Stop communicating certainty. Start building trust.
Over the past 25 years, I’ve worked with many organizations navigating significant change. One of the most challenging situations is when leaders have made a decision they know employees won’t like.
I’ve seen this with return-to-office mandates and office relocations. Leadership has
decided what needs to happen, often for legitimate business reasons, and turns to the communication team to explain the decision and get employees on board.
But employees are thinking about what it means for their lives. How much longer will my commute be? What happens to my childcare arrangements? Why am I losing flexibility that worked well for me?
No amount of carefully crafted messaging will make those concerns disappear.
I’ve come to believe that one of the biggest mistakes leaders make is assuming communication begins once the decision is final. By then, employees may already feel something is being done to them rather than with them.
That lesson applies just as much to AI transformation as it does to returning to the office.
Duolingo’s AI-first announcement: A compelling strategy, a communication problem
Consider what happened at Duolingo.
In April 2025, CEO Luis von Ahn announced that the company was going “AI-first.” Duolingo would gradually stop using contractors for work AI could handle. AI use would become part of hiring and performance expectations. Teams would consider automation before adding headcount.
There was a compelling business case.
Using generative AI and new internal tools, Duolingo launched 148 new language courses in less than a year. Developing its first approximately 100 courses had taken more than a decade.
But that wasn’t what people were talking about.
The announcement quickly became a story about AI replacing people. Employees and others focused on jobs and opportunities. Customers worried about what replacing human expertise with AI might mean for product quality.
What struck me wasn’t that Duolingo had made a bad strategic decision. The company had a strong case for expanding access to language learning. What struck me was how quickly the conversation shifted from what AI could make possible to what people stood to lose.
A few weeks later, von Ahn acknowledged that he hadn’t communicated the change clearly enough. He clarified that he didn’t see AI replacing Duolingo employees, said the company was continuing to hire and described support to help employees learn to use AI.
The strategy hadn’t fundamentally changed. But the communication needed to.
People don’t need every answer. They need honesty.
I’ve learned that employees can handle more uncertainty than leaders sometimes give them credit for. What they struggle with is silence, vague reassurances or feeling their concerns haven’t been considered.
Leaders naturally focus on what they’ve decided and why it makes business sense. Employees have other questions:
- Why did we make this decision?
- What do we know, and what don’t we know yet?
- What does this mean for me?
- How can I ask questions, provide input or influence what happens next?
You don’t have to answer everything immediately. But you do have to acknowledge what people are asking.
Sometimes that means saying, “We don’t know yet. Here’s how we’ll figure it out, and when we’ll tell you more.”
And when a decision is final, be honest about that too. Inviting feedback shouldn’t imply it’s up for discussion when it isn’t. Employees may still influence how the change is implemented.
Developing the communication can help shape the decision
Too often, communicators are brought in after the strategy is set.
The announcement goes out next week. Can you help us communicate it?
Of course. But I’ve found that developing the communication is often what forces leaders to think through the implications of their decisions.
Once we start putting things in writing, questions surface. Have we considered the employee impact? What exactly have we decided? What remains open? Are we prepared to explain how this will work?
And something else happens: leaders have to get aligned. It’s easy for everyone to leave a meeting with a slightly different interpretation of what was agreed. It’s much harder when there’s a written explanation everyone must stand behind.
That’s why I believe communicators should be involved earlier. We’re not just translating strategy into messages. We’re helping leadership clarify the strategy itself.
This doesn’t mean delaying decisions until everyone agrees. It means using communication to identify gaps, resolve differences and prepare the organization for change.
Trust is built in what happens next
I’ve never believed good communication can make every unpopular decision popular.
But it can make a difficult change more understandable, more humane and ultimately more successful.
That requires listening, explaining what you’ve heard, making adjustments where possible and being candid about what won’t change. It also means following through. If you promise another update, deliver it — even if you still don’t have all the answers.
As communicators, we need to help leaders move from “How do we announce this decision?” to “How do we bring our people through this change?”
Because trust doesn’t come from leaders always knowing what happens next.
It comes from being honest about what they know, acknowledging what they don’t and continuing to show up as the answers evolve.
