A migration project to a new ERP, three months behind schedule, and teams bypassing the software by filling out their old spreadsheets. The problem almost never lies in the technology itself, but in how people are prepared to change their habits. This is where the ADKAR method, developed by Prosci, makes sense: it structures individual support into five sequential steps, from awareness to the sustainable anchoring of new behavior.
Adoption of AI in business: a field case to test ADKAR
Articles about ADKAR often present the five letters (Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability, Reinforcement) as a theoretical framework. In practice, the value of the model is measured by the actual speed of adoption of a tool or process.
Related reading : The latest trends and highlights not to miss in the news
In 2024, Prosci documents the case of McCarthy Holdings, a company in the construction sector that deployed an artificial intelligence project. By structuring individual support with ADKAR, McCarthy Holdings achieved a 90% adoption rate in 30 days. This result is not due to the quality of the tool itself, but to the fact that each employee was guided step by step, from “why this change” to the concrete ability to use the solution daily.
This type of feedback shows that the ADKAR method in training goes beyond the framework of traditional reorganizations. It applies to advanced technological transformation projects, including the deployment of chatbots, automation tools, or analytics platforms.
See also : Practical guide to install the Intex 58983 metal frame pool in your garden
Change training: structuring each ADKAR step with concrete actions
Change is not taught like software. An e-learning module on the features of a tool covers the Knowledge phase, but completely misses the first two steps of the model. Without awareness of the problem (Awareness) or desire to get involved (Desire), technical knowledge does not lead to any adoption.
Awareness and Desire: the two steps that traditional training ignores
Most training plans start directly with “how to do it.” Teams are sent to a room, shown the new tool, and then wonder why the usage rate plateaus three weeks later.
Starting by explaining the problem that the change solves changes the dynamic. In practice, this involves short sessions, prior to any technical training, where a manager presents the data justifying the transformation: costs of the current process, customer complaints, measured performance gaps.
The Desire phase requires a different approach. You cannot decree desire. It is built by showing what each person gains concretely, identifying individual resistances, and giving a voice to frontline managers. Feedback on this point varies according to corporate cultures, but a convinced manager accelerates their team’s buy-in much more than top-down communication from management.
Knowledge, Ability, Reinforcement: the sequence that anchors change
Once awareness and desire are in place, the actual training can begin. Here’s how to structure the last three steps:
- Knowledge: impart the necessary skills through suitable formats (practical workshops, video tutorials, peer sessions). The content focuses on “how,” not “why,” which has already been addressed.
- Ability: allow time for guided practice. An employee may understand a process without knowing how to execute it under pressure. Real-life exercises, with a reference person available, bridge this gap.
- Reinforcement: consolidate the change through regular rituals, visible tracking indicators, and recognition. Without this step, old reflexes return within weeks.
Why ADKAR works where other change models struggle
ADKAR is often compared to Kotter’s model, which proposes eight steps centered on the organization. The fundamental difference lies in the target. Kotter drives change at the collective level. ADKAR targets the individual and measures their progress step by step.
In training, this granularity changes everything. Instead of asking “is the project progressing?”, we ask “at which step is this person stuck?”. If an employee understands the change but does not want to engage, the answer is not additional training; it is work on the Desire phase.
Change training programs for leaders now integrate ADKAR and Kotter as two complementary skills. ADKAR is used to diagnose individual blockages, while Kotter structures the overall governance of the project. Combining the two avoids addressing change solely from the top down.
Common mistakes when deploying ADKAR in training
The most common trap is turning the five steps into five PowerPoint slides. ADKAR is not a training content; it is a diagnostic framework. We do not “train people on ADKAR”; we use ADKAR to design a training path that truly covers each phase of change.
Another mistake: skipping the Reinforcement phase because the project is officially completed. The deployment of a tool concludes with a go-live date. Behavioral change, however, has no end date. Planning follow-up points one month, three months, and six months after launch is an integral part of the process.
The Ability phase is also often underestimated. Knowing is not enough; one must be able to do, under real job conditions. If the work environment hinders application (limited access, unchanged workload, poorly configured tools), even the most comprehensive training will yield no results.
A successful change process in a company relies less on the quality of the chosen model than on the rigor with which each step is genuinely worked through. ADKAR provides a readable framework for this, as long as it is not reduced to an acronym displayed in a meeting room.