This chapter outlines a strategic pathway for reforming government communication in response to the accelerating pace of digital transformation and evolving public expectations. Drawing on OECD survey findings and country experiences, the chapter highlights the need for data-driven approaches, investment in digital skills, and the adoption of innovative practices to strengthen trust and policy impact. It emphasizes the importance of agile, multidisciplinary teams, robust evaluation frameworks, and trustworthy use of emerging technologies such as AI. The roadmap calls for governments to embed continuous learning, foster collaboration across departments, and ensure communication is citizen-centred and resilient to future challenges. By prioritising evidence, adaptability, and strategic leadership, public institutions can unlock the full potential of communication as a lever for positive change in governance.
Reforming Government Communication for the Age of Algorithms
Abstract
Reforming public communication is now a governance priority. The pressures described in this report, from fragmented audiences and algorithm-driven platforms to AI and declining trust, require governments to treat communication as a strategic function for policy delivery, not only as a channel for announcements.
The 2025 OECD Survey shows that data-driven communication is the most commonly identified reform priority, reflecting the need to ground communication in evidence about public needs, behaviours and expectations. This priority sits alongside a wider push for people-centred communication, which respondents also identified as a leading area for reform.
For example, communication needs stronger evidence and evaluation to demonstrate its contribution to policy outcomes. Only less than 30% report evaluating communication in relation to outcomes, while many continue to rely mainly on output or activity measures such as reach, impressions or engagement. Strengthening evaluation would help provide decision makers with clearer evidence of how communication supports delivery.
Communication teams need more agile ways of working to keep pace with continuous change. In the OECD Survey, time and resource constraints, alongside risk aversion, are among the most commonly reported barriers to innovation in communication teams. Building agility will require space for responsible experimentation, faster learning loops and more flexible collaboration across disciplines.
The profession likewise needs new skills, ethical guidance and specialist capabilities. Survey responses point to rising demand for digital and content specialist profiles, and most respondents indicate that the use of AI in communication calls for updated ethical guidance. Governments will need to invest in training, multidisciplinary teams and guidance that supports innovation while protecting accuracy, impartiality and public trust.
One-third of respondents say their institutions now see communication as a primary lever for achieving organisational and policy goals. To add value, however, communication must be embedded earlier and more consistently in the policy process. The OECD Survey suggests that only one quarter report being involved across the full policy cycle. Bringing communication insights into agenda-setting, policy design, and implementation can help governments understand public concerns, explain trade-offs, improve uptake and adapt delivery.
Effective communication depends on coherent mandates, co-ordination across government, adequate resources and leadership support. The Survey points to persistent gaps in whole-of-government co-ordination and shows that communication budgets remain strained compared to growing demands on the function. Without these foundations, communication teams may be asked to deliver more in a more demanding information environment without the authority, capacity or budget needed to do so.
This report has taken stock of how a new wave of digital disruption has been reshaping the field of communication and is forcing governments to adapt to ensure they can connect better with citizens at a critical time for public governance. Investing in strategic, transparent, and citizen-centered communication is pivotal at this moment: it enables governments to build trust, understand what people want, and ensure that policy changes are understood and embraced by both public servants and citizens.
This chapter draws on the findings of the 2025 OECD Survey of Government Communicators to discuss the roadmap for reforms to ensure communication departments are resilient to change, agile, and innovative so to make the most of the opportunities and mitigate the challenges of the age of algorithms. Sustained political leadership and commitment is a critical enabler of this reform agenda. It requires securing decision-makers’ recognition of the strategic value of public communication and their willingness to invest adequately in the institutional capacities, skills, and resources needed to drive and sustain change.
The OECD Survey reveals that senior communicators see different priorities for reforming how their institutions communicate, with no dominant areas emerging (Figure 4.1). However, the reform area most frequently identified as a top priority by respondents to the OECD Survey is the need to make communication more data-driven, recognising that robust audience analysis and evidence-based methods should guide both strategic planning and evaluation efforts for a more effective communication (OECD, 2021[1]; OECD, 2025[2]). The strong emphasis on evidence and data also supports broader priorities, such as making communication more citizen‑centred, which was identified as another top reform area.
What do you think the top priorities should be for reforming the communication function in your institution/government?
Note: Data shown above refers to 57 responses to the relevant question in the OECD Survey of Government Communicators. Respondents could select maximum three options. The full answer options labels read: “Making our communication more data-driven (i.e. based on analysis, measurement and evaluation)”, “Adopting AI to increase efficiency and effectiveness of our teams”, “Upskilling and specialising our teams in technical disciplines (e.g. data analysis, behavioural insights, stratcom, video/audio production, etc)”, “Enhancing communication’s role in designing and delivering policies and services”, “Reinforcing our strategy and methods to ensure information integrity”, “Supporting government efforts for citizen participation in policymaking”, “Making a clearer distinction between institutional and political communication”, “No reforms are needed in your institution/government”.
Source: OECD 2025 Survey of Government Communicators.
Digital innovation emerges as another priority for reform in the survey. Achieving progress in this area depends on the ability of communication teams to experiment, embrace new methods, and effectively scale successful approaches. To enable this agility and innovation, it is crucial to have the right mix of specialist expertise, strong leadership, and technical skills, an area highlighted as a reform priority by 37% of respondents.
However, respondents are clear that technology and innovation on their own are not enough. The responses in Figure 4.1 also highlight a focus on foundational aspects of the communication function. Chiefly making sure that communication meets the needs and expectations of citizens (39%) and supporting their participation in policymaking (12%), improving its role in designing and delivering policies and services (35%), improving cross-government co-ordination for coherence vis-à-vis citizens (25%).
At the same time, respondents’ comments recognised the constraints posed by limited resources, which can hinder progress on centralising or reforming communication structures. These areas of reform speak to an ongoing shift in making communication more purposeful and leveraging it more strategically, but also highlight persisting challenges that had emerged in the OECD’s first Report on Public Communication (2021[1]).
