Why Delayed Communication Undermines Business Decisions In African Markets

Communication is not something that happens after strategy is set

JOHANNESBURG, South Africa, February 24, 2026/APO Group/ --

By Laila Bastati, Chief Commercial Officer at APO Group (www.APO-opa.com).

Most leaders think communication comes after decisions are made. In African markets, that is too late.

The moment a decision leaves the room, it starts being interpreted. Not when the statement goes out. Not when teams are aligned. Immediately. And once that interpretation sets in, it is hard to reverse.

A multinational restructured its operations across East Africa in late 2025. Rational decision. Operationally sound. They planned to announce internally first, then handle external communications once approvals were finalised.

But in markets where the CEO's strategy session is discussed in regulatory circles before the memo goes out, there is no "once approvals are finalised".

Employees in the regional hub heard it as validation. Employees in the office being consolidated heard it as abandonment. Local media in a third market framed it as disinvestment before the company had said a word. A regulator in a fourth market read about the restructuring in the business press before receiving official notification. The approval process that followed was slower, more cautious. Not because the decision was flawed, but because the foundation of trust had been eroded before the formal process even began.

Same decision. Four interpretations. All forming faster than the company could schedule town halls.

By the time leadership issued the official statement, they were not introducing a strategy. They were correcting narratives that had already shaped how stakeholders saw the decision. Talent retention became an unplanned cost. The partnership they were counting on in one market stalled because the initial framing stuck.

This is the pattern. Companies finalise decisions, plan the rollout, and assume silence buys time. It does not.

In high-context African environments, silence is not neutral. It is interpreted. And interpretation happens fast.

This is because information does not move the way most executives expect. A company will issue a statement in Lagos, Nairobi, and Accra and assume it lands the same way in each place. It does not.

In one market, the business conversation happens on radio. In another, it is shaped in WhatsApp groups before any official media picks it up. In a third, a press release without a prior face-to-face conversation is read as disrespect.

The company thought it was managing one narrative. It was navigating three different information ecosystems, each with its own timelines, trusted voices, and expectations.

And the cost shows up later. In talent walking out after an acquisition because the framing was wrong. In market access that does not materialise because the initial perception stuck. In partnerships that stall because trust was not managed early.

Leaders who operate well in Africa bring communication into the room while decisions are being made. Not to write statements. To ask the questions that prevent expensive mistakes.

What will this look like in a market where the previous government promised jobs? How will employees in the hub country hear this differently than employees in the market being consolidated? If we say nothing for three weeks, what story forms in that gap?

That discipline changes outcomes. Fewer decisions need explaining later because fewer are misunderstood early.

Africa makes this visible faster. Memory is long. Trust is local. Context is not optional. The gap between intent and interpretation closes quickly.

The problem is not that companies fail to communicate. It is that they measure success using the wrong scorecard.

Media coverage matters. But it does not tell you why the partnership stalled. Why talent walked. Why the regulatory process took twice as long as expected.

When things go wrong, those metrics leave you blind. You know the outcome was bad. You do not know what broke or where.

Bringing communication into the decision-making process solves a different problem. It is not about controlling the narrative after the fact. It is about designing decisions that account for how they will land before they are finalised. That prevents the fracture from happening in the first place.

In African markets, that is not a communications luxury. It is operational necessity.

Communication is not something that happens after strategy is set. It is decision insurance.

And in markets where narratives form fast and trust is built slowly, you do not buy insurance after the risk has materialised.