Employee Login

Enter your login information to access the intranet

Enter your credentials to access your email

Reset employee password

Article

FleishmanHillard Launches the “America 250” Unit to Help Organizations Navigate a Historic Milestone

May 12, 2026

The new offering supports brands and institutions in capturing opportunity and managing risk surrounding the United States’ upcoming 250th anniversary.

FleishmanHillard today announced the launch of an America 250 Unit, a specialized offering designed to help brands and organizations navigate the opportunities and complexities surrounding the United States’ 250th anniversary in 2026.

The semiquincentennial of the United States marks a defining cultural and civic moment, expected to drive unprecedented levels of national excitement, global attention, and engagement. For organizations, it presents a unique opportunity to connect with audiences, demonstrate shared values, and build lasting brand relevance. At the same time, it introduces heightened reputational risk as companies operate within an increasingly polarized and fast-moving environment.

“America 250 is not just a milestone. It is a defining moment for how organizations show up in culture, in communities, and in the national conversation,” said Jim Joseph, Global Head of Brand Impact, FleishmanHillard. “There is enormous opportunity for brands to engage in meaningful ways, but it must be done with precision, authenticity, and a clear understanding of the broader environment. Our clients are looking for guidance that balances ambition with accountability, and that’s exactly what this unit is built to deliver.”

FleishmanHillard’s America 250 Advisory Unit brings together experts across corporate affairs and brand impact to help clients both leverage and navigate this moment in order to build brand value while protecting reputation.

A Comprehensive Approach to America 250

FleishmanHillard’s America 250 Unit will provide clients with a full suite of capabilities, including:

  • Strategic counsel on positioning, narrative development, and stakeholder engagement
  • Risk assessment and scenario planning for reputational and political sensitivities
  • Partnerships and alignment with official and unofficial America 250 organizations
  • Earned media strategy and collaboration with leading publishers, media platforms, and influencers
  • Executive visibility and thought leadership programming tied to the milestone
  • Always-on intelligence and audience insights through a dedicated America 250 client newsletter and briefings

FleishmanHillard counselors are already in regular contact with key stakeholders shaping the America 250 ecosystem, including organizers, policymakers, media organizations, and cultural institutions. This access enables clients to identify credible opportunities and engage early in the planning cycle.

“We’re already working across more than a dozen clients to help shape how they engage in this moment,” said Michael Moroney, Head of Corporate Affairs, The Americas, FleishmanHillard. “What’s clear is that this is not a one-size-fits-all opportunity. It requires a thoughtful balance of brand ambition, cultural awareness, and risk management. We’ve developed internal playbooks and frameworks to help clients move quickly, while ensuring they are aligned, relevant, and prepared for scrutiny.”

The America 250 Unit reflects FleishmanHillard’s broader strategy to lead clients through moments where business, brand, policy, culture, and reputation converge. As organizations face increasing pressure to take positions and engage authentically, the firm’s integrated model ensures that communications strategies are both impactful and resilient.

Click above to download our Leadership Playbook ‘License To Lead’
Article

Your Employees Are Disengaged. Listening Isn’t Enough. Follow-Through Is.

May 7, 2026
By Emily Barlean

Employee engagement is in freefall.

Globally, just 20% of employees are engaged right now. That’s down from 23% in 2022. The rest are either coasting or actively spreading discontent. And it’s costing the economy an estimated $10 trillion in lost productivity. That’s roughly 9% of global GDP.

Why? The reasons are layered. People are operating in a climate of ongoing uncertainty and anxiety. Organizations are asking them to absorb near-constant change while doing more with less. Priorities keep shifting. Expectations are high. Support feels thin.

In this environment, one thing becomes critical for employees: feeling heard. Employees want visibility and agency, especially when circumstances keep shifting.

Here’s where most organizations fall short: they have the listening infrastructure in place — surveys, focus groups, meetings — but they stop after intake. Organizations collect the feedback and then the trail goes cold. No explanation of what happens next. No visible follow-through. No proof that the input actually mattered.

Why Organizations Stop After They Collect Feedback

Most companies confuse listening with infrastructure. They build the intake mechanisms and believe that’s the work. But listening and acting are two separate systems, and most have only built one.

Here’s the typical sequence: data comes in, analysis happens, someone files a report and leadership reviews it. Then silence. Employees wait. They shared something. Where did it go? Is anyone actually doing anything? Will anyone tell them what happened?

The radio silence breaks trust faster than the listening ever builds it.

Organizations aren’t malicious. They’re just flawed. They’ve invested in collection and haven’t built the response system. And that’s the gap that’s costing them retention, engagement, and productivity.

What Best-in-Class Organizations Actually Do

Leading companies layer multiple channels — skip-level meetings, focus groups, roadshows, ask-me-anything sessions, pulse surveys. No single source of truth. Just a wide enough net so they catch every voice.