4.1.1. Reforming to drive results: The case for evidence- and data-driven communication
The use of evidence and data to inform decisions and approaches from conception to delivery of an activity is a defining feature of modern public communication. The OECD Public Communication Scan of France (2025[2]), underscores that data-driven approaches are not simply technical enhancements, but strategic necessities for building trust, demonstrating value, and achieving meaningful change.
Evidence is core to communication’s value for policy and its credibility as a discipline. The function has historically suffered low recognition, often being seen by policymakers and decision makers as merely a tool for publicity or reputation management rather than as a strategic lever for change (Sanders and Canel, 2013[3]; Macnamara, 2023[4]). Without concrete evidence of their impact, communicators fail to address misconceptions about their value add.
The OECD’s 2020 Survey on Public Communication had already identified significant gaps in the use of audience and behavioural insights, and highlighted evaluation as one of the most challenging aspects of the function (OECD, 2021[1]). Despite data being plentiful and more accessible than ever, most communication departments struggle to make the most if it and to measure the effects of their communications on citizens and policies (OECD, 2025[2]).
Evidence and data-driven communication is essential for several reasons. First, it underpins the shift toward more citizen-centric communication. By leveraging practices such as organisational listening (Macnamara, 2022[5]), sentiment analysis, and targeted research, institutions can better understand the concerns, preferences, and information-seeking behaviours of audiences. Evidence-based communication is more likely to be perceived as neutral, transparent, and trustworthy (Smillie and Scharfbillig, 2024[6]).
Second, grounding communication in evidence is critical for accountability and continuous improvement. Measurement, evaluation and learning, long underdeveloped in many public communication functions (Macnamara, 2023[4]), are now indispensable. By systematically tracking outputs, outcomes, and impacts, governments can demonstrate the value of communication, justify investments, and adapt strategies in real time. This culture of learning and adaptation is vital in a context where digital disruption and societal challenges demand agility and innovation.
Third, data-driven insights empower communication professionals to play a more strategic role within government. By systematically collecting and analysing evidence communicators can provide decision makers with actionable intelligence. This positions communication teams as advisors, not just executors, enabling them to shape policy discussions, anticipate risks, and advocate for approaches that are responsive to real-world dynamics. As seen in France and other OECD countries, this advisory capacity is strengthened when communication is recognised as a management function, supported by clear objectives, robust measurement, and a culture of continuous improvement (OECD, 2025[2]; OECD, 2023[7]).
Finally, the rise of artificial intelligence and advanced analytics offers unprecedented opportunities to enhance data-driven communication. From real-time monitoring of information flows to predictive modelling of public sentiment, responsible use of new technologies can help communicators anticipate trends, identify risks, and seize opportunities for engagement.
The OECD’s 2020 Survey on Public Communication had already identified significant gaps in the use of audience and behavioural insights, and highlighted evaluation as one of the most challenging aspects of the function (OECD, 2021[1]). Despite data being plentiful and more accessible than ever, most communication departments struggle to make the most of it and to measure the effects of their communications on citizens and policies (OECD, 2025[2]).
The responses to the 2025 OECD Survey of Government Communicators highlight the need for improvement in this domain, by showing significant gaps in the evaluation of communication. Despite expectations for communication to improve trust, support policy, and inform the public, these goals often go unmeasured. For 16% of respondents, evaluation of any kind is not a common part of their processes. Too often, communication strategies focus on outputs1 rather than on outcomes or, most importantly, impact. This is reflected in the prevalence of respondents who measure outputs (broadly the first 5 rows in Figure 4.2), compared with those (between 14% and 30%) who measure outcomes or impact (the rest of the indicators).
Which performance indicators were your institution’s communication activities evaluated against most commonly in the last year?
Note: Data shown above refers to 57 responses to the relevant question in the OECD Survey of Government Communicators. Multiple choices possible. Full answer options: “Engagement with online content (likes, clicks, shares, comments, replies…)”, “Reach of target audiences (share of an audience segment who viewed the content)”, “Reach of communication (# of citizens who viewed the content)”, “Uptake of a given public service/compliance with a given policy”, “Changes in public discourse on a given topic (volume, sentiment)”.
Source: OECD 2025 Survey of Government Communicators.
Given the constant evolution of the information ecosystem, a primary focus in communication reform should be establishing an environment that enables teams to remain agile and respond swiftly to emerging challenges and shifting priorities. The case study in Annex A illustrates efforts made in Italy towards these goals. A study of corporate communication functions defines agile communication departments as those that continuously sense change in their environment and adapt swiftly to thrive in volatile and complex contexts (Dühring, Zerfaß and Berger, 2020[8]). This study found that teams that qualified as agile against a set of key parameters coped better with shocks like the pandemic.
The OECD’s 2025 Survey of Government Communicators indicates that in this respect there is scope for improvement across most public institutions (Figure 4.3). Shy of two-thirds of respondents (63%) rate their teams as “mostly agile” in keeping up with transformations to the communications industry and seizing innovations. These respondents find that while their team can sometimes struggle to update tools and working methods, they can keep up with leading practices and handle new challenges. Conversely, similar proportions of respondents claim to be highly agile or not sufficiently agile (19% and 17% respectively). Highly agile teams report routinely experimenting with cutting-edge approaches and being early adopters of new communication tools and methods.
These actions owe considerably to an enabling environment for learning and material support. Dühring et al. (2020[8]) have synthesised the factors that determine agility in the communication sector into five core categories:
The team cultivates a culture that encourages curiosity, experimentation, open feedback, and psychological safety. Leaders serve as enablers and coaches, empowering their teams to test new ideas, learn from experience, and adapt to changing circumstances.
The ways of working are characterised by iterative, incremental delivery, with rapid feedback loops, and decisions grounded in evidence. Visual workflows and transparent prioritisation mechanisms help teams adjust their focus as priorities shift.
