Exits. Stays. Surveys.
Targeted Listening Interventions
Clarity when teams aren't functioning well – and the signal isn't clear.
Sometimes people aren’t leaving.
But something isn’t working.
Energy dips.
Trust erodes.
Performance plateaus.
Tension shows up in pockets — not everywhere.
Surveys feel too blunt.
Waiting for exits feels too late.
That’s when targeted listening matters.
What this is – and what it isn't.
Targeted listening interventions are short, focused listening efforts with specific teams or populations when leaders need clarity before taking action.
They are not:
-
a broad engagement program
-
a substitute for day-to-day leadership conversations
-
an exercise in collecting more data
They are a diagnostic intervention — designed to surface what’s actually driving friction, disengagement, or risk when internal signals aren’t enough.
When this is the right move.
Targeted listening is most useful when:
-
A team isn’t functioning well, but the cause isn’t obvious
-
Survey results raise questions without clear direction
-
Attrition is clustering in one area — or expected next
-
Leaders feel pressure to act, but don’t want to overcorrect
-
A specific population feels exposed after change, growth, or reorganization
Sometimes this work is proactive.
Sometimes it’s urgent.
In both cases, guessing is expensive.
How I run targeted listening.
I design and run confidential, tightly scoped listening interventions using stay-interview methodology — adapted to the situation, not applied as a program.
That means:
-
Clear intent upfront: clarification, prevention, or containment
-
Tight scope around the risks that actually matter
-
Independent interviews so employees speak candidly
-
Explicit confidentiality boundaries
-
System-level synthesis focused on decisions — not stories
Raw notes, transcripts, or identifiable quotes are not shared.
Patterns are.
Why this work often breaks down internally.
Even capable leaders and HR teams struggle when:
-
Employees manage what they say internally
-
Power dynamics or fear dilute honesty
-
Time pressure shortcuts discipline
-
Different leaders interpret the same conversations differently
-
HR is pulled in reactively, without clear ownership
When safety erodes, the signal degrades — fast.
A neutral owner creates distance, consistency, and credibility when it matters most.
What this gives you.
-
A grounded view of what’s actually driving friction or risk
-
Confidence in whether action is warranted — and how hard to act
-
Faster decision-making under pressure
-
Relief from carrying uncertainty alone
Sometimes the outcome is a course correction.
Sometimes it’s confirmation that restraint is the right move.|
Both are valuable outcomes.
A real example.
In one organization, a senior leadership team flagged a “problem team.”
Engagement scores were down.
Collaboration felt strained.
Delivery timelines were slipping.
The assumption was performance — and the initial instinct was to intervene hard.
Before action was taken, I ran a short, targeted listening intervention with that team.
What surfaced wasn’t lack of effort or accountability.
It was role ambiguity following a reorganization, compounded by inconsistent decision-making and unspoken frustration about how priorities were changing.
People weren’t disengaged.
They were confused — and compensating quietly.
The outcome wasn’t a performance reset or leadership change.
It was:
-
clarified decision rights
-
tighter role definition
-
a reset of expectations at the leadership level
The team stabilized quickly.
No attrition followed.
And a heavy-handed intervention was avoided.
The value wasn’t the interviews.
It was knowing what not to do.
Engagement & pricing.
Targeted listening is are in interview blocks to ensure reliable patterns.
Typical blocks:
-
10 interviews – $3,000
-
20 interviews – $5,500
-
30 interviews – $8,000
Scope is adjusted based on exposure, urgency, and population size.
This is a fit if...
-
You sense something is off — but don’t yet trust the story
-
Leaders need clarity before acting
-
Surveys or exits haven’t answered the real question
-
HR is carrying risk without a neutral owner
If you’re looking for reassurance or consensus, this isn’t the right tool.
If you need clarity — before decisions harden — this work helps.