But the channels are only the starting line. The separation happens in what comes after.

Best-in-class organizations designate specific leaders with clear accountability for the feedback process and they communicate that ownership internally. Then — this is the part most organizations skip — those leaders communicate back.

They share what feedback they received. They explain what actions they’re taking in response. They articulate what they decided not to do and why. They use videos, infographics, town halls, and repeat the message until it actually lands.

The result? Employees feel heard. Even when the answer isn’t what they wanted. Because they see their input shaped the decision-making process.

The Gamechanger: Building an Employee Communications Council

The most effective organizations embed employees directly into the decision-making process, not as a token gesture, but as a real intelligence mechanism. One way to do this is to establish an employee communications council.

Representative of different areas of the business, this group can be enlisted to review communications before rollout and serves as an early-warning system: Is this landing? What are we missing? Where will this break down on the front lines?

But a council only works if the organization acts on its feedback. When the organization adjusts messages, channels and other approaches in accordance with the council’s input, internal communications effectiveness can improve – and so can important metrics, such as awareness, understanding, confidence and engagement.

The Bottom Line

Disengagement isn’t just a morale problem. Often, it’s a trust problem.

Employees stop believing their voice matters when organizations collect feedback and then operate in silence. Employers break trust when they keep employees guessing about decisions that affect them.

Building real listening systems requires courage from both sides. Employees have to trust that speaking up will make a difference. Leaders have to be willing to share what’s happening, even when the answer isn’t what people want to hear. They have to trust their workforce with transparency.

The companies pulling away from the pack right now aren’t just the ones with the best culture decks or compensation packages. They’re the ones treating employee feedback as business intelligence. They understand that in times of uncertainty, people don’t just need information. They need proof that their voice shapes decisions and that their leaders trust them enough to be honest about what’s happening next.

Ready to build a listening – and response – strategy that actually closes the loop?

Article

PRovoke Media Names FleishmanHillard a Top Agency in the UK and Europe

April 30, 2026

PRovoke Media has named FleishmanHillard one of the 70 best agencies in the UK and one of the 60 best agencies in Europe as part of their 2026 agency rankings.

For the UK rankings, PRovoke notes: “FleishmanHillard’s UK business is making a clear, unapologetic bet: that scale still matters in communications, but only if it is matched by transformation.” The ranking continues: “the Omnicom agency has spent the past 18 months rebuilding momentum and sharpening its proposition around a more integrated, future-facing model. The tone is notably more direct than in previous years, with a clear internal view that the traditional big agency model is not obsolete, but it does need to evolve quickly to stay relevant.”

“Beyond structure, the agency’s evolution is being driven by a clearer point of view on how communications works now. FleishmanHillard is leaning into what it describes as a shift from “spray and pray” media relations towards a model built on identifying the audiences that matter most and engaging them through the channels and voices they trust.”  Read the Full Ranking from PRovoke.

For their rankings of the 60 Best Agencies in Europe, PRovoke notes that “FleishmanHillard’s Continental European business reflects a consultancy model built for complexity, combining deep corporate affairs expertise with an increasing focus on brand impact, data and integrated communications across markets.”

PRovoke also called out the commitment to embedding AI and data at all levels of the agency. “FleishmanHillard has also continued to invest in data and AI as part of its integrated intelligence model, embedding these capabilities across teams rather than treating them as specialist add-ons. This is supported by ongoing training and development programs designed to ensure that all consultants are equipped to work in a more data-driven environment.” Read the Full Ranking from PRovoke.

The rankings follow PRovoke’s naming FleishmanHillard as one of the top PR agencies of the world earlier in 2026 in addition to singling out the ConsumerTechnologyHealthcarePublic Affairs and Corporate practices.

Article

The AI Readiness Gap Series: Why Normalization Is the Most Skipped, and Most Essential, Phase of AI Adoption

By Zack Kavanaugh

This is the second installment in a series on what it takes to close the gap between AI investment and tangible business impact.

In the first piece, I argued that the real barrier to AI adoption is not the technology itself. It is the human side of change. You can have the tools, investment and strategic urgency — and still fall short if your people are not ready to come with you.

A new data point from Harvard Business Review reinforces just how widespread this challenge has become. In its annual AI & Data Leadership Executive Benchmark Survey, 99% of respondents said investments in data and AI are a top organizational priority.

And yet, 93% identified human issues — culture and change management — as the key challenge to AI adoption, the highest percentage in the survey’s 15-year history.

That is the paradox organizations are facing right now. We have never been more aligned on the importance of AI, and we have never been clearer about what is standing in the way.

So, what do we do about it?

That is what this series is for. In forthcoming posts, I will go deeper into each phase of the AI adoption continuum I introduced in the first piece, starting with the one most organizations rush past: normalization.