Structurally, the department is organised into flexible, cross-functional teams or task forces that can form and dissolve around specific issues or campaigns, with co-ordination often resembling a newsroom to allow for real-time re-prioritisation.
The people within the department develop T-shaped profiles, combining deep expertise in their fields with broad collaborative skills, while managers emphasize coaching and capability-building to support self-organised teams.
Finally, evaluation practices align success metrics with outcomes and value creation rather than just output, integrating continuous evaluation and learning into the workflow to enable quick pivots and ongoing improvement.
Against these characteristics, survey responses suggest that for most institutions there are important gaps in the conditions that favour agility and provide fertile ground for innovation. Regardless of perceptions of their teams’ agility, most respondents share the same constraints on resources and time pressures as the primary barrier to innovation. These material constraints go hand in hand with a gap in relevant skills and expertise needed in technical areas, which affects a quarter of respondents.
Figure 4.3 additionally highlights cultural factors that are common to the public sector and are inimical to innovation. Among them risk aversion is the most prominent for 2 in 5 respondents, but it is closely related to a lack of incentives from the top, a sense of low forgiveness if things go wrong (or no “license to fail”), and the lack of a culture of innovation in the teams – each of which affects around 1 in 5 teams.
The United Kingdom’s Government Communications has adopted a comprehensive innovation strategy to address these barriers to innovation (Box 4.1). As part of this it is addressing the challenge of resource constraints with a policy to allocate 10% of every campaign budget to test an innovative approach, while also emphasising the role of culture from the top of the institution.
The 10% innovation budget policy
In support of the ‘innovation’ pillar of its 2022-25 multi-annual reform strategy, UK Government Communications has introduced a measure requiring departments to allocate about 10% of every communication campaign budget to testing an innovation. This policy, inspired by private sector good practice, ensures that experimentation and adoption of new techniques are embedded in government communications rather than treated as optional extras.
The policy is supported by changes to spending controls, making it easier for departments to direct funds toward innovative activities. By formalising innovation funding, it empowers teams to test new approaches, learn from pilots, and scale successful methods, driving continuous improvement and ensuring government communications remain effective and future-ready. In 2023, more than 30 innovative projects have been piloted as part of this initiative, ranging from department-specific pilots to government-wide and even ground-breaking approaches.
Innovating with Impact Strategy
The 10% policy is a cornerstone of the “Innovating with Impact Strategy” which sets out a comprehensive vision for how teams should keep pace with rapid technological change, including AI, data-driven methods, and new digital channels – but not only. The Strategy aims to encourage government communicators to harness technological advances such as AI and data analytics for more effective, ethical, and inclusive public communication by:
1. Empowering responsible innovation: the strategy lays out the ethical principles to guide all innovation, ensuring transparency, accuracy, and privacy. A new Framework for Ethical Innovation helps communicators assess emerging technologies, such as generative AI, against civil service values and legal obligations.
2. Creating a culture of innovation: the strategy promotes systematic innovation through a model of “Encourage, Identify, Test, Scale.” Initiatives like Project Spark! (a Dragon’s Den-style competition) and an Innovation Hub foster collaboration and knowledge-sharing across departments and agencies.
3. Delivering New Tools and Platforms: the strategy involves central investments on tools including a secure AI co-pilot for drafting content, advanced audience segmentation, and personalisation tools leveraging first-party data. These aim to reduce repetitive tasks, improve campaign targeting, and free resources for strategic work.
The institution’s leadership has publicly committed to this approach, and it was a pillar of the Innovating with Impact Strategy. It is supporting this, they stress that “no one would be penalised for trying new things”.
Source: UK Government Communications (2024[9]), Innovating with Impact Strategy, https://www.communications.gov.uk/publication/gcs-innovating-with-impact-strategy/; Simon Baugh (2023[10]), “Seven ways to make the Civil Service more innovative…”, Civil Service Blog, https://civilservice.blog.gov.uk/2023/09/12/seven-ways-to-make-the-civil-service-more-innovative/.
Note: Panel A. Data shown above refers to 57 responses to the relevant question in the OECD Survey of Government Communicators. "Highly: the team routinely experiments with cutting-edge approaches and is an early adopter of new communication tools and methods", "Mostly: the team can sometimes struggle to update its tools and methods, but it keeps up with the leading practices in the field and can handle new challenges", "Not sufficiently: changes to the field and technology can be difficult to adjust to and the team is behind the curve of industry leading practices". Panel B. n=56. Respondents could select up to three options.
Source: OECD 2025 Survey of Government Communicators.
4.2.1. The ethics of responsible innovation in communication
Efforts to foster innovation must go hand in hand with a focus on ethics and responsibility. New technologies and working methods typically carry risks in this regard, as noted in the previous chapter on the adoption of AI. In many cases, public sector communicators are aware of potential risks associated with new practices and tools (Zerfass et al., 2024[11]). In the absence of appropriate guidance, however, this leads to hesitance in the use of technologies and can deter innovation.
According to the 57 senior communicators surveyed, guidance on ethics and responsible practices requires updates in several key domains (Figure 4.4). Nearly all respondents are calling for updated guidance on the responsible use of AI, and on AI-generated content and AI-based tools, against the risks noted in the previous chapter. The other prevalent area where guidance is needed is on the work with intermediaries, such as content creators, which concerns over half of respondents. Practices in this space can raise risks about manipulation and misleading audiences about the authenticity of content that is instead sponsored (Alfonsi et al., 2022[12]). There is also reason for concern about reputational risks to the institutions in associating with individuals who can later compromise their standing.
Additionally, a minority of respondents have also highlighted that their institutions’ guidance concerning data handling (especially personal data), audience targeting, and online content moderation, can be outdated. For 30% of respondents, updates to ethical guidance are also needed in relation to the boundaries between institutional and political communication. While this last aspect of ethical communication does not relate specifically to areas of innovation, it is one that is critical to the trustworthiness and efficacy of public communication (OECD, 2023[7]).
