INDEPENDENT EXIT INTERVIEWS FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD SERVICES
Independent exit interviews that reveal why people leave
Give departing educators and leaders a confidential space to speak openly. We uncover recurring themes, workplace risks and retention opportunities—then turn the feedback into clear, practical recommendations for your service.
Most exit interviews do not tell you the truth
When educators leave, the reasons shared internally are often softened.
Not because people are dishonest — but because they are protecting relationships, references, and their own professional reputation.
What is typically heard:
“I just wanted a change
What is often experienced in practice:
“The role became harder to sustain than the work itself”
Without independent insight, the real pattern often stays hidden — until the same role becomes vacant again.
What independent exit insight can uncover
A resignation rarely tells the whole story on its own. The value comes from understanding what sits underneath the stated reason for leaving.
What may sound simple at first:
“I needed a change.”
may actually point to something more specific:
- planning time that exists on paper but is regularly interrupted
- a room where expectations are significantly heavier than others
- communication patterns that leave educators feeling unsupported
- returning parents feeling vulnerable, pressured or poorly accommodated
- role expectations that changed after commencement
- unresolved tension between leadership and room teams
- workload pressure being described as a “personality fit” issue
- educators leaving quietly because they want to protect future references
The purpose is not to turn one person’s view into a diagnosis. It is to identify whether the feedback points to an isolated concern, a role-specific issue, a leadership pressure point or a broader retention pattern.
That distinction matters before you replace the person and unintentionally place the next hire into the same conditions.
What could staff turnover be costing your service?
Victorian Department of Education analysis estimates that replacing an early childhood teacher or educator costs approximately 40 per cent of their annual salary—and describes this as a conservative estimate.
Average annual salary
× 40%
× Number of departures
= Estimated replacement cost
Average annual salary: $75,000
Estimated replacement cost: $30,000
Four departures in one year: $120,000
That estimate covers the visible cost of replacing people. It does not fully capture the loss of team knowledge, disruption to children and families, additional pressure on remaining educators, reduced productivity or reputational risk.
The question is not whether an exit costs your service. It is whether you learn enough from that departure to reduce the likelihood of another.
This is not a survey. It is a structured, independent conversation.
We conduct confidential, one-to-one exit interviews with departing educators and leaders.
Because we sit outside your organisation — and understand early childhood practice — participants speak more openly, and with greater clarity.
Each interview is translated into a structured insight report that highlights:
- Operational patterns impacting retention
- Gaps between intended practice and lived experience
- Early indicators affecting remaining staff
- Areas worth examining before the next resignation occurs
The report is not a transcript of complaints. It is a structured view of what may be affecting retention, leadership confidence and future hiring risk.
The hidden cost of hiring the same role twice
Most services understand the cost of advertising a role.
Fewer measure the leadership time absorbed by hiring, onboarding, replacing and rehiring the same position.
A single educator or teacher recruitment process can require 25–30 hours of leadership time before the person has even settled into the role.
That time includes preparing the advert, posting across job boards, reviewing applications, communicating with candidates, arranging screens, conducting interviews, managing no-shows, completing follow-up actions, negotiating the offer, preparing contracts and coordinating onboarding.
At a conservative leadership cost of $60 per hour, that is approximately $1,500–$1,800 in internal time per role — before advertising costs, onboarding effort, agency fees or disruption to the wider service are considered.
If the person leaves within months, the process usually starts again.
Hiring once is work.
Hiring the same role twice is a warning sign.
Independent exit insight helps you understand whether the issue is isolated, role-specific, leadership-related, cultural, operational or part of a repeating pattern.
Simple Example
One role takes around 30 hours to fill.
If the same role turns over and needs to be filled again, that becomes 60 hours of leadership time spent restoring the same staffing position.
That is time not spent supporting educators, strengthening practice, engaging families or improving quality.
Why staff turnover is rarely random
- One room experiences higher turnover than others
- Certain leadership styles create more pressure over time
- Role expectations feel manageable on paper, but not in practice
- Different educators leave — but for similar underlying reasons
What looks like separate resignations is often the same issue repeating.
Most services only recognise this after the role has been filled more than once.
Without clarity on the cause, the next hire often walks into the same conditions.
Choose the level of insight before you rehire
Start with one independent conversation, or use multiple conversations to identify whether the issue is isolated, role-specific or part of a repeating pattern.
Single exit insight
$950 + GST
Best for: one recent resignation where you need a clearer, independent perspective before replacing the role.
- 1 independent conversation
- Early signal identification
- Summary of key theme
- Practical observations
This identifies potential patterns early.
It is not intended as a definitive conclusion.
MOST COMMON CHOICE
Workforce insight sprint
$3,200 + GST
Best for: repeated turnover, uncertainty around leadership or culture, or situations where one resignation is unlikely to explain the full workforce picture.
- Up to 4 targeted conversations with exiting and/or current staff
- Cross-conversation analysis
- Identification of recurring workforce themes
- Structured workforce insight report
- Practical recommendations
- 20-minute leadership debrief
Designed to identify whether turnover is isolated, role-specific or part of a broader workforce issue.
Retention advisory
Tailored engagement
Best for: owners, boards or leadership teams that need deeper visibility across people, structure and retention risk.
- Broader staff conversations across team layers
- Leadership and workforce pressure point analysis
- Identification of subcultures and recurring themes
- Prioritised action plan
- Practical recommendations
- Leadership debrief session
Designed for more complex situations where the goal is broader organisational clarity.
Not sure where to start?
