For leaders who keep funding change that reverts in the field

Beyond ADKAR: why the 21st century demands a new operating model for commercial transformation.

Change management is necessary — but on its own it was never sufficient. No rollout, however well-governed, builds an enterprise that keeps adapting on its own.

By
Jesse Hopps, Founder
Commercial Excellence Consortium
Format
Executive brief
Reading time
14 minutes
$4T+
Projected annual spend on transformation by 2027, up from $1.8T in 2022
IDC
38%
Of employees will support enterprise change — down from 74% in 2016
Gartner
76%
Of transformations still fail to generate lasting value
BCG

We fund more transformation every year — and get the same result.

The money is not the problem. Spend on transformation is on track to more than double — from $1.8 trillion in 2022 to over $4 trillion by 2027. Boards are funding it at unprecedented levels.

What is collapsing is the willingness to carry it. Employee support for enterprise change has fallen from 74% in 2016 to 38% today. And roughly three in four transformations still fail to produce lasting value.

The pattern has held for thirty years. The inputs keep rising; the outcome does not move.

This is not an execution problem. It is a capital-allocation problem.

ADKAR is built to manage change.

ADKAR is the change-management model most Fortune 100 companies run on. Created by Prosci founder Jeff Hiatt and formalized in his 2006 book, it describes the five sequential conditions an individual must meet to adopt and sustain a change. For three decades it has been the default playbook for rolling out change — and for its era, a genuine contribution.

A
Awareness. The individual understands why the change is necessary — the rationale, the risk of inaction, the strategic context.
D
Desire. A personal decision to support the change. Motivated, at least at the surface, to engage.
K
Knowledge. Knowing how to change — training, process documentation, the information required to execute differently.
A
Ability. Implementing the new behaviors in practice — moved from knowing to doing, at least under observation.
R
Reinforcement. The new behavior sustained through incentives, recognition, accountability, and performance management.

It is a logical model, and a necessary one. It was simply never a sufficient one. Managing an organization through a defined change is not the same as building one that keeps adapting after the change ends.

ADKAR helps drive compliance. The 21st century demands commitment.
The failure mode nobody logs
People rarely resist openly. They comply in the meeting — and revert in practice.
03 · Where ADKAR falls short

Five gaps between what ADKAR manages and what transformation now requires.

01

It drives compliance more than commitment.

A manager who complies uses the framework when observed and eases off when not — and ADKAR does little to address the passive resistance that can follow.

02

It treats motivation as a communication problem.

Its Desire stage conflates burning-platform messaging with intrinsic motivation, ignoring the autonomy, competence, and relatedness that Self-Determination Theory shows are required.

03

It does not account for whether learning endures.

Structured training decays fast — up to 90% forgotten within a week. Retention comes from doing and teaching the real work, not from sitting through instruction.

04

It does little to prepare people for adversity.

ADKAR does little to prepare people for how they respond when transformation gets hard — measured as AQ®, among the strongest predictors of whether change survives.

05

Its reinforcement leans on outside pressure.

Reinforcement depends on external governance; when the sponsor moves on or Q4 pressure mounts, it can fade — with little intrinsic motivation left to keep the change in place.

None of these are training or communication gaps. They are motivational ones — and ADKAR has no layer to close them.
04 · What replaces it

TransformationOS, defined.

A commercial transformation operating model that turns compliance into commitment. It builds the mindset to absorb change before the skillset to execute it and the toolset to sustain it — to accelerate adoption of new ways of working.

Not a framework

A framework is a diagram on a wall.

An operating system runs underneath the work and keeps it running. This is the layer beneath the training, the tools, and the governance — not another one of them.

It governs the order

Mindset, then skill, then tools.

Most programs install those three in reverse, then wonder why nothing takes. The operating model enforces the sequence that makes each layer land.

It persists

Commitment outlasts the sponsor. Compliance can't.

Behavior driven from outside needs a watcher to survive. Behavior people own carries itself — the point where ADKAR degrades is exactly what this is built for.

The layer change management was always missing — where rapid mindset and behavioral evolution are built.

Built by operators, on science older than ADKAR.

TransformationOS did not come out of a change-management textbook. It was assembled inside Demand Metric — the advisory firm behind the Commercial Excellence Consortium, an invite-only community of senior commercial operators — who kept watching well-run programs pass every adoption metric on the dashboard and then revert in the field.

Rather than write another communication model, it synthesizes three bodies of performance science that ADKAR leaves out. Two of the three were established well before ADKAR was formalized in 2006, and left on the table.

Adversity science · 1997

Adversity Quotient (AQ®) & GRIT

Dr. Paul Stoltz's paired measures of how people handle hardship: AQ® for how they absorb pressure and setbacks, GRIT for how they push through toward goals that matter.1

Motivation science · 1985

Self-Determination Theory

The autonomy, competence, and relatedness that produce intrinsic motivation — what ADKAR's Desire stage asks for but cannot create.2

Learning science · 2019

Project-based learning

Capability is built by doing the real work, not delivered to a room — and it outlasts anything the classroom can teach.3

1 Stoltz, P. G. (1997). Adversity Quotient: Turning Obstacles into Opportunities. Wiley.   2 Deci, E. L. & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. Plenum.   3 Chen, C.-H. & Yang, Y.-C. (2019). Revisiting the effects of project-based learning on academic achievement: a meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 26, 71–81.