In your view, which of the following elements of communication require new or updated formal ethics and propriety rules?
Note: Data shown above refers to 51 responses to the relevant question in the OECD Survey of Government Communicators. Multiple choices possible.
Source: OECD 2025 Survey of Government Communicators.
As governments keep up with change in the field of communication and navigate the ethical questions that arise, they ought to strike the right balance in the rules they introduce to avoid stifling innovation. In this vein, governments can consider following some common principles to provide their teams with a future-proof way to think about innovation and responsible use of technologies in public communication. Two core principles that emerge from literature and good practices are those of transparency and autonomy (Smillie and Scharfbillig, 2024[6]).
The European Commission’s Joint Research Centre’s (JRC) recommendations for trustworthy public communication call for communicators to be transparent with audiences about their goals (whether to inform, persuade, or change behaviour), and to take a proportionate approach to goals that have a higher effect on audiences’ autonomous decision making (as illustrated in Figure 4.5). Technologies and applications of data, such as micro-targeting audiences or highly-personalised and persuasive AI-generated content, can easily boost the effects of communication on autonomy and even cross the boundaries of manipulation.
The diagram highlights the effects of different modes of communication on audiences’ autonomy and the ethical steps that can warrant such modes of communication
Source: Smillie, L. and M. Scharfbillig (2024, p. 30[6]), Trustworthy Public Communications: How Public Communicators can Strengthen our Democracies, https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC137725.
Thus, using autonomy as the guiding measure for ethical communications can help navigate a wide range of difficult questions. The JRC approach, for example, prioritises communication modes such as explanation and evidence-sharing to support citizens’ informed and autonomous decision making. Persuasive approaches, while sometimes warranted, demand stronger moral justification and democratic legitimacy. The more a message seeks to change beliefs or behaviours, the higher the ethical bar for openness about intent and the need for the goal to be informed by active listening and official policy (Smillie and Scharfbillig, 2024[6]).
A useful template to foster ethics and responsibility in innovation of communication comes from the United Kingdom’s Government Communications. The service introduced a dedicated Framework for Ethical Innovation as a values-based, flexible tool for decision making to support the implementation of their innovation strategy (UK Government Communication Service, 2024[13]).
4.2.2. Equipping communicators for the digital era: Evolving skills and specialisations
Agility, as noted above, is also fundamentally rooted in the continuous development of new skills and the strategic integration of specialist roles. As digital transformation accelerates, modern communicators must now master data analysis, digital strategy, multimedia content creation, and behavioural insights, alongside core skills in public engagement and crisis response. The OECD’s review of the United Kingdom’s public communication function (2023[7]) highlighted that the most effective teams invest in upskilling, foster a culture of continuous learning, and collaborate within and across departments and with policymakers.
The trend towards greater specialisation in communication competencies is a longstanding one, which continues to reshape the make-up of government departments. About a third of respondents to the 2025 OECD Survey reported investment in specialisation in the three years prior. A few teams have also reported undertaking full reorganisation along the same lines.
For a majority of teams in the Survey, the last three years have seen a rise in demand for communicators with advanced digital and content competencies (Figure 4.6). Social media strategy and management was the most widely sought skill for 58% of respondents, whereas proficiency with AI is not yet top of the field despite fears that it would displace jobs in the sector. However, as AI adoption becomes more widespread, communicators who are well-versed in using AI tools are going to outperform their peers who are not, regardless of their specialty (Baugh, 2023[14]). This makes it an essential skill for the future.
Moreover, the profiles most threatened by AI on paper, those of video, audio and graphic content production, have been in growing demand. This is largely driven by the massive growth in video-based content across leading online platforms, which some government communication departments have been slower to catch-up with.
The survey findings reaffirm the transformation of communication profiles away from traditional press-centric, journalism, and even marketing profiles. In turn, these changes raise the importance of continuous learning and development.
Formal training has long been a pillar of skills and professional development. Belgium, Canada, France, Korea, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom are among the governments that have established dedicated in-house programmes and academies to provide training to civil servants at different levels of government (see Box 4.2). Notably, some of these programmes particularly target the most senior communicators, which is critical to develop since good leadership is recognised as an essential element of agile and innovative teams (Dühring, Zerfaß and Berger, 2020[8]).
Which of these skills and profiles has your communication team required more of in the past 3 years?
Note: Data shown above refers to 57 responses to the relevant question in the OECD Survey of Government Communicators. Respondents could select up to three options. Full answer option: “My team’s needs for skills and specialist profiles are the same as 3 years ago”
Source: OECD 2025 Survey of Government Communicators.
Korea’s Public Communication Office training programme on digital competencies and AI
Central government ministries are placing growing emphasis on equipping civil servants with the tools and expertise required for the digital age. Several institutions contribute to this effort, including the Ministry of Personnel Management and the National Human Resources Development Institute for Civil Servants, which provide structured training programmes for public officials.
In addition, the Public Communication Office plays a key role through its Communication Policy Division, which promotes training to strengthen policy communication skills, particularly in areas such as big data and artificial intelligence (AI). Complementing this, the Digital Communication Division delivers practical, task-oriented training focused on day-to-day digital communication work.
Together, these institutions offer a diverse suite of training formats that allow communicators to upgrade their skills in emerging priority areas. The programmes cover topics such as big data analysis, AI applications, and the latest developments in new media, ensuring that participants remain up to date with rapidly evolving digital practices. Participation in these courses is open and voluntary, yet demand remains strong, as demonstrated by the 2 037 public officials who took part in the programme in 2024.
The training sessions are designed to be inclusive and effective for participants with different levels of experience. Introductory modules focus on building confidence with basic digital tools, while more advanced sessions explore topics such as AI-driven analytics and automation. Learning is grounded in practice, combining hands-on exercises, such as drafting communication content using AI tools or analysing public sentiment through data platforms, with problem-based learning activities. In group settings, participants tackle realistic scenarios, including responding to the spread of misleading information and planning digital communication campaigns.
