Internal communications benchmarks reviewed on a large monitor

Internal Communications Benchmarks in 2026: What Good Looks Like

By Nicolas Saliba · 8 min read

How to set targets, and why your own baseline beats any industry average

Key takeaways

External benchmarks are directional at best; channel mix, industry, and workforce make most cross-company comparisons unreliable.
Your own baseline is the benchmark that matters: improvement against last quarter and last year is the credible target.
Set targets per segment, not just in aggregate, because a healthy average can hide a population well below any benchmark.

Why external benchmarks mislead
The benchmark that actually matters: your own
How to establish a baseline
Setting targets per segment
Using benchmarks in leadership conversations
How to use external benchmarks well

Introduction

'Is a 60 percent reach good?' is the wrong question without context. Gallagher's State of the Sector publishes useful sector-level patterns, but a single benchmark number divorced from your channel mix and workforce can send you chasing the wrong target. This article reframes benchmarking around the comparison that is actually valid.

The appeal of an external benchmark is understandable: it promises a quick verdict on whether you are doing well. The problem is that the verdict is usually unreliable, because the number was produced by organisations measuring different things in different contexts. This article does not tell you to ignore external benchmarks; it tells you to demote them to context and promote your own history to the primary comparison, which is the only one guaranteed to be valid.

Why external benchmarks mislead

A cross-company benchmark assumes comparability that rarely exists. A reach figure depends on channel mix, how reach is defined, the share of frontline workers, industry, and even time zone spread. Two organisations reporting the same headline number may be measuring entirely different things. External benchmarks are useful for direction and for sanity-checking, not for target-setting.

Definition is the deepest problem. One organisation counts reach as unique people who opened a message, another as total views, another as employees in channels where it was posted, and these produce wildly different numbers for identical performance. Layer on differences in workforce composition, a 70 percent frontline manufacturer cannot be compared to an all-office software firm, and the headline benchmark becomes not just imprecise but actively misleading, because it invites you to chase a number that means something different where it came from.

Practical step: Before adopting any external benchmark, ask how that source defines the metric. If the definition differs from yours, the comparison is not valid.

The benchmark that actually matters: your own

The most credible benchmark is your own history: is this quarter better than last, is this year better than last year. It is automatically comparable because the definition, channel mix, and workforce are constant. This is why unlimited history matters: a 6-month cap makes year-on-year benchmarking impossible, and year-on-year is the comparison leadership trusts most.

Your own baseline has a property no external benchmark can match: every variable that distorts cross-company comparison, the definition, the channel mix, the workforce, is held constant, because it is the same organisation measured at two points in time. That makes an improvement against your own history a fact rather than an interpretation, and it is also the comparison leadership finds most intuitive, because 'better than last year' needs no explanation. The only requirement is the history to support it, which is exactly what a 6-month cap denies you.

Practical step: Set this quarter's target as a specific improvement on the same quarter last year. It is the one benchmark no one can argue is unfair.

How to establish a baseline

If you do not yet have history, build a baseline now: measure reach, engagement, and your key segments consistently for a quarter, document the definitions, and treat that as your zero point. Every future report compares against it. The sooner you set the baseline, the sooner you have a benchmark worth using.

The urgency is real because a baseline cannot be created retroactively if the data was never captured or has aged out of native. Every quarter you wait is a quarter you can never compare against later, so the single most valuable thing a team without history can do is start measuring consistently today, even imperfectly, and protect the definitions from then on. A baseline begun now and held steady is worth more in a year than a sophisticated measurement model adopted too late to have anything to compare against.

Practical step: Pick three metrics and measure them this quarter with fixed definitions. That is your baseline; protect the definitions so the comparison stays honest.

Setting targets per segment

An aggregate target can be met while a key population stays far below it. Set targets per segment: a frontline reach target, a regional engagement target, a new-joiner onboarding-reach target. Segment targets are harder to hit and far more meaningful, because they close the gaps an average hides.

Segment targets also change behaviour in a way aggregate targets do not. A team chasing an aggregate reach target will rationally pour effort into the populations that are already easy to reach, because that lifts the average fastest, which makes the gap worse. A team held to a frontline reach target has to invest where the gap is, which is exactly where the business value sits. The target you set determines where effort goes, so setting it per segment is how you direct effort toward the populations that need it.