What Normalization Means

Normalization is not a communications campaign. It is not a CEO video about the future of work. And it is not a training session scheduled before a platform goes live.

It is the deliberate, ongoing work of helping people feel safe, supported and included as they begin to make sense of AI and what it may mean for their work. It is how organizations “de-weird” the technology, create space for honest questions and begin making AI feel like something that belongs in everyday work rather than something being imposed from above.

Why Normalization Matters

Psychological safety is a critical condition for learning, experimentation and collaboration. When people don’t feel safe, they don’t ask questions, test ideas or admit what they don’t know. They comply quietly, or they quietly disengage. Neither is adoption.

The goal of normalization is to close the distance between where people are emotionally and where the organization needs them to be. Some employees will move quickly and begin experimenting right away with the tools they now have at their disposal.

Others will be unfamiliar, skeptical or unsure what this shift means for their role, their value or their future. For those employees especially, adoption does not begin with training. It begins with the feeling that engaging with AI will not make them look foolish, irrelevant or behind.

And creating that kind of readiness requires three things done well.

Three Things That Actually Work in the Normalization Phase

1. Create space – and systems – for listening.

The biggest mistake organizations make in this phase is starting with all the answers. They launch the platform, send the announcement, schedule the training – and assume those things alone will shift mindsets and change behavior.

They won’t.

What creates the conditions for readiness is being heard first. At its core, this means building an ongoing conversation about AI across the organization – one that gives employees regular, low-pressure spaces to surface questions and ideas, voice concerns and get honest responses.

That can take several forms: Office hours. Small-group sessions. Open Q&A. Pulse surveys and live polls. Not as symbolic gestures, but as mechanisms for shaping how AI gets introduced into the work people actually do.

And if you’re going to ask people to take the time to engage, you must show that what they share matters. The only thing worse than not asking employees for feedback is asking and then ignoring what you hear.

That’s why listening cannot be treated as a singular event. It has to be built into the rollout itself.

One all-hands meeting is not an AI listening strategy. Listening has to be structured, recurring and visibly tied to action. When people see their input reflected in how your AI transformation evolves, trust grows. When they don’t, skepticism hardens.

2. Coach leaders to show curiosity.

This may be the most uncomfortable shift for many leaders — and one of the most important.

We often expect leaders to project confidence during change: Here’s where we’re going. Here’s why it’s the right call. Here’s what I need you to do. In many transformations, that kind of clarity is reassuring. But AI introduces a level of uncertainty that makes a different posture more effective.

Much of this is still unfolding, and employees know that. When leaders over-index on certainty, it can unintentionally create distance. What tends to build trust instead is transparency – a willingness to share what is clear, what is still emerging and what they themselves are learning along the way.

Leaders who say, Here’s what I tried last week. Here’s where it didn’t go as expected. Here’s what I’m still figuring out, give their teams permission to approach AI the same way: openly, curiously and without needing to have everything resolved upfront. In doing so, they model the kind of learning culture this moment requires.

And this does not have to be overly formal. It can be as simple as a leader taking a few minutes in a team meeting or a 1:1 to share how they have been using AI, where it has helped, where it has fallen short and then asking whether others are seeing similar use cases or running into similar issues. Moments like that make AI feel less abstract and more like part of how the team solves problems and gets work done.

A little humility goes a long way here. Saying, We don’t have all the answers yet, but we want to understand what you’re seeing and what you need, helps build the trust and reciprocity that make people more willing to engage over time.

3. Engage both champions and skeptics.

Most AI rollouts activate champions. Fewer engage skeptics.

That’s a missed opportunity – and often a source of quiet resistance that never gets addressed.

Champions build belief. They carry peer influence, spread early momentum and make it socially safe to try.

But skeptics matter too. They ask the questions others are hesitant to raise, stress-test the strategy and identify blind spots the optimists have not yet considered.

And both groups need to be identified across the organization. The concerns people have, the language that resonates, and the use cases that feel relevant will differ by role, function, team and location. A centralized group of AI-forward employees alone will not catch those nuances.

Bring both into the process. Involve them in reviewing messaging before it goes out. Ask them to serve as ears on the ground within their teams, surfacing the quiet hesitations people may not yet be voicing openly. Invite them to curate real-world examples, flag what feels off and help co-create the evolving story – not just receive it.

When the people most likely to champion the change and the people most likely to question it both have a hand in shaping the narrative, two things happen: the strategy gets sharper, and trust grows. That makes the rollout more credible, because it starts to reflect the reality of how different parts of the organization will actually experience it.

How You Know It’s Working

Normalization isn’t a box you check. It’s a condition you build. Here are three signals that tell you the work is landing:

  • Safety and trust are growing. Survey data and anecdotal feedback show people feel comfortable asking questions about AI – even uncomfortable ones.
  • Ownership is being distributed. Champions and skeptics are in the room, giving honest input, not just nodding along.
  • Early participation is building. Attendance at office hours, demos and opt-in sessions is growing – not because it’s mandatory, but because people are curious and finding value from what you’re sharing.