Beyond skills development, the training programmes also foster collaboration across government. By bringing together officials from different ministries, the sessions create valuable networking opportunities and encourage the exchange of good practices and innovative ideas. This cross-ministerial interaction not only strengthens individual competencies but also supports longer-term co-operation and knowledge sharing across teams.
The Advance Programme in the United Kingdom
The Advance Programme, created as part of the UK Government Communications’ Academy, is designed to strengthen professional skills and leadership across government communication roles. It offers a structured learning pathway that supports career progression while addressing the evolving challenges of modern public communication.
The programme begins with the Practitioner level, a six-month online course that provides foundational knowledge for those new to the profession or seeking to refresh core skills. For senior managers, the Expert level combines immersive learning through a five-day SkillsCamp and a two-day Learning Festival, deepening strategic communication expertise and fostering collaboration. At the highest tier, the Leader level spans 15 months and blends online and in-person learning, culminating in a Postgraduate Diploma in Strategic Communication Leadership, with an option to progress to a Master’s degree.
Advance is designed to keep government communicators agile in a rapidly changing environment, integrating themes such as digital innovation and AI. By embedding continuous learning and professional standards, it seeks to address the government’s goal to future-proof communication and enhance public trust.
Source: Written information provided to the OECD Secretariat by the Korean Public Communication Office (November 2025); UK Government Communication Service (2025[15]), “Academy – What is Advance?”, https://www.communications.gov.uk/academy/.
However, besides formal training programmes, many governments are investing in more informal, peer-to-peer formats to encourage the exchange of practices, ideas, lessons learned, and to apply this knowledge in their jobs. This model has been found very successful in Australia, where the GovSocial community has expanded to over 200 professionals and become a pillar of efforts to navigate the changing digital landscape (see the case study in Annex A). Similar cross-government networks additionally exist in Belgium, Canada, Ireland, and the European Commission (Box 4.3).
Several, like in France and the United Kingdom, have also emerged from grassroots initiatives around specific areas of expertise. The United Kingdom has recently formalised the roles of Heads of Disciplines as leads for communities of practice in seven core areas. This step is a recognition of the value of this horizontal and collaborative approach to cultivating expertise, upholding standards, and sharing knowledge. Heads of Discipline are drawn from various ministries and play a key role in driving ongoing enhancement and skill development within their fields. They also help steer the implementation of the United Kingdom’s Government Communications reform strategy, ensuring progress on objectives relevant to their areas of expertise (OECD, 2023[7]).
Such flexible, horizontal and collaborative arrangements for cultivating expertise and skills match some of the main characteristics of agile communication departments noted above and are likely to be an important asset in a rapidly changing landscape.
Canada’s Communications Community Office
Canada’s Communications Community Office (CCO) exemplifies a peer-led, community-based model for supporting government communications professionals in a rapidly evolving digital landscape. The CCO co-ordinates over 20 communities of practice, enabling practitioners to regularly exchange expertise in key domains and address emerging challenges, including those posed by new technologies and AI. Through its annual Learning Day conference, monthly learning events, webinars, and tailored courses, the CCO facilitates networking, community-building. In turn this fosters cross-departmental collaboration and provides a forum for sharing best practices, troubleshooting, and co-creating solutions to complex communication challenges.
Recent initiatives have focused on digital innovation and AI readiness, such as workshops on generative AI, digital literacy, and responsible technology adoption. The CCO partners with central agencies and external experts to deliver up-to-date workshops on topics like data stewardship, cyber security, and the impact of AI on public trust and the spread of false information.
Networks and communities as key elements of professionalisation in France
In recent years, France’s Service d’Information du Gouvernement (SIG) has pursued a comprehensive strategy to professionalize government communication and strengthen its integration across the public sector. Rather than focusing solely on formal training, SIG has cultivated a collaborative ecosystem that leverages networks and shared practices as key drivers of capability building.
This approach rests on four main pillars. First, SIG introduced common standards and tools to harmonize practices and ensure consistency across government communication. Second, it helped formalise discipline-specific, cross-government networks that foster peer learning and knowledge exchange, creating communities of practice that connect professionals beyond institutional silos. Third, SIG is developing a training offer that combines online learning modules with technical workshops, enabling continuous upskilling. Finally, a robust programme of events and networking activities consolidates public communication as a unified sector, with regular roundtables and thematic sessions addressing common challenges.
Source: Government of Canada (2025[16]), Communications Community Office, https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/government-communications/communications-community-office.html; OECD (2025[2]), Public Communication Scan of France: Evaluating public communication performance to strengthen public trust, https://doi.org/10.1787/7450361a-en.
In many countries, public communication is becoming increasingly recognised as a core lever for delivering policy, not an accessory to it. The digital transformations and the disruption to the ways societies connect have been catalysts for this change. The COVID-19 pandemic and the subsequent economic and geopolitical crises that have marked recent years have reinforced this reckoning.
As governments continue to confront complex societal challenges, the OECD’s work underscores that better communication and engagement with citizens and stakeholders will need to become a much larger part of the equation in helping institutions bring people along. However, to this day, only a third of senior communicators surveyed claim that “communication is widely regarded as one of the primary levers for the government to achieve organisational and policy objectives and is leveraged accordingly”.
Conversely, 42% of respondents feel that “communication has been playing an increasingly strategic role in government and enjoys greater recognition as a means to achieve government objectives than before the COVID-19 pandemic”. According to a quarter of respondents, however, “communication’s full potential is not realised and it is mainly relied on as a vehicle for publicity rather than a means to achieve government objectives”.2
This progress is significant compared to the assessment in the OECD’s first report on this topic. (OECD, 2021[1]). Yet it also reveals a persistent disconnect: in many institutions, communication is still not recognised as a strategic lever, limiting its influence and potential impact. This in turn creates a self‑reinforcing loop: because communication is viewed narrowly as a means for publicity, it remains underused, keeping recognition of its full potential persistently low. Strengthening the foundations therefore requires bringing communication into the core of policymaking.
