He/she should be willing to listen to your needs and concerns, as well as provide you with regular updates on the progress of the project and the results achieved. Effective communication is not only about communicating messages to external audiences, but also about maintaining clear and open communication within the team.

Finally, and this is pretty obvious, before you commit to your candidate, take the time to research their track record and reputation. Ask for references from previous clients and seek testimonials that support the quality of the consultant’s work and their ability to meet the client’s expectations.

*Article written by Juancho Pajares, consultant and director of Communication and ESG at A Creative

La entrada Keys to choosing a good communication consultant se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

Yes, that’s a lot of questions. Clearly, it is not easy to measure the value of communication.. Of course, we can count the likes, shares and impressions, but what about the more intangible aspects of our work? How do we measure the impact of our efforts on the reputation of the brands we work for? How much is bad news worth? And a good one? We have already approached this dichotomy here using as an example the case of Iberdrola/El Confidencial.

This is a challenge facing all communications professionals and one that has become more difficult in the age of social media, yet at the same time equipping us with new and easier metrics. The media, the audience and their capacity for impact are constantly changing; In an age where anyone can be a critic, it is more important than ever to be able to quantify the value of our work;

The importance of measuring intangibles

Quantifying intangibles is a complex task.. While marketing tends to focus on measuring what is tangible – such as the number of leads, ROI, brand value – there are certain aspects of communication that are more difficult to quantify;

A company’s reputation, for example, is an intangible that has a huge impact on its success and valuation; It cannot be measured precisely, but its relevance is immense and we need to be able to quantify it; Similarly, the purpose or aspirations of a company are other variables that cannot be touched, but influence its outcome;

Communication professionals are looking for simple and feasible formulas to demonstrate the value of our work. Although it is not always easy to measure intangibles, it is important to do so in order to manage them but, above all, to be able to improve;

Last week a very interesting round table discussion was organised by the Association of Communication Consultants (ADC) -of which comma is a member-, and Anunciosmagazine. Title:‘Realities and challenges: KPIs and measurement in communication’. We wanted to talk about that, about what are the main metrics our sector should work with and how they should contribute to measure in an appropriate, fair and coherent way the PR actions;

The conclusions of the round table, summarised very aptly by our colleague from Hill+Knowlton Strategies Spain. Elena Serrano on her Linkedin: “What can’t be measured can’t be improved; if there are no accounts, they are just stories; and the need for organisations to specify cross-cutting and unified KPIs across departments in order to make sound and effective business decisions”, are very revealing; Where do we start?

One of the reasons why marketing has succeeded in absorbing communication skills is its ability to use quantitative metrics in a much more efficient way. According to José Manuel Velasco, citing Antonio Lópezteacher of teachers and honorary president of Dircom, “with the obsession with metrics we run the risk of focusing only on the short term and neglecting the magic of a job that involves managing relationships, emotions, feelings and solutions to problems that are often not easy to measure”. He adds:“But if the market asks for measurement, it will have to be measured;” The key is to develop metrics that combine short- and long-term goals, because communication must be conceived as a core component of sustainability, a goal that can only be served with the spotlight on;

At this stage, nobody questions the importance of metrics in the communication sector because we know the importance of the quantitative, but also of the qualitative, those intangibles that are increasingly evident in an environment where audiences are in more different media; No one doubts that business objectives must go hand in hand with communication objectives to achieve real brand impact;

But what should the method be?

The most curious thing of all is that there is no unanimity in the answer. Depending on who you ask, you will get one answer or another; At the end of the day, we tend to make measurements to measure: that’s how you are, that’s how we measure you; Some brands require one type of measurement more in line with their own organisation, others another;

The literature that has been created around the measurement of intangibles, although relatively recent, is prolific, but doesn’t quite hit on the consensus, industry-wide formula. There are different ways of measuring intangibles; One is by attribution of results (a process by which a value is assigned to an action based on its impact on the final result, such as market analysis, which measures the impact of an action in terms of sales, market share or any other quantifiable result. We are talking about the AVE method or the EAR); Another, by content analysis (assessing the impact of the campaign through the analysis of conversations on social networks and other online channels, which allows you to measure engagement and brand perception.