ADKAR gave the field a vocabulary. Never the science of why people commit.
What replaces training theater
Capability built in the work itself — live commercial problems, operator-coaches alongside.
The whole system, one view

How the pieces fit — and why the order matters.

Install in this order
Mindset Skillset Toolset
Layer 01 · install first

Mindset

Built before any framework. Skip it and the skills and tools that follow get rejected. The coaching: AQ® and GRIT, run by Operator-Coaches.

Layer 02 · then

Skillset

Real capability, built on the team's own live P&L problems — not a training audience. The real work: 90-day Growth Projects on the team's own priorities.

Layer 03 · last

Toolset

Frameworks embedded in daily workflows, for a population already motivated to use them well. On demand: 1,000+ Demand Metric playbooks, pulled when the work needs them.

All three install cohort by cohort through AIRAS, the five-stage rhythm — detailed next.

Deploy tools into an adversity-averse population and they get rejected. Build the mindset first and new tools and processes finally get adopted — and stick.

The five-stage rhythm, run cohort by cohort.

AIRAS is the delivery rhythm beneath the model — how the mindset, skill, and tool layers actually get installed. Each stage builds intrinsic commitment, not just awareness.

A
Align. Establish shared context, commercial reality, and personal stakes before any new content — activating relatedness, the third pillar of intrinsic motivation.
I
Inspire. Surface the intrinsic 'why' through guided discovery — questions that let participants reach their own conclusions. Where ADKAR's Desire stage should be, but cannot be.
R
Reflect. The stage with no ADKAR equivalent. Between sessions, participants use AQ® tools to reframe resistance and doubt as signal rather than obstacle.
A
Apply. Project-based application to live commercial problems, facilitated by operator-coaches who have done the same work themselves — the retention that only doing the real work produces.
S
Scale. Transfer ownership. Participants teach, coach peers, and embed new behaviors into operating rhythms — where the measurable business impact begins.
The shift it produces

From today's pattern to the one that lasts.

The same organization, run on a mindset-first operating model. Left is the pattern most transformations are stuck in; right is what the work actually produces.

  • Transformation activity is high, but velocity is slowTeams adapt and execute faster under pressure
  • Programs run, but adoption is uneven across teams and regionsAdoption lasts after the pressure lifts
  • Training happens, but behavior doesn't changeCapability is built in the work, and it stays
  • Passive resistance slows everything downResistance is surfaced and reduced at the root
  • Commercial Excellence struggles to prove its strategic contributionCommercial Excellence becomes a credible growth engine
AIRAS is what moves you from left to right. Align, inspire, reflect, apply, scale.

AQ® — Adversity Quotient — is measurable, and can be permanently improved.

AQ® measures defense — how a person absorbs and recovers from pressure, setbacks, and ambiguity. GRIT measures offense — how they turn that adversity into forward motion on goals that matter.

Over four decades and 3,500+ studies, the same methodology has been used at the most elite levels of sport, academia, and enterprise — and unlike IQ, it can be assessed, strengthened, and linked directly to outcomes.

The research the mindset layer stands on · AQ®

What high adversity capacity predicts — and improves.

These are AQ® research findings — the foundation the mindset layer is built on, not results from any one program. Across 3,500+ independent studies and 5M+ people tested, higher AQ® predicts and strengthens the outcomes a mindset-first model is built to move.

250–320%
Sales-volume differential between high- and low-AQ individuals (real estate)
Stoltz / PEAK Learning
Innovation output of high-AQ individuals vs. lower-AQ peers
Stoltz / PEAK Learning
11–23%
Average AQ improvement through structured development — never observed to reverse in 10+ years
Longitudinal tracking

Higher AQ® predicts and improves — at the individual and team level: performance, productivity, innovation, agility, resilience, pace of change, problem-solving, optimism and energy, and morale. At the enterprise level: retention and hiring, talent, leadership, culture, and engagement.

Source: PEAK Learning / Peak Performance International research base; independent studies including Cornell University and Educational Testing Service (ETS).

What it takes to install — and where it breaks.

This isn't plug-and-play. It asks more of the sponsor and the team than a training rollout does — that's the point, and the risk.

What it requires

A sponsor who protects the mindset work when it doesn't show up on a completion dashboard next week.
Real operators on live problems — a cohort with P&L accountability and real stakes, not a training audience.
Operator-Coaches who have done the job, not consultants who have read about it.
90-day cycles, run cohort by cohort — not a one-day offsite.

Where it breaks

×
Tools first. Skip the mindset layer and the tools get rejected — no label changes that.
×
No live problem. Without real stakes, Apply reverts to training theater.
×
A sponsor who wants proof by Friday. Mindset change doesn't move a completion rate.
×
Treated as an event, not a rhythm. One cohort is a pilot; durability comes across two or three.
Run as a rhythm, the first cohort proves it. Run as an event, it's failed training, again.
How you'd know it's working

Three signals — and the one to own.