Businesswoman handshake and business people. Successful business concept.
Over the past 25 years, I’ve worked with many organizations navigating significant change. One of the most challenging situations is when leaders have made a decision they know employees won’t like.
I’ve seen this with return-to-office mandates and office relocations. Leadership has
decided what needs to happen, often for legitimate business reasons, and turns to the communication team to explain the decision and get employees on board.
But employees are thinking about what it means for their lives. How much longer will my commute be? What happens to my childcare arrangements? Why am I losing flexibility that worked well for me?
No amount of carefully crafted messaging will make those concerns disappear.
I’ve come to believe that one of the biggest mistakes leaders make is assuming communication begins once the decision is final. By then, employees may already feel something is being done to them rather than with them.
That lesson applies just as much to AI transformation as it does to returning to the office.
Duolingo’s AI-first announcement: A compelling strategy, a communication problem
Consider what happened at Duolingo.
In April 2025, CEO Luis von Ahn announced that the company was going “AI-first.” Duolingo would gradually stop using contractors for work AI could handle. AI use would become part of hiring and performance expectations. Teams would consider automation before adding headcount.
There was a compelling business case.
Using generative AI and new internal tools, Duolingo launched 148 new language courses in less than a year. Developing its first approximately 100 courses had taken more than a decade.
But that wasn’t what people were talking about.
The announcement quickly became a story about AI replacing people. Employees and others focused on jobs and opportunities. Customers worried about what replacing human expertise with AI might mean for product quality.
What struck me wasn’t that Duolingo had made a bad strategic decision. The company had a strong case for expanding access to language learning. What struck me was how quickly the conversation shifted from what AI could make possible to what people stood to lose.
A few weeks later, von Ahn acknowledged that he hadn’t communicated the change clearly enough. He clarified that he didn’t see AI replacing Duolingo employees, said the company was continuing to hire and described support to help employees learn to use AI.
The strategy hadn’t fundamentally changed. But the communication needed to.
People don’t need every answer. They need honesty.
I’ve learned that employees can handle more uncertainty than leaders sometimes give them credit for. What they struggle with is silence, vague reassurances or feeling their concerns haven’t been considered.
Leaders naturally focus on what they’ve decided and why it makes business sense. Employees have other questions:
- Why did we make this decision?
- What do we know, and what don’t we know yet?
- What does this mean for me?
- How can I ask questions, provide input or influence what happens next?
You don’t have to answer everything immediately. But you do have to acknowledge what people are asking.
Sometimes that means saying, “We don’t know yet. Here’s how we’ll figure it out, and when we’ll tell you more.”
And when a decision is final, be honest about that too. Inviting feedback shouldn’t imply it’s up for discussion when it isn’t. Employees may still influence how the change is implemented.
Developing the communication can help shape the decision
Too often, communicators are brought in after the strategy is set.
The announcement goes out next week. Can you help us communicate it?
Of course. But I’ve found that developing the communication is often what forces leaders to think through the implications of their decisions.
Once we start putting things in writing, questions surface. Have we considered the employee impact? What exactly have we decided? What remains open? Are we prepared to explain how this will work?
And something else happens: leaders have to get aligned. It’s easy for everyone to leave a meeting with a slightly different interpretation of what was agreed. It’s much harder when there’s a written explanation everyone must stand behind.
That’s why I believe communicators should be involved earlier. We’re not just translating strategy into messages. We’re helping leadership clarify the strategy itself.
This doesn’t mean delaying decisions until everyone agrees. It means using communication to identify gaps, resolve differences and prepare the organization for change.
Trust is built in what happens next
I’ve never believed good communication can make every unpopular decision popular.
But it can make a difficult change more understandable, more humane and ultimately more successful.
That requires listening, explaining what you’ve heard, making adjustments where possible and being candid about what won’t change. It also means following through. If you promise another update, deliver it — even if you still don’t have all the answers.
As communicators, we need to help leaders move from “How do we announce this decision?” to “How do we bring our people through this change?”
Because trust doesn’t come from leaders always knowing what happens next.
It comes from being honest about what they know, acknowledging what they don’t and continuing to show up as the answers evolve.
