Most change programmes fail for entirely predictable reasons.

Research shows 60-70% of change initiatives never achieve their goals. The statistics are brutal, but the patterns are clear.

I've examined this framework not as a theory but as a diagnostic tool. Five components must align for successful transformation. When any single element goes missing, a specific failure pattern emerges.

The elegance lies in its predictive power.

The Architecture of Failure

The framework identifies five essential components: 1) Vision, 2) Skills, 3) Incentives, 4) Resources, and 5) Action Plan. When all five exist, genuine change occurs.

Remove one component, and you get a predictable outcome.

• No Vision creates Confusion.

• No Skills generates Anxiety.

• No Incentives breeds Resistance.

• No Resources produces Frustration.

• No Action Plan results in False Starts.

Each failure pattern has distinct characteristics. Understanding them transforms how you diagnose change readiness.

1) Vision: The Confusion Test

Vision answers the fundamental question: why does this change matter?

Without clear vision, people lack direction. They understand tasks but not purpose. Confusion manifests as conflicting priorities, redundant efforts, and constant requests for clarification.

Only 15% of employees always understand the rationale behind their organisation's strategy. That gap between leadership intent and employee comprehension creates the confusion the framework predicts.

The diagnostic question is simple: can your team articulate, in their own words, why this change matters?

If they repeat corporate messaging without a genuine understanding, there is no vision.

2) Skills: The Anxiety Indicator

Skills determine whether people can execute new requirements.

When skills are missing, anxiety emerges. People understand the vision but doubt their capability to deliver. This manifests as avoidance behaviours, excessive questioning of the process, and reluctance to commit to timelines.

The anxiety is rational. You're asking people to perform tasks they haven't mastered.

Ask yourself: have we identified the specific capabilities this change requires? Have we provided structured development to build those capabilities?

If the answer is vague reassurance rather than concrete skill-building, expect anxiety to undermine momentum.

3) Incentives: The Resistance Pattern

Incentives explain what people gain from embracing change.

Without clear incentives, resistance becomes the dominant response. People understand the vision and possess the skills, but see no personal benefit. Why invest effort in something that offers no return?

Resistance appears as passive compliance, minimal effort, and subtle sabotage. People do what's required but nothing more.

The diagnostic here cuts deep: what specific benefits will individuals experience from this change? Not organisational benefits, but personal ones.

If you struggle to articulate individual gains, you've identified why resistance persists.

4) Resources: The Frustration Factor

Resources encompass time, budget, tools, and support structures.

When resources are absent, frustration dominates. People understand the vision, have the skills, see the incentives, but cannot execute because they lack the necessary resources.

This creates the most painful failure pattern. Capable, motivated people watch initiatives stall due to constraints beyond their control.

The question becomes tactical: have we allocated sufficient time for this change? Do people have the tools they need? Have we removed competing priorities that consume their capacity?

Frustration signals a resourcing problem, not a people problem.

5) Action Plan: The False Start Syndrome

The action plan provides structure and sequence.

Without it, organisations experience false starts. Initial enthusiasm generates activity, but without systematic planning, momentum dissipates. People take action, but in uncoordinated directions.

False starts are particularly damaging because they create change fatigue. People invest effort, see no results, and become cynical about future initiatives.

Your diagnostic: do we have a structured implementation plan with clear milestones? Does everyone understand their specific role and timing?

Vague commitments to "work together" signal the absence of genuine planning.

The Multiplier Effect

Here's where the framework's power becomes clear.

Transformations using comprehensive approaches are nearly 8 times more likely to succeed than those addressing single components. The framework isn't additive, it's multiplicative.

Each component amplifies the others. Vision without skills creates anxious confusion. Skills without incentives produce capable resistance. Resources without planning generate well-funded false starts.

The diagnostic application is straightforward. Assess each component systematically before launching change initiatives.

For Vision: conduct listening sessions where people explain the change rationale in their own words. Confusion reveals itself quickly.

For Skills: map required capabilities against current competencies. Identify specific gaps rather than assuming readiness.

For Incentives: articulate individual benefits explicitly. Test whether people find them compelling.

For Resources: calculate actual time and budget requirements. Compare against what's allocated.

For Action Plan: document specific activities, ownership, and timelines. Vague plans expose themselves under scrutiny.

Application in Practice

The framework serves three distinct purposes.

First, as a planning tool. Before launching the change, systematically verify that each component exists. This prevents predictable failures.

Second, as a diagnostic instrument. When change initiatives stall, the framework identifies which component is missing. This focuses intervention efforts.

Third, as a communication structure. The framework provides language for discussing change readiness without assigning blame.

The real value emerges in ongoing application. Change isn't a single event but a continuous adaptation. Leaders who embed this diagnostic thinking build organisational capability for navigating complexity.

Executive coaching becomes essential here. Coaches help leaders continuously assess these five components as circumstances evolve. They provide an external perspective on gaps leaders might overlook.

Advisory services bring pattern recognition from multiple implementations. Advisors anticipate challenges specific to your context and design mitigation strategies before problems manifest.

The framework's simplicity enables systematic application. Five components, five failure patterns, five diagnostic questions.

What appears elegant in theory proves powerful in practice.