Unpleasant news is too important to "wing it." Take time to deliver it in an honest, sensitive manner. Prepare ahead and put yourself in the other person's shoes.

By delivering the message with tact and kindness, you maintain the relationship and leave a positive impression in the worst of times.

Employees thrive when information flows freely and seize up or become distracted when uncertainty replaces understanding. In fact, according to a study published in the Journal of Psychological Science, people who are mildly neurotic (and let’s face it, who isn’t mildly neurotic?) are more stressed by uncertainty than by a clearly negative outcome.

So, how should companies communicate with employees during uncertain times?

It’s one of the most somber meetings in business. With more and more companies laying off unprecedented numbers of workers, many firms are choosing to hold a town hall meeting with the remaining employees the day after the big announcement. While such gatherings have all the levity of a funeral, they’re an increasingly important way to re-engage employees who are reeling from the news and likely questioning the future (as well as their own.)

Re-energizing these employees is no small task: A recent University of Wisconsin study found that the annual turnover rate for companies undergoing downsizing is 13 percent, compared with 10.4 percent for those with no layoffs. Such attrition is expensive and disruptive, making communication – including face-to-face meetings – critical throughout staff reductions.

Here are five things we’ve seen leaders convey in effective post-downsizing meetings:

Most Thursdays, several women from my circle of friends get together to watch Grey’s Anatomy, the ABC dramedy about a team of surgeons at a fictional Seattle hospital. While I enjoy these weekly gatherings as a time to relax and think about life outside work, a recent episode (Oct. 1) illustrated exactly how NOT to communicate during a merger – so much that halfway through, I picked up a pen and started taking notes for this blog.

Here’s a quick recap: When the hospital staff learned that their employer, Seattle Grace, would be merging with its cross-town rival, Mercy West, chief of surgery Richard Webber demonstrated exceptionally poor leadership. He holed up in his office for days, “making some very difficult decisions,” thus throwing the entire unit into a frenzied rumor mill. Just as in the business world, the threat of layoffs distracted the doctors and nurses from their duties –they talked about the merger instead of the patient on the operating table before them, and one physician even accidentally amputated a limb due to the pressure.

Job cutting is never easy, but it often becomes progressively harder as we go deeper into an organization.

At the beginning, employers may be able to lay off only weak employees they might have considered letting go anyway. While these weak performers are human beings worthy of dignity and respect, we can make ourselves feel alright about their terminations because they are based on merit.

Best Buy was in the news the other day for an oops. It offered a 52-inch HDTV that normally sells for $1,600 on its web site for $9.99. Eager web surfers gleefully pulled out their credit cards and placed orders.

As word of the deal spread, Best Buy realized the mistake, quickly pulled the offer from the site and announced it would not honor the purchases.

Employees want open communication from their bosses, particularly in bad times. Surprise, surprise.

Well, don’t just slough that off: Being kept in the loop translates into increased commitment and good will among the staff.

According to a recent Ouch Point survey from Opinion Research Corp., employees are twice as likely to go the extra mile for their company and about four times as likely to recommend it to others if they’re satisfied with the ways it communicates difficult decisions.

“I can summarize my reaction to this study in one word: Duh,” says Jim Ylisela, president of Ragan Consulting. “Anyone working in communications today knows that employees always respond better to open, candid communication from their leaders, even when the news is bad. Especially when the news is bad.”

Jim Keenan (left) said, "While skiing this weekend, I stopped into the ski rental shop I visit often. While renting skis for my daughter, I remembered something I had bought from that store over Christmas holiday that had broken. I sought out a clerk and showed her my broken purchase (a ski hat with headphones built in). I didn’t expect the store to do anything, but I had only woren it 6 or 7 times, so I figured I’d ask."

Walt Disney World calls its workers, from actors in Goofy outfits to laundry workers, “cast members” to make them feel part of the show. There’s a garbage can every 25 steps, so litter will be tossed not dropped. There’s a polite way to answer one of the park’s most asked questions: “What time is the 3 o’clock parade?”

Communicating negative information to subordinates is one of the more discomforting managerial responsibilities. Yet managers frequently have to make tough decisions which sometimes result in unfavorable outcomes for subordinates.

Managers may be lured into using electronic media to distance themselves from the victim(s) of the bad news. A consequence of this choice may be more negative employee reactions than is necessary. We present four considerations balancing efficiency of communication with sensitivity to the impact, increasing employee acceptance of undesired outcomes.