ADKAR ASSESSMENT & INTERVENTION GUIDE
───────────────────────────────────────
ADKAR = Awareness → Desire → Knowledge → Ability → Reinforcement
Each person must move through all five in sequence.
A barrier at any stage blocks adoption — regardless of progress on others.

AWARENESS — Do people know WHY the change is happening?
  Assessment questions:
    - Can employees articulate why this change is necessary?
    - Do they understand the consequences of not changing?
    - Have they heard the message from credible sources?

  Gap indicators:
    - "I don't understand why we're doing this"
    - Rumors and misinformation spreading
    - People unaware the change is happening at all

  Interventions:
    □ Sponsor communications explaining the business case
    □ Town halls with Q&A to address confusion
    □ Manager briefing kits for team conversations
    □ FAQ documents addressing common questions

DESIRE — Do people WANT to support and participate?
  Assessment questions:
    - Are employees motivated to make the change work?
    - Do they see personal benefit in the change?
    - Are they actively resisting or passively complying?

  Gap indicators:
    - "I know why we're doing this but I don't agree with it"
    - Visible resistance or workarounds being created
    - Champions and sponsors not engaged

  Interventions:
    □ Address WIIFM (What's In It For Me) explicitly by audience
    □ Involve resistors in design to build ownership
    □ Peer influence through change champion network
    □ Incentives aligned to adoption behaviors

KNOWLEDGE — Do people know HOW to change?
  Assessment questions:
    - Do employees know what skills and behaviors are required?
    - Have they received adequate training?
    - Do they know where to get help?

  Gap indicators:
    - "I want to do this right but I don't know how"
    - High volume of support tickets post-go-live
    - Workarounds because people don't know the new process

  Interventions:
    □ Role-specific training on new processes and systems
    □ Job aids, quick reference guides, process maps
    □ Help desk and super-user support structure
    □ Practice environments before go-live

ABILITY — Can people perform the new behaviors consistently?
  Assessment questions:
    - Are employees successfully applying what they learned?
    - Are there barriers — time, tools, authority — preventing adoption?
    - Is performance returning to pre-change levels?

  Gap indicators:
    - Training completed but behavior not changing
    - "I know what to do but the system/process won't let me"
    - Performance dip persisting beyond expected adjustment period

  Interventions:
    □ Coaching and on-the-job support
    □ Remove systemic barriers to adoption
    □ Observation and feedback from managers
    □ Adjust workload to accommodate learning curve

REINFORCEMENT — Are the new behaviors being sustained?
  Assessment questions:
    - Is the change being recognized and reinforced?
    - Are people reverting to old behaviors?
    - Are consequences (positive or negative) aligned with the change?

  Gap indicators:
    - Adoption spike at go-live then gradual decline
    - Old systems or processes being used in parallel
    - No recognition for people doing it right

  Interventions:
    □ Success stories and public recognition
    □ Performance metrics that reward new behaviors
    □ Audit and correct reversion to old ways
    □ Celebrate milestones at 30, 60, 90 days post go-live

STAKEHOLDER MAPPING
───────────────────────────────────────
For each major stakeholder group:

Group:              [Name / Department / Role]
Size:               [# of people affected]
Impact level:       High / Medium / Low (how much does this change affect them?)
Influence level:    High / Medium / Low (how much can they influence adoption?)
Current state:      Unaware / Aware / Resistant / Neutral / Supportive / Champion
Target state:       [Where they need to be by go-live]
Gap:                [What needs to happen to move them from current to target]
Key concerns:       [What they're worried about — specific, not assumed]
WIIFM:              [What's actually in it for this group?]
Engagement approach:[How and when we engage this group]
Owner:              [Who manages this relationship]