These signals matter because they show people are getting more comfortable – asking questions, engaging more openly, and beginning to see where AI might fit into their work.

But that does not mean everyone is in the same place. In most organizations, some people will already be experimenting or integrating AI into parts of their workflow, while others are still making sense of what this technology means for their role, their value and their day-to-day work.

That is why normalization matters. It is not something you complete before moving on. It is the ongoing foundation that helps leaders understand where people are, how they are experiencing the change and what they need next as the work continues.

Organizations should be moving. But they need to keep listening as they do. That is what makes adoption more coherent, more durable and more likely to spread beyond the early adopters.

Article

Live from the PRWeek Sports Conference: A Team-First Approach to Communications

April 28, 2026

Nine Bay Area counties, three major organizations and 6,500 journalists all speaking as one required daily calls, clear decision rights, relentless scenario planning and no ego. Here’s the playbook.

PR Week Sports Conference
From Left to Right: Mitch Germann, Ellie Caple, Katie Hill and Zaileen Janmohamed at the PRWeek Sports Conference.

An integrated communications playbook is as good as the teams buying into it. That was a driving force behind the PRWeek Sports Conference session “Inside the Huddle: Navigating a Complex Multi-Stakeholder Environment for Super Bowl LX.”

Football’s main event brings together one of the most complex communications ecosystems in all of sports including a host committee, the NFL, the venue, sponsors, partners, local municipalities, civic leaders and the media. All are moving at lightning speed, merging on the host city to tackle communications challenges both planned and unpredictable. Aligning these varying voices and stories across different stakeholder audiences requires precision, trusted relationships and a shared vision for success.

Enter the panel’s sports leaders who put theory aside for an intimate look at the actual modern playbook that stood up to the forces inside one of sports communications’ biggest pressure cookers. What they made clear: success managing the intensity of game day and the preceding Super Bowl media week hinges on the culture built over months of close collaboration. As the World Cup heads to the Bay Area later this summer, that integrated playbook is about to be activated at an even larger scale.

Lessons Learned from Previous Big Games

“Comms and PR was an essential part of our strategy from very early on,” said Zaileen Janmohamed, President and CEO of the Bay Area Host Committee. She explained that the organization absorbed a great deal of intelligence from the group who worked on Super Bowl 50 ten years prior.

“I think the narrative that came out of that event wasn’t as strong or consistent as the 49ers or other teams wanted to see around the Bay,” Janmohamed said. “Which is why we put comms at the forefront of every single thing that we did this year.”

Building the Architecture

Mitch Germann, Chief Growth Officer at FleishmanHillard, also served as Head of Communications for the Bay Area Host Committee, positioning him at the center of coordinating across all three organizations. In this unified structure, the NFL drove global narrative and the integration of emerging voices into the league’s growing audience footprint. The San Francisco 49ers focused on community impact and ground intelligence. The Bay Area Host Committee owned regional stakeholder coordination across nine counties.

“Without clarity, things slip through the cracks,” said Katie Hill, SVP of Communications at the NFL. “You lose sight around corners. Your scenario planning isn’t going to be as strong.”

Hill painted a dizzying picture of the wide-ranging stakeholder ecosystem—including creators, elected officials, sponsors, reporters, broadcast partners—that brought home how many audiences need to be reached and pleased in a tight timeframe. “It’s about mapping out that whole ecosystem and then figuring out what information does each group need? What are their needs and wants? Who best owns that relationship? And then what’s the best tactic and the best timing to reach them?”

“World-class process leads to world-class outcomes.”

The Connective Tissue Between Teams

“There was no ego,” Janmohamed said of the integrated team structure. “It’s just a relentless focus on detail and process.”

“We felt that the game was going to live and die in people’s memory of what happened, not necessarily what actually happened,” said Ellie Caple, VP of Corporate Communications and Public Affairs for the San Francisco 49ers.

In order to mitigate potential issues, down to traffic and littering, the team engaged government and community leaders who became “pseudo-spokespeople” for the event, distributing ground intelligence and ensuring stakeholders felt prepared and informed.

“We really wanted to spend time talking about the philanthropic work that we were doing in the community, the economic impact of an event like this and then to talk about the stadium itself and the opportunities that come with having a stadium to really attract global events into the region. Those were the sort of narrative touchdowns for us.” Caple said.

Janmohamed also kept a north star of messaging simple: Uniting the Bay through Sport. One narrative repeated for months until stakeholders started repeating it back unprompted.

“We just kept hitting the same points. We talked about this unification of this region coming together all the time, building pride, connecting our communities and it got to be so consistent that all of these stakeholders then basically just repeated it back out. That’s when you know the messaging has resonated.” Janmohamed said.

