Industry Leading Results Book a quick call

Client Results

Not just case studies. Here is what the work looked like inside real companies, what it cost them not to do it, and what changed.

As the market changes and competitors improve, maintaining current results will cause your company to fall behind.

For mid-sized companies, maintaining current results will likely cost them millions of dollars per year.

Here are some projects I've completed and the results I helped my clients achieve.

“I Hate Change”

Most often, clients come to me for help managing internal changes driven by shifts in market demand.

In late 2025, a large bookkeeping company was losing business as clients adopted AI tools to do the number crunching internally.

The future looked bleak. Several employees quit as the clients they worked with stopped using their company's services. In more than one exit interview, employees said, "I hate change."

In a survey, clients said the value they received from the bookkeeping company was in interpreting the data and helping them make better business decisions.

This meant drastic changes for the bookkeeping company. They no longer needed nearly as many number crunchers. They needed employees who could find insights in operational and financial reports, make recommendations, and lead efforts to implement the recommendations.

The bookkeeping company wanted to provide training and skills so employees could add more value for clients, but many employees refused to believe that the market was changing. They blamed the sales team for not selling more.

This reminded me of a few printing companies I heard about that believed offset printing would never go away.

Helping employees move from resisting change to embracing it is a very predictable human behavior process.

I presented a workshop series for the bookkeeping company on my From Resistance to Results™ one-page conversational change model, to company leaders and managers. The model explains how to help employees move from resisting change to embracing it.

I assigned application homework between sessions and was available for coaching as needed.

Three weeks later, I presented the same workshop to all employees so they could see how resistance to change occurs naturally and how they can move through the process themselves.

One interesting note. Two employees asked if they could use the model at home with their children. I said yes, as long as the children were human. One man said he wasn't sure his children were human.

Another woman asked if she could use the model on her husband. I said yes, as long as she taught him the model as well.

I stressed that Human Behavior Science isn't a set of tools for manipulating employees into doing things. Human Behavior Science offers science-based insights and tools that explain how human behavior actually works.

When the leader and the employee both understand the model, the quality of their communication improves dramatically.

In 2012, I developed a tool called TBR.

TBR is a one-page tool that contrasts the thinking and the behaviors behind our current results compared to our desired results. When we see the differences between current and desired thinking, behavior, and results, we see that improving results is clearly in our control.

I use TBR in every project I do, and I teach it to every client. Here's one example.

An $8.9 million gift to their competitors

In 2024, a $75 million manufacturing company was struggling to improve sales. They had tried sales training twice. The CEO suspected it was more than a sales issue. His CPA referred him to me.

Based on their previous growth track record and industry growth trends, I estimated that they were missing out on an additional $5.4 million in sales per year. But I didn't want them to take my word for it.

I asked them to do their own assessment. They concluded that they were missing out on an additional $3 million in revenue per year. They had never run these numbers before, and they were shocked.

They acknowledged that they were leaving $3 million in additional revenue on the table every year.

I led their leadership team through four one-hour TBR workshop sessions and assigned them 30 minutes of homework between sessions to apply what they learned.

By guiding them through the TBR one-page worksheet several times over the four sessions, they realized that many internal departments were looking out for their own best interests instead of their customers' best interests.

In session four, they concluded that the weighted percentage for the departmental portion of their bonus program was too high, because it gave employees too much incentive to ensure their departments hit their numbers - even at the expense of other departments, the company, and the customer.

You might argue you would never let something so obvious continue. But what assumptions, cultural practices, processes and beliefs are costing your company millions of dollars per year?

This client then asked me to take their sales team through the same TBR workshop. I also met with each sales rep to provide one-on-one coaching.

One of their six sales reps quit after realizing he didn't really like sales and didn't want to do what it took to improve his sales results.

Three of the remaining sales reps increased sales by at least 20% in the next 12 months, and two of the sales reps increased their sales by more than 45%.

The company's culture changes and sales improvements increased sales by $2.8 million in the first year and $6.1 million in year two.

Over the two years, sales increased by $8.9 million. Their competitors never saw it coming. Now their competitors are playing catch-up.

"Sales increased by 31% in the first 12 months after Jim Connolly worked with our sales team."

CEO of a $41 million family-owned business

The dopamine drug addiction

In 2023, a $150+ million professional services firm was growing rapidly. They targeted big clients and prided themselves on being perceived as easy to do business with. Their goal was to double in size in three to four years.

Internally, though, they still acted like a much smaller company. When problems surfaced, several long-time employees would swoop in, fix the problem, and once again be regarded as the hero.

This is called the dopamine effect. Dopamine is the brain's chemical messenger that drives reward, motivation, and behavior.

The long-time employees actually liked it that way, because they could roam into any department and "save the day," all in the interest of satisfying the customer.

Humans are drawn to activities they are rewarded for, so they swoop in, "save the day," and get that dopamine reward - even if it limits the company's ability to grow.

The company's real problem stemmed from a lack of clear accountability and ownership for key responsibilities.

Managers who supposedly owned responsibilities that the "swoopers" took away from them reached a point where they developed learned helplessness. They knew the long-timers would swoop in, undermine them, and get the credit for going "above and beyond."

While this dysfunctional model worked then, it also kept them from growing. The long-timer "swoopers" were maxed out saving the day full time. And the duties they were supposed to be doing - the ones they didn't like doing - got ignored.

The only way to grow was for company leaders to assign one owner for each role. The entire leadership team had to agree that if they wanted to grow company sales, the "swoopers" could no longer swoop. In the new structure, the "swoopers" owned only their own set of responsibilities.

I also had them restructure their weekly meetings into metrics meetings. Each leader reported only on the metrics they owned. "Swoopers" were called out for swooping. This process instilled new habits that unleashed the company's capacity to grow.

