What you can expect from internal comms in 2026

Internal communications have changed. The real question is whether our systems, habits and expectations have evolved alongside it.

For years, internal comms was primarily a distribution function. Its role was to share updates, cascade decisions and ensure employees were informed. That model worked when proximity carried much of the cultural weight: Offices created context, leadership visibility was assumed, and conversations filled in the gaps.

That is no longer the environment most organisations operate in.

In a hybrid, AI-shaped world, internal comms aren’t simply about the movement of information. It’s about connection, clarity and culture. It shapes how strategy lands, how change feels and whether people see themselves reflected in the organisation’s direction.

When only 10% of UK employees describe themselves as engaged at work, the stakes for getting this right could not be clearer.

Before Covid, much of organisational culture was absorbed informally. Employees overheard conversations, observed leadership behaviours and developed context through shared physical spaces. Internal comms largely existed to support that environment by broadcasting key information at the right time.

Today, between 90 and 95% of organisations operate some form of work-from-home policy. That shift has fundamentally changed how people experience work. The informal infrastructure that once reinforced clarity and culture has weakened. In its place, communication carries far more responsibility.

Internal comms are now expected to foster engagement, strengthen belonging and create alignment across distributed teams. It must bridge physical distance and provide context that no longer travels organically.

The challenge is that many communication systems were designed for a different era. While organisations have evolved from a one-way knowledge model to a more social, two-way conversation, the mechanics of communication have not always kept pace. Approval structures, content habits and channel strategies often remain rooted in broadcast thinking.

As a result, communications can feel transactional. Messages are sent, channels are updated and newsletters go out, but the experience can lack ownership, dialogue and emotional resonance.

60% of employees say internal updates are not engaging. The expectation has shifted from informing people to involving them.

One of the most persistent traps in internal communications is equating activity with effectiveness. In busy organisations, it's easy to focus on output. Campaigns are launched, content calendars are filled and dashboards show healthy distribution metrics.

But high send volume does not automatically translate into engagement.

The more meaningful question is what the communication is changing.

Internal comms should ultimately be measured by outcomes, not activity. For every major message, comms leaders should be able to articulate three things with clarity.

When those outcomes are defined from the outset, communication becomes strategic rather than reactive. When they are not, it becomes difficult to distinguish between busyness and impact.

Internal comms is not a publishing engine. It's a behaviour-shaping discipline.

Disengagement rarely stems from indifference. More often, it stems from misalignment.

People don’t disengage because they don’t care; they disengage because the communication often doesn’t feel relevant to them. Messages may be clear and professionally produced, yet still lack context, ownership or a sense of audience.

Leadership visibility plays a crucial role here. Employees are significantly more likely to engage with communication that comes from an identifiable, accountable leader rather than a generic inbox. Not because hierarchy is valued for its own sake, but because accountability builds trust.

A global, hybrid workforce can’t be effectively served by a single message distributed through a single channel. A frontline colleague consumes information differently from a desk-based employee. Access to technology, geography and working patterns all shape how communication is received.

Effective internal comms recognises this complexity and designs accordingly. That means equipping leaders and managers with clear narratives so they can contextualise change locally. It means segmenting communication thoughtfully rather than defaulting to company wide broadcasts. And it means designing campaigns that blend formats, from storytelling and recognition to interactive dialogue.

The commercial impact of getting this right is significant. McKinsey reports that effective communication can increase organisational productivity by 25%.

Another structural issue that undermines engagement is fragmentation. In many organisations, updates are shared in one place, policies live somewhere else and informal conversations happen in yet another channel. Employees are left unsure where the authoritative version of information sits.

When people cannot clearly identify a trusted source of truth, confidence erodes. Over time, they disengage from communication altogether.

This fragmentation does more than create inefficiency. It undermines trust.

Internal comms strategy should therefore be built around a clear and accessible central source of truth that connects communication, knowledge and conversation. In practice, this often includes:

When knowledge and communication are aligned, employees spend less time searching and more time engaging. When they are scattered, productivity suffers and belief weakens. Internal comms is inseparable from knowledge management. Treating them as separate disciplines is increasingly unworkable.

No modern discussion about internal communications is complete without acknowledging the role of AI.

Used thoughtfully, AI can accelerate drafting, improve search functionality, identify knowledge gaps and streamline workflows. It can remove friction from systems that have become overly complex and free up time for higher value work.

However, AI cannot replace accountability.

It can summarise information and support scale, but it cannot instinctively judge tone in sensitive moments. It cannot understand the lived experience of employees. And it cannot take responsibility for how a message lands.

The most effective organisations treat AI as a layer that enhances clarity and efficiency, not as a substitute for human voice. Structure, analysis and initial drafts can be supported by technology. Tone, context and final sign off remain human.

Over reliance on AI risks stripping away the authenticity and trust that internal comms exists to protect. Used well, it strengthens the system without diluting ownership.

The question is not whether AI has a place in internal comms. It's how to integrate it in a way that reinforces connection rather than replacing it.

The organisations seeing the strongest impact from internal communications share one characteristic. They position comms as a strategic partner, not a downstream distribution channel.

When internal comms is brought into conversations early, change initiatives land more effectively. When it's embedded in business planning, cultural messages are more coherent. When leaders are supported to communicate clearly and humanly, credibility increases.

In this model, internal comms play a central role in shaping organisational experience. It supports transformation programmes, strengthens leadership visibility, reinforces cultural behaviours and connects strategy to day to day reality.

It becomes culture infrastructure.

With engagement in the UK workforce sitting at 10%, according to Gallup 2025, treating internal comms as an afterthought is no longer viable. It's a lever that directly influences alignment, productivity and performance.

Internal comms can no longer be defined purely by output. Nor can it rely on legacy systems designed for a different way of working.

To succeed in a hybrid, digital workplace, organisations must design communication around people rather than platforms. They must integrate knowledge, context and conversation into a coherent system. Leaders must show up as humans rather than sign offs. And AI must be used to enhance clarity without eroding accountability.

There is no finished state to reach. Internal communications will continue to evolve alongside technology and organisational complexity.

But the direction is clear.

Move from broadcast to belonging, information to infrastructure and transactional updates to intentional engagement.

Because in a hybrid, AI-shaped world, internal comms have to be more than a message.