STAKEHOLDER GRID (Influence × Support):
  ┌─────────────────────┬─────────────────────┐
  │  HIGH INFLUENCE     │  HIGH INFLUENCE     │
  │  LOW SUPPORT        │  HIGH SUPPORT       │
  │  → Manage closely   │  → Leverage as      │
  │  → Address concerns │    champions        │
  ├─────────────────────┼─────────────────────┤
  │  LOW INFLUENCE      │  LOW INFLUENCE      │
  │  LOW SUPPORT        │  HIGH SUPPORT       │
  │  → Monitor          │  → Keep informed    │
  │  → Don't ignore     │  → Show appreciation│
  └─────────────────────┴─────────────────────┘

RESISTANCE RISK REGISTER:
  Individual/Group:   [Name or group]
  Resistance type:    Active / Passive / Vocal / Silent
  Root cause:         [Why are they resistant? — specific]
  Risk to project:    High / Medium / Low
  Intervention:       [Specific action plan]
  Owner:              [Who handles this]
  Status:             [Open / In progress / Resolved]

COMMUNICATIONS PLANNING FRAMEWORK
───────────────────────────────────────
CORE MESSAGING ARCHITECTURE:
  The Change:         [What is changing — specific, not vague]
  Why Now:            [The business case — honest and specific]
  What Stays Same:    [What is NOT changing — anchors and reduces anxiety]
  Impact on You:      [By audience — role-specific consequences]
  Timeline:           [When things happen]
  Where to Get Help:  [Specific channel, name, contact]

COMMUNICATIONS CALENDAR:
  Phase          Audience     Message          Channel      Owner    Date
  ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
  Announcement   All staff    What/Why/When    Email+Town   Exec     [Date]
  Detail         Managers     How to lead it   Briefing     HR       [Date]
  Training        Users       How to do it     LMS invite   PM       [Date]
  Go-live         Users       It's live/help   Email+Slack  CM       [Date]
  30-day check    All         How it's going   Survey       CM       [Date]
  Success story   All         What's working   Newsletter   Comms    [Date]

CHANNEL SELECTION GUIDE:
  All-staff email:      Broad awareness — not for complex or emotional messages
  Town hall:            Two-way dialogue — critical decisions, Q&A needed
  Manager cascade:      Personal messages — emotional impact, role-specific change
  Intranet/Portal:      Reference information — FAQs, guides, resources
  Team meetings:        Application to specific work — manager-led
  Video message:        Senior leader visibility — authenticity and accessibility
  Slack/Teams:          Real-time updates, quick questions, community building
  1:1 conversations:    Resistant individuals, sensitive situations

COMMUNICATION QUALITY CHECKLIST:
  □ Written from the audience's perspective (not the project's)
  □ Answers: What? Why? When? How does it affect me? What do I do next?
  □ Consistent with all previous communications
  □ Approved by sponsor before sending
  □ Sent from the right sender (exec for strategic, manager for local)
  □ Feedback mechanism included (reply, survey, Q&A session)
  □ Plain language — no jargon or project acronyms

RESISTANCE INTERVENTION GUIDE
───────────────────────────────────────
STEP 1 — DIAGNOSE BEFORE INTERVENING
  Is the resistance based on:
  a) Lack of awareness? → Education and communication
  b) Disagreement with the change itself? → Involve in design or escalate
  c) Fear of personal impact? → Address WIIFM specifically
  d) Distrust of leadership? → Sponsor credibility and transparency
  e) Legitimate concern about execution? → Listen and possibly adjust

  Never apply a solution before understanding the root cause.
  The wrong intervention makes resistance worse.

RESISTANCE BY TYPE:
  Vocal active resistance (most visible, not always most dangerous):
    - Meet 1:1 to understand concerns
    - Listen fully before responding
    - Involve in problem-solving where possible
    - Set clear expectations for behavior even if disagreement remains

  Silent passive resistance (hardest to detect, often most damaging):
    - Monitor adoption metrics — workarounds, non-use, parallel processes
    - Engage managers to identify and surface concerns
    - Create psychological safety for honest feedback
    - Don't assume silence means acceptance

  Organized group resistance (cross-functional, coordinated pushback):
    - Engage the group leader directly — understand the collective concern
    - Don't dismiss; validate what's legitimate in their concerns
    - Sponsor-level engagement may be required
    - Adjust approach if concerns reveal a genuine change design flaw

PHRASES FOR RESISTANCE CONVERSATIONS:
  "Help me understand what's driving your concern."
  "What would need to be true for you to feel better about this?"
  "I hear that. What part of this concerns you most?"
  "That's a fair point. Here's what we've considered on that..."
  "I can't promise that will change, but I can make sure your perspective
   is heard by [decision maker]."

