Introduction: why this action matters for adoption
A change plan is only useful if it keeps pace with what impacted people are actually experiencing. During implementation, early performance gaps often show up as low tool usage, inconsistent process adherence, manager hesitation, unclear sponsorship, training rework, or quiet resistance. Treating these signals as “execution noise” is risky. They are diagnostic data.
This action helps the change manager pause, assess what is happening, and adapt the change plan before adoption deteriorates. ACMP positions evaluation of change impact, readiness, risks, success criteria, execution monitoring, and plan modification as part of professional change management practice [ACMP, 2025]. (acmpglobal.org) In practical terms, the goal is not to defend the original plan; it is to protect adoption outcomes.
What this action is and when to use it
This is a diagnostic assessment and planning intervention. It combines data review, stakeholder listening, gap analysis, prioritization, and plan adjustment. Use it when performance is below expectation, when adoption data conflicts with positive status reports, when a critical stakeholder group is not ready, or before a major phase gate such as pilot, go-live, hypercare, or benefits review.
The diagnostic should examine both organizational readiness and individual adoption. Weiner defines readiness as shared commitment to implement a change and shared belief in collective capability [Weiner, 2009]. Prosci’s ADKAR model adds an individual lens: awareness, desire, knowledge, ability, and reinforcement can reveal where people are stuck [Prosci]. (pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov)
Preparation: inputs, stakeholders, materials, timing, and decisions needed
Start with the available evidence: adoption dashboards, process metrics, help desk tickets, training attendance, proficiency checks, manager feedback, risk logs, sentiment data, and sponsor observations. The CDC evaluation guide recommends clarifying the evaluation question, evidence needed, data sources, timing, and how findings will be used [CDC, 2026]. (cdc.gov)
Invite the people who can explain the gap and act on the findings. That usually includes the change lead, project lead, sponsor or sponsor delegate, impacted managers, frontline representatives, training or HR partners, communications support, and data owners. PMI cautions that different stakeholder groups often define success differently, so the assessment should not rely only on senior stakeholders or formal authority [PMI, 2015]. (pmi.org)
Before the session, confirm three decisions: who can approve plan changes, what trade-offs are allowed, and which adoption outcomes matter most.
Step-by-step facilitation guide
Frame the purpose. Open by saying: “We are here to understand the adoption gap, not to assign blame.” Restate the desired future-state behavior and the performance gap.
Review the evidence. Show a small set of data that compares expected versus actual readiness, adoption, proficiency, or performance. Include qualitative evidence, because interviews and open comments often explain why numeric indicators are moving.
Segment the impacted groups. Separate groups by role, location, manager, customer impact, process impact, and readiness level. A single average adoption score can hide a high-risk population.
Diagnose the likely barrier. Ask whether the gap is caused by awareness, desire, knowledge, ability, reinforcement, workload, local leadership, process design, technology usability, or competing priorities. ADKAR is useful here because it prevents “more communication” from becoming the default answer [Prosci].
Identify root causes with the group. Ask managers and employees what is making the new behavior difficult. McKinsey’s influence model is a useful check: do people understand and believe the change, see leaders role-modeling it, have the skills to perform, and experience formal reinforcement that supports the new behavior [McKinsey, 2016]? (mckinsey.com)
Prioritize gaps. Rate each gap by adoption impact, risk, urgency, affected population, and ease of intervention. Do not try to fix everything at once.
Adapt the plan. Convert findings into changes to the change plan: targeted manager coaching, revised training, local floor support, sponsor intervention, process simplification, new reinforcement mechanisms, additional listening sessions, or adjusted timing.
Assign owners and follow-up measures. Each action needs an owner, due date, success indicator, and escalation path. ACMP notes that change plans may need modification through the lifecycle to maintain momentum and results [ACMP, 2025].
Example: how this could be applied in a real change initiative
A company introduces a new CRM process. Two weeks after go-live, overall login rates look acceptable, but sales managers report that opportunity stages are incomplete. The change manager reviews CRM data, training attendance, support tickets, and manager feedback. The diagnosis shows that representatives understand why the CRM matters and attended training, but they lack confidence applying the new qualification rules during live customer conversations.
