Did the change message reach 84% of staff?
A sent message is not a unique person reached. A person reached is not proof that they understand.
The question
Meridian has 1,000 employees: 400 office staff and 600 frontline staff. The communications report adds email opens and briefing attendance to claim 84% reach. Counts below refer to unique people within each channel.
| Email opens | Briefing attendance | People in both | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Office staff | 300 | 60 | 40 |
| Frontline staff | 0 | 480 | 0 |
A person in both channels must be counted once. Opening a message does not prove understanding.
“Correct reach, identify the missed audience, then respond to the shift update.”
Not saved by this site. Your browser may restore text when you navigate back.
A strong answer, step by step
Open each step in turn. This is one strong answer, not the only one.
Step 1: Remove overlap
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Add every channel count.
Tempting, but it misses something. That counts the same 40 people twice.
Deduplicate the 40 office staff.
The strong move. A person reached twice is still one person.
See how a strong candidate says it
“300 + 60 + 480 − 40 = 800 unique people: 80% of staff. Adding channel totals without overlap gives a misleading 84%.”
Why it works: A person reached twice is still one person.
Step 2: Show who is still missing
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Show both group rates and gaps.
The strong move. The total rate can hide which group needs attention.
Assume the remaining 20% all work in the office.
Tempting, but it misses something. The frontline group has the larger absolute gap.
See how a strong candidate says it
“Office reach is 320/400; frontline reach is 480/600. Both are 80%. The gaps are 80 office staff and 120 frontline staff.”
Why it works: The total rate can hide which group needs attention.
Step 3: Use the corrected shift record
Two shifts were missed. Correct frontline briefing attendance from 480 to 360; all office counts stay unchanged.
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Retain 80% because the first report was approved.
Tempting, but it misses something. Approval does not preserve an incorrect count.
Arrange access for the missed shifts.
The strong move. The new attendance record changes the priority.
See how a strong candidate says it
“With 360 frontline attendees, total reach is 320 + 360 = 680, or 68%. Frontline reach is 60%; 240 frontline staff remain unreached.”
Why it works: The new attendance record changes the priority.
Step 4: Check understanding separately
What would you do here? Open the move you’d make.
Check the action people can explain and take.
The strong move. Reach, comprehension and acceptance are different results.
Call the message understood because people opened it.
Tempting, but it misses something. An open is not a comprehension measure.
See how a strong candidate says it
“Use a short check-back with the affected shifts. A voluntary survey of 100 people does not prove what all 1,000 employees understand.”
Why it works: Reach, comprehension and acceptance are different results.
The answer, in short
- Decision
- Correct the report and reach the missed shifts.
- Because
- The revised gap is a channel and access problem, not proof of employee resistance.
- What would change it
- A current attendance record and check-back could show that people can act on the change.
The shift record reduces frontline attendance to 360. Who needs the next communication?
Common traps
- Double-counting people.
- Treating opens as understanding.
Check your answer
- I removed overlap.
- I split the audience.
- I used the corrected attendance.
- I checked understanding separately.
Last reviewed Nov 10, 2026