Retention Intelligence Audit - Sample Deliverable
Revenue-at-Risk Role Alignment Map
1 of 5 diagnostic deliverables - this one answers: is every person in the right seat? Scores whether people are in the right seat, on the right work, with the right manager - and quantifies what each wrong seat is costing.
Illustrative sample - companies, names, and data are fictionalOngoing Role Fit
Place
Right person, wrong seat. When someone is placed wrong, the cost shows up everywhere - 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
This map shows who's in the right seat and who isn't - and what each wrong seat is costing. The problem isn't usually the person - it's the placement. Fixing the seat is cheaper than replacing the person.
Who's in the Right Seat
Four numbers that tell leadership whether people are in the right seats - and what the wrong seats are costing across the team.
No action needed
Structural fix needed
Early drift detected
from wrong seats
Role Fit by Seat
Scores each team member across four dimensions that determine whether they're in the right seat. Dots are scored 1-10 against the 7.0 healthy threshold. Revenue exposure estimates what each wrong seat costs.
Dots below 7.0 signal seats that need attention, not people who need to be replaced.
What Wrong Seats Cost You
A wrong seat doesn't just affect the person sitting in it - it creates cost in three places that most leaders never quantify until someone leaves.
Seat Diagnosis - James R.
When the map flags a seat as wrong, the system produces a diagnosis: what's off, what it's costing, and the structural fix - framed as a placement issue, not a performance failure.
Diagnosis
James was hired to lead operations - 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.
Recommended Actions
- 30-minute role exploration conversation with manager within 5 daysOwner: David K. - Managing Partner
- Map James's strengths against available seat configurations on the teamOwner: David K. + Leadership
- Evaluate lateral move to structured individual contributor track (process/ops)Owner: Leadership - within 30 days
- Reassign direct client delivery responsibilities to well-placed team membersOwner: David K. - within 14 days
- Schedule 60-day follow-up to score seat fitOwner: David K. + Leadership
What This Map Revealed
Leadership assumed James was underperforming. The data showed something different: he was misplaced. His operations and process skills scored in the top quartile when assessed independently. But in a client-facing seat, those skills weren't being used. The map reframed the conversation from "is James the right person?" to "is James in the right seat?" That distinction saved a $52K replacement cost and preserved institutional knowledge that would have walked out the door.
been prevented with a
seat change, not a replacement
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 - not a template.
Book the Audit$1,447 · Deliverables-based guarantee
Not sure yet? Get Your Reality Check ($27) and score yourself first.