Whatever the method, we lack unanimity; The debate around the round table pointed out certain coordinates in relation to investment, training, technology, the competences of the different departments, transversality, tools… We have an important responsibility when it comes to disseminating homogeneously in organisations what the KPIs of each discipline are, not invading territories that are not our own and not allowing them to invade ours;

But there are two fronts on which we need to shed more light; The first is the growing demand from brands to determine metrics that really contribute to the business (perhaps because of the magnifying glass we mentioned earlier, which measures only the most tangible part); the second, the lack of a common, agreed and adaptable universal measurement system to changing circumstances so that we can all pull in the same direction;

Who takes the first step?

La entrada KPIs are a big issue. What cannot be measured, does not exist? se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

First of all, in order to understand why change is necessary, we must bear in mind the importance of communication in society: it is, no more and no less, what makes it possible for them to see one of their fundamental rights fulfilled: the right to information. And that is why it has to be, if not a pioneer, one of the first to show flexibility, innovation and adaptability in order to offer at all times the information that citizens demand.

In this way, different forms and formats of press releases, press releases, interviews, reports, articles and, the queen of them all: press conferences, have come down to our days. The purpose and objectives of all of them have been changing, but these meetings with journalists have always been the most sensitive, key and important point for companies and institutions. That is the only thing that has not changed.

Press conferences: a little history

Thus, press conferences have followed a path that has gone through markedly institutional, propagandistic, informative and commercial periods, and now it seems that everything seems to come together. There are times when, in fact, the real objective of the call is confused because it is ‘covered’ with one that is, a priori, more striking.

But this confusion has always been played upon. As early as the beginning of the 20th century, Ivy Lee called a press conference at the very spot where two trains of the Pennsylvania Railroad company for which she worked had collided. In this way, Lee prevented a tragic accident from becoming the company’s Achilles’ heel and turned it into its strong point, a true display of transparency whereby he provided journalists with all the information they required on the spot. Information, yellow journalism or both?

Be that as it may, with that press conference, Lee was laying the groundwork for free information and, without realizing it, was giving a master class in crisis management.

How have press conferences changed?

A century later, communication became highly commercial and, as a result, press conferences would come to be dominated by product presentations and the launching of new services. But only a few, among the hundreds that are held daily, stand out above the rest. Thus, in 2007, we find one of the most historic: Steve Jobs starred in the unveiling of the first iPhone. This press conference would mark a turning point, not only in the technology sector, but also in society by turning this mobile device into a true symbol of capitalism and consumerism. Jobs showed the first images of the device at 9.41am and, since then, that is the exact time the iPhone is unveiled at each presentation;

But press conferences must not only adapt their content to the new times, but also their format and how to present it to the press; Exceptional situations such as the one we experienced in 2020 caused face-to-face presence shares the throne with the virtual world. Who said it wasn’t possible?

Over the years we have witnessed the first telematic press conferences, which have now given way to hybrid models where journalists, spokespersons and public relations people can enjoy all kinds of press conferences from wherever they want, which has made us realise the opportunities that lie ahead. To do this, it is key to be clear about 5 things:

Differentiate the objective of your press conference;

It is not the same to summon the press for commercial purposes to present a new product than to summon them to communicate a corporate change or to analyse with them the current news; In fact, in times like these, journalists’ interest is more focused on the latter, so be sure to assess whether the content of the press conference is attractive enough to attract journalists; Otherwise, use other tools; Journalists will thank you;

Keep track of dates

If the press conference is feasible, keep track of important dates and other possible press conferences in the same sector so that your press conference does not coincide with any of them and, therefore, (tele)attendance and interest are higher;

Choose the format that best suits your needs

It can be telematic, face-to-face or hybrid; If it is telematic or hybrid, assess whether you are going to need to share a screen to make it easier for tele-attendees to see the content, whether you want them to see each other or only the press conference spokespersons, whether you want to set up a channel for questions, etc. In the case of an in-person event, make sure that the chosen location meets the logistical, seating and catering requirements you need;

Prepare the agenda, timetable and the interventions of the spokespersons

Both in terms of content (through the arguments and Q&A) and non-verbal language, making sure that all of this is framed within the stipulated time (ideally no more than 60 minutes), and reflect this very well in thebriefing that you need to prepare.

