Replace the next module with paired rehearsal of underperformer and manager‑boundary conversations.

Two-cluster split — strain words dominate 46% ('stretched' 25%, 'questioning' 21%) — normalize the load and pair people.

Emotional temperature skews strained, not defeated: 'stretched' (25%) and 'questioning' (21%) outweigh 'growing' (17%). 'Tired' (13%) and 'isolated' (8%) add an energy and connection gap. This tilt pairs with the later support ask for practice over theory, suggesting people want real help, not more models. Treat as: validate the strain and mirror the growth; pair for near-term support.

Themes

Strain and uncertainty 67%

Normalize permission to act while under load; add peer contact to reduce isolation.

Evidence

•	stretched — 25% (6/24)
•	questioning — 21% (5/24)
•	tired — 13% (3/24)
•	isolated — 8% (2/24)

Growth with curiosity 33%

Channel this into reps on real conversations to convert growth into action.

Evidence

•	growing — 17% (4/24)
•	curious — 8% (2/24)
•	capable — 4% (1/24)
•	hopeful — 4% (1/24)

Symptom vs root cause

Symptom: “stretched” and “tired” dominate medium
Possible root causes:
• Upward permission dynamics slowing action
• Insufficient peer connection for sense-making
Evidence
•	stretched — 25% (6/24)
•	tired — 13% (3/24)
•	Permission from this room to act on what I already know — 8% (2/24)
Diagnostic question: Where are you waiting for permission you could give yourself, and who is your peer sounding board this week?

Audience language to mirror

Suggested follow-ups

• Open the next session by mirroring 'stretched'/'questioning' back to the room and inviting one specific permission each person will claim this week; debrief in 10 minutes.
• Create peer triads today for weekly 15‑minute check‑ins; have each triad log one action taken between sessions.

Near-tie at the top (29% vs 25%) — boundaries and direct feedback are moving; keep reps, not models.

Practice is shifting where it matters: 'Holding boundaries with my own time' leads at 29% with 'Giving direct feedback' close at 25% (4pp gap). Gains are emerging across self and team, yet 'Saying no upward' sits at 4%, a small but strategic gap that echoes later permission signals. Treat as: rehearse upward boundaries and direct feedback in pairs.

Minority signals worth watching

Saying no upward — 4% (1/24) Permission dynamics are a blocker elsewhere; this is the smallest, most leveraged practice to rehearse.

Suggested follow-ups

• Assign partners now; each writes a two‑line 'no upward' boundary and a 20‑second feedback opener, rehearses twice, and runs one real conversation before next session; debrief next time.

Closely contested avoidance: 'underperformer' (24%) edges 'role boundaries with my manager' (19%) — pick one and rehearse live.

Avoided conversations cluster in two places: managing underperformance (24%) and upward role boundaries (19%), with peer politics (14%) and self‑advocacy (14%) close behind. The spread (head 3 combined 57%) says avoidance isn’t about one script; it’s about permission plus reps. Treat as: mirror the two hotspots and run paired rehearsals on one of them now.

Themes

Performance management 29%

Provide a simple underperformance script and first‑five‑minutes structure.

Evidence

•	underperformer on my team — 24% (5/21)
•	a mistake I made — 5% (1/21)

Upward/peer boundaries 33%

Practice 'what I own / what I don’t' language and boundary resets.

Evidence

•	role boundaries with my manager — 19% (4/21)
•	a peer who undermines me — 14% (3/21)

Self‑advocacy and career 39%

Use a clean ask framework and normalize bringing career topics into 1:1s.

Evidence

•	asking for more support — 14% (3/21)
•	pay and promotion — 10% (2/21)
•	leaving the role — 10% (2/21)
•	redrawing my role — 5% (1/21)

Minority signals worth watching

leaving the role — 10% (2/21) A resignation‑threshold signal; worth 1:1 coaching attention even at low share.

Audience language to mirror

Suggested follow-ups

• Have each participant commit in writing to one real conversation (which one and by when) before the next session; collect commitments and revisit outcomes next time.

Clear preference at 39%: 'I keep waiting for permission' — program should validate agency and script first steps.

Permission is the primary gap at 39% (17pp over skill and capacity, both 22%), not knowledge. A further 13% don’t yet trust their judgment, which rhymes with the minority ask for explicit permission later on. This isn’t a content problem; it’s an action‑under‑authority problem. Treat as: validate agency explicitly and rehearse permission‑light moves.

Suggested follow-ups

• Start next session with a 5‑minute 'authority I already hold' write‑down; have each person name one action they can take without escalation and schedule it within 7 days.

Moderate lead for peer rehearsal at 33% (8pp over coaching) — the room wants reps before more models.

Practice support tops content: 'A peer to rehearse a hard conversation with' leads at 33% (8pp over a focused coaching session at 25%). 'A clearer model for my own decision‑rights' at 21% and 'A structured way to say no to my manager' at 13% translate the permission theme into tools. Only 8% asked for 'Permission from this room to act,' reinforcing that confidence grows through doing. Treat as: fund paired rehearsal and time‑boxed coaching slots.

Minority signals worth watching

Permission from this room to act on what I already know — 8% (2/24) Direct echo of the permission gap; address explicitly so practice sticks.

Suggested follow-ups

• Publish peer pairings today and schedule two 20‑minute rehearsal blocks within 4 weeks; open a weekly 60‑minute group office hour for situational coaching.