Technique 5.22 Change-Readiness (Organisational Commitment Profile)
Introduction
It based on Affective, Normative and Continuance Commitment
(for more detail, see elsewhere in the knowledge base)
The purpose isto assess the quality of commitment supporting a change initiative; not just whether people will comply, but why.
How to Use
- Respondents rate each statement on a 1–5 scale
1 = Strongly Disagree
2 = Disagree
3 = Neutral / Inconsistent
4 = Agree
5 = Strongly Agree - Analyse patterns, not just averages
- Use results to tailor change interventions
Scoring Statements
Section 1 — Affective Commitment (Want to Change)
Measures emotional engagement, belief and ownership
|
Statement |
Score (1–5) |
|
1.1 I understand and believe in the purpose of this change. |
|
|
1.2 This change aligns with values that matter to me. |
|
|
1.3 I feel proud to be part of this organisation as it undertakes this change. |
|
|
1.4 Leaders involved in this change act in ways I trust. |
|
|
1.5 I feel my views and experiences have been genuinely considered. |
|
|
1.6 I feel motivated to contribute to making this change successful. |
|
|
1.7 I would speak positively about this change to others. |
Affective Commitment Score: ____ / 35
Section 2 — Normative Commitment (Ought to Change)
Measures obligation, loyalty and moral responsibility
|
Statement |
Score (1–5) |
|
2.1 I feel a sense of responsibility to support this change. |
|
|
2.2 This organisation has invested in me, and I feel an obligation to contribute. |
|
|
2.3 Supporting this change feels like the right thing to do. |
|
|
2.4 My team expects me to engage constructively with this change. |
|
|
2.5 Leaders are carrying their share of the burden in this change. |
|
|
2.6 I would feel uncomfortable letting others down by resisting this change. |
Normative Commitment Score: ____ / 30
Section 3 — Continuance Commitment (Have to Change)
Measures perceived cost of non-compliance or exit
|
Statement |
Score (1–5) |
|
3.1 Resisting this change would negatively affect my role or future here. |
|
|
3.2 Leaving the organisation because of this change would be difficult for me. |
|
|
3.3 I feel I have limited alternatives if this change doesn’t suit me. |
|
|
3.4 The personal cost of not adapting to this change feels high. |
|
|
3.5 I feel anxious about what would happen if I didn’t go along with this change. |
Continuance Commitment Score: ____ / 25
Commitment Profile Interpretation
Compare the 3 scores
Plot results as a commitment profile, not a single readiness score.
|
Pattern |
Interpretation |
Readiness Level |
|
High Affective, Moderate Normative, Low Continuance |
Healthy, intrinsic commitment |
High |
|
Moderate Affective, High Normative, Low Continuance |
Duty-driven change |
Medium |
|
Low Affective, Moderate Normative, High Continuance |
Fear-based compliance |
Low |
|
Low across all 3 |
Disengagement and risk |
Very Low |
Assessment Insights for Change Leaders
If Affective Commitment is Low
Signals
- Cynicism, disengagement, passive resistance.
Interventions
- Re-articulate purpose and “why now”
- Increase employee participation and co-design
- Improve leadership visibility and authenticity
If Normative Commitment is High but Affective is Low
Signals
- Compliance without energy
- Quiet resentment or burnout risk.
Interventions
- Shift from obligation language to meaning and agency
- Acknowledge effort and emotional cost
- Invite honest dissent and dialogue.
If Continuance Commitment is High
Signals
- Anxiety, risk-avoidance, minimal effort.
Interventions
- Reduce perceived risk (reskilling, clarity, support, etc)
- Explicitly separate performance management from learning
- Build psychological safety and future pathways.
Some Reflection Questions
- What kind of commitment are we currently relying on?
- What kind of commitment does this change require?
- Where might we be unintentionally increasing fear or obligation?
- What would move people from “have to” to “ought to” to “want to”?
(main source: Elda Dollija et al, 2021)