Recessionary times mean employers are slashing jobs and scaling back on workplace benefits. Often, HR/benefit managers are the unfortunate staffers called upon to deliver the news workers never want to hear.

To help companies design communication strategies for delivering bad benefits news, Associate Editor Lydell C. Bridgeford reached out to HR consultant Dennis Ackley for tips on the subject.

Ackely, president of Missouri-based Ackley Associates, believes that a good communication program is just as effective with bad news as it is with good news. While workers won't be pleased with the message, they will appreciate straight talk, humane action and strong leadership.

EBN: What are the common communication mistakes employers make when announcing to their workforce a cutback or reduction in benefits?

Ackley: A common mistake is communicating too soon with too little information ... or waiting too long and telling employees what they've already heard.

The key goal is not to get the bad news out as soon as possible; it's to implement the changes with as little disruption as possible.

Even highly effective bad news communication will be an unpleasant distraction - for employees and the employer.

But poorly done bad news communication can be devastating. Uncertainty is a killer of workforce productivity and a catalyst for stress.

For example, an e-mail from management announcing that significant health plan cuts are coming and more information will be available in a few months, simply raises anxiety.

That's a long time to wait for answers to questions that seem essential to employees, such as:

How much will the coverage cost?

Will I still be able to enroll my family members?

Will my doctor still be in the network?

At the time the announcement is made, or very shortly after, employees expect answers to what they believe are basic questions.

In bad news communication, speed is important.

But it's not how fast news about the bad news decision is announced.

Rather, it's how quickly the major details - especially the "What does this mean to me?" issues - can be explained and uncertainty reduced, without the grapevine becoming the go-to source of information for employees.

One way to help reduce uncertainly is to promise employees at the initial announcement that every question about the change, new benefit plan or cutback will be answered before the employees need to make any decision.

EBN: When delivering bad news, what type of tone should the message evoke?

Ackley: Don't make the message overly grim and dark, or too light and jolly. Bad news needs to be clear, honest and straightforward ... with a measure of optimism.

Even after cutbacks, benefits still have value. Take the medical plan for example. Employees should be reminded that it continues to provide terrific financial protection from catastrophic medical expenses - which is the major purpose of the plan. Certainly, the benefit reduction and increased employee contributions hurt, but the plan remains strong.

Here's an example. If, God forbid, an enrolled member of your family has a serious medical condition resulting in $80,000, or even $800,000, in eligible expenses in a calendar year for network providers, the most you would pay out of your pocket that year would be $3,0000 [or whatever the out-of-pocket provision is]. Yes, that's a sizeable amount. But it's a fraction of the total cost.

EBN: Talk a little bit about the idea of companies showing their real values when they communicate bad news.

Ackley: Bad news communication shows an organization's true colors. When the message is unpleasant, the "We are an employer-of-choice" talk gets put to the "say/do" test.

Organizations that say they are great places to work have an opportunity to prove it by the way they do things during tough times.

When the say and do are in sync, the organization can reinforce and strengthen trust and commitment in the workforce.

But employers that use "We're a world-class employer" slogans and don't back it up when the news is bad - showing that they say one thing and do another - will increase employees' cynicism and reduce trust and productivity.

Be sure any negativity is focused on the jobs that, because of the weak economy, were no longer being supported by what the customers were buying.

But be positive about the people who were doing the jobs because the terrible part of job cuts is that good people were in those jobs.

Also, be certain to communicate what the organization is doing to help those people. The employees who are not leaving will be watching to see if the organization acts in the way it says it values people.

EBN: When it comes to employers delivering bad news to workers, there's the classic image of the company's executives conducting a town hall meeting or the companywide e-mail sent on a Friday at the end of day. Does the venue or medium in which the bad news is delivery affect the success of the communication campaign? Or is it all about the follow-up?

Ackley: The idea of sending bad news as employees walk out the door for the weekend is meant to keep the disruption to a minimum. Employees know that's why management does it that way.

They also know it's easier for management to hide behind an e-mail rather than stand in front them when making the announcement.

Over time, which day the news was announced won't remembered as much as how the news was delivered. Did a senior member of management deliver the news in person, supported by other managers? Or was the task given to a junior HR specialist?Worse yet, was the news sent via what is the corporate version of a Dear John letter - the bad news e-mail?

EBN: Do employers have to amend the communication campaign's message or tone based on which benefit program is being scaled back or shut down?

Ackley: The magnitude of the communication needs to match the magnitude of the bad news. For example, in difficult economic times, making a big announcement about a reduction in the type of office supplies available might be seen by employees as a waste of effort - something that should have been a normal business step that didn't deserve the attention.

If a layoff or cutback is being announced, don't underplay the importance. Also, don't target the communication to just the employees being affected. If a plant is being closed in Dallas, employees in other plants should be told about it as well.

Also, if you are changing benefits for retirees, but not active employees, the active employees need to be told. The word will spread, and it will appear that management is trying to hide things.

Follow EBN on: Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | Podcasts