While the fate of OSHA’s “vaccine or test” mandate is still up in the air, many organizations are choosing to revisit their policies around vaccination mandates in preparation for mandate approval.

As we wait for issues surrounding the mandate to be resolved in a courtroom, every business should take this time to consider both the financial and opportunity costs around mandate implementation at their own organization. Moreover, once a decision is made, how management sets about communicating the decision will mean the difference between success and failure.

Can you afford to do it?

When making any substantive change in an organization, it’s important to look at the cost of implementation as well as the productivity cost during and after the change. For organizations that decide to mandate vaccinations, extending the time for remote work after vaccination will likely have an impact on business continuity. Reconfiguring conference rooms and open space offices can be expensive and time consuming. On the other side of the equation, given that so few organizations were conversant in remote work practices in March of 2020, ongoing remote work may impact productivity unless there is an intentional effort to establish ways of working and managing performance that are built for a virtual world. Also, consider the risk to business continuity in the event of an office outbreak. It is difficult to mitigate in advance and even more challenging to solve with little to no lead time with the current transmission rates. So, the question becomes not only can you afford to do it, but can you afford not to?

Company values and culture play a big role.

Any change that is perceived as being counterculture will meet with employee resistance. Organizations deciding between vaccinations or weekly testing should consider which change supports a larger company value. Consider one business that has already come forward saying that they are requiring staff members to be vaccinated to help protect them from exposure to the virus and they ask, or require, that customers do the same. Now, consider another that has allowed employees to make the choice between vaccination or testing for themselves, believing that individual choice and personal accountability are at the forefront of the issue. Both sides of the argument are grounded in values-based conversations and aligned to culture. And both can be successful as policy.

There are solutions, but they need to be developed thoughtfully. Both precipitous change and swift refusal are damaging to businesses.

Once a decision is made, communications planning and execution takes the lead. Some of the best ideas have fallen flat because of poor communication, and this is no exception. The simplest way to think of communications planning comes from Aristotle: “Tell them what you’re going to tell them. Tell them. Tell them what you told them.”

Before the change. This begins when management is considering change. Either at the beginning of a project, or in this case, on the back of a change that impacts the workforce. The focus of the communications is two-fold: communicate why the change is being considered and, perhaps in a second step, how it may impact employees.

Surveys, focus groups or task forces can be effective at this stage of communications. They provide a much-needed pulse check on organizational climate and may shed light on new and different issues. However, ask the question—and be ready for the answer. Running a survey or focus group generates demand. It creates the implied contract that the company and its leadership will implement any requested changes from the organization. Non-response is not an option. For example, if you issue an employee survey to understand comfort levels with vaccination, it is critical to use that feedback to clearly communicate the survey results and how they factor into decisions around company policy. Acting in accordance with the survey results and presenting the survey as support for a decision will help policy changes be received more positively.

During the change. The first communication at this stage includes what the change is and a repeat of why it’s important to do it. Organizations that decide to mandate vaccines will also need to communicate the reasoning behind the decision and how they feel that the requirement is supporting culture and values and how it will achieve the overall goal, even if it’s in response to a government decree. Also, there is an impact on other business processes that needs to be evaluated and addressed. For example, how will job postings or initial phone screens need to be changed to communicate new requirements? What systems will need to be changed to accommodate vaccine attestations or verifications? Communication continues here until the change is fully implemented, in this case, when fully vaccinated employees are working together in a physical setting. Frequent repetition is also important. It takes several different communications, usually through different channels, for a message to be fully received by an audience. Lastly, it’s important to clearly state that the change is a decision at this point, not a discussion.

After the change. Finally, it’s critical that leadership walk the talk at this stage. Managers must actively support the decision and the leadership team should have a game plan for how to handle backlash to ensure that everyone responds the same way.

Regardless of whether you plan to mandate weekly testing, vaccinations, masks, some or all of these measures, make sure to get your leadership team together to establish a communication plan in advance. If you’re still in the consideration stage and aren’t sure what decision to make, let alone how to communicate it, start by asking: Will the change help create a safer work environment? Will making this change reinforce or undermine core values? Can we afford to do it? Can we afford not to?

Finally, keep in mind that we’ve reached a point in the pandemic where companies need to be decisive and direct, and any organization that fluctuates or wavers in their decision-making should prepare for the consequences.