Practical step: Set one segment-level target this quarter, usually frontline reach. Hitting it matters more than improving the blended average.

Using benchmarks in leadership conversations

In front of leadership, lead with your own trend and use external benchmarks only as context. 'Frontline reach is up 12 points year on year, and broadly in line with sector patterns' is credible. 'We hit the industry average' invites the question of whether the average is even comparable. Tryane keeps unlimited history across channels with segmentation, is SOC 2 Type 2 certified, and deploys in a couple of hours, so your own benchmark is always available.

The structure that works is your trend first, external context second, and never the external number alone. Leading with your own improvement establishes a fact leadership can trust, and adding 'broadly in line with sector patterns' reassures them you are not improving from an embarrassing base, without staking your credibility on a comparison you cannot fully defend. Inverting the order, leading with the industry average, hands the conversation to a number you did not produce and may not be able to justify under questioning.

Practical step: Lead every benchmark statement with your own year-on-year trend, then add external context. Never present an external average as your primary measure.

How to use external benchmarks well

External benchmarks are not useless; they are just misused as targets. Their legitimate jobs are sanity-checking and direction-finding. If your reach is wildly above or below a sector pattern, that is worth investigating, because it may signal a definition mismatch or a genuine outlier. And a sector trend, such as declining open rates industry-wide, can usefully inform expectations and explain a movement in your own numbers to leadership. Used for these purposes, with the definition difference acknowledged, external benchmarks add real value.

The rule of thumb is to let external benchmarks raise questions but never set targets. A sector figure that prompts you to check your definitions or investigate an outlier is doing useful work; the same figure adopted as a goal sends you chasing someone else's number under someone else's conditions. Keep the external benchmark in the role of context and diagnostic, and keep your own history in the role of target, and you get the benefit of both without the distortion of either.

Practical step: Use external benchmarks to raise questions, never to set targets. A sector figure that prompts you to check your own definitions is doing its proper job.

Tryane is SOC 2 Type 2 certified, GDPR / RGPD compliant by design, and EU-hosted by default, with data residency in other countries (notably the US) available on demand. Deployment takes a couple of hours: SSO via Azure AD or Entra ID plus channel connection. Power BI integration is on the roadmap; in the meantime Tryane provides its own dashboards with executive-ready templates.

Next step. To establish your own benchmark and track improvement against it on your actual data, book 30 minutes with Jérémy: https://tryane.com/en/#contact-home

This article reflects information as of 2026-05-19. External benchmark figures vary by source and definition; validate against your own baseline.

FAQ

What is a good reach rate for internal communications?

There is no single right number, because reach depends on channel mix, workforce, and how reach is defined. The useful target is improvement on your own baseline, especially year on year, rather than matching an external average that may not be comparable.

Are external internal communications benchmarks reliable?

Only directionally. Cross-company comparisons assume a comparability that rarely exists, since metric definitions, channel mix, and frontline share differ. Use external benchmarks for context and sanity-checking, not for target-setting.

How do I establish an internal communications baseline?

Measure reach, engagement, and your key segments consistently for a quarter with documented definitions, and treat that as your zero point. Every future report compares against it, so the sooner you set it, the sooner you have a usable benchmark.

Should internal communications targets be set per segment?

Yes. An aggregate target can be met while a key population stays well below it, and chasing an aggregate target pushes effort toward easy-to-reach groups. Segment targets, such as a frontline reach target, direct effort to where the gap and the business value are.

How should I use external benchmarks if not as targets?

For sanity-checking and direction. A figure far from a sector pattern is worth investigating, and a sector trend can explain a movement in your own numbers to leadership. Let external benchmarks raise questions; let your own history set targets.

Why does unlimited history matter for benchmarking?

Because the most trusted benchmark is year-on-year improvement, and a 6-month history cap makes that impossible. Unlimited history lets you compare any period to the same period last year, which is the comparison leadership believes most.

Sources

• Gallagher State of the Sector 2025

• Gallup State of the Global Workplace 2025

• Deloitte Human Capital Trends 2026

• Microsoft Learn, SharePoint site usage and analytics

• Microsoft Learn, Viva Engage analytics for admins