.png)
If you work in L&D, you’ll know the problem:
“change
management” can mean anything from personal anxiety to stakeholder politics to
leaders who can’t translate vision into action.
MLR’s change tools aren’t duplicates. They sit in different
parts of the change system. The trick is to match the tool to the real
constraint.
In this two-part blog, Part A compares the theories/models,
the results each tool produces, and their strengths/limitations. Part B will
give you a practical “when to use what” guide.
The four spaces these tools occupy
Most change programmes need four different lenses:
- Change
leadership capability (can leaders drive change well?)
- Change
leadership behaviours (what do people do to champion change day-to-day?)
- Individual
response to change (how are people reacting right now?)
- Change
readiness/concerns (what are people worried about, and what will block
adoption?)
Different tools map to different lenses.
1) Change Management Effectiveness (CME): the manager as “change driver”
Model/theory it’s built on
Change Management Effectiveness is explicitly framed around seven change management
competencies that contribute to effective change leadership. It also
distinguishes types of change (e.g., organic incremental change vs step-change
transformational change) and positions the assessment as supporting the process
of managing either.
In other words: CME is not about how people feel about
change. It’s about whether the person leading change has the capability to do
it well.
Results you get
A competency-based profile across the seven competencies
(i.e., a “strengths and gaps” map for change-driving skill).
Strengths
- Strong
for leadership development and targeted coaching (“which competencies do we
need to build?”).
- Useful
pre- and post-programme as a capability baseline.
- Helps
avoid the common trap of treating change as comms-only; it’s about competence.
Weaknesses / watch-outs
- It won’t
tell you what employees are worried about or why adoption is stalling.
- If the
real issue is organisational design, workload, or trust, a leader capability
profile alone won’t fix it.
Find CME info HERE
2) Leading Change at Every Level (LCEL): five behaviours of effective change leaders
Model/theory it’s built on
Leading Change at Every Level is built around the idea that change success improves
when it’s led by the people it impacts — not just senior leaders. It measures
five behavioural dimensions:
- Modelling
the change
- Communicating
about the change
- Involving
others in the change
- Helping
others break from the past
- Creating
a supportive environment for the change
This is a behaviour model: “what do effective change
champions do?”
Results you get
Scores across the five behaviours, giving a practical
picture of how someone is likely to show up as a change leader (at any level).
Strengths
- Very
practical for building a distributed change network (champions, team leads,
supervisors).
- Turns
change leadership into observable behaviours you can practise and coach.
- Helpful
for post-change review: “what did we do well/poorly as change leaders?”
Weaknesses / watch-outs
- It’s not
primarily a diagnostic of emotional reaction or resistance.
- If people
are stuck in denial/resistance, you may need a transition tool first.
Find LCEL info HERE
3) Mastering the Change Curve (MCC): transition phases (Jaffe & Scott)
Model/theory it’s built on
Mastering the Change Curve is based on Jaffe & Scott’s four-phase Change Curve:
- Denial
- Resistance
- Exploration
- Commitment
The theoretical background makes the key point: change is a
process, not an event, and “negative” behaviours (denial, anger, resistance)
can be normal and adaptive.
Results you get
A profile showing where someone is currently located on the
curve (via sub-scores), plus guidance and action planning for moving through
the phases.
Strengths
- Excellent
for normalising emotions and giving people a map of transition.
- Useful
when people are experiencing change they didn’t initiate (explicitly called out
as the most appropriate audience).
- Great for
workshops where you want shared language for “where are we right now?”
Weaknesses / watch-outs
- It
doesn’t diagnose leadership competence or stakeholder strategy.
- It can be
over-used as a “feelings” tool when the real issue is unclear decisions, poor
planning, or lack of resources.
Find MCC info HERE
4) Change Reaction (CR): approaches to handling organisational change
Model/theory it’s built on
Change Reaction is grounded in the idea that resistance is inevitable and
that people show different approaches to handling organisational change. The
tool emphasises that regardless of reaction type, there is always “motion” in
response to change.
Results you get
A charted profile on the Change Reaction Profile, based on
responses to 24 statements, with interpretation of possible reactions and
combinations.
Strengths
- Strong
for raising awareness of individual responses and planning more effective
behaviour.
- Useful in
change programmes as a diagnostic and a way to discuss support systems.
- Can be
used as an OD diagnostic to surface patterns across groups.
Weaknesses / watch-outs
- Less of a
“phase model” than MCC; it’s not primarily about where you are in a transition
journey.
- Like all
self-report tools, it benefits from debriefing with real examples.
Find CR info HERE
5) Change Management Predictor (CMP): preferred style when confronted with change
Model/theory it’s built on
Change Management Predictor is built on a Change Style Continuum model and measures
a person’s preferred style when confronted with change. It explicitly positions
the result as neither right nor wrong.
Results you get
A personal change style score on the continuum, with
interpretation of the styles.
Strengths
- Useful
for self-awareness and team discussions about why people respond differently.
- Helpful
early in a programme to reduce judgement (“they’re not difficult; they’re
different”).
- Good for
managers who need to tailor how they involve and support different people.
Weaknesses / watch-outs
- It’s a
preference/style lens; it won’t tell you what specific concerns are blocking
adoption.
- It’s not
a change leadership capability model.
Find CR info HERE
6) Change Abilitator (CA): stages of concern (University of Texas research)
Model/theory it’s built on
Change Abilitator is based on research (cited as University
of Texas) suggesting people move through predictable stages of concern when
change is introduced. It’s designed to surface concerns people may not openly
admit.
It identifies six types of concerns and can be used over
time to measure progress, including group averages to identify collective
concerns.
Results you get
A concern profile (individual and/or group) showing what’s
most likely to block acceptance and adoption.
Strengths
- Very
practical for change agents: it tells you what to address (and with whom).
- Strong
for planning interventions, comms, and manager actions.
- Useful
for tracking progress and identifying hotspots across teams.
Weaknesses / watch-outs
- It
doesn’t measure leader competence; it measures employee concerns.
- If you
don’t act on the concerns, it can backfire (“you asked, then ignored it”).