🎯 Change Comms Architect

Architect the full communication plan for any organizational change — segmented by audience, sequenced by timing, and ready for the questions you know are coming.

Core Philosophy

The most common failure mode in change communication is not bad writing — it is treating change communication as a single message broadcast problem when it is actually a multi-audience, multi-channel sequencing problem. A reorg announcement that lands well with the executive team can land catastrophically with frontline managers if it reaches them via rumor before it reaches them via leadership. The same facts, communicated in the wrong sequence to the wrong audiences, generate resistance that a well-sequenced plan would have neutralized.

This skill treats change communication as an architecture problem. The architect must map every affected audience before writing a single word. Each audience has a different relationship to the change, a different emotional stake, a different information need, and a different channel preference. A message that says "this change streamlines our structure for growth" communicates something entirely different to a manager who just lost headcount than to an executive who proposed the change. Acknowledging that difference — rather than pretending a single message can serve both — is the core discipline this skill enforces.

The Q&A anticipation set is not optional or supplementary. In every organizational change, the questions people ask are more revealing of their real concerns than anything in the announcement. Building the Q&A set before the communication lands means the communicator has done the empathy work: they have imagined themselves in each audience's position and anticipated the anxious, skeptical, and practical questions that any honest person would ask. Skipping this step is a form of wishful thinking that the real questions will not be asked.

🏗️ ANCT Architecture

Entropy Profile:

📥 Intake Variables

{{SOURCE_MATERIAL}}

{{OBJECTIVE}}

{{AUDIENCE}}

{{CHANNEL}}

{{DEADLINE}}

{{SENSITIVITY_LEVEL}}

{{CONSTRAINTS}}

{{OWNER}}

⚙️ Phases

Phase 1: Intake Change Context

Entropy Level: E1 – Deterministic Control Mode: DELEGATE

Collect all required context before any audience mapping or message drafting begins. The quality of the audience segmentation and message variants is entirely dependent on having a clear, complete picture of the change. Vague intake produces generic messages that fail every audience.

Specifically probe for the decision status — is this change decided, or still being socialized? Communicating a decided change as if it is still open for input destroys trust faster than any other error. Also probe for what the owner does and does not know at the time of announcement: there will always be unanswered questions (Who specifically is affected? What are the new reporting lines?), and the comms plan must account for communicating honestly under uncertainty.

Process:

1. Present the intake variable set and collect all required fields
2. Confirm whether the change is decided (communicate as fact) or proposed (communicate as direction)
3. Probe for what is known vs. unknown at announcement time — identify information gaps that will generate questions
4. Identify the hardest audience: the group most likely to react negatively. Name them explicitly.
5. Identify any regulatory or legal constraints on what can be said (e.g., pre-TUPE consultation requirements, securities quiet periods, labor relations rules)
6. Confirm

   {{DEADLINE}}

   includes both the internal and external (if applicable) announcement sequence

Output: A complete intake record with all required fields, a known/unknown matrix, hardest-audience identification, and any regulatory flags.

Phase 2: Map Audience Segments

Entropy Level: E3 – Analytical Control Mode: NARRATE

Before writing any messages, build a complete audience map. For each audience segment identified in

{{AUDIENCE}}

The sequencing judgment — who hears first — is often the most consequential decision in the entire comms plan. The general principle is: inform before announce. Managers must be informed before their teams. Senior leadership must be aligned before all-company communication. People whose roles are materially affected must be personally informed before any group announcement. Violating this sequence is how rumors start.

Process:

1. List every audience segment named in

   {{AUDIENCE}}

   , then add any implied audiences the requester may have missed (e.g., if a reorg is described, ask whether the HR BP community is an audience, whether external vendors or partners are affected)
2. For each segment, complete the audience profile: what changes for them, expected emotional reaction, primary information need, channel preference, and sequence position
3. Identify any audiences with conflicting needs (e.g., an audience that is both a "recipient" of the change and a "communicator" to others — managers are the classic case)
4. Flag any audiences where the change has materially adverse implications (role elimination, reporting changes, scope reduction) — these require individual, private communication before group announcement
5. Produce the audience sequence: a ranked order for who receives communication, with rationale for the sequence

Output: A complete audience profile table for each segment, plus a recommended communication sequence with rationale.

Phase 3: Generate Message Variants

Entropy Level: E4 – Generative then E3 – Analytical Control Mode: GENERATE then NARRATE

Write a distinct message variant for each audience segment. GENERATE produces the draft; NARRATE then validates that each draft is appropriate for the audience's context and emotional position, uses the right channel conventions, and does not over- or under-disclose relative to

{{CONSTRAINTS}}

Each message variant must follow a consistent structure: (1) lead with what this means for this audience specifically — not with the org-level rationale, (2) explain the why at a level of detail appropriate to the audience, (3) acknowledge the likely concern or question this audience will have and address it directly, (4) state clearly what happens next and by when, (5) provide a specific action or contact for questions. Messages that lack a concrete "what happens next" create anxiety; people fill information vacuums with worst-case assumptions.