The change plan is adapted. Instead of sending another all-user email, the team creates short scenario-based practice sessions, gives managers a coaching script, adds in-system examples, and asks the sponsor to reinforce that pipeline quality matters more than activity volume. After three weeks, the team checks completion quality, manager coaching frequency, and user confidence.
Roles and responsibilities
Role | Responsibility |
Change manager | Designs the diagnostic, facilitates discussion, synthesizes findings, updates the change plan. |
Sponsor | Confirms priorities, removes barriers, reinforces consequences and commitment. |
Project lead | Assesses whether solution, timing, scope, or resourcing changes are needed. |
Managers/frontline supervisors | Explain local adoption barriers, coach teams, test whether interventions work. |
Impacted employees | Provide practical feedback on what helps or blocks adoption. |
HR/L&D/communications partners | Adapt learning, reinforcement, and messaging based on diagnosed gaps. |
Data owner | Provides reliable adoption and performance data. |
Common mistakes to avoid
A common mistake is treating every performance gap as a communication problem. Communication may help awareness, but it will not fix unclear incentives, insufficient skill, poor usability, or manager non-compliance. Another mistake is relying only on senior stakeholder sentiment. PMI’s stakeholder guidance highlights the importance of understanding influence networks and differing definitions of success [PMI, 2015]. A third mistake is collecting feedback without acting on it; the CDC framework emphasizes that findings should be translated into action [CDC, 2026].
Measures of success or adoption indicators
Use a balanced set of indicators. Good measures include readiness scores, ADKAR barrier movement, attendance and proficiency data, usage quality, process compliance, exception rates, help desk volume, time to competence, manager coaching completion, employee sentiment, sponsor activity, and benefit indicators. McKinsey’s model suggests also checking whether skills, reinforcement, role modeling, and belief in the change are improving [McKinsey, 2016].
Checklist for the change manager
Have we defined the specific performance or adoption gap?
Do we have both quantitative and qualitative evidence?
Have we segmented the impacted groups?
Have we spoken with managers and employees closest to the work?
Have we diagnosed the likely barrier, not just the symptom?
Have we prioritized the few gaps that most threaten adoption?
Have sponsors agreed to the required decisions or trade-offs?
Have we updated the change plan, owners, dates, and measures?
Have we scheduled a follow-up review to test whether the adaptation worked?
Optional reusable worksheet
Diagnostic question | Notes |
What adoption or performance gap are we seeing? | |
Which group is most affected? | |
What evidence supports the finding? | |
Is the likely barrier awareness, desire, knowledge, ability, reinforcement, capacity, or design? | |
What is the root cause? | |
What change-plan adjustment is needed? | |
Who owns the action? | |
What indicator will show improvement? | |
When will we review progress? |
References
ACMP. The Standard for Change Management©. Association of Change Management Professionals. 2nd edition published August 26, 2025. https://www.acmpglobal.org/page/the_standard
Prosci. The Prosci ADKAR® Model. Prosci. No publication date listed. https://www.prosci.com/methodology/adkar
Weiner, Bryan J. A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science. October 19, 2009. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2770024/
CDC. Program Evaluation Framework Action Guide. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2026. https://www.cdc.gov/evaluation/media/pdfs/2026/02/CDC-Program-Evaluation-Framework-Action-Guide.pdf
CIPD. Change management: A guide for people professionals. Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development. December 11, 2024. https://www.cipd.org/en/knowledge/guides/change-management/
McKinsey. The four building blocks of change. McKinsey Quarterly. April 11, 2016. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/people-and-organizational-performance/our-insights/the-four-building-blocks--of-change
PMI. Engaging Stakeholders for Project Success. Project Management Institute. January 1, 2015. https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/engaging-stakeholders-project-success-11199
SHRM. Managing Organizational Change. Society for Human Resource Management. June 18, 2024. https://www.shrm.org/topics-tools/tools/toolkits/managing-organizational-change