A structured, data-informed assessment completed over a one-hour call. Specific findings across six risk dimensions. A governance-ready report within 24 hours.
You bring the initiative — we surface the risk. Report delivered within 24 hours.
Every major transformation gets rigorous financial and technical scrutiny before anyone commits. The human side almost never does. By the time adoption problems surface, scope is locked and budget is spent.
A structured intake, a weighted scoring engine, and a governance-ready report — delivered within 24 hours of the assessment call.
A facilitated 45-minute assessment covering 22 questions across six risk dimensions. Each question is designed to surface what governance teams need to know but rarely ask before approving scope.
Responses are scored across six weighted dimensions. An override logic catches the combinations of risk factors that a weighted average alone would miss — the patterns most reliably associated with adoption failure.
A two-page risk profile delivered within 24 hours. Overall risk rating, dimension scores, critical flags, and scope requirements — designed to be tabled at a steering committee, not filed in a change manager's workplan.
Not a survey. Not senior judgment. A structured, data-informed risk profile fast enough to run before scope is locked and specific enough to act on.
Delivered within 24 hours of the call. Designed to be read by a project sponsor, shared with leadership, and used to make a decision — not filed away.
This initiative carries medium human adoption risk. Leadership alignment and change history are strengths to build on. The primary risk is timeline pressure relative to the behavioural change required — manageable with targeted sponsorship and early stakeholder engagement.
A structured one-hour conversation conducted over a call — Google Meet, Teams, Zoom, or whichever platform works for you. A ChangeViable practitioner leads the session, working through questions across six risk dimensions covering the initiative, the organisation, leadership alignment, timeline, and the people affected.
The conversation is designed to surface what is known, what is assumed, and what has not yet been decided. You do not need to have all the answers before the call.
The project sponsor or initiative lead — the person closest to the decision about scope and resources. Not everyone involved needs to be on the call. One or two people with a clear view of the initiative is enough to produce a reliable risk profile.
Yes — and this is often where the most valuable findings emerge. Running separate sessions and aggregating the results surfaces divergence in how different people understand the same initiative. When the sponsor scores leadership alignment as MEDIUM and the project team scores it as HIGH risk, that gap itself is a critical finding. Multi-session assessments can be scoped on request.
The earlier the better — ideally before scope and budget are finalised, before a steering committee sign-off, or before a vendor contract is signed. It can also add value once a project is underway when resistance has emerged or timelines have slipped.
Any initiative where people are being asked to change what they do. Common use cases include:
The methodology scales to the initiative — large programmes and smaller targeted changes alike.
No minimum or maximum. The assessment has been run on initiatives affecting fewer than 100 people and on global programmes affecting thousands. The dimensions and scoring adjust to the initiative.
Certain combinations of risk factors are more dangerous than a weighted average can reflect. The override logic monitors for these patterns — for example, HIGH behavioral change required alongside a timeline under 16 weeks — and automatically escalates the overall rating to HIGH regardless of the weighted total.
The assessment is a live conversation led by a senior practitioner — not an automated form or chatbot. AI supports the analysis and report production after the call, applying the scoring framework consistently and drafting the report. The practitioner reviews and validates all findings before delivery.
Yes — everything discussed and all findings are strictly confidential. The report is delivered by email within 24 hours to the person who requested it, formatted for sharing with leadership. No findings are shared without explicit permission. A follow-up call to walk through findings can be arranged on request.