Anticipate possible unforeseen events at the press conference

Make a list of all the probable ones you can think of (there can always be one that you haven’t thought of) and prepare a solution to anticipate each one of them or, if that is not possible, solve them as soon as possible if they do arise: failures with the Internet network, sound coupling, room with a smaller (or larger) capacity than that of the final attendees, controversial/delicate issues in the journalists’ round of questions…

A good example of the latter is in the press conference given on 5 September 2022 by Christophe Galtier, Paris Saint-Germain football coach, and Kylian Mbappé, Paris Saint-Germain player, who were asked about the possibility of the French team travelling by train (instead of by plane) to cities near the French capital to protect the environment, they responded with laughter and irony, showing zero sensitivity to the fight against climate change and a totally disrespectful attitude towards the journalist who asked the question;

This caused a great stir in French society and its institutions, and put the team under the spotlight for totally unfortunate statements on a subject which, apparently and falsely, had nothing to do with the activity of a football team; What is clear is that time is passing and the press conferences remain the most sensitive time for an entity’s public appearance.

Improvising is forbidden at a press conference;

Preparing for them requires a great deal of work beforehand; Contextualisation; preparation of possible questions and their answers; preparation of spokespersons– tboth in terms of content and non-verbal communication -; taking care of off de records, etc.

It is the moment of public exposure from which it is necessary to emerge, at the very least, successful, but it is better if it is done triumphantly and, to do so, no aspect of your press conferences should be left to chance however unlikely you think it is to happen or however controlled you think they are; Otherwise, you could find yourself in a reputation crisis like Paris Saint-Germain;

La entrada Press conferences: renew or die se publicó primero en Agencia comma.

The aforementioned Directors of Communications, the invisible ones, exist in all sectors, and especially in big national companies (many of them working on some of the corporations listed in the prestigious IBEX35 index) and international ones. That is to say, that this bad practice is widespread. Can anyone imagine a director of the legal department who is not a lawyer and has not come up with a defence strategy for a dispute, which might affect the company? Or a director of Human Resources who does not decide the policy for recruitment and for the remuneration packages for the company? Why then is the Communications strategy in the hands of the Department of Corporate and Regulatory matters? Or why is it under the umbrella of marketing as something that is in third or fourth place in terms of importance? Or why does it depend on Human Resources?

The figure that oversees the Department of Communications in these companies, two or three levels below the figure head, in fact is ultimately the authentic Director of Communications, the one who defines the plan of communications and is in charge of its execution, who leads the team, has the vision, and on many occasions, has the powerful personal brand in the sector of Communications. Their salary is far below what is reasonable and their capacity to deal with problems is infinite. Of course, their chances of advancing their professional careers within a company are very narrow because the next step depends, on many occasions, on the complacency, closeness and loyalty you demonstrate to the boss. And we all know that a director of communications often has to say no to the CEO´s ideas.

And it is only getting worse. Some examples: the big oil company that loses its Director of Communications and once it has named the successor, then forbids that person to sit on the Board of Directors. Or the bank that hires a new Director of Communications and tells him he needs to earn his position on the Board of Directors, even though his predecessor had this position. Or the technology firm that has its Director of Communications report to its Director of Human Resources or the laboratory that reports to the sympathetic but ignorant (in terms of Communications) Head of Compliance. Infinite number of stories we hear about every day.

Honestly, is there any remedy for this? Why does the Association of Directors of Communications accept this state of affairs? What actual alternatives remain for the Directors of Communications to face the invisibles? The advice that I am used to giving to these brave professionals is to review their situation at each annual performance evaluation or speak with the Human Resources department about your plan of professional development; that they should demand clarity from their companies and that, if they are not able to do this or have already tried without any success, they should explore other opportunities in the market; that they should leverage their personal brand, making it visible in the network and participating actively in the sector.

La entrada Invisible DirComs se publicó primero en Agencia comma.