Tara McDonagh

In one post, the function is either the overarching umbrella that contains internal communications, public relations, executive communications, and often community affairs, investor relations, corporate citizenship, events, social media, public affairs, and creative or design—usually led by a chief communications officer reporting to the CEO—or a corporate-level centre of excellence with communicators embedded in business units who connect back to it.

• Naming the function after only one part hides the rest of the work and keeps the field from being understood at full scope.
• In a second post, they turn the point into a practical naming argument and call on communicators to set expectations themselves.

Tara McDonagh compares naming a department “Media and Communications” to calling Finance “Payroll and Budgeting,” HR “Recruiting and Training,” or IT “Helpdesk and Information Security.”

• The second post grew out of a comment-thread conversation with a communications professional whose department was named for PR and internal communications but carried many other unnamed responsibilities.
• The person agreed that “Corporate Communications” would have been the more accurate label.

The first post sets out two possible shapes for the function. The later post turns a naming problem from a comment thread into four actions: set expectations, share what others are doing well, show the gaps a centralized function would fill, and name the function accurately while expecting others to do the same.

Read original · Original 2

The term fits someone whose role is genuinely limited to writing and storytelling about the brand; otherwise, it describes one small piece of a larger function that includes PR, internal communications, and other responsibilities.

• The field already struggles to be taken seriously as a source of critical business advisors, so an oversimplified title adds to the misunderstanding.
• They agree that storytelling is not simple; the objection is about scope, not difficulty.

The post compares calling a corporate communications leader a brand storyteller to calling a CFO a payroll expert. Tara McDonagh traces the habit to around 2006, says they wrote a short piece about it in 2019 and updated it in 2021, and argues that unlike other 2006 habits that have returned, this one should be left there.

Tara McDonagh notes that the argument has been reused over time: an original piece in 2019, a 2021 update, and a renewed post when the topic came up again. The concession that storytelling is not easy deliberately narrows the objection.

Read original

Yet the head of communications is constantly questioned, their assessments challenged and their expertise treated as opinion. McDonagh wants communications leaders' expertise to be assumed rather than continually earned, and frames the change as something communicators must initiate rather than wait for.

In one post, Tara McDonagh asks why a CFO's knowledge is assumed while a communications leader's is not, then invites readers to share the post with their business partners.

• In another, a communications leader describes being asked to chase entry-level work.
• McDonagh argues that refusing the work is stewardship of company dollars, not elitism, and that communications leaders deserve more respect.
• A client testimonial in a third post shows what can follow when the function is elevated.

Read original · Original 2 · Original 3

They link the pattern to two years of cuts and reject the idea that the leader is arrogant or elitist.

• The issue is how company resources are used.
• McDonagh then tells the story in the first person, from a corporate communications leadership role: a first attempt with a trusted boss was shut down, so they rebuilt the case around the business.

The leader in the story said, “You don't want me to do that.

• I get paid too much.”
• In Tara McDonagh's account, the successful second attempt used data: salary broken down by the hour, what the company could pay for the same work instead, where time was already being spent on strategic work with impact, where more time should go, the expected return, and a plan for who else could take on the entry-level work.
• Framed around the business rather than the individual, the case was well received.
• The post closes by asking whether you would pay a CFO to run payroll.

Tara McDonagh first wrote about the story about five years earlier and revisited it because the problem was surfacing again, this time among other communications leaders rather than clients. The current post is an explicit update.

Read original

Its purpose is to connect employees to business goals so they are aware of and engaged in those goals, ideally enthusiastic about them, and make daily decisions that connect to them—affecting engagement, connection, and productivity.

• From that premise, McDonagh argues that all business areas are equal in internal communications: HR information is not inherently more important than telling employees about product, sales, customers, financial results, or protecting the brand in a crisis.
• Even when internal communications reports through HR, they say, it happens to report there but is not part of HR; it partners with the entire organization.

The post is written to be forwarded to HR colleagues.

• It uses a numbered list of employee outcomes and quotes RaeShonda Lias of Instagram fame to set up the explanation: “Some of ya'll are confused.
• I'm here to help ... let's break it down ...”
• Tara McDonagh then separates a reporting line from a function's purpose.