Getting Ready for the Next Big Game

The Super Bowl communications challenge was solved well before game day with rock-solid infrastructure, scenario planning and genuine camaraderie among leaders willing to check ego at the door.

As the World Cup comes to the Bay Area this summer, this same playbook will be tested at an even larger scale—coordinating not just nine counties but multiple continents and audiences. The framework that proved effective in San Francisco is about to prove itself again.

For organizations managing stakeholder complexity, the takeaway is straightforward: build infrastructure before you need it.

Article

How to Shape a Brand’s AI Visibility in 2026: Six Moves for Communications Teams

By Margaux Vega

As AI increasingly determines what gets said about brands, communications teams can rise as architects of brand visibility – driving the credibility, narratives, and signals that AI relies on. This article outlines the six strategies communicators can use to help shape whether their brand shows up in AI, and how.

PR has always been about relationships. The ones that move needles, build credibility, and shape how the world sees you. Now, the most powerful voices are AI powered assistants you’ll never meet, answering questions you’ll never hear.

When someone asks ChatGPT or other Large Language Models (LLMs) about your company, they get a synthesized answer from thousands of sources, including your website, your LinkedIn posts, your press releases and your hard-earned media coverage.  And only 8% of people consistently verify these responses. The vast majority just accept them at face value.

While these changing behaviors have become the new enemy of the C-suite, it is re-writing the playbook for you as a communicator, putting PR professionals at the most powerful intersection to solve it.

How? You influence what gets published. You shape narratives and determine consistency. You build the earned media relationships that influence these LLM systems. And you have meaningful leverage to shape how AI learns about your company.

This is not a new job. It’s the same job with a much larger stage.

Top 6 Communications Strategies to Increase Potential AI Visibility

AI is evolving quickly, but you can drive positive impact today through everyday programming you already know how to do. Here is how to get started:

1. Press releases are your AI blueprint. Despite the name, press releases are really just centralized documents that help explain your brand and your products. As AI has emerged, press releases have returned as a valuable source of truth to inform how machines understand you too. In a recent audit, FleishmanHillard found that optimized releases, on a company’s owned newsroom, can inform as much as 20% of what appears when someone asks an LLM about your company. Publish press releases and write them for machines – which luckily will make them easier for humans to read too – with clarity, facts first, no fluff. Make it crawlable and easily extractable. Make it count.

2. Depth beats reach. Vertical-specific publications that go deep on your topic can carry more weight with AI than hundreds of mentions in top-tier press. In many cases FleishmanHillard has seen single outlets contribute to 20-50% or more – of all AI responses about a single brand. Identify who these folks are for you and help them write informative and detail-rich stories. While maybe smaller in traditional reach, these key media carry huge, concentrated influence tohelp make your company visible within LLM responses.

3. Consistency wins. AI systems reward consistency. It’s one of the strongest signals of credibility. If your brand says different things across your website, press releases, bios and media coverage, it weakens trust and LLMs will turn elsewhere. Standardize 2-3 positioning statements, key topics of importance, and repeat them relentlessly. Every consistent mention reinforces the last. This is how machines learn to trust you and how you can build authority.

4. Answer the questions they’re actually asking. Identify your top 10 audience questions about your space. Better yet, ask ChatGPT what they are. Then answer them. Directly. Publish them where AI will find them. When LLMs search for expert voices in your category, yours should be cited.

5. If you want it known, it must be published: LLMs need data to crawl, so if something important lives behind a paywall or happens at a live event, it is largely invisible in AI outputs. Publish it on YouTube, LinkedIn, your blog, and your website. The content you put out is the content AI learns from. The content you gate might as well not exist.

6. Technical details matter: Metadata. Schema markups. Structured headings. You can partner with your web team on this. It can be the difference between being crawlable and creating unbranded real estate. Make sure it’s done.

The C.R.A.W.L.S. Framework to Increase AI Visibility Strategy

These six moves form a framework that can be easily remembered. Just remind yourself to create a strategy that C.R.A.W.L.S.

  • Consistency.
  • Releases.
  • Authority.
  • Written.
  • Linchpin media.
  • Structured backend.

If yes to all six, you’re not just generating coverage. You’re actively educating the systems that shape how the world understands your brand.

You Already Know How to Do This

LLM accuracy will depend heavily on the quality of input. PR teams will be able to create and optimize content that has the most potential to be visible to LLMs and help shape how their industry is defined.  

Margaux Vega width= Margaux Vega Is a FleishmanHilllard senior lead and strategist for Fortune 500 companies, driving integrated communications from strategy to shape brand perception at scale. At the forefront of new ways of communications thinking, Margaux is focused on visibility and influence in an AI-first landscape.