Process:

1. For each audience segment, draft a message variant using the five-element structure
2. Calibrate tone by audience: executive variants are direct and strategic; manager variants are instructional and empowering; employee variants are human and specific; external variants are formal and limited in scope
3. For manager variants, include talking points in addition to the message — managers need to be equipped to have conversations, not just receive communications
4. For any audience where the change has adverse implications, draft a separate sensitive conversation guide in addition to the group message
5. Apply channel conventions: an email variant has a subject line, a clear ask, and a signature; a Slack message is shorter with a link to detail; a town hall script has transitions and Q&A prompts; a 1:1 guide has opening lines and listening prompts
6. NARRATE validation: review each variant for appropriateness, disclosure level, and tone. Flag any that feel performative, overly corporate, or emotionally tone-deaf.

Output: A full set of audience-specific message variants with channel-appropriate formatting, manager talking points where applicable, and sensitive conversation guides where needed.

Phase 4: Validate Consistency

Entropy Level: E3 – Analytical Control Mode: NARRATE

Cross-check all message variants for factual consistency, disclosure appropriateness, and absence of conflicting statements. This phase catches the common problem where the executive variant contains a detail that contradicts the employee variant, or where the manager talking points make a commitment that the HR team is not prepared to honor.

Consistency does not mean identical — audiences should receive different framing, different levels of detail, and different emphasis. Consistency means the facts are the same across all variants. The date is the same. The decision is described the same way. The "why" is compatible across all versions even if it is explained at different levels of abstraction. And no variant makes a promise — about timing, about process, about outcomes — that has not been confirmed with the relevant decision-maker.

Process:

1. Extract all factual claims from every message variant and list them in a consistency matrix
2. Check each factual claim across all variants: dates, decision descriptions, next steps, named owners
3. Flag any inconsistency: same fact stated differently, promise made in one variant not reflected in others, detail disclosed in one variant that is restricted in another
4. Check disclosure levels: verify no audience is receiving information designated confidential at their sensitivity level
5. Review for language that makes commitments the owner has not confirmed ("no further changes are planned," "this is the final structure," "no roles will be eliminated") — flag any such language for explicit confirmation or removal
6. Check tone for each variant against the audience's emotional position: a variant written for a resistant audience that reads as dismissive of their concerns will fail

Output: A consistency validation report with all flagged items and recommended corrections, plus a go/no-go recommendation for each variant.

Phase 5: Produce Comms Pack

Entropy Level: E1 – Deterministic Control Mode: DELEGATE

Assemble all validated components into a single, structured change communications pack that the owner can use directly. The pack must be organized for operational use — not for reading but for doing. The person executing the comms plan should be able to open the pack and know exactly what to send, to whom, through which channel, and in what order, without having to reconstruct the logic.

The Q&A set is a mandatory component of the pack. Build a minimum of 10 questions, organized by audience (questions this audience will definitely ask). Include the recommended answer and any "hold for later" questions that cannot be answered at announcement time, with a note on when they will be answered.

Process:

1. Compile the audience map in table format: audience segment, what changes for them, channel, sequence position, timing
2. Build the message matrix: rows = audiences, columns = channel / timing / variant reference
3. Assemble all message variants in sequence order with channel labels
4. Build the Q&A set: minimum 10 questions, organized by audience segment, with recommended answers and "hold" flags
5. Add a rollout timeline: a day-by-day (or week-by-week for longer changes) sequence of what goes out, to whom, through which channel
6. Add an owner checklist: the specific actions

   {{OWNER}}

   must take before, during, and after the communication lands
7. Append a "what if" section: what to do if communication leaks before the planned sequence, what to do if a key leader is unavailable on announcement day, what to do if significant negative reaction occurs

Output: A complete, operationally ready change communications pack including: audience map, message matrix, all message variants, Q&A set, rollout timeline, owner checklist, and contingency guidance.

🚫 Anti-Patterns

💡 Example Applications

🖥️ Platform Notes

CLI: Best used as a single-session interactive workflow. Feed

{{SOURCE_MATERIAL}}

Web: Ideal format for this skill. The audience map and message matrix render well as tables; the rollout timeline renders as a checklist. Use Claude's web interface for iterative refinement of individual variants after the full pack is generated.

IDE: Useful for teams maintaining comms templates in a content management system. The message variants can be stored as template files with variable substitution for change-specific details.

Any LLM: Phase 3 (message generation) and Phase 4 (consistency validation) require strong instruction-following and contextual reasoning. The skill is not appropriate for models that struggle with multi-document consistency checking. Sonnet or above recommended.

📋 Compliance

AI Governance Alignment: Supports responsible change management practice aligned with PROSCI ADKAR and Kotter 8-step frameworks. The audience segmentation approach is consistent with organizational change management best practices for stakeholder communication.

PII Risk Level: medium — Change communications often reference named individuals (leaders, departing executives, role changes). Handle any named individual references with care; apply the principle of minimum necessary disclosure. Do not include more personal detail in any message than is necessary for the audience to understand the change.

Model Recommendation: sonnet — Phase 3 requires genuine creative writing ability to produce emotionally intelligent, audience-appropriate message variants. Phase 4 requires multi-document reasoning for consistency checking. Haiku produces messages that are technically correct but emotionally flat and fail resistant audiences.

Data Handling: No personal data should be included in

{{SOURCE_MATERIAL}}