In the first four months, several long-timers tried to revert to the old way of doing things, because they missed the chance to save the day.

By the end of 12 months, sales had increased by more than 20%, and internal chaos and dysfunction had decreased significantly.

Here's a do-it-yourself exercise to try. Individually, and then as a group, make lists of behaviors at your company that are rewarded, tolerated, and/or ignored.

Are there behaviors on these lists that are interfering with your company's growth? If so, address them.

Leaders who never got leadership training

In 2024, I presented to a Vistage CEO group. One of the CEOs referred me to a large contract food manufacturer.

The CEO was frustrated because of employee turnover and complaints about supervisors and managers. He also said they couldn't start an idle production line because they didn't have the employees to run it.

He asked me to help them reduce turnover and improve leadership skills.

I quickly learned that most production-line team leaders, supervisors, and even company managers had risen through the ranks without ever receiving any leadership training.

He asked me to do a three-hour leadership training for his managers. I told him no - it would be a waste of time and money.

I asked him whether he wanted to expose his managers to leadership concepts in three hours, or help them lead more effectively. He said he wanted them to lead more effectively.

We calculated the cost of employee turnover over the past year: placing ads, reviewing resumes, scheduling interviews, conducting interviews, making offers, orientation, safety training, and job training. And when employees quit, they had to pay those expenses all over again. He was shocked at the cost.

He also knew, based on his active production lines, how much money he was losing by not running the idle line.

He concluded that building real leadership effectiveness was well worth the cost.

I showed him my one-page leadership model that his leaders could use to lead effectively in every conversation they had throughout the day.

I ran four one-hour sessions for his leadership team, managers, supervisors, and team leaders. The workshop included quizzes and homework between sessions to apply what they were learning.

As a result, leadership effectiveness increased dramatically, as shown by employee surveys and eNPS scores. In addition, the CEO said the company culture became more accountable and results-focused.

Employee turnover dropped by more than 50%.

Six months later, they had enough effective managers to hire for the idle production line. They kept developing leaders and, in the following year, expanded to two shifts.

"I choose outside guidance with great care. Jim is an expert and he delivers results. He earned our business and delivered the results he promised. Our leaders are more effective and our leadership team is working together better than ever before. Jim has become a trusted advisor for our company."

Dave Van Laar - CEO, Oak State Products

“I’m an Engineer, Not a Manager”

After conducting more than 3,400 interviews, a consulting company hired me to join a project team at a well-known Fortune 100 client.

Three engineering teams were based at three production plants a few miles apart. One team had significantly higher employee turnover than the others. I interviewed managers on the team with the much higher turnover.

During my discussion with Daniel, one of his employees knocked on his door. Daniel barked, "Come in!" as he rolled his eyes. Daniel said, "What?" The employee, who looked like he didn't want to talk to Daniel at all, now looked like he regretted getting out of bed that morning.

The employee, an engineer, asked a very technical question, and Daniel answered it. I think it had something to do with a flux capacitor. 😊

I said to Daniel, "Are you frustrated by that particular employee, or does managing people in general frustrate you?"

What he said next gave me insight into the reason for the employee turnover problem.

Daniel said, "This people stuff is what I have to do on top of my real job."

I asked him what his real job was. He said, "I only get to spend about 10% of my time doing engineering."

I asked him, "You miss the engineering, don't you?"

He sighed and said, "Yes, but in order to move up the pay scale and career path, you have to manage people."

I said, "Do you like managing people?" Daniel said, "I majored in engineering, not management."

I recommended to the client that Daniel move to a role where he could do engineering without managing people.

Daniel was reassigned the next week to a more technical engineering role. I saw Daniel three months later, and he said, "I was miserable as a manager, and this transfer saved my marriage. Thank you."

This Fortune 100 company reviewed all three engineering teams and paid closer attention to whether technical people were wired for managing people. Employees who preferred the technical route could stay technical and serve multiple plants. As a result, employee turnover was reduced significantly.

Moneyball for interviewing

Back to the guiding principle: while every employee is unique, human behavior is highly predictable.

Interviewing is dysfunctional on both sides of the desk.

Nowadays, candidates come to job interviews with thoroughly rehearsed, perfect answers and examples for every question you might ask.

On the other hand, some interviewers show me their "magic" interview questions, which they believe give them perfect insight into whether to hire the candidate.

Both approaches are flawed.

Candidates sometimes get hired for jobs they won't like doing. Managers are sometimes so impressed by perfect answers that they hire people who won't succeed.

Human Behavior Science shows us that talent - a naturally occurring pattern of thought, feeling, or behavior - predicts on-the-job performance better than any other factor.

The problem is that resumes, interview questions, and perfect answers don't come anywhere close to predicting on-the-job performance.

I've now conducted more than 3,400 talent interviews. I know which talents to look for, how to ask whether they are present, and how to confirm their presence by asking for specific examples.

I'm glad to teach your team to do the same thing - but I have a 3,400-interview head start.

Accurately assess talent, and you have a good chance of hiring a 4X top performer. Get it wrong, and you hire a boat anchor.

"Our track record for hiring people who would be successful was awful. Before working with Jim Connolly, my personal success rate was 1 for 9. I would have been better off flipping a coin. With Jim Connolly's help, our track record is now 6 for 6 and all 6 have been with us 1–7 years and are performing well."

Managing Partner – commercial real estate brokerage

Apply this principle in your company and it becomes the competitive advantage you build over your competitors - without lowering prices, cutting expenses, or becoming a commodity.

Ready to talk it through?

Book a quick call

Human Behavior Science. The edge your competitors have overlooked. So far.