Post System Go-Live
A status board tells you the system is live. It never tells you what's quietly breaking for the people using it, why they're working around it, or what would make it stick.
For consultancies running system and tool rollouts: interview everyone who has to use it in their own words, surface why adoption is stalling and where the workarounds are forming, and fix the rollout while there is still momentum to fix it.
A dashboard tells you it's live.
It never tells you why it isn't landing.
A status board can show usage is dropping in a team.
It can't tell you what's breaking for them, or why they're slipping back to the old way.
A status board can confirm the system is live, but not whether people actually work in it. What decides that lives in the daily work below: the steps that break, the workarounds, the quiet return to the old way, and the reasons behind them. Interviews capture that depth, and running them across everyone who has to use it turns a green light into a rollout that actually holds.
The status board tells you they logged in. The interviews tell you whether they're actually working in it.
A status board can only tell you who signed in. The interviews reach past the login to how the work is really being done, in people's own words, following up on every answer, so you can see where the rollout has landed and where it has quietly stalled.
Is the new system actually being used?
The real state of adoption, not the green light.
You can tell the client which teams have genuinely moved across, and which have only moved on paper.
Where is it breaking down?
The steps that stall the work.
You can point to the exact steps and gaps to fix, and the workarounds that will harden if they aren't.
A status board measures.
It never listens.
People admit the workarounds no dashboard sees.
Nothing is invented
Every finding is tied to a real quote; anything the interviews don't support is left out.
Every voice, not a sample
Everyone who uses the system takes part: every team, not a sample.
Anonymous by design
Nothing traces back, so people admit the workarounds and the quiet reversions.
Every conversation, turned into one map of where adoption stands,
and where it's stalling.
A single view of which teams have genuinely adopted the new system and which have quietly slipped back, plus the workarounds forming underneath, drawn from interviews with everyone who has to use it and traceable to what they said.
Returns run on a shared spreadsheet, off-system
One login shared around to skip re-auth
Old CRM kept open "just in case"