The Prosci ADKAR model has received a lot of attention over the years. It is possibly the most well known of all the change methodologies, but perhaps this comes without merit. It should be said right from the beginning that this article is not intended to criticize Prosci or any of its employees. In fact, just the opposite is true. I have great respect for the company and value their input on many topics. They also provide a wealth of information that you can use when learning about change management or planning your change strategy.
However, this article does intend to take another look at the ADKAR model and ask if this is what you want to use for your organization. Below is a brief overview of the model for your reference.
Awareness: be aware of the change
Desire: support and take part in the change
Knowledge: know how to change
Ability: be able to implement the change
Reinforcement: sustain the change
Below is a breakdown of some of the reasons this model may be lacking.
A Beginner’s Model.
Simply put, the ADKAR model should be considered a beginner’s model. It can be an efficient way for beginners to think about change and the steps necessary to make it happen in their organizations. It can also be thought of as a tip sheet for things to include in your change strategy, with the understanding that it is not the entire model. In other words, the steps in the model are necessary, but they not sufficient to bring about change.
No Planning.
The five steps in the model aim to guide your change management strategy. I am going to give Prosci the benefit of the doubt and guess that they do not recommend skipping the critical assessment phase. However, it is worth noting that the model does not offer a single word on assessment or how to go about doing it. Planning your strategy without adequate assessment is a disaster waiting to happen.
Leadership is Missing.
There are certain essential components to change management. Experts can argue about what are the most important components, but they will likely agree that some must be included in any change model. Leadership is one of these components. It is absolutely critical to have effective leadership to bring success to any significant or complex change, particularly when it requires a shift in attitudes or behavior. Leadership should come from multiple levels of the organization and it should be the voice of the project to drive the vision to all employees.
It Starts with Awareness.
Is the Awareness step really necessary? Of course, employees must be aware of the change, but does it really need its own step? The second step (the Desire step) talks more to the idea of employees taking part in and supporting the change. It is difficult to take part in something that you are not aware of. Perhaps these two steps can be combined.
Knowledge and Ability Can be Combined.
I get it, first you need to know how to do something before you necessarily have the ability to do it. But are these really two distinct steps? The important concept here is that employees need to be able to perform the functions of their roles in the future environment, which can be captured in one step.
Change Management Must be Agile.
Another concern is that this model offers a rigid process that puts the change strategy in five buckets that should be completed in order. This type of sequential or linear process is yesterday’s thinking. The change process should be more fluid and agile where adjustments and pivots are encouraged and can easily be made along the way. In some ways, the ADKAR model is to change management what the Waterfall model is to software development.
The Prosci Certification.
It is perplexing to me why so many organizations put so much weight on the Prosci certification. Their standard certification is a three day course. It is not feasible to think that an employee can become an expert in something in just three days, let alone a discipline as complex as change management. It sometimes seems as though organizations value this three day certification over advanced degrees and years of actual hand-on experience.
General vs. Specific.
Whether or not you agree with the specifics outlined above, the general criticism may still hold true. That is, for complex organizational changes, the ADKAR model lacks the depth necessary to make them effective. Far more goes into planning and executing change than is covered in the model.
Did I get it wrong? Perhaps you disagree with the entire premise that this model is lacking in some ways. Maybe you agree that it is lacking, but for different reasons than those mentioned above. Let us know what you think. Comment below.
We connect you to change management consulting firms that take a deeper approach to drive success for your project.
