Revenue-at-Risk Role Alignment Map - Sample Deliverable - The Retention Studio

Retention Intelligence Audit โ€” Sample Deliverable

Revenue-at-Risk Role Alignment Map

1 of 5 diagnostic deliverables โ€” scores whether every person is in the right seat, on the right work, with the right manager, and quantifies what each wrong seat is costing.

Illustrative sample โ€” companies, names, and data are fictional

Ongoing Role Fit

Place

Right person, wrong seat. When someone is placed wrong, the cost shows up everywhere โ€” in their output, their team's energy, and eventually in a resignation that didn't have to happen.

Deliverable: Revenue-at-Risk Role Alignment Map

Revenue-at-Risk Role Alignment Map Riverside Advisory Group โ€” Client Services Team โ€” 7 Members โ€” Q4 2024
Connect
Align
Place
Invest
Amplify

Who's in the Right Seat

Four numbers that tell leadership whether people are in the right seats โ€” and what the wrong seats are costing across the team.

4
Right seat
No action needed
2
Wrong seat
Structural fix needed
1
Drifting
Early drift detected
$92K
Estimated annual exposure
from wrong seats

Role Fit by Seat

Scores each team member across four dimensions that determine whether they're in the right seat. Revenue exposure estimates what each wrong seat costs.

7.0+
7.0 and above
Right Seat
Low retention and revenue risk
5โ€“6
5.0 to 6.9
Drifting โ€” review within 30 days
Elevated risk โ€” drift forming
<5
Below 5.0
Wrong Seat โ€” structural fix needed
Active revenue and retention exposure
Revenue Impact
Does this seat configuration help or hurt client relationships, deal flow, or revenue continuity?
Scope Clarity
Is this person doing what they were actually hired to do, with clear ownership and accountability?
Role Direction
Is this person settling into the seat or drifting further from it?
Team Leverage
Does this placement multiply the people around them, or create bottlenecks, rework, and capacity drag?

Dots below 7.0 signal seats that need attention, not people who need to be replaced.

Team Member
Revenue Impact
Scope Clarity
Role Direction
Team Leverage
Status
Exposure
Sarah M.
Account Manager
8.4
8.0
7.6
8.8
Right Seat
โ€”
Priya N.
Business Analyst
8.1
8.5
7.9
8.2
Right Seat
โ€”
Marcus T.
Client Coordinator
7.3
7.5
7.1
7.8
Right Seat
โ€”
Monica T.
Client Success Manager
7.2
6.4
5.8
7.4
Drifting
$9K
Elena V.
Project Coordinator
6.1
6.5
5.9
6.3
Drifting
$14K
James R.
Operations Lead
3.8
3.2
2.9
3.5
Wrong Seat
$52K
Derek A.
Project Coordinator
4.4
4.1
5.2
3.9
Wrong Seat
$26K

What Wrong Seats Cost You

A wrong seat creates cost in three places simultaneously โ€” and the total is almost always larger than leadership expects.

$34K
Productivity Drag
Slowed execution, duplicate work, rework cycles, and manager correction time from people operating outside their strengths.
$38K
Replacement Risk
The cost of losing a good person because they were placed badly โ€” then rehiring to solve a problem that was actually structural.
$20K
Team Impact
Downstream load on adjacent seats, bottleneck creation, morale drag, and client inconsistency caused by one wrong seat.
Basis: Productivity drag = manager correction time + rework cycles at loaded labor rate. Replacement risk = SHRM cost-per-hire benchmark. Team impact = downstream capacity loss modeled at 15% of adjacent seat productivity. Source: SHRM 2022 ยท Gallup Cost of Poor Management Research.

Seat Diagnosis โ€” James R.

When the map flags a wrong seat, the system produces a diagnosis โ€” what's off, what it's costing, and the structural fix, framed as a placement issue, not a performance failure.

James R. โ€” Operations Lead
Client Services Team ยท Reporting to David K.
3.4
Overall Score
$52K
Exposure

Diagnosis

James was hired to lead operations โ€” cross-team coordination, process optimization, and workflow management. In practice, he's spending 70% of his time on direct client delivery, which pulls him away from the systems work he was brought in to do.

His Revenue Impact score (3.8) reflects that client-facing work isn't his strength. His Scope Clarity score (3.2) confirms he's unclear on what success looks like in his current configuration. His Team Leverage score (3.5) shows he's absorbing capacity rather than creating it.

This is a placement issue, not a performance failure. James has the skills โ€” they're deployed in the wrong seat. Recommended: role exploration conversation before the next review cycle.

Recommended Actions

  • 30-minute role exploration conversation with manager within 5 days
    Owner: David K. โ€” Managing Partner
  • Map James's strengths against available seat configurations on the team
    Owner: David K. + Leadership
  • Evaluate lateral move to structured individual contributor track (process/ops)
    Owner: Leadership โ€” within 30 days
  • Reassign direct client delivery to well-placed team members
    Owner: David K. โ€” within 14 days
  • Schedule 60-day follow-up to score seat fit improvement
    Owner: David K. + Leadership
70%
of employee engagement variance is explained by the manager โ€” and wrong-seat placement is the most common structural reason managers can't do their job effectively.
Gallup State of the Global Workplace, 2023

What This Map Revealed

Riverside Advisory Group's leadership assumed James was underperforming. The map showed something different: he was in the wrong seat. The reframe โ€” from performance failure to placement problem โ€” preserved $52K in replacement cost and the institutional knowledge that would have left with him.

75%
of employee turnover
is preventable โ€” most
exits are a systems failure
Work Institute
Retention Report, 2024

Ready to See Your Numbers

Find the Gap That's Costing You the Most

The Audit scores your company across all 5 touchpoints, identifies your highest-risk gap, and quantifies what it's costing in dollars, productivity, and team stability. Every deliverable is built from your data โ€” not a template.

Book the Audit

$1,447 ยท Deliverables-based guarantee

Not sure yet? Get Your Reality Check ($27) and score yourself first.

Review full Audit details