A single insight can point you in a direction.
Multiple conversations provide the clarity needed to act with confidence.
Start a conversation
Confidential. Practical. Obligation-free.
Share a brief overview of your situation and we will help you determine the most appropriate starting point.
Confidential and obligation-free.
How the process works
A simple, structured process designed to produce useful, practical insight. The process is structured, but flexible depending on your situation.
1
You brief us on the content
You provide context, role details and any areas you would like explored.
2
We conduct the conversation
We speak independently with the departing employee using a structured framework.
3
We separate feedback from patterns
Feedback is reviewed for patterns, inconsistencies and practical implications.
4
You receive practical insight
A clear, structured report with observations and practical recommendations.
We can also talk through the findings where useful.
How we ensure the report is actually useful
The key question is simple: will the report actually be useful?
A useful report is built on specific examples, repeated themes and clear implications — not vague sentiment.
It should explain what the issue is, where it shows up and what may need to change.
- We separate direct feedback from interpretation
- We identify whether comments are isolated or repeated
- We avoid presenting one person’s view as a complete diagnosis
- We focus on practical implications for retention, leadership and future hiring
- We refine the report if useful clarity has not been achieved
This is not about what was said — it is about what is actually happening.
Why independent exit interviews work better than internal conversations
Internal exit conversations can be useful, but they are shaped by existing relationships.
Research in organisational behaviour consistently shows that people provide more candid and complete feedback when conversations are conducted independently.
People often:
- soften feedback
- avoid conflict
- protect future references
In practice, this often means:
- Concerns raised informally are only confirmed once multiple independent conversations align
- Feedback that appears significant internally is sometimes found to be situational rather than systemic
- The stated reason for leaving is often different to the underlying cause
This is where independent insight becomes more reliable than informal internal feedback.
Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
Most questions come down to three things: usefulness, confidentiality and how the process works.
How is payment structured?
Payment is typically required upfront prior to commencement. An invoice will be sent that contains full bank details, with an option to also pay by Credit Card (Merchant fees apply). This ensures the work can be prioritised and delivered within the agreed timeframe. For larger or tailored engagements, staged invoicing can be discussed.
What happens after we confirm the engagement?
Once confirmed, you will receive a short briefing form to capture context, role details and any areas you would like explored. This allows the work to commence quickly and ensures conversations are aligned to your priorities. Where helpful, a short alignment call can be arranged before interviews begin.
How are employees contacted?
Employees are typically introduced to the process by their employer, who confirms the purpose of the engagement and seeks consent to share contact details. Once confirmed, we coordinate directly and conduct the conversation independently.
How do you ensure confidentiality?
Conversations are conducted independently and feedback is presented in a way that focuses on themes and patterns rather than identifying individuals. Specific comments are contextualised rather than attributed.
Can we choose who is interviewed?
Yes. You can nominate individuals, or we can suggest a mix based on the situation. In some cases, including current staff provides additional context beyond a single exit.
What if we only want one conversation to start?
That is absolutely fine. Many businesses start with a single conversation to test the process, then expand if early signals suggest a broader pattern.
How quickly can this start?
In most cases, work can commence within a few days of confirmation. Priority engagements can begin sooner depending on availability.
What level of involvement is required from us?
Very little. Aside from the initial brief and confirming participants, the process is handled independently. A short debrief can be scheduled if you would like to walk through the findings.
Can this be used alongside recruitment?
Yes. In many cases, this is used immediately before or alongside recruitment to provide better context for the next hire and reduce the risk of repeating the same outcome.
What if the feedback is not what we expected?
That is often where the value sits. The purpose is not to confirm assumptions, but to provide a clearer, more objective view so decisions can be made with better information.
Is this suitable for small teams?
Yes. Even in smaller teams, a single resignation can have a disproportionate impact. The insight is often just as valuable, particularly where roles are harder to replace.
Are exit interviews actually effective?
Independent exit interviews are widely recognised as a useful tool for understanding staff turnover, particularly when feedback is structured and analysed across themes. Research from organisations such as The Front Project highlights the role of workforce stability and leadership consistency in quality outcomes. Independent conversations can help surface insights that may not emerge through internal processes.
Are there any considerations around employment or workplace obligations?
Yes. While exit interviews are focused on feedback, they often touch on areas such as workload, expectations and workplace conditions. It is important that any actions taken align with broader employment obligations and workplace standards. Guidance from the Fair Work Ombudsman provides a useful reference point for understanding these considerations.
How does this align with regulatory expectations in early childhood services?
Understanding workforce stability, leadership and staff experience is closely linked to broader quality expectations in early childhood services. Regulatory bodies such as ACECQA emphasise the importance of governance, staffing arrangements and continuous improvement. Independent insight can support more informed decision-making in these areas.
What if the feedback is critical of leadership?
Feedback is handled carefully and professionally. The purpose is not to blame individuals or treat every comment as fact. We look for specific examples, repeated themes, inconsistencies and practical implications. Where feedback relates to leadership, it is framed around what may be affecting retention, communication, trust or day-to-day operations.
Do you treat one employee’s feedback as the full truth?
No. A single conversation can provide useful early signals, but it is not treated as a complete diagnosis. We distinguish between isolated feedback, repeated patterns and issues that may require further exploration. This is why multiple conversations can be useful where turnover appears to be recurring or unclear.
Before you replace the role, understand why it became vacant
A resignation can be a one-off event, or it can be an early warning sign. Independent exit insight helps you understand the difference before the next hiring decision is made.