Read original

In a trust recession, they write, it is hard to believe anyone talking about their own work, so the post hands the claim to a client instead. The plan is not just a document: it aligns communications with organizational goals and becomes the basis for team structure, resources, and standing.

Lauren Keane, Vice President of Communications at Southern New Hampshire University, says the team was already highly regarded but that Tara McDonagh helped them reach a new level, with a new team structure, additional staff and resources, and a communications strategic plan aligned with organizational goals.

• McDonagh says a longer version and other client references exist across industrial manufacturing, food and beverage, banking, renewable energy, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, and a first-nations-owned business.
• They state the intent in one line: clients will not need Tara McDonagh forever, and that is the point.

Read original

Every other argument rests on this definition.

McDonagh rejects the idea that corporate communications is a sub-function of PR or internal communications and describes two models.

• In one, it is the overarching umbrella for internal communications, public relations, executive communications and often community affairs, investor relations, corporate citizenship, events, social media, public affairs, and creative or design.
• A chief communications officer or corporate affairs officer usually leads it and reports to the CEO.
• In the other, it is a corporate-level center of excellence, with communicators embedded in business units and connected to it formally or through dotted lines.
• They say this structure appears where an organization is large or complex enough to need it: regulated B2B companies, complex non-profits, very large consumer businesses, healthcare, banking, universities, manufacturing where unions are involved, and energy.
• Their closing claim is blunt: corporate communications is not a sub-function of anything else.

For brands planning a campaign

This lays the groundwork for a webinar on elevating communications as a strategic function. It lets the audience agree on what the function is before debating its standing.

McDonagh argues that calling the function “Media and Communications,” or listing only some of its parts, is like calling Finance “Payroll and Budgeting,” HR “Recruiting and Training,” or IT “Helpdesk and Information Security.”

• They trace the post to a comment-thread conversation with a communications professional whose department was named for PR and internal communications but carried many other unnamed responsibilities.
• The professional agreed that “Corporate Communications” would have been the more accurate label.
• McDonagh then offers four steps: set the expectation, share what others are doing well, show the gaps a centralized function would fill, and name the function accurately while expecting others to do the same.

For brands planning a campaign

A ready-made discussion prompt for a webinar section on positioning and internal advocacy. The Finance and HR comparisons work well with business audiences and are easy to put on a slide.

Useful for understanding their tone before the more combative posts.

McDonagh dates the habit of explaining communications work as “brand storytelling” to around 2006 and says the topic makes them fiery.

• They grant that storytelling is not simple, then argue that “brand storyteller” fits only someone whose role is genuinely nothing but writing and storytelling about the brand.
• Using it otherwise, they say, is like calling a CFO a payroll expert.
• A label that covers only one part of the work adds to the oversimplification and misunderstanding of a field already struggling to be taken seriously as a critical business advisor.
• They note that they wrote a short piece on this in 2019, refreshed it in 2021, and were reminded of it again while posting about what has come back into style from 2006.

For brands planning a campaign

The most quotable hook in the set. It gives a webinar host a productive opening tension: McDonagh explicitly invites disagreement rather than shutting it down.

Read it to see the argument the rest of their writing is trying to win.

McDonagh starts with a comparison: you assume a CFO knows math, even though you know math too, and defer to them on budget allocation, investment income, margin and similar matters.

• They ask why the head of communications is instead constantly questioned, with assessments challenged and expertise treated as opinion.
• They call for communications leaders' expertise to be assumed rather than continually earned, and invite readers to share the post with their business partners.
• The post speaks to peers as much as to the executives who question them.

For brands planning a campaign

A useful framing line for promotion or for opening a webinar aimed at communications leaders and the business partners they serve. It names the credibility problem in one sentence.

It shows the problem, the failed first attempt, and the approach that worked—more useful than the argument alone.

McDonagh recalls a communications leader telling them five years earlier, with exasperation and some trepidation, that they were being asked to chase work an entry-level person could do, and that saying so out loud would not look good.

