Going full circle: Why people-first internal communication is a return, not a revolution
Lee Smith
Minutes
16th January 2026
Employee Experience
Internal Communications
PFIC
Internal Communications
PFIC
Internal communication often presents itself as a profession in perpetual reinvention. New channels. New technologies. New frameworks. New job titles.
The argument at the heart of People-First Internal Communication is not that we need to invent something entirely new. It’s that we need to remember who we were before we became distracted by tools, tactics and transmission. In many ways, the future of our profession looks remarkably like its past – as Emma and I discovered as we began digging into the history of our profession.
But when we step back and look at our history, a different, and more reassuring, story emerges.
The argument at the heart of People-First Internal Communication is not that we need to invent something entirely new. It’s that we need to remember who we were before we became distracted by tools, tactics and transmission. In many ways, the future of our profession looks remarkably like its past – as Emma and I discovered as we began digging into the history of our profession.
Thanks to the Institutional History of Internal Communication project — and particularly the work of Professor Michael Heller — we now have a richer, evidence-based understanding of where internal communication came from, what it was originally for, and how it evolved.
What that history reveals is striking: internal communication began as a deeply human, relational and moral practice. Over time, it became increasingly technical, managerial and instrumental. And now, in the age of AI and constant change, the pendulum is swinging back.
The human-centred origins of internal communication
Long before internal communication was a “function”, it was a response to human need.
As Professor Heller’s research shows, these early practices were embedded in values: dignity, care, community and shared purpose. Back then, communication was inseparable from experience.
In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, early practitioners — often labelled welfare officers, editors or works managers — focused on connection, belonging, education and voice. Company magazines, noticeboards, councils and forums were designed not just to inform, but to humanise work at scale.
Organisations like Cadbury, Rowntree and Lever Brothers saw communication as part of a broader social contract between employer and employee. Listening mattered. Dialogue mattered. Culture mattered. Community mattered. The goal was not message alignment, but mutual understanding and connection.
As Professor Heller’s research shows, these early practices were embedded in values: dignity, care, community and shared purpose. Back then, communication was inseparable from experience.
The rise of process, control and consistency
As organisations grew larger and more complex through the mid-20th century, internal communication began to professionalise — and with that came a shift.
The post-war era prioritised efficiency, standardisation and hierarchy. Communication increasingly flowed downward. The role of internal communicators became closely tied to management objectives: clarity, consistency, compliance.
This wasn’t without value. Structure mattered. Process mattered. But something subtle was lost along the way. Communication became more about what was said than how it was experienced. Employees were audiences, not participants.
The history captured by the Institutional History of Internal Communication project helps us see this shift not as a failure, but as a reflection of its time. Stable organisations required stable narratives. In a chaotic world, control felt reassuring.
The expert-led, channel-obsessed era
By the late 20th and early 21st centuries, internal communication had become firmly established as a specialist discipline — but one increasingly dominated by channels, campaigns and outputs.
Intranets, newsletters, toolkits and cascades multiplied. Measurement focused on reach and engagement metrics. Professional credibility often came from technical mastery rather than human insight.
Ironically, as work became more complex and emotionally demanding, communication often became more transactional. The profession got very good at producing content — but sometimes less confident in shaping meaning, experience and behaviour.
This is the era many practitioners still recognise today. And it’s the context in which People-First Internal Communication was written.
Why the people-first shift feels inevitable
The age of AI has acted as an accelerant — and a mirror.
The six human strengths we describe in the book — curiosity, creativity, resilience, empathy, influence and courage — would have been instantly recognisable to early internal communicators, even if the language was different.
When machines can draft messages, analyse sentiment and automate distribution, the value of internal communication can no longer sit primarily in execution. It has to sit in judgement, empathy, facilitation and design — the very qualities that defined the profession at its birth.
This is where the historical lens is so powerful. What we are calling “people-first” is not a trendy rebrand. It’s a return to first principles:
- Communication as experience, not output
- Listening as a strategic act
- Meaning before messaging
- Culture shaped through everyday interactions, not campaigns
- Practitioners as facilitators of understanding, not just transmitters of information
The six human strengths we describe in the book — curiosity, creativity, resilience, empathy, influence and courage — would have been instantly recognisable to early internal communicators, even if the language was different.
Standing on the shoulders of history
The Institutional History of Internal Communication project has been invaluable in shaping this perspective. It has provided not just facts and timelines, but context — helping us see patterns, cycles and continuities that are easy to miss when you’re living through change.
Professor Michael Heller’s work, in particular, has reminded us that our profession has always been shaped by wider social, economic and technological forces — and that moments of disruption often trigger a return to human fundamentals.
We are deeply grateful for this scholarship. It has grounded our thinking, challenged our assumptions, and given us the confidence to say: this isn’t a leap into the unknown — it’s a reconnection with who we’ve always been at our best.
The circle completes — if we choose to let it
History doesn’t repeat itself neatly. But it does offer choices.
The future of internal communication may be powered by AI. But its purpose remains profoundly, unmistakably human.
We can continue down a path where internal communication is defined by speed, scale and surface-level engagement. Or we can consciously step back into a role that is older, richer and more impactful: designers of experience, stewards of meaning, and advocates for the human reality of work.
People-First Internal Communication is an invitation to complete the circle — not by abandoning everything we’ve learned, but by integrating it with the values that gave birth to the profession in the first place.
The future of internal communication may be powered by AI. But its purpose remains profoundly, unmistakably human.
