*Learn to use the "Hit vs. Shit" radar to predict resistance and protect your program's ROI and reputation.*

Listen the episode:

The "Hidden" Risk: Diagnosing Communication Gaps Before They Kill Adoption

Most IT programs have rigorous logs for data migration, cutover readiness, and vendor dependencies. Yet, they rarely track the one risk that consistently sabotages ROI: Poor Stakeholder Engagement.

You can have the technology side of your big tech change (e.g. S/4HANA migration) in place and still lose the adoption battle if you ignore communication risk. Your program carries a reputation inside the organisation, and that reputation is a fragile asset. Once trust erodes, adoption follows, turning expensive licenses into shelfware.

This article introduces a rigorous framework for treating communication not as a "soft skill," but as a measurable operational risk. We explore the concept of "Silent Noise" – the quiet withdrawal of support that is far more dangerous than open complaints. You'll learn to use the "Hit vs. Shit" lens to diagnose your stakeholders’ perceived gains and losses across your timeline, score adoption risks with the same precision as technical bugs, and decide when to disclose bad news proactively to protect your program's credibility.

The Invisible Saboteur of ROI

When a program hits the investment radar, it becomes an internal brand. Business leaders and end-users immediately form expectations. They judge whether this initiative is a priority that helps them or a burden that slows them down.

If these expectations don't match reality, trust takes a hit.

Most CIOs monitor "Loud Noise" – escalations, steering committee conflicts, and vendor flags. These are painful, but they’re visible. You can manage them. The true killer of adoption is "Silent Noise".

Silent noise manifests as non-responsiveness, missed deadlines, and "attendance without engagement." In meetings, stakeholders nod "yes," but in their daily work, they withdraw. This is a hidden risk that often only surfaces at go-live, leading to teams that technically accept the system but never embrace it.

The Diagnostic Tool: The "Hit vs. Shit" Radar

To manage this risk, you need to stop guessing and start diagnosing. The most effective tool for this is what we call assessing your “Hit and Shit” topics.

Inside the program, topics look functional: naming conventions, workflow approvals, role mappings. But stakeholders experience these topics emotionally as either gains or losses.

A "Hit" Topic: Something stakeholders perceive as a win (e.g., automation of a tedious task).

A "Shit" Topic: Something they perceive as a loss (e.g., loss of autonomy, new approval steps, stricter data entry).

Perception is everything. A minor process tweak to you might feel like a loss of control to them. If a "Shit Topic" hits an influential, overloaded stakeholder without preparation, it triggers disproportionate resistance.

How to Score and Manage Communication Risk

You can score, map, and manage these risks just like technical defects.

1. Map the Timeline Don't just look at next week. Look at the full journey from Design Freeze to Hypercare. At each milestone, ask: "What will they like? What will they hate?".

2. Score the "Noise Factor" Evaluate each topic based on three criteria:

Reach: How many people are affected?

Influence: Are the affected stakeholders powerful or negative?

Escalation Probability: How likely is this to blow up?

3. Decide: Proactive vs. Reactive Once you’ve scored your risks, you have a strategic choice.

Go Proactive: If the probability of noise is high and the emotional charge is heavy, communicate early. Research shows that organisations that disclose difficult information proactively experience 30–50% less reputational damage than those who are forced to disclose it later. Acknowledge the issue, explain the mitigation, and show the plan.

Stay Reactive: If the likelihood is low, pre-announcing might create unnecessary anxiety. In this case, prepare your materials but hold them back. This allows you to act within the "Golden Hour" if the issue surfaces, preventing speculation from filling the vacuum.

Key Takeaways for IT Leaders

Communication is Reputation Protection. It's not about making people "feel good." It's about protecting the credibility of your multi-million dollar investment.

Silence is a Warning Sign. Don't mistake a lack of complaints for alignment. In many cultures, silence indicates withdrawal.

Build Goodwill. Use "Hit" topics strategically to build a trust buffer before you have to communicate the "Shit" topics.

Bad News Ages Poorly. If a high-impact negative change is coming, owning the narrative early is always safer than letting the rumour mill define it for you.