In The HR World’s webinar We Don’t Talk Anymore, sponsored by Thomas, Elcke du Plessis, Global Training Specialist, Thomas; Florence Carter, Global VP of People and Culture, Fuse Universal and Spencer Gray, People Business Partner, Thomas examined the challenges around handling communications within companies.
They explained how HR could help determine which channel was most appropriate for specific communications, and how best to use each channel, avoiding confusion and over-communications. The webinar is well worth a watch for the practical advice and examples given, but here below the panel address two more questions raised on the subject.
1: Do you think businesses and HR have the right to prevent people using certain platforms/channels for work? If so how can this be patrolled?
Spencer Gray: I don’t think it’s about having the right to prevent – it’s about having a clear rationale and being transparent about why certain platforms are or aren’t supported. It’s often about security, compliance, or data protection – and that’s fair. But the key is to explain the why, not just enforce the what.
At Thomas, we try not to take a ‘thou shalt not’ approach. Instead, we make it easy to use the tools we do support – and then build culture around those. If people are using WhatsApp or private channels for work, it’s often a sign that our official tools aren’t meeting their needs. So rather than policing behaviour, we ask: what’s missing from the current setup? What do people need to collaborate more easily?
I don’t like the term ‘patrolling’ as that makes HR sound like the ‘HR police’ which is something I feel the industry is trying to break away from. If teams know where to go for the right info, and feel confident in the tools provided, the need for using incorrect channels starts to disappear.
Elcke du Plessis: Businesses definitely have the right to prescribe which platforms and channels to use (they’re paying for it, after all!) – it’s about how these restrictions are communicated. When HR takes on the role of Enabler, not Enforcer, people will understand why certain tools are prohibited and feel supported in their use of the approved tools. The messaging should be framed as “protecting your work and your clients” instead of the simple “thou shalt not” approach Spencer mentioned.
Florence Carter: Yes, I believe businesses and HR have the right to restrict employee access to certain platforms and channels for work. This is important for the following reasons:
- Security: Some unauthorised platforms can pose security risks, exposing sensitive company data to breaches and cyberattacks.
- IP Protection: Restricting access helps safeguard confidential information, trade secrets, and other valuable IP from unauthorised dissemination.
- Confidentiality: Maintaining client and internal confidentiality. Uncontrolled platform usage can lead to accidental or intentional leaks.
These restrictions can be enforced by:
- Clear policies: Create relevant policies outlining acceptable and unacceptable platform use.
- Technical controls: your IT department can implement technical measures to restrict/ block access to prohibited sites and applications. I’ve worked in companies that have restricted use/ access of some sites and you need to submit a strong business case of why you need access, before it is granted.
- Monitoring: The IT department can conduct regular audits of network and device usage to identify potential violations. But this should be done in a way that respects employee privacy while maintaining security.
- Employee training and awareness: Educate your people about the risks associated with unauthorised platform usage and the importance of adhering to company policies. For example at Fuse we have an annual IT & Data Security Training and Assessment that all of our people need to complete and pass.
By combining clear policies, technical controls, and ongoing education, companies can effectively manage platform access and mitigate the associated risks.
2: Does the panel have any tips on how to prevent/deal with ‘word of mouth’ issues – when rumours etc. are spreading about the business?
Florence Carter: Dealing with word of mouth issues needs a proactive and transparent approach:
- Open-door policy:
- I always lead my team to keep close to our people, to keep a close ear to the ground to understand our people’s concerns and potential rumours that may be brewing. Early detection is important to prevent rumours from escalating.
- I encourage our people to voice their concerns directly to their managers or the People team, rather than relying on informal channels
- Proactive communication from Leadership:
- We have group Q&A sessions directly with our CEO, which is a powerful tool. These sessions provide a platform for leadership to directly address employee concerns, put things straight, listen to our people, and dispel any rumours.
- Regular updates from leadership, through various channels helps to keep our people informed and reduce uncertainty.
Spencer Gray: If rumours are flying around, that usually means there’s a vacuum – and people are filling it with their own version of events. Our job in HR and leadership isn’t just to correct the record, it’s to pre-empt the need for speculation in the first place.
When rumours do start, we address them head-on – not in a defensive way, but with curiosity. Where is this coming from? What’s the underlying fear or uncertainty? Because behind every rumour is usually a real concern that deserves to be heard – even if the story around it isn’t accurate.
So ultimately, it’s not about shutting down whisper networks – it’s about creating enough clarity and psychological safety in the original communication or decision, that people don’t need to whisper about them.
Elcke du Plessis: Totally agree — transparency is key, and it’s not a one-off effort. Regular, consistent updates from leadership build trust and reduce the need for people to seek answers elsewhere. It’s not just about responding to concerns when they surface, but about creating a steady rhythm of communication that keeps people informed and connected. When employees feel safe asking tough questions — and get honest, thoughtful answers — it reinforces a culture where clarity and trust are the norm, not the exception.
