Insight communication and activation often falters at the very start of the process, before any analysis or storytelling occurs. This is where vague questions, compressed timelines and unclear expectations impact on the capability and capacity to tell a meaningful and actionable data-led story.
As part of our Insight Communication Experts (ICE) series, I spoke with Thomas Johnson, Head of Growth & Experimentation – On Trade at Heineken, about the behaviour changes in the team after training and why the briefing phase continues to be the single biggest lever for impact.
What shifted immediately after the training
In the weeks following the Insight Impact training, Tom observed a noticeable uplift in energy and engagement, with teams investing more time thinking about the story behind their work. Frameworks introduced during the sessions began to show up in decks, and conversations around structure and application became more visible.
Networks formed during the sessions continued afterwards, creating new opportunities for collaboration and cross-team knowledge sharing. Managers also played an active role in sustaining early momentum, keeping storytelling best practice alive through one-to-ones and regular check-ins on how the training was being applied.
The habit that has really stuck
One action that has been consistently applied since the training is the discipline around the upfront briefing conversation. Tom highlights how the teams have become more deliberate in pausing to ask:
- What are stakeholders really asking for?
- What decision is this informing?
- Where are the gaps in clarity?
The frameworks covered in the training helped provide structure at the start of new requests. Even when not shared directly with stakeholders, it supported internal thinking, challenging stakeholders and overall confidence. Importantly, Tom emphasises that until these behaviours become second nature, structure matters.
“Utilising the frameworks consistently is key. It’s not necessary to get these frameworks out with the stakeholders, but using them to think ahead of time, to understand where you need more clarity, to apply the structure to that thinking is where we’ve been more disciplined. In one-to-one we are checking with the team that they have gone through the template when new requests come in. We then ask them to talk us through it, explain where they are you feeling confident, and ask questions to help them think using the structure.”
Where embedding new ways of working became difficult
Pressure remains the greatest disruptor. When timelines tighten and workloads intensify, the first casualty is often reflection. The time required to challenge a brief, sharpen a question or shape a clearer story can quickly erode under delivery demands.
Tom also describes a pattern common to many capability programmes. Workflows, particularly in teams handling high volumes of data requests and dashboards, gradually pulled individuals back toward familiar delivery modes. Without a consistent backlog of work suited to deeper storytelling application, some elements of the training were harder to embed. In reality some individuals have actively sustained new habits, while others drifted back toward previous ways of working.
In addition, without parallel capability-building for stakeholders, tensions persist. Analysts seek clarity and definition to tell a better story, while stakeholders, often under their own pressures, push for rapid outputs or just the numbers.
“Whilst we’ve tried to engage our direct stakeholders with how we want to work with them; I don’t think we’ve necessarily helped them to change. So, they hear us saying “we want to work differently”, but they just want to get to the number they need. When it’s really under pressure, that’s when these behaviours are amplified and it becomes focused on just the delivery. The challenge, especially because now it feels as though 90% of the time is spent in that very stretching, time pressured environment, is getting the balance right.”
How to strengthen longer-term activation
- Stakeholder capability
Tom highlighted the need to help stakeholders understand:
- How to frame better questions
- How to engage with challenge at briefing stage
- How to get maximum value from analytical support
- Leadership reinforcement
While managers initially kept storytelling alive, Tom notes that sustained embedding requires more structured leadership follow-up. This would allow leaders to:
- Share what’s working
- Address drift and regression
- Reinforce expectations
- Reignite momentum
If one thing could change…
When asked what would make the single biggest difference, Tom’s answer was immediate: the brief.
Despite improvements in storytelling and visualisation, the greatest inefficiencies and frustrations still stem from poorly defined questions. A single-line request from a senior stakeholder often masks layers of complexity and context. Unpacking this takes time, and when clarity isn’t achieved, teams risk producing outputs that are technically correct but commercially misaligned.
What this tells us about storytelling in practice
Insight communication and activation excellence depends on:
✔ Clearer questions
✔ Stronger briefing conversations
✔ Stakeholder capability
✔ Leadership reinforcement
✔ Protection of thinking time under pressure
These themes, echoed across our interview series, form a core pillar of our upcoming white paper on insight communication in practice.
We will be sharing more insights from the interviews and the white paper over the coming months…so watch this space.