WHEN RESISTANCE REQUIRES ESCALATION:
  - Individual is actively undermining the change with their team
  - Resistance is based on a legitimate concern that could derail the project
  - Behavior is affecting others' adoption
  - Manager coaching has not moved the needle after 2-3 conversations
  → Engage HR and the business sponsor for performance management discussion

ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE READINESS ASSESSMENT
───────────────────────────────────────
Score each dimension 1-5: 1=Very Low, 3=Moderate, 5=Very High

LEADERSHIP READINESS
  □ Executive sponsor is visibly committed and active          [1-5]
  □ Leadership team is aligned on the change                  [1-5]
  □ Leaders are willing to model new behaviors                [1-5]
  □ Leadership has credibility with the organization          [1-5]
  Leadership score: [_/20]

ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY
  □ Staff have bandwidth to absorb this change                [1-5]
  □ Other changes are not competing for attention             [1-5]
  □ Historical track record of successful change              [1-5]
  □ Change fatigue level is manageable                        [1-5]
  Capacity score: [_/20]

STAKEHOLDER READINESS
  □ Key stakeholders understand why change is necessary       [1-5]
  □ Affected employees have been engaged in the process       [1-5]
  □ Resistance is identified and being managed                [1-5]
  □ Champions are in place across the organization            [1-5]
  Stakeholder score: [_/20]

PROCESS & INFRASTRUCTURE
  □ Technology and tools are ready to support the change      [1-5]
  □ Processes are documented and ready for training           [1-5]
  □ Support infrastructure (help desk, super-users) is ready  [1-5]
  □ Metrics to measure adoption are defined                   [1-5]
  Infrastructure score: [_/20]

COMMUNICATIONS & TRAINING
  □ Core messages are clear and consistent                    [1-5]
  □ Communications have reached affected audiences            [1-5]
  □ Training is scheduled and resources are ready             [1-5]
  □ Feedback mechanisms are in place                          [1-5]
  Communications score: [_/20]

TOTAL READINESS SCORE: [_/100]
  80-100: High readiness — proceed with standard approach
  60-79:  Moderate readiness — address gaps before go-live
  40-59:  Low readiness — significant risk; consider phased approach
  <40:    Not ready — go-live at this stage has high failure probability

POST GO-LIVE SUSTAINMENT PLAN
───────────────────────────────────────
ADOPTION METRICS (define before go-live):
  System/Process:
    - % of users logged in / accessing new system
    - % of transactions processed through new process
    - # of workarounds or parallel processes in use

  Behavioral:
    - Manager observation of new behaviors
    - Quality of outputs under new process
    - Error/rework rate compared to baseline

  Attitudinal (survey):
    - Ease of use rating
    - Confidence in new process/system
    - Net promoter score for the change

SUSTAINMENT MILESTONES:
  Day 30:   First adoption pulse — identify gaps, deploy quick fixes
  Day 60:   Mid-point assessment — targeted coaching for lagging groups
  Day 90:   Full adoption review — close out change management plan or extend

REVERSION RISK INDICATORS (watch for these):
  ❌ Old systems still being accessed after go-live
  ❌ "Unofficial" workarounds spreading across teams
  ❌ Support tickets spiking again after initial decline
  ❌ Manager conversations not happening (cascade failed)
  ❌ Recognition absent — new behaviors not being acknowledged

REINFORCEMENT ACTIONS:
  □ Success stories shared in all-hands and newsletters
  □ Early adopter recognition program
  □ Manager performance conversations include adoption metrics
  □ Ongoing tip-of-the-week communications (90 days post go-live)
  □ Peer coaching program — high adopters coaching low adopters
  □ Remove access to legacy systems on defined retirement date