Rise 360 · Onboarding
A Rise 360 onboarding course designed to close the gap between knowing the job and doing it confidently — built after exit interviews revealed one pattern behind 30% new-hire turnover.
Project Artifact
Add your Rise 360 screenshots, exported slides, or a SCORM preview image here. Drag and drop a file or click to upload.
Add project screenshot, PDF, or demo image
PNG, JPG, PDF — max 20MB
The Problem
RetailReady Co. had an onboarding program. It covered the employee handbook, store policies, product knowledge, and a welcome tour. Completion rates were strong. But turnover in the first 90 days held steady at 30%.
When exit interviews finally asked the right question — "When did you first feel like you knew what you were doing?" — the answers were uncomfortable. Most employees said: never. Or: "around month three, if I stayed."
"I never knew what I was supposed to do or who to ask. I didn't want to look stupid, so I just guessed."
The existing training gave new hires information. It did not give them certainty. There's a difference — and it's exactly the difference between someone who stays and someone who leaves in week three.
The Process
Before opening Rise 360, I completed a full needs assessment. I interviewed five stakeholders — including two managers and three current employees who had survived the first 90 days — and built a gap analysis that separated "doesn't know" from "doesn't know how to do it with confidence in front of a real customer."
That distinction drove every design decision:
The storyboard mapped five Rise 360 sections — one per core job task — each following: Situation → Information → Practice → Feedback. The companion job aid (a Week 1 Cheat Sheet) was designed in Canva to live in their apron pocket, not in an LMS they'd never visit again.
Design Artifacts
Add your storyboard PDF, needs assessment document, or Canva job aid here.
Add storyboard, needs assessment, or job aid PDF
PDF, DOCX, PNG — max 20MB
The Result
The redesigned module gives new hires five things the original never did: clarity on what the job actually looks like in practice, a model for handling the most common situations, a physical job aid for the moments of uncertainty, a sense of who to go to and how to ask, and a concrete picture of what success looks like at the end of week two — not the end of year one.
The GREET model works well for customer interactions, but it's prescriptive for a new hire who's still learning to read the room. I'd add a "What does this look like when it's going wrong?" scenario branch — so learners can practice recovery, not just the ideal path. I'd also build a manager's companion guide so supervisors know what the first two weeks should reinforce.