• They heard the same thing again recently, this time from other communications leaders rather than clients, and link it to two years of cuts.
• They reject the idea that the leader was arrogant: not doing the work is, in their words, stewardship of the company's dollars.
• McDonagh then describes facing a similar situation in a corporate communications leadership role.
• Their first attempt to raise it with a boss they trusted was shut down.
• They returned with data: their salary converted to an hourly figure, what the company could instead pay for that work, where they were already spending time on strategic work with impact, where they wanted to spend more time, the expected return, and a plan for who else could take on the entry-level work.
• Framed around the business rather than themself, the proposal was well received.
• They close with a comparison that runs through much of their writing: would you pay a CFO to run payroll?

For brands planning a campaign

The strongest candidate for a webinar's central narrative. It gives the audience a live example of the problem the session addresses, and attendees can apply McDonagh's data-based approach in their own organizations.

Read it to see how McDonagh distinguishes a reporting line from a function's purpose.

McDonagh states plainly that internal communications does not exist to support HR.

• Its purpose, they write, is to connect employees to business goals: employees should know and engage with those goals, support them enthusiastically, and make daily decisions that advance them, affecting engagement, connection and productivity.
• From this, they argue that all business areas are equal in internal communications: HR information is no more important than updates about products, sales, customers, financial results, or protecting the brand in a crisis.
• Even when internal communications reports through HR, they say, it happens to report there but is not part of HR; it partners with the entire organization.
• The post is explicitly written to be forwarded to HR colleagues.

For brands planning a campaign

Good material for a segment on structure and mandate, particularly if the webinar audience includes internal communications practitioners whose teams sit under HR. It also shows McDonagh writing for a specific reader rather than an abstract one.

It shows what the advice is intended to produce when applied.

McDonagh opens by conceding that in a trust recession it is hard to believe anyone talking about their own work, including themselves, and hands the post to a client instead.

• Lauren Keane, Vice President of Communications at Southern New Hampshire University, says the team was already highly regarded but that McDonagh helped them reach a new level, resulting in a new team structure, additional staff and resources, and a communications strategic plan aligned with organizational goals.
• They say a longer version of the quote exists, along with others from current and former clients in industrial manufacturing, food and beverage, banking, renewable energy, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology and a first-nations-owned business.
• They sum up the intent behind the work: clients will not need them forever, and that is the point.

For brands planning a campaign

Useful as the credibility beat in a webinar: it points to concrete outputs—team structure, headcount, resources, and a strategic plan—rather than approval alone. The client outcome is reported in McDonagh's post and quoted from the client.

Naming a department after just one, such as “Media and Communications,” obscures the rest of the work and the field’s full scope. Two posts make the case: one lays out the umbrella-versus-sub-function distinction; the other compares communications with finance, HR, IT and marketing to show how unusual it would be to name those functions after a single task.

Compares communications with other business functions, lists its sub-functions and calls on the field to set expectations for how it is named.

For brands planning a campaign

A webinar can help communications leaders audit how their function is named and described, then show how an umbrella label changes internal perception, budget conversations and cross-functional partnerships.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2

In a related post, a communications leader describes being asked to take on entry-level work and feeling compelled to justify time spent on strategy: breaking down salary by the hour, showing what the company could pay for the same work, and tying more strategic time to expected ROI. McDonagh frames that refusal as stewardship of company dollars, not elitism, and argues that communications leaders deserve more respect.

Rhetorical questions comparing communications with finance; a first-person account of making the case to a boss with data; analogies comparing communications leaders with CFOs and CHROs.

One post clarifies that the leader in the entry-level work example was not arrogant or elitist; the issue is how company resources are used, not status.

For brands planning a campaign

A webinar can give communications leaders a repeatable way to make the business case for their time and expertise, using hours, opportunity cost and ROI rather than personal preference.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2

Its purpose is to connect employees to business goals so they understand and engage with them, then make daily decisions that support them.

• HR information is no more inherently important than information about products, sales, customers, financial results or brand protection.
• Internal communications partners with the whole organization—not just one function.

Lists employee outcomes, directly rebuts the assumption that internal communications belongs to HR because it reports there, and opens with a popular line about confusion.