 

 
Article

Rebecca Weinstein and Jonathan Arias Win the 2026 U.S. Young Lions Digital Competition

April 23, 2026

FleishmanHillard’s Rebecca Weinstein and Jonathan Arias have won the Digital category of the 2026 U.S. Young Lions competition, taking home top honors for their concept “Tiny Tiny Desk Concerts.”

Their work focuses on the concept of a partnership with NPR’s iconic “Tiny Desk Concerts” series to let student musicians perform and record at their desks. Every single recorded and sold will fund music education through Save The Music Foundation, supporting the nonprofit’s work across more than 285 school districts nationwide.

Weinstein and Arias will represent TEAM USA at the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity, competing against the world’s top young creatives from June 22-26. FleishmanHillard served as the Digital category sponsor for this year’s competition, which also showcased strong talent from across the Omnicom Public Relations network. Weber Shandwick’s June Hernandez and Valiant Freeman won the PR category with a concept rooted in the power of silence, a partnership with the New York Philharmonic that highlights the real consequences of music education cuts through social and experiential activations.

“The 2026 TEAM USA winners reflect exactly why this competition matters: it gives the next generation of creative talent the opportunity to showcase their sharp, strategic thinking while advancing an important cause,” said Mike Rosen, Chief Revenue Officer at NCM. “Each winning team delivered fresh ideas that will help Save The Music reach new audiences and expand its impact. We’re excited to see them represent the U.S. on the global stage in Cannes.”

All five winning teams across Digital, Film, PR, Print, and Media categories will compete on the global stage in Cannes.

Article

A Corporate Communications Evolution: Strategies for the Agentic Age

April 22, 2026
By Matt Rose

Corporate Communications has long operated on a stable premise: organizations craft messages, distribute them through controlled and earned channels, and monitor how those messages are received. While tools and platforms have evolved, the underlying model has remained largely intact. At its core, the function exists to sustain visibility, build trust, and protect and enhance reputation among key stakeholders in ways that support business performance and long-term value.

Artificial intelligence challenges that model at a structural level.

The most significant shift is not faster content production or the automation of routine tasks. It is the growing role of AI as an intermediary in how information is consumed, interpreted, and acted upon. Where algorithms once filtered what audiences saw, AI now reshapes it. Organizations are no longer communicating directly with stakeholders; they are communicating through systems that filter, summarize, and reframe information before it ever reaches human audiences.

This shift extends well beyond efficiency. Historically, Corporate Communications assumed that messages, while filtered by journalists, analysts, and platforms, would remain largely intact if those filters were well understood. AI changes that dynamic. Information is no longer simply filtered; it is deconstructed and recombined with other sources to produce new outputs such as summaries, recommendations, and comparisons. Organizations are therefore not communicating discrete messages but contributing inputs into systems that determine how those messages are ultimately presented and understood. The implication is a shift from controlling the message to structuring both message and context, so that they are interpreted accurately by AI systems.

The Changing Nature of Information Consumption

Across stakeholder groups, this dynamic is already taking hold. Investors use machine-assisted tools to analyze earnings calls and identify inconsistencies. Journalists rely on AI to accelerate research and draft initial narratives. Policymakers and regulators are beginning to incorporate AI-generated summaries into their workflows. Customers and patients are turning to AI as a primary source of information and interpretation. In each case, information is no longer encountered in its original form. It is mediated.

This introduces a new layer of risk and opportunity. Errors, inconsistencies, or ambiguities can be amplified quickly. At the same time, well-structured, consistent information can be propagated more effectively than ever before. As a result, narrative control is shifting upstream, from the point of publication to the point of interpretation.

In this environment, the traditional focus on outputs is no longer sufficient. Press releases, speeches, and media engagement remain important, but they are only part of the picture. What matters is not just whether a message is distributed, but whether it is understood as intended across a range of human and machine interpreters. This requires a shift from outputs to systems.

From Outputs to Systems

An effective communications function must be capable of continuously ingesting external signals, interpreting their significance, generating aligned messaging, assessing potential risks, and executing responses in a coordinated manner. These activities must be integrated rather than siloed and must operate at a speed that reflects the pace of the external environment.

Many organizations are experimenting with discrete AI applications, such as automated content generation or enhanced media monitoring. While these efforts can deliver incremental value, they do not address the underlying structural challenge. Without integration, they risk creating a patchwork of capabilities that improves efficiency in isolated areas but does not fundamentally improve how the organization is understood or how effectively communications supports business outcomes.

The Emergence of Agentic Architectures

What is beginning to emerge instead is a more integrated, system-based model. Distinct AI capabilities perform specific roles within the communications lifecycle. Some systems monitor external signals, drawing on media, social, policy, and market data. Others synthesize this information into a structured understanding of emerging narratives and stakeholder sentiment. Additional capabilities generate content, assess potential risks, or support execution.