4.3.1. Strengthening the role of communication across the policy cycle
Closer integration between policy and communication is essential to realising the function’s potential for more effective, citizen‑centred governance. Communication can strengthen public policy when it is embedded throughout the policy cycle rather than confined to dissemination at the end. Yet the 2025 OECD Survey shows this is true in only a quarter of institutions (Figure 4.7, Panel B). A majority of teams are called upon only at the moment of announcing or rolling out a policy or initiative, some with limited discretion over the content of what is being announced.
This limited involvement significantly reduces the strategic value communication can bring to policy. The function creates the most value when it brings public insights into decision making and prepares the ground for policies under development. It is far less effective when involved only after decisions have already been made. In this sense, it could be an intelligence‑gathering and problem‑solving function that brings attitudinal and behavioural understanding and real‑time feedback to policymaking. This would make it an asset to manage likely controversies upstream and deliver more responsive and effective policies (OECD, 2023[7]; OECD, forthcoming[17]).
One of the most important enablers of this role is the systematic early involvement of communicators in key decision‑making forums. This is for two reasons: first, early involvement allows them to conduct upstream analysis and gather relevant public insights that can inform further phases of the policy process and eventual announcements. Secondly, collaboration across functions improves when leaders signal that communication is integral to achieving policy goals, not an afterthought. Therefore, institutions where communication sits at the table where decisions are made provide a more conducive environment for integrating it effectively in relevant aspects of the institutions’ missions.
Note: Data shown above refers to 56 responses to the relevant question in the OECD Survey of Government Communicators.
Source: OECD 2025 Survey of Government Communicators.
The 2025 survey provides encouraging evidence in this respect, with 70% of respondents confirming that Directors of Communication typically participate in most leadership meetings of their institutions (Figure 4.7, Panel A). Yet over two in five respondents report that a poor understanding of the function’s role at different stages of the process remains a key barrier to collaboration (Figure 4.8) This exceeds the share who cite being involved too late (27%) or lacking resources to play a role earlier in the process (9%).
What, if any, of the following barriers stand in the way of effective collaboration between communication, policy and programme teams?
Note: Data shown above refers to 56 responses to the relevant question in the OECD Survey of Government Communicators.
Source: OECD 2025 Survey of Government Communicators.
Despite the evolution of communication’s role in government, many public officials still equate it with the traditional press office function (OECD, 2021[1]). Changing this perception falls on communicators themselves. OECD studies in France and the United Kingdom (OECD, 2025[2]; OECD, 2023[7]) highlight the importance for communicators to be advocates for their own work and earn their colleague’s trust and recognition.
Leadership and robust public insights emerged as the most effective means for senior communicators to explain their contribution and demonstrate the value of their work. According to practitioners, successful collaboration starts with an effort from communicators to cultivate relations with policy teams and demonstrate expertise. Findings from the analysis in France (OECD, 2025[2]) highlight instead that data and evidence can empower communicators as effective and trusted advisers.
Methods that enable teams to work together more effectively can also strengthen integration between communication and policy. In some countries, such as the United Kingdom and Ireland, establishing multi-disciplinary teams has allowed to bring together different areas of expertise around a specific policy problem or programme. In Ireland, a dedicated task force was established in 2023 to co-ordinate elements of the country’s climate action that involved communication specialists alongside policy and other relevant disciplines. In the United Kingdom, some government departments adopted the practice of embedding such specialists in teams that are tasked with delivering flagship programmes. In both cases, accounts from officials involved stressed the usefulness of these models to transform the interactions between disciplines from transactional to genuinely collaborative.
In practice, these collaborative approaches show that embedding communication expertise alongside policy and delivery functions strengthens decisions and helps teams respond more effectively to public needs. But integration at programme level is only part of the picture. To ensure clarity for citizens and coherence across government, these efforts must be supported by strong co-ordination mechanisms.
4.3.2. Cross-government co-ordination for greater coherence and impact
Survey results confirm that co-ordination remains one of the most persistent challenges for function. It was the most frequently cited obstacle to performing core communication competencies in the OECD’s 2020 survey (OECD, 2021[1]) and resurfaced as a priority for reform for a quarter of respondents in the 2025 Survey of Government Communicators (Figure 4.1).
Despite these challenges, most governments already operate with some degree of co-ordination. As shown in Figure 4.9, only a small minority of institutions work in fully decentralised systems. The dominant model is to have varying degrees of horizontal co-ordination (66% plus the share who responded “other”), where ministries manage their own communication but align regularly with peers. Fewer than a quarter of institutions operate under a centrally co-ordinated system. In practice, these labels mean slightly different things in different contexts.
How is the communication function organised in your government?
Note: Data shown above refers to 56 responses to the relevant question in the OECD Survey of Government Communicators. Full answer options: “Centrally co-ordinated (all ministries carry out communication largely according to a centrally agreed strategy or plan, often with support from the central communication department in the Prime Minister/President/central government office)”, “Decentralised (each ministry is in charge of its own communications and there is little to no co-ordination with other communication teams across the government)”, “Horizontally co-ordinated (each ministry is in charge of its own communications and departments co-ordinate regularly on their respective plans)”.
Source: OECD 2025 Survey of Government Communicators.
Respondents emphasise that horizontal models often strike an effective balance between strategic alignment and operational autonomy, allowing ministries to tailor messages on sectoral topics while ensuring coherence on shared priorities. At the same time, many see value in stronger centralisation at the strategic level, as well as on developing shared tools, guidelines, or crisis co-ordination mechanisms. However, some responses caution that overly centralised approaches risk reducing responsiveness and sector-specific expertise, fall prey to politicisation, or become detached from operational realities.’