For brands planning a campaign

For a webinar on elevating corporate communications, this offers a concrete operating-model topic: reporting lines, partnership expectations and how internal communications sets priorities across the business.

Examples: Source 1

The term describes one part of the work—writing and storytelling about the brand—but not the broader function, which includes PR, internal communications and other responsibilities.

• The post argues that the field already struggles to be taken seriously as a source of critical business advice, and an oversimplified title makes that harder.
• The issue is scope, not whether storytelling is easy.

Compares calling a communications leader a brand storyteller with calling a CFO a payroll expert; uses humor and refers to an older piece from 2019, updated in 2021.

Tara McDonagh agrees that brand storytelling is not simple; the objection is that it covers only part of the role.

For brands planning a campaign

A webinar can examine the language leaders use about their function and show how titles and descriptors shape whether it is seen as strategic or narrow.

Examples: Source 1

In one post, a client testimonial says that with their help, the team gained a new structure, additional staff and resources, and a communications strategic plan aligned with organizational goals.

• The testimonial comes from Lauren Keane, Vice President of Communications at Southern New Hampshire University.
• McDonagh cites a trust recession and lets a client make the case, grounding the claim without self-promotion.

Uses a named client testimonial and points to longer client references across sectors, including industrial manufacturing, food and beverage, banking, renewable energy, pharmaceuticals, biotechnology and a first-nations-owned business.

The testimonial post cites the client’s result but does not include the plan itself; ask for more context.

For brands planning a campaign

A webinar can use the strategic plan as a working artifact: how it aligns communications with organizational goals and informs team structure, resources and status as business advisers.

Examples: Source 1

One post recalls writing about a communications leader being asked to do entry-level work about five years earlier, then deciding it was time for another take because the problem had returned.

• Another says a piece first written in 2019 and updated in 2021 is still relevant.
• They return to these arguments when the field repeats the same mistakes.

Calls back to earlier writing, notes updates and explains why the topic is worth revisiting now.

For brands planning a campaign

A webinar can frame these topics as enduring issues rather than a new trend, supporting a thought-leadership angle on why communications keeps facing the same scope and credibility challenges.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2

The post presents the work as a completed engagement and recommends McDonagh to communications leaders.

View example

They list messaging, social media, public relations, analyst relations, investor relations, change management, crisis communications, and employee communications as parts of one umbrella, treating the field as McDonagh does: corporate communications is the whole function, with its sub-functions under it. Both also push back on how the work gets described and credited.

Chambers writes from a CMO and personal-branding angle.

• Corporate accounts become archives, while founders, executives, and subject-matter experts carry reach as individual creators; reach and LLM citation patterns are the rationale.
• McDonagh stays inside the function, arguing about naming, reporting lines, credibility with business partners, and what internal communications is for.

Read original · Original 2

That instructional instinct matches McDonagh's habit of defining the field for people standing next to it — for example, separating a communications reporting line from a function's purpose.

Gregory's explanatory post is an outside-in primer, written from a sales, marketing, and business-development career.

• It covers who benefits and what an outside firm provides.
• McDonagh writes as an advocate from inside corporate communications, arguing for the function's scope, standing, and resources rather than introducing it from scratch.

Read original · Original 2

That measurement-over-assertion approach is close to McDonagh's insistence that communications leaders make the case for their time with hours, alternative costs, and expected return. They also argue that expertise should be assumed rather than continually re-earned.

Foote's subject is revenue operations and go-to-market systems — CMO spend data, attribution models, dashboards, and fractional leadership — and his audience is growth and RevOps leadership. McDonagh focuses on the communications function, its name, its place in the organisation, and its partnership with HR.

Read original · Original 2

One post spans PR, employee and executive communications, crisis work, and other functions; another argues that personal accounts can reach audiences better than corporate pages. Together, those ideas give a webinar a clear focus on communicating the value of the function and building visibility.

Tara McDonagh is the stronger fit for a campaign positioning communications as a strategic business function.

• Their posts explain how communications fits into an organization and how leaders can make the business case for moving from tactical work to higher-impact strategy.
• Becca’s examples offer a useful perspective on communications’ scope and visibility, but make that case less directly.

Examples: Source 1 · Source 2