These elements are increasingly connected through an orchestration layer that ensures coordination across activities. The result is not a collection of tools, but a system that can sense, interpret, and respond in a continuous loop.

Importantly, this shift does not eliminate the role of human practitioners. Rather, it redefines it. As routine tasks are automated, the relative importance of judgment, context, and strategic decision-making increases. Communications leaders are required to not only craft messages, but to oversee how systems generate and deploy those messages at scale. While execution becomes more system-driven, accountability does not shift. Leaders remain responsible for the accuracy of content, the outcomes it produces, and the trust and credibility the organization maintains with its stakeholders.

Implications for Organizational Design

This evolution has implications for organizational design. Many communications functions remain structured in silos, separating media relations, social and digital, executive communications, and reputation management. While this structure provides clarity, it can lead to fragmentation in execution. Inconsistencies across channels become more visible, and the ability to respond quickly to emerging issues is constrained.

An AI-enabled model places greater emphasis on integration. Shared data layers, common intelligence frameworks, and coordinated workflows become central. The goal is not to eliminate functional expertise, but to ensure that it operates within a unified system rather than in parallel tracks. In practice, this can result in a more centralized model supported by shared capabilities.

Rethinking Measurement

Measurement must evolve as well. Traditional indicators such as volume of coverage, impressions, or engagement rates capture activity, but not whether stakeholders are interpreting the organization’s actions and positions as intended. Advances in data availability now make it possible to assess who is reached, whether priority audiences are engaged, and how messages are interpreted. Metrics such as relevant audience reach, message resonance, and narrative alignment provide a more accurate view of effectiveness in shaping stakeholder perception and supporting business outcomes.

These approaches are more complex and often more resource-intensive, but they reflect how communication actually works in an AI-mediated environment. The central question is no longer how far a message travels, but how accurately it is understood and by whom.

Implementation Considerations

Despite the sophistication of the end state, implementation does not require a comprehensive transformation from the outset. Organizations that are making progress typically begin with focused applications that address clear needs, such as executive briefing tools that synthesize external signals or systems that accelerate the drafting of media responses while maintaining consistency with approved messaging.

Efforts to modernize Corporate Communications have often been constrained by cost concerns and the perception that its impact on business outcomes is indirect. In this case, those barriers are lower. Most large organizations already have access to advanced AI capabilities through enterprise technology investments. The incremental cost of applying them within communications is relatively modest. The greater challenge lies in rethinking how the function operates and how value is defined.

The Risk of Inaction

The risk of inaction is not that organizations move too slowly internally. It is that their stakeholders move more quickly externally. As AI becomes embedded in how information is consumed and decisions are made, narratives are increasingly shaped by systems outside the organization’s control. Inconsistencies are surfaced more quickly, and misinterpretations can scale rapidly.

Addressing this risk requires more than faster response times. It requires ensuring that the organization’s information is structured, consistent, and accessible in ways that support accurate interpretation.

Conclusion

Artificial intelligence is not simply enhancing Corporate Communications. It is changing the conditions under which communication takes place. Organizations that move toward integrated, system-based approaches will be better positioned to maintain control over how they are understood, sustain trust with stakeholders, and support long-term business performance and value. Those that do not may find that control increasingly resides elsewhere.

In a world where perception is shaped as much by machines as by people, the ability to manage how information is interpreted becomes a core strategic capability.

Matt Rose width= Matt Rose is the Americas Lead for Crisis, Issues & Risk Management. An SVP & Senior Partner in New York, he brings more than 30 years’ experience in advising organizations on crisis and issues management, risk mitigation, and reputation recovery. He has guided companies through reputational crises, labor issues, regulatory challenges, ESG controversies, and high-profile litigation.

 

 
Article

Navigating the UPF Definition Landscape: Are You Prepared?

April 21, 2026

Ultra-processed food (UPF) remains one of the food industry’s most pressing challenges—yet there’s still no standardized federal definition. This federal regulatory void, combined with 17 separate state definitions, has created significant confusion for manufacturers, retailers, and consumers alike. While FDA leadership promised a definition by late April, recent statements from FDA Deputy Commissioner Kyle Diamantas confirmed delays: “A definition for ultra-processed foods is really hard.”

Two Models, One Decision

The FDA is evaluating two competing approaches: the NOVA classification system (focused on processing level) and the IAFNS-led Guiding Principles model (balancing processing and formulation with nutritive value). There’s also speculation the FDA may define non-UPFs instead—a strategy mirroring the organic and GMO regulatory approaches of the past decade.

The Real Question for Your Business

Rather than debating which definition will prevail, forward-thinking food companies should ask: “Do we know how to win in each potential scenario?” Each definition carries distinct implications across the entire food ecosystem, affecting product formulation, marketing claims, regulatory compliance, and competitive positioning.