Taken together, these findings show that governments are searching for the right-sized approach to co-ordination, one that ensures coherence and efficiency without imposing unnecessary burdens or diluting institutional autonomy. While respondents highlighted the operational challenges, the broader rationale for strengthening co-ordination across government goes beyond internal organisation. Enhanced co-ordination supports more effective public communication in several ways.
First, stronger co-ordination enhances coherence and credibility. When spokespeople articulate policies using aligned messages, timelines, and evidence, it reduces confusion and presents citizens with a clear understanding of government actions (UK Government Communication Service, 2022[18]). A coherent narrative also increases the likelihood that reforms will be understood by the public, particularly when they span multiple sectors.
Second, co-ordination enables a single government voice where it matters, especially during crises, major reforms, or sensitive policy debates. While maintaining the autonomy needed for sector‑specific communication, shared frameworks and regular alignment help ensure that institutions avoid contradictory messages or competing explanations that weaken impact. These reflections have motivated a drive for better central co-ordination and even integration of government campaigns in France, spearheaded by the SIG (Box 4.4).
France’s SIG has, in recent years, undertaken a wide‑ranging effort to bring greater coherence, clarity and consistency to the government’s public communication. This work has focused on unifying the government’s visual identity, increasing the number and quality of interministerial campaigns, and progressively centralising capabilities that benefit from shared stewardship. This is the case, notably, of the centralisation of the procurement of advertising, creative, and analytical services for communication departments, which has brought down costs while harmonising practices and standards.
Building on this trajectory, the French government introduced a new reform in December 2025 with a focus on strengthening the governance of communication across the administration and optimising resources. The reform (underway at the time of writing) assigns the SIG a significantly expanded mandate to steer interministerial communication.
Through this strengthened stewardship role, SIG becomes responsible not only for strategic coherence but also for guiding shared standards, improving planning and ensuring that communication efforts collectively serve the government’s core priorities. From 2026 onwards, each ministry is required to prepare an annual communication plan aligned with a common SIG‑defined framework and validated under the authority of the Government Spokesperson. Funding is allocated against these plans, ensuring that resources are strategically deployed and that communication activity reflects whole‑of‑government priorities rather than disparate ministerial initiatives
The reform also introduces new integrated capabilities and processes that enable more effective co-ordination. A cross‑government events and production hub has been established to serve all ministries, reducing duplication and encouraging more efficient use of shared assets
By pairing strategic central leadership with modernised shared services and a unified planning cycle, France aims to enhance both the effectiveness and the efficiency of its communication function, while reinforcing the government’s ability to explain reforms, foster understanding and strengthen its dialogue with citizens.
Source: OECD (2025[2]), Public Communication Scan of France: Reforming public communication in France and beyond – Towards efficiency and impact, https://doi.org/10.1787/7450361a-en; Government of France (2025[19]), Refonte de la stratégie et des moyens de la communication de l’État, Info.gouv.fr, 1–3 December 2025, https://www.info.gouv.fr/communique/refonte-de-la-strategie-et-des-moyens-de-la-communication-de-l-etat; Premier ministre (France) (2025[20]), Instruction n° 6514/SG du 15 décembre 2025 relative à la refonte de la stratégie et des moyens de la fonction communication de l’État, Légifrance, https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/circulaire/id/45634.
Third, co-ordinating at the centre makes it possible to pool specialised capabilities and expertise (for example, content production, monitoring and analytics, behavioural insights, marketing, or partnerships) rather than duplicating them across ministries. Central hubs or shared services can increase efficiency, improve quality, and enable access to skills that individual teams might lack (Alfonsi et al., 2022[12]). This is the model of countries such as the United Kingdom and Singapore, for example.
Finally, co-ordination creates opportunities for strategic prioritisation and resource optimisation. Shared planning mechanisms can help identify overlaps, streamline efforts, and focus resources on the issues that matter most to citizens. In several OECD countries, central bodies have taken steps to harmonise branding, integrate digital platforms, or co-ordinate interministerial campaigns, allowing for more impactful communication at lower cost (OECD, 2023[7]; OECD, 2025[2]). These efforts are particularly urgent in a context of budgetary constraints which affects a majority of institutions in the 2025 Survey, as discussed in the next section.
4.3.3. Investing strategically in communication capacity
Across many OECD countries, the fiscal environment in which communication teams operate is tightening at the same time as expectations for the function continue to rise. Many of the reform priorities identified in this chapter, whether scaling use of effective AI solutions, building new skills, measuring impact or supporting innovation, require adequate investments. In the current context, for many institutions, these investments will likely come from a prioritisation exercise, rather than from additional budget.
Government communicators surveyed in 2025 paint a picture of overall pressure on budgets and resources. While only a minority (26%) report that their budgets have decreased compared to three years prior (Figure 4.10, Panel A), many respondents qualified in their answers that that their communication teams must do more with the same level resources than before.
Only a minority mentioned experiencing significant staff cuts, but many teams describe operating under budgets that are already stretched. Respondents associate this factor with struggling to meet growing demands posed by digital engagement, crisis communication, and promoting access to accurate information. These accounts are consistent with the majority share of communicators (54%) who deem budgets less than adequate but still manage to deliver despite these constraints, and the small minority (7%) whose work is severely affected (Figure 4.10, Panel B).
Note: Data shown above refers to 57 responses to the relevant question in the OECD Survey of Government Communicators.
Source: OECD 2025 Survey of Government Communicators.
For a large minority of respondents, the outlook is more favourable. 37% of institutions have enjoyed budget increases, the share to those who have maintained stable resources. This broadly matches the share of respondents who deem their budgets appropriate for the scope of work, some of whom even enjoy scope to expand their mission.
Overall, balancing expanding responsibilities and constrained resources has increased the need for efficiency and prioritisation. Several institutions report turning to new approaches to manage competing pressures, such as pooling capabilities, restructuring their teams, and growing expectations for AI to boost productivity. Once again, demonstrating tangible results, whether in improved public understanding, stronger engagement, or more effective crisis response, will be essential for communicators to make the case for sustained or increased investment. In an era of rising demands and limited means, the function’s future capacity will depend on its ability to show that well‑designed, two-way communication is not a cost, but a multiplier of public value.