The metrics Commercial Excellence and Transformation own — leading, behavioral, then financial. The financial ones belong to the business.

Leading indicator · moves in weeks

Adaptive capacity

AQ® for defense, GRIT for offense, benchmarked before and after. The science shows it predicts successful outcomes better than any other metric. Commercial Excellence owns this.

Behavioral indicator · moves in months

Execution discipline

Growth Project progress, adoption of new ways of working, and the consistency of follow-through — observed by coaches, not self-reported. Commercial Excellence owns this.

Lagging indicator · moves in quarters

Business impact

Pipeline, margin, win/loss, market entry — measured in your own systems, on the Growth Projects the work put in motion. The business units own this.

Commercial Excellence and Transformation own the leading indicators. And adaptive capacity is the one to own — it predicts successful outcomes better than any other metric.

He scrapped a failed consulting playbook and rebuilt it mindset first.

At LANXESS, Roy van Griensven inherited a classroom capability program from a top consulting firm — a design he had watched fail before. It treated behavior as a downstream result of training, not the thing to solve for.

He rebuilt it as the Commercial Excellence Academy, designed with Demand Metric. Participants started with an adversity-response baseline, then ran 90-day projects on their own live problems, coached weekly by a senior operator — not a consultant.

“The best development experience of my career.” — a German-HQ skeptic

300+
Frontline commercial leaders through the program, adopting with minimal resistance
52
90-day projects launched on real commercial opportunities — new-market entry, cross-unit deals, pricing, AI
6
Cohorts delivered globally, with the coach-the-coach model embedded to run the next ones internally
Side by side

ADKAR vs. TransformationOS, across every structural dimension.

Dimension
ADKAR
TransformationOS
Paradigm
Change management: move an organization through one bounded change, then finish.
Behavioral evolution: build an enterprise that keeps adapting on its own.
Core objective
Drives behavioral compliance through a defined sequence of conditions.
Ignite intrinsic motivation and reduce passive resistance to raise transformation velocity.
Theory of change
Information + incentives + governance = adoption. Resistance must be overcome.
Mindset + guided skill + tools = commitment. Passive resistance is a rational signal.
Motivation model
Extrinsic. Build Desire through burning-platform messaging and senior endorsement.
Intrinsic. Activate autonomy, competence, and relatedness before new behaviors.
Sequencing
Awareness → Desire → Knowledge → Ability → Reinforcement.
Mindset → Skillset → Toolset. Adversity readiness precedes skills; skills precede tools.
Passive resistance
Treated as insufficient Awareness or Desire — met with more communication.
Treated as a rational signal of misalignment — addressed at the motivational root.
Learning method
Instructional delivery: training events, e-learning, process docs.
Guided discovery and project-based learning — capability built by doing the real work.
Adversity readiness
Not addressed. No mechanism to strengthen response to challenge and pressure.
Central. AQ® development is the foundational layer — improvement 11–23%, permanent.
Who delivers it
Change-management consultants and internal change offices.
Operator-coaches who have executed commercial transformation at scale.
Reinforcement
External: governance, incentives, metrics. Degrades when oversight reduces.
Internal: intrinsic motivation, AQ® resilience, peer coaching cadences.
Durability
Dependent on sustained reinforcement. Reverts when governance pressure reduces.
Durable. AQ® gains and intrinsic motivation do not degrade when oversight ends.
Track record
Widely deployed. 70–80% of major transformations fail (McKinsey; HBS).
Deployed at LANXESS (2025): 300+ leaders, adoption held with minimal resistance.
ADKAR manages the surface. Compliance needs a watcher — it fades when the pressure lifts. TransformationOS changes the motivational root. Commitment carries itself — and lasts long after oversight ends.

The job has changed. The sharper question for your next initiative.

ADKAR gave the field structure, vocabulary, and a repeatable process for managing the human dimension of change. For three decades, it was the best available tool for the job.

But the job has changed. Commercial leaders are now driving fundamental shifts in how their organizations create and capture value — under pressure, against inertia ADKAR does not dissolve. The usual alternatives — big-consultancy change practices, Prosci, the LMS — manage the same surface ADKAR named. None install the mindset layer underneath.

Compliance needs someone watching. Commitment does not. Motivation that belongs to your people is the one advantage capital cannot buy — and the only reason change outlives the sponsor who launched it.
The next step

Ready to equip your people to harness the adversity transformation generates?

For Consortium members and their leadership teams, the next step is straightforward: book a confidential Executive Briefing. No pitch. No proposal. A candid, peer-level diagnostic.

For senior Commercial Excellence, Strategy, Transformation, and Growth leaders at $1B+ enterprises.

About the author

Jesse Hopps

Founder and Group Moderator of the Commercial Excellence Consortium, an invite-only peer community of 250+ senior executives at large global enterprises responsible for enterprise transformation and organic growth.

The Consortium hosts monthly executive roundtables and convenes practitioners who believe that operators — not consultants — are best positioned to solve the hardest problems in commercial excellence.