Policy Shifts Are Already Shaping the Market

The 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans prioritize “real food”—emphasizing protein, dairy, healthy fats, fruits, vegetables, and whole grains while rejecting processed foods. This guidance will directly influence federally funded programs including school lunch, WIC, SNAP, and military meals, as well as  changing shelf space requirements in retail.

However, mainstream consumer adoption remains uncertain. While the guidelines promote whole foods, convenience and processed products represent 43–70% of current American food purchases. Shifting eating patterns requires increased access, culinary education, and affordability—factors beyond regulatory control.

Preparation Is Competitive Advantage

Every potential scenario presents both opportunities and challenges. The policy discussion itself drives consumer awareness of product healthfulness, making strategic positioning critical.

To help food industry leaders prepare, we’ve developed the UPF Navigator, an AI-powered tool providing:

  • Regulatory Risk Mapping: How your products perform under NOVA vs. Guiding Principles models, including SNAP/WIC eligibility implications
  • Claim Vulnerability Assessment: Identifying marketing statements and ingredient choices that could face enforcement risk
  • Stakeholder Landscape Analysis: Your brand’s positioning relative to competitors, retailer expectations, and advocacy narratives
  • Monitoring Targets: Key developments to track before definition release

When policy and public opinion intersect with unprecedented polarization, mapping scenarios and developing action plans enables decisive brand strategy. This waiting period provides a critical opportunity for leaders to ready their responses.

Need more information on the UPF Navigator? Reach out to the FleishmanHillard Food, Agribusiness and Beverage team.

Article

Why Trust is the Real Competitive Advantage in Ag Tech  

April 2, 2026
By Vanessa Sapino, Kristin Hollins and Shelly Kessen

At this year’s World Agri-Tech Summit in San Francisco, several key insights cut through all the AI, robotics and data ecosystems discussions with one clear stand out: Trust and relationships form the foundation of successful technology adoption and meaningful connections in agriculture.

We took away from the conversations that the future of successful ag tech isn’t built in boardrooms. It starts at the farm level, with credible voices, practical solutions and farmers who see themselves as partners in innovation. It’s shaped by people who deliver not only technology, but who understand the market, the mission and the opportunity for real change.

As a proud co-sponsor with Western Growers within the California Delegation of the Ag Tech Alliance, FleishmanHillard was on the ground hearing directly from farmers, food leaders, agribusinesses and tech innovators, along with global policy, industry and academic leaders about what’s working and what’s not.

What we heard repeatedly was striking. While innovation and disruption drive today’s ag tech conversation, farmers still rely most heavily on word of mouth, recommendations from trusted advisors, and partnerships built over years. From the tech company perspective, the conversation centered on differentiation and how to stand out in a crowded market while competing for limited investment and customer attention.

This creates a fundamental challenge: While ag tech companies seek to differentiate in an oversaturated market, farmers seek clarity amid piecemeal options. As one farmer panel pointed out, there is no “Good Housekeeping seal of approval” for ag tech. Farmers face a bewildering array of options, each claiming to solve different pieces of the puzzle. The result? Adoption stalls.

Farmers need holistic solutions that work immediately, reliably, practically, and profitably. That demand for certainty is where trust becomes currency. Without a credible source vouching for a solution, many farmers find themselves in analysis paralysis. But trust shortens the decision cycle. When a farmer trusts a source, they can move faster.

Relationships Are Infrastructure

In agriculture, relationships aren’t soft. They’re structural. A trusted agronomist, equipment dealer or financial advisory team becomes part of operational infrastructure because that person understands the farm’s specific challenges, geographic weather patterns, soil conditions, financial constraints and business goals.

New technology that arrives without relationship context is just noise. Conversely, technology that arrives with a trusted recommendation becomes an asset.

To keep that infrastructure intact, farmers, food companies, agribusinesses and investors across every panel kept emphasizing the same characteristics for technology that actually gets adopted: practical, reliable, immediate ROI, user-friendly, easy to operate, and easy to service. The key takeaway: functional innovation earns credibility.

The Communications Parallel: Moving Forward

The same principle that governs farmer tech adoption also governs communications strategy. Just as farmers need advisors and relationships from day one, organizations across every industry — from scrappy startups to established enterprises — need a trusted communications partner embedded in their growth journey from the beginning to help craft their narrative.

When an organization partners with a communications advisor from day one rather than after launch or when they need crisis response, something powerful can happen. As the ag tech ecosystem faces a challenging commercialization gap, the answer isn’t just deeper partnership with farmers. It’s recognizing that breakthrough ideas only scale when translated into stories that farmers, investors and the entire market can understand, believe in and ultimately adopt. That translation work happens early, or it doesn’t happen at all.

That’s how you build understanding and credibility. That’s how you scale. And in agriculture — as in communications — trust is everything.