About the paper
The report analyses the state of internal communication and employee experience in 2023/24, with a strong focus on strategic influence, measurement, technology, channels, manager communication and communicator wellbeing.
It is based on Gallagher’s original global survey of more than 2,300 respondents conducted between October and November 2023 across 56 countries, supplemented by multivariate statistical analysis and calculated scoring models; the report’s scope is global, with half of respondents in North America and 41% in the UK and Europe.
Length: 41 pages
More information / download:
https://www.ajg.com/employeeexperience/state-of-the-sector/
Core Insights
1. What is the report’s central argument about the changing role of internal communicators?
The report’s core argument is that internal communicators are being pushed to become more strategic, more business-aware and more central to employee experience, but many organizations are still not investing in them, involving them early enough, or giving them the conditions to succeed. The report frames 2023/24 as a period in which communicators are expected to connect communication with business outcomes, culture, change, leadership visibility and employee understanding, while still dealing with familiar operational barriers such as low capacity, weak technology and limited budget.
That tension runs throughout the report. On one hand, the purpose of internal communication is increasingly tied to strategic alignment as well as culture and belonging. On the other hand, communicators still report structural obstacles that stop them from acting strategically, including lack of time or capacity, disengaged employees, insufficient budget and channels that are not fit for purpose.
So the report is not simply saying that internal communication has become more important. It is saying that the function is in the middle of a role redefinition: expected to drive business outcomes and employee experience, but still too often treated as a delivery function rather than a strategic one.
2. What evidence does the report present that a more strategic communication function performs better?
The strongest finding is that when communicators operate strategically rather than in merely advisory or supporting roles, employee understanding improves. The report explicitly states that topics handled strategically were more likely to be understood by employees at a good or excellent level. It quantifies this with an average employee-understanding rating of 10.8 for strategic communicators, compared with 10.4 for advisory and 9.7 for supporting roles, with statistical significance reported at P = .012.
The report also links strategic working to better use of measurement. Strategic communicators are described as more likely to use measurement data as evidence of value or ROI, and 47% of strategic communicators are using measurement to influence leadership. The text argues that strategic communicators align communication with broader business goals, plan ahead, set objectives, reflect on progress and combine quantitative data with qualitative insight.
There is also an important human dimension. The report finds that strategic communicators report higher wellbeing than advisory or supporting peers, suggesting that strategic influence is associated not just with better outcomes for organizations, but also with a stronger sense of purpose, fulfilment and control for practitioners themselves.
Taken together, the report’s evidence suggests that strategy is not a status label. It is a practical advantage: better understanding among employees, stronger leadership influence, more effective measurement and better wellbeing for communicators.
3. What does the report reveal about the profession’s main operational problems in 2024?
The report shows a profession under pressure from overload, constrained resources and weak organizational systems. The top reported barriers to success for 2024 are lack of time and capacity in the team at 35%, disengaged employees at 32%, lack of budget at 25% and internal technology or channels not fit for purpose at 24%. Volume of communication also rose in importance as a barrier, moving up to sixth place.
This is reinforced by the findings on change communication. Although nine in ten communicators expect organizational change in 2024, only 25% are part of the team making decisions around change. Just over half, 51%, are consulted only after decisions have already been made and are then asked to build the communication strategy afterwards. The report presents this as a major strategic weakness: communicators are often expected to drive engagement with transformation without being involved early enough to shape it.
The report also shows that topic volume and employee attention are becoming harder to manage. Strategy, vision and purpose remained the most-communicated topic, but change activity and business performance entered the top ranks as well, indicating a more business-heavy agenda. Yet employee understanding of change activity was only 36%, which points to a gap between what organizations are communicating and what employees actually grasp.
Another operational problem is that many communicators are still not set up with sufficiently coherent channel strategies. One in three respondents are dissatisfied with their channel mix, and one in three added a channel during the year, even though communication volume is already seen as a challenge. The report argues that channel frameworks, master plans, communication strategies and employee preference data all improve channel effectiveness and satisfaction.
So the report portrays the profession’s main practical problem as a mismatch between expectations and enabling conditions: organizations expect communication to deliver clarity, engagement and change, but often under-resource the function and involve it too late.
4. How does the report assess measurement, listening and the use of technology, including AI?
The report presents measurement as an improving but still constrained area. Communicators are collecting more data than in the previous year across reach, understanding, behaviour change and communication satisfaction. The share who said they “always” measure reach rose to 77%, understanding to 69%, behaviour change to 63% and communication satisfaction to 60%. The report sees this as encouraging because robust measurement appears to go hand in hand with a strategic approach.
Measurement is also being used more actively. Respondents increasingly use measurement to provide evidence of ROI, refine channels, tailor content, adjust messaging and request investment. At the same time, 84% say they want to measure more often or more comprehensively, but the main constraints are lack of time and resources, lack of metrics, and lack of tools for collation and analysis.
On listening, the report suggests that communicators are not abandoning qualitative insight in favour of metrics. Engagement surveys remain the most-used listening channel at 75%, but live Q&A, post-event feedback, listening sessions and focus groups are all highlighted as effective. Independent audits were the least-used method, but rated among the most effective. The report therefore advocates a balanced listening model combining formal measurement with richer qualitative channels.
On AI, the report presents a profession that is curious but still unevenly prepared. Sixty per cent of respondents say they are using AI in some way, from experimentation to developing their own solutions. One in three are experimenting with AI, and one in five are using it to create communications. At the same time, only 29% say their organizations have guidance on when, where or how to use AI, and only around one in five say their organization provides AI training or resources. Half say there is nobody in charge of AI, while 13% do not even know whether their company is using generative AI.
Attitudinally, the report shows guarded optimism. Forty-one per cent are “enthused” and 9% “championing”, but there remains a sizeable group marked by resignation, denial or fear. The report’s interpretation is that experimentation reduces fear and helps communicators see AI as a tool for efficiency rather than replacement, especially for high-effort, low-reward tasks.
5. What conclusions does the report draw about people managers, communicator wellbeing and the future of the profession?
The report concludes that people managers still matter, especially in hybrid and deskless environments, but that organizations cannot simply rely on them without support and accountability. Eighty-four per cent of respondents say they rely on managers for communication to some degree, yet three in five say manager communication is below expectations. Reliance on managers rises as the proportion of deskless employees rises, but manager performance ratings worsen in those contexts.
The report’s answer is not to remove managers from the communication chain, but to support them better. Managers perform better when they are evaluated on communication and when internal communication teams provide them with resources. Managers evaluated on communication are twice as likely to meet or exceed expectations, and on-demand learning, written resources, managers-only forums, training and coaching are the most common support tools.
On wellbeing, the report is notably sober. It says the post-pandemic glow around internal communication has faded. While 32% still describe the work as a passion and vocation, 44% say they love communications but could see themselves happy elsewhere. Over the past year, 38% say their wellbeing deteriorated, compared with 22% who say it improved. The report links this to weak business investment, heavy expectations and declining recognition.
The resourcing data supports that concern. For 2024, 47% expect their budget to remain the same and 17% expect it to be cut, while average team sizes are described as stagnating or shrinking, especially in enterprise organizations. The report warns that businesses risk losing talented communicators if they continue to undervalue the function.
Its final conclusion is therefore double-edged. Internal communication has a stronger business case than ever, and the report offers a clear action list around strategy, measurement, change, channels, manager support, AI and listening. But unless organizations back those expectations with real involvement, structure and investment, the profession’s capacity and morale will continue to erode.