The case for corporate diplomacy
Corporate affairs leaders are embracing a grander title, but the rise of strategic silence suggests a convenient retreat rather than a new mandate.
If the first half of this year was dominated by PR consultancy disruption, the second half appears to have swung towards a more familiar refrain, concerning the evergreen issues of in-house access and authority.
The latest missives on this topic come from Edelman’s Future of Corporate Affairs report, Ipsos’ newest Reputation Council instalment, and the 2026 edition of We.’s long running Brands in Motion survey, although we can probably be forgiven if more research has dropped that we have missed.
Indeed, the sheer preponderance of studies into in-house communicator habits, in Western markets at least, suggests that this profession is not as under-researched as its measurement anxieties imply. I can count at least 15 studies of in-house comms behaviour this year alone, from AI-focused studies to musings on geopolitics, which makes me think that our in-house corporate affairs and communications professionals are more thoroughly studied than most flora and fauna.
When you consider the consistent finding that client responsibilities are expanding faster than traditional structures can bear, it prompts one observation: perhaps some of this pressure could be alleviated by participating in fewer surveys, other than Earned First’s of course ;)
