One of the things I’ve learned from 25 years in communications and from walking into many organisations as an outsider is that the problems are usually visible before anyone names them.

It’s not that charity teams aren’t working hard. They are. It’s that they’re often working hard on the wrong things, or in the wrong direction, without a clear picture of why the communications aren’t landing the way they should. Clarifying purpose can inspire confidence in their efforts.

These are the five signs I see most often. If more than two of them sound familiar, it’s probably worth a proper look at what’s happening strategically.

1. You’re creating content first and thinking about your audience second

This is the most common one and the hardest to spot from the inside because it doesn’t feel like a problem. It feels like productivity.

The newsletter goes out because it’s the first Monday of the month. The social post goes up because there’s a gap in the calendar. The press release gets written because the programme team asked for one.

But the question that should sit at the front of every piece of communication is: Who is this for, and what do we want them to do with it? Often gets answered after the fact, if at all.

Communications built around a content schedule are an activity. Communications built around an audience are a strategy. The output can look identical. The results usually aren’t.

2. You can’t say in one sentence what you want people to do differently

Try this: pick one of your recent campaigns, appeals, or communications programmes and complete this sentence.

After seeing this, we want [our audience] to [think/feel/do]… 

If it takes more than 30 seconds, or if everyone in the room gives a slightly different answer, that’s a signal. Not a crisis — a signal.

Good communication moves people. But you have to know where you’re trying to move them before you can work out how to do it. The organisations I see doing communications well are very clear on this. The ones that struggle tend to be producing content that explains a lot but asks for very little.

3. Everyone has a view on the comms, but nobody owns the strategy

In most charities, communications is a shared interest. The CEO has opinions. The fundraising team has requests. The programmes team has stories they want told. Trustees sometimes have views on the website.

None of that is wrong. But when everyone is a stakeholder in communications, and nobody is a strategist, someone who can say, “Yes, but which of these serves our most important audience right now?” Communications ends up being shaped by whoever shouted the loudest or emailed goals.

This is one of the strongest arguments for having a dedicated senior communications lead, whether in-house or fractional. Not to gatekeep, but to make the strategic calls that keep everything else in implementation.

4. You’re measuring how much you publish, not whether it’s working

Outputs—posts sent, emails delivered, press releases issued—are easy to count. Outcomes—trust increased, applications received, donations made, policy shifted—are harder to attribute. So most organisations report on what they can measure and quietly assume that those things stand in for impact.

They don’t.

Most charities measure outputs, but focusing on outcomes reassures leaders that their communications are truly making a difference in conversations, relationships, or behaviours.

The best measurement is simple: go back to the thing you wanted your audience to do, and find out whether more of them are doing it.

5. Your communications read like they were written for you, not for your audience

This is the one people find hardest to hear, so I’ll say it gently.

A lot of charity communications are written by people who care deeply about the organisation and its work, for an audience that cares far less than they think. The mission statement took six months to agree on. The impact report runs to 40 pages. The social post that explains the programme logic instead of telling the story of the person it helped.

None of it is wrong. But the question an audience is always asking, consciously or not, is: what does this mean for me? And if your communications doesn’t answer that question quickly, they’ll find something else that does.

Shifting from ‘here’s what we do’ to ‘here’s what this means for you’ is the single most effective thing most charities can do to improve their communications. It doesn’t require a rebrand or a new strategy. It requires a genuine understanding of who your audience is and what they actually need to hear.

What to do if you recognise yourself in any of these?

Start with the audience question. Who are the three people or groups your charity most needs to reach in the next twelve months? What do you want them to think or do differently? Where are they, and what do they already care about?

You might find that answering those questions reveals a gap you weren’t expecting. That’s a good thing. A gap you can see is one you can close.

If you’d find it useful to talk through any of this, I offer a free 30-minute conversation for charity leaders who want to understand how their communications could be more effective. No pitch, no pressure. Just a useful half hour.

You can book one at vscomms.co.uk or drop me a line at vishnee@vscomms.co.uk.

Vishnee Sauntoo is the Founder of VS Comms and a strategic communications consultant with 25 years’ experience working with charities, not-for-profits, and mission-led organisations. She is a Trustee of CharityComms and hosts The Comms Collective Podcast.