References
[12] Alfonsi, C. et al. (2022), “Public communication trends after COVID-19: Innovative practices across the OECD and in four Southeast Asian countries”, OECD Working Papers on Public Governance, No. 55, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/cb4de393-en.
[23] Association for Measurement and Evaluation of Communication (2025), Interactive Framework, https://amecorg.com/amecframework/framework/interactive-framework/.
[14] Baugh, S. (2023), “AI and innovation in communications [Speech]”, LinkedIn, https://www.linkedin.com/posts/simon-baugh-8108b214_ai-and-innovation-in-communications-speech-activity-7111266717653159936-4JA7/ (accessed on 1 December 2025).
[10] Baugh, S. (2023), “Seven ways to make the Civil Service more innovative…”, Civil Service Blog, https://civilservice.blog.gov.uk/2023/09/12/seven-ways-to-make-the-civil-service-more-innovative/.
[8] Dühring, L., A. Zerfaß and K. Berger (2020), “Redesigning ommunications: Five steps toward an agile communications department”, Communication Insights No. 8, https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/234731/1/1728001730.pdf.
[16] Government of Canada (2025), “Communications Community Office”, https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/government-communications/communications-community-office.html (accessed on 1 June 2026).
[19] Government of France (2025), “Refonte de la stratégie et des moyens de la communication de l’État”, Info.gouv.fr, https://www.info.gouv.fr/communique/refonte-de-la-strategie-et-des-moyens-de-la-communication-de-l-etat (accessed on 1 June 2026).
[21] Macnamara, J. (2024), Jim Macnamara’s MEL Manual for Public Communication.
[4] Macnamara, J. (2023), “A call for reconfiguring evaluation models, pedagogy, and practice: Beyond reporting media-centric outputs and fake impact scores”, Public Relations Review, Vol. 49/2, p. 102311, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2023.102311.
[22] Macnamara, J. (2022), “Measurement, evaluation + learning (MEL): New approaches for insights, outcomes, impact”, in The Routledge Companion to Public Relations, Routledge, London, https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003131700-21.
[5] Macnamara, J. (2022), Organizational listening in public communication: Emerging theory and practice., University of Technology Sydney, https://figshare.uts.edu.au/articles/report/Organizational_Listening_in_Public_Communication_Emerging_Theory_and_Practice/29288984?file=60946702.
[2] OECD (2025), Public Communication Scan of France: Evaluating public communication performance to strengthen public trust, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/7450361a-en.
[7] OECD (2023), Public Communication Scan of the United Kingdom: Using Public Communication to Strengthen Democracy and Public Trust, OECD Public Governance Reviews, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/bc4a57b3-en.
[1] OECD (2021), OECD Report on Public Communication: The Global Context and the Way Forward, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/22f8031c-en.
[17] OECD (forthcoming), Building Common Ground with Communication, OECD Publishing, Paris.
[20] Premier ministre (France) (2025), “Instruction n° 6514/SG du 15 décembre 2025 relative à la refonte de la stratégie et des moyens de la fonction communication de l’État”, Légifrance, https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/circulaire/id/45634.
[3] Sanders, K. and M. Canel (eds.) (2013), “Government communication in 15 countries: Themes and challenges”, Government Communication - Cases and Challenges, No. 16, Bloomsbury Publishing, https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/government-communication-9781849666121/.
[6] Smillie, L. and M. Scharfbillig (2024), Trustworthy Public Communications: How Public Communicators can Strengthen our Democracies, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, https://doi.org/10.2760/695605.
[15] UK Government Communication Service (2025), “Academy – What is Advance?”, https://www.communications.gov.uk/academy/ (accessed on 1 June 2026).
[13] UK Government Communication Service (2024), Framework for Ethical Innovation, UK Government Communications, London, https://www.communications.gov.uk/publication/framework-for-ethical-innovation/.
[18] UK Government Communication Service (2022), Performance With Purpose: Government Communication Service Strategy, https://strategy.gcs.civilservice.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/gcs-strategy-2022-25.pdf (accessed on 10 January 2023).
[9] UK Government Communications (2024), GCS Innovating with Impact Strategy, https://www.communications.gov.uk/publication/gcs-innovating-with-impact-strategy/.
[11] Zerfass, A. et al. (2024), “Ethical Challenges of Digital Communication: A Comparative Study of Public Relations Practitioners in 52 Countries”, International Journal of Communication, Vol. 18, pp. 1-23, https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/20636.
← 1. Evaluation best practice guides communicators to measure each of the following levels (Macnamara, 2022[22]; Macnamara, 2024[21]; Association for Measurement and Evaluation of Communication, 2025[23]):
Outputs refer to the immediate products of communication activities—such as press releases, social media posts, or public campaigns. It consists of what is published on information channels.
Outcomes are the short- to medium-term effects these outputs have on audiences, which include simple actions such as clicks and likes, and more tangible changes such as increased awareness, improved understanding, or shifts in attitudes.
Impact represents the long-term, substantive changes that communication seeks to achieve for policy, such as increased public trust, behavioural change, or improved policy or service uptake.
← 2. Respondents to the 2025 Survey of Government Communicators (n=57) were asked “Do you believe that communication is leveraged to its full potential in your institution to achieve organisational and policy objectives?” and could select one of the following options: “Yes, communication is widely regarded as one of the primary levers for the government to achieve organisational and policy objectives and is leveraged accordingly”, “Partially, communication has been playing an increasingly strategic role in government and enjoys greater recognition as a means to achieve government objectives than before the COVID-19 pandemic”, “Not sufficiently, communication’s full potential is not realised and it is mainly relied on as a vehicle for publicity rather than a means to achieve government objectives”.