Improve internal communication

How We Improved Our Internal Communication Through Everybody’s Favorite Thing: A Game

We know that a lack of internal communication can lead to losses in efficiency and therefore revenue. Something as easy to fix as communication doesn’t have to be complicated, so we decided to try something new.

Here at Emgage we are trying to live out our company values during our day-to-day tasks. The value of the week this week was Communication, and after a quick brainstorming session, we decided to go with Joy’s idea of communicating interdepartmentally whilst learning new things about our coworkers. Just off the bat, I want to say that this blog post does not dive very widely across industries, but it is a look into the depths of a company’s internal communication and what happened while trying to improve it.



The Rules:

How did your person exhibit one of the following four parts of the communication value at work:


  1. Listens well instead of reacting fast, so you can better understand
  2. Be concise and articulate in speech and writing
  3. Treats people with respect, independent of their status or disagreement with you
  4. Understands “conflict avoider” vs “conflict seeker personality types and where you fit and how to work with the other style.



The Players:

Andrew: Had Joy. Part of her job is conducting demos for prospects.  She communicates well by not only listening to what they want, communicates well back to them on how to help solve their problems. That happens internally as well because she talks to us about those conversations and tells us what we need to know about them in order for us to help as well. Every single demo, she listens to the potential customer’s requests and dives deeper into what they want to see and need.



Todd: Had Preston. He listens well and doesn’t react fast. However, there was this one instance where he was working on a support case. He kept responding quickly because one of our goals is to get support information out as soon as possible.  The customer appreciated the quick responses, but asked Preston to take a day and give a really comprehensive solution that would be the best option. After Preston did so, it was well received and appreciated by the client and it was an example that reacting fast isn’t always the best and listening really helped the situation.



Kelly: Had Patrick. He was on the phone for 2 hours trying to fix the phones in the office and I don’t think he could have been successful without listening very well before making quick decisions, being concise, and treating the other person with respect.  Both didn’t get mad, stayed cool and had to deal with each other’s personality types and finally fixed the phone. He added 3 more phone lines and saved 25$ a month.



Joy: Had Harout. I observed him doing BDR work on the phone and he acknowledged the hard work it took, calling people that signed up for the webinars and trying to solve the solutions. For some of the lower level people who he talked with, he explained it very well and treated them with respect and was able to get the numbers of the higher level people and get new opportunities.



Michael: I had Jon. We had to do code reviews with another team, and he exhibited the 2nd and 3rd points. When people are just learning a new code like react, it’s easy to say not nice things about it. But he treated them with respect and empathy and told them how to fix their code.



Jon: Had Harsimran. Last week he did a really good job helping Michael and I settle, making sure we had everything we needed. He would check in every hour or so asking if we needed help with anything. At one point he spent an hour helping me debug a component I had been working on for half of the day, even though he had his own stuff to work on. He was clear and concise and communicated very well and it made our workdays much easier.



Me: Had Geoff. Last week was webinar week which means his workload tripled. On Wednesday he came to Kelly and I and said we had a lot of things to do since he needed to prioritize being in the sales room. He explained that we had to do a lot of things he would normally do. He was very concise in explaining our tasks and he wrote them down so we didn’t have to ask him more questions and trusted us with doing these very important tasks.  He avoided conflict by not trying to do it himself and was great at listening and answered the questions that we did end up having.



Geoff: I failed at communication because Preston had Todd and I forgot to tell him. So I’m going to give a communication review. He’s very respectful whenever helping anybody within the company in any department. Harout chipped in and said, “If Todd could be described in one word, it would ‘concise.’ I am super busy sometimes and he’s very good at telling me all I need to know very concisely.”



The Results:

Overall we agreed that our internal communication had improved this week not only because were we aware of it , but this game gave a reason to try to exemplify it and put it into practice. We want to try use similar games like this to encourage engagement in our company values every week.

No Comment