ADKAR Change Model: An Assessment of Your Strengths and Weaknesses
The ADKAR change model was first published by Prosci in 1998. Prosci is the recognized leader in business process design and change management research, and is the world’s largest provider of change management and reengineering toolkits. and benchmarking information.
Prosci’s own research shows that problems with the human dimension of change is the most cited reason for project failures.
And in terms of change management, study after study shows that 70% of all business initiatives where there is a significant change element [which is virtually all of them!] not achieve the expected benefits.
Summary of the ADKAR model
It is based on 2 basic ideas:
(1) It is people who change, not organizations.
(2) Successful change occurs when individual change coincides with the stages of organizational change.
For successful change to occur at the individual level, people must go through each of these stages:
– Awareness of the need for change
– longed for to make change happen
– Knowledge about how to change
– Ability to implement new skills and behaviors
– Reinforcement retain the change once made
For organizational change to be successful, these individual changes must progress at or near the same rate of progress through the business dimension of the change.
Prosci defines the business dimension of change as the inclusion of these typical project elements:
– The business need or opportunity is identified
– The project is defined (scope and objectives)
– The business solution is designed (new processes, systems and organizational structure)
– New processes and systems are developed.
– The solution is implemented in the organization.
Evaluation of the AKBAR model
There are 2 quite different schools of thought that have shaped the practice of change management.
(1) The engineer’s approach to business improvement with a focus on the business process.
(2) The psychologist’s approach to understanding human responses to change by focusing on people.
The single most important reason for the staggeringly high 70% failure rate of ALL business change initiatives has been the overemphasis on the process rather than the people: the complete failure to consider the impact of change on those people who are involved. are more affected by it.
Closely related to that reason is the lack of a process to directly address the human aspects of change.
In my opinion, your ADKAR model reflects Prosci’s BPR background and engineers’ approach to business improvement, this is quite evident in the language and tone of your model description and with your emphasis only on management and control. process.
The clear strength of the model is that it provides a useful transition phase management checklist.
The weaknesses, in my opinion, are the following, the ADKAR model:
(1) Does not distinguish between “incremental change” and “step change”
If the change involves any of the following factors, it should definitely be handled as a “gradual change” and treated as a specific initiative that is outside of business as usual. The factors are: complexity, size, scope and priority.
The ADKAR model is, in my opinion, suitable for incremental change and is an effective management checklist. But it loses too much to be fully effective in an incremental change initiative.
(2) Does not distinguish between leadership and management roles and functions.
While the very definitions of change management and project and program management emphasize the management aspect [and of course this is important] much of the cause of the 70% failure rate in change initiatives can be directly attributed to a lack of leadership… Leadership that sees the big picture, that ensures people will follow suit, and the discipline of a program management approach provides the tools and processes to facilitate that.
An incremental change initiative must be led, and must be seen to be led.
(3) Ignoring the need for leadership to address the emotional dimension
The transition between stage one of the ADKAR model – an awareness of the need for change and stage two – the desire to participate in and support change can be enormous – especially at a change of pace.
One of the main points that William Bridges makes in his book “The Way of Transition” is that transition is not the same as change. Change is what happens to you. The transition is what you experience.
Many thought leaders in the world of change management and change leadership now speak loudly about the importance of the emotional dimension of leadership and the need to address the human dimension of change.
So, to summarize, in Bridges’ own words: “A change can work only if the people affected by it can successfully make the transition it causes.”
(4) Does not see the macro level of program management
Steps three through five of the AKBAR model deal with knowing how to change, the ability to implement change and reinforcement, making change stick, and all of these relate to one of the most important issues in implementing change. , which boils down to: translating vision and strategy. in actionable steps.
The traditional project approach to which the AKBAR model refers sees it as a set of tasks that, if executed successfully, obtain a result. In other words, the typical process-based approach that has failed so consistently and spectacularly in the last 20 years.
There is an important distinction between the micro level and macro level perspectives of change management, and one that AKBAR does not recognize.
At the macro level, the root cause of this is lack of clarity and miscommunication about the people aspects of how to manage change, and even more fundamentally, the lack of a language and contextual framework to articulate and manage processes. necessary changes that will work for the people. At this level, an important part of the solution to this lies in employing a program management approach to change, and this is because it is holistic and takes much more account of the many dimensions that are overlooked by the scope. limited from a project management-led approach.
At the micro level, implementing a strategy and changing a culture requires detailed practical management (sometimes micromanaging) in the details of how to do it, especially during the early stages. So at this operational level, people need to be trained and supported to develop the capabilities to implement your strategy and become who you want them to become. [or as close to that as is realistically possible].