One thing you can say for certain about actuaries is that they know about numbers.

There are two other observations. What’s the difference between an English actuary and a Sicilian actuary? The English actuary can tell you how many people will die in 2011 and the Sicilian one can give you their names.

The other is the hoary old cliché – told to me by a member of that great profession – that the thing to remember about actuaries is that they are people who find accountancy too racy.

By now you will rightly be saying what has this to do with communications?

The answer is that ever since I was introduced to actuaries in a big way through working with the Office of the Policyholder Advocate (don’t ask it would take too long to explain), I have kept in touch with some brilliant research reports from Watson Wyatt, a leading actuarial firm.  This is not because I have some secret hankering to become an actuary but because of its regular reports on communications.

Its 2009/2010 report on ‘Capitalising on Effective Communications – How Courage, Innovation and Discipline Drive Business Results in Challenging Times” is another eye-opener.

It is particularly valuable for communicators who find themselves in the gimlet glare of a finance director round budget time being asked to ‘justify that level of spend’.

Here are some key findings:

• Companies that are highly effective communicators had returns 47 per cent higher over the last five years than the least effective
• Despite all the organisational changes being implemented to cope with new economic conditions, only 14 per cent of companies are taking steps to explain them to employees
• While only three in 10 companies are training managers to deal with resistance to change, highly effective communicators are three times more likely to do so
• Despite adoption of social media to help communicate, companies are struggling to measure the return on investment in those tools. Highly effective communicators are more than three times more likely to regard these tools as giving a positive return
• Less effective communicators are much more likely to have no effective measures of communication in place.

Watson Wyatt has a fine reputation for its communications studies and tells a consistent story. Companies that communicate well perform better. They have better informed employees and greater clarity about their strategic goals.

This puts a premium on management to either acquire or develop communication skills. This side of business is often underrated and under resourced.

One reason for this is that managers will say that as we all communicate with each other every day what’s so special about communications – just get on with it. Cannier managers appreciate that communications is a complex business – after all in our every day how many times do we find ourselves at cross-purposes even with our family, or missing points entirely?

Messages need to be crafted, thought about, considered for complexity and put forward with what I call the ‘assume’ warning. This is never assume anything – find out.

The other element is the skill of the individual to deliver messages and it is vital to be able to do it effectively in person. There is a reason why speaking in public is routinely described in surveys as in the top four of stressful events. It is difficult and we all need to practice as often as we can.

So while the CIPR and others carry on really valuable work on communications measurement and effectiveness, companies should invest in training their best and brightest to communicate effectively. After all concert pianists would not go on stage to play Rachmaninov from scratch. Actuaries don’t leave home without a scientific calculator. And communicators should get out and hone their skills in a safe environment.

Pitch-Perfect runs a variety of highly regarded courses to help communicators raise their game to even higher levels. On the basis of Watson Wyatt, even the finance director would start to see the benefit of that investment.