Mark DesJardine<\/a> has encountered the same issue from the outside in. In his research on shareholder activism, he\u2019s noticed that even subtle inconsistencies in how companies describe their strategy can raise red flags\u2014prompting investors to question credibility or push for change.<\/p>\nWhat both have come to believe is that most communication breakdowns aren\u2019t strategic failures. They\u2019re coordination failures. In global organizations, with teams spread across functions and geographies, alignment is difficult to sustain. \u201cIt\u2019s pretty hard when you have people all over the world,\u201d Argenti says. \u201cAlignment isn\u2019t going to happen naturally.\u201d<\/p>\n
Investor, employee, and customer messaging should emphasize different elements, but all should map back to the same underlying priorities. If each audience gets a fundamentally different story, alignment is already breaking down.<\/p>\n
At the same time, the stakes have risen. Investors, analysts, and the media routinely triangulate across earnings calls, press releases, speeches, and social channels. When messages don\u2019t line up, trust\u2014and value\u2014erodes.<\/p>\n
AI now offers a way to manage this complexity, not by replacing human judgment, but by making it possible to see the full picture. Where no single executive or team can track every message a company produces, AI can analyze and compare communications across channels and flag where they begin to drift.<\/p>\n
The goal isn\u2019t uniformity, but coherence: the ability to tailor messages to different audiences without contradicting the core narrative. In \u201cThe AI Advantage in Corporate Communication,\u201d a paper forthcoming in Management Business Review, DesJardine and Argenti argue this kind of alignment is not only a communications fix, but a strategic capability that delivers a real advantage.<\/p>\n
Companies have never been able to control how their messages are received, only how clearly and consistently they are communicated. Today, that communication is getting harder. The volume of messages has exploded, audiences have multiplied, and the gaps between what companies say in different places are easier than ever to spot. The firms that get this right won\u2019t just avoid missteps; they\u2019ll build credibility with investors, employees, and the market.<\/p>\n
A Framework for Staying Aligned<\/p>\n
Argenti and DesJardine\u2019s approach to \u201cdouble alignment\u201d is a four-step process for making coherence a repeatable capability.<\/p>\n
\tSet the foundation
Alignment starts with clarity. Companies need a well-defined \u201ccommunication spine\u201d\u2014a shared understanding of strategy, priorities, and values that can anchor every message. Just as important is governance: a cross-functional group spanning communications, investor relations, legal, and IT to oversee how AI is used and ensure consistency across the organization.
\n\tBuild the system
Next comes assembling the full communication picture. That means pulling together everything from earnings calls and investor decks to marketing campaigns, internal documents, and external feedback. AI models are then trained not to generate content, but to recognize patterns, identifying shifts in tone, gaps in messaging, and emerging inconsistencies.
\n\tEmbed it in the workflow
For alignment to stick, it must happen in real time. AI tools can be built into everyday platforms\u2014Word, PowerPoint, content systems\u2014so that messages are checked before they go out. The system flags potential contradictions, highlights risks, and suggests adjustments, allowing teams to tailor messages without losing coherence.
\n\tAlign externally
This is where many companies stumble. Tailoring messages is necessary, but it needs to be done with discipline. In practice, that means starting with a single core narrative and then pressure-testing how it shows up across audiences:<\/p>\n
\t\tTranslate, don\u2019t reinvent. Investor, employee, and customer messaging should emphasize different elements, but all should map back to the same underlying priorities. If each audience gets a fundamentally different story, alignment is already breaking down.
\n\t\tCheck messages side by side. Before release, compare communications across channels\u2014a press release, an earnings script, a marketing campaign\u2014to see how they read together. Misalignment is often only visible in combination.
\n\t\tAnticipate cross-audience spillover. Assume that investors will see marketing campaigns, employees will read earnings transcripts, and media will connect both. Messages designed for one audience won\u2019t stay contained.
\n\t\tUse AI to stress-test framing. AI can surface where differences in tone or emphasis may be interpreted as contradiction. For example, AI can raise an alert when growth narratives begin to undercut claims of cost discipline.<\/p>\n
Where AI Can Mislead<\/p>\n
AI can sharpen communication. It can also distort it, if companies aren\u2019t careful.<\/p>\n
Mistaking automation for judgment
The temptation is to let the system decide. That\u2019s a mistake. AI is most useful as a diagnostic tool\u2014surfacing inconsistencies\u2014not as a replacement for human decision-making.<\/p>\n
Bias and blind spots
AI systems reflect the data they\u2019re trained on. If that data is narrow\u2014say, limited to investor materials\u2014they can miss how messages land with employees or customers.<\/p>\n
Risk and exposure
Feeding sensitive internal documents into unsecured systems creates obvious legal and competitive risks. So does generating language that runs afoul of disclosure rules.<\/p>\n
No clear owner
Communication spans functions. So does this problem. Without clear governance\u2014across communications, IR, IT, and legal\u2014AI tools can create as much confusion as they resolve.
The takeaway is simple: AI can help companies see their messaging more clearly. But it still takes people to decide what that message should be.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"by Kirk KardashianJul 13, 2026 BlackRock didn\u2019t set out to confuse anyone. For years, the firm positioned itself…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":104514,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[24,25,52573,52572,76,52574,52571,52575,9507,25169],"class_list":["post-104513","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-ai","tag-ai","tag-artificial-intelligence","tag-business-administration","tag-business-school","tag-education","tag-executive-education","tag-graduate-school","tag-ivy-league","tag-management","tag-mba"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104513","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=104513"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/104513\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/104514"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=104513"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=104513"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=104513"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/ai\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/tuck-faculty-paul-argenti-and-mark-desjardine_800_533_75_c1.jpg\")
<\/p>\n