SIGNAL™FrameworkUse SIGNAL™
Use SIGNAL™

SIGNAL™ Framework - Full Dimension Reference

The six dimensions of change readiness.

Every SIGNAL™ assessment measures the same six dimensions. Each dimension represents a structurally independent class of readiness — it can be strong or weak regardless of the others.

Reference notes

  • 5-point Likert scoring across every dimension
  • Critical threshold below 2.5 on any dimension
  • 30-question full instrument for group-level assessment
  • 12-question SQD diagnostic for directional orientation

Readiness bands

4.5-5.0Optimally Ready
3.5-4.4Ready with Monitoring
2.5-3.4Approaching Ready
1.5-2.4At Risk
1.0-1.4Not Ready
Any single dimension below 2.5Critical Flag
SSignalIIntentGGroundingNNeedAAnchoringLLeadership
S

Signal

Does this group understand the change, why it is happening, and what it means for them?

Measures clarity of understanding: rationale, scope, timeline, and personal implications.

Definition

Signal measures whether impacted groups have a clear, accurate understanding of the change - its rationale, scope, timeline, and specific implications for their role and way of working.

The dimension is named Signal because it assesses whether the change message has actually been received and understood, not just broadcast.

What low looks like

  • Groups are surprised by change announcements, rely on rumour, or receive contradictory information from different sources.
  • People cannot articulate why the change is happening or how it connects to organisational strategy.
  • Questions go unanswered or receive deflecting responses that erode trust in official communications.

What high looks like

  • Groups can explain the change in their own words, including the business rationale, without reference to official communications.
  • People understand precisely what will change about how they work, what will be expected of them, and by when.
  • There is a consistent narrative across communication channels and leadership levels.

Assessment questions

5-point Likert scale: 1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree

  1. 01People in this group understand why this change is happening.
  2. 02The rationale and business case for this change have been communicated clearly to this group.
  3. 03This group understands what will specifically change about how they work day-to-day.
  4. 04People in this group know what will be expected of them during and after the transition.
  5. 05This group has had sufficient opportunity to ask questions and receive honest answers about the change.

Signal score

1.0-1.4
Not ready
1.5-2.4
At risk
2.5-3.4
Approaching ready
3.5-4.4
Ready with monitoring
4.5-5.0
Optimally ready
Not readyImmediate intervention and pause deployment decisions.
At riskFull communications reset required.
Approaching readyStructured two-way sessions and Q&A forums required.
Ready with monitoringContinue and address specific message gaps.
Optimally readyMaintain current communications cadence.

Intervention triggers

  • Score below 2.5: immediate communications reset before continuing.
  • Q3 or Q4 below 2.5: escalate to line manager cascade and role-specific FAQs.
  • Q5 below 2.5: structured Q&A forums or town halls with direct executive engagement are required.

Relationship to other dimensions

  • Signal is the foundational dimension. Without it, high scores elsewhere are fragile.
  • It is most closely linked to Intent and Grounding.
I

Intent

Does this group genuinely want the change to succeed - not just comply with it?

Measures genuine motivation, active commitment, and willingness to change established habits.

Definition

Intent measures the degree to which impacted groups are genuinely motivated to engage with and support the change - not merely compliant, but actively committed to its success.

The distinction between compliance and commitment is one of the most consequential measurement problems in change management.

What low looks like

  • Groups comply with change requirements but privately resist, express cynicism, or work around new processes.
  • People do not advocate for the change within their peer groups or actively undermine it.
  • People revert to old ways of working as soon as oversight reduces.

What high looks like

  • Groups actively advocate for the change to colleagues who are sceptical or neutral.
  • People take initiative beyond minimum requirements and share positive early experiences.
  • The group models new behaviours and holds each other accountable for following through.

Assessment questions

5-point Likert scale: 1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree

  1. 01People in this group genuinely want this change to succeed.
  2. 02This group would actively advocate for the change to colleagues who are sceptical or resistant.
  3. 03People in this group are willing to change established habits and ways of working, even where this is personally inconvenient.
  4. 04There is a meaningful personal or professional reason for people in this group to embrace this change.
  5. 05This group trusts that the organisation is making the right decision in pursuing this change.

Intent score

1.0-1.4
Not ready
1.5-2.4
At risk
2.5-3.4
Approaching ready
3.5-4.4
Ready with monitoring
4.5-5.0
Optimally ready
Not readyImmediate escalation — informal resistance network risk is high.
At riskTargeted engagement intervention with active sponsor visibility required.
Approaching readyCo-design sessions and personal value narrative development required.
Ready with monitoringContinue and monitor for early compliance drift.
Optimally readyMaintain engagement cadence and reinforce personal value narrative.

Intervention triggers

  • Score below 2.5: engagement and co-design interventions required.
  • Q4 below 2.5: a targeted personal value narrative is required.
  • Q5 below 2.5: sponsor visibility and direct honest engagement are required.
  • Q2 below 2.5: high risk of informal resistance networks forming.

Relationship to other dimensions

  • Intent responds to engagement, co-design, and visible honesty from sponsors, not broadcast messaging.
  • It is closely linked to Leadership and Anchoring.
G

Grounding

Does this group have the knowledge and skills to operate in the new state?

Measures practical competence: the ability to perform, not just describe, the new way of working.

Definition

Grounding measures whether impacted groups have the knowledge and practical skills required to operate effectively in the new state.

A group is grounded when they can perform confidently in the new state, help colleagues who are struggling, and operate without constant escalation.

What low looks like

  • Groups know a change is coming but cannot perform the new tasks or use new systems confidently.
  • Training has been delivered but has not landed at a practical application level.
  • There is high anxiety about getting it wrong in the new way of working.

What high looks like

  • Groups can confidently demonstrate the skills required, not just describe them.
  • People apply new knowledge in varied and unfamiliar situations without needing to escalate.
  • Post-training support infrastructure has been accessed and is working.

Assessment questions

5-point Likert scale: 1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree

  1. 01People in this group have the knowledge needed to perform their role effectively in the new state.
  2. 02This group has received training or learning support that is relevant and directly applicable to their specific role.
  3. 03People in this group can practically demonstrate the skills required by this change, not just describe them.
  4. 04This group has access to the resources, job aids, and ongoing support they need to build and sustain competence.
  5. 05People in this group would be able to explain and support a new colleague in navigating the changed way of working.

Grounding score

1.0-1.4
Not ready
1.5-2.4
At risk
2.5-3.4
Approaching ready
3.5-4.4
Ready with monitoring
4.5-5.0
Optimally ready
Not readyImmediate L&D escalation — do not advance deployment without remediation.
At riskRedesign and re-deliver training with applied simulation.
Approaching readyApplied practice sessions and role-specific job aids required.
Ready with monitoringContinue and address any role-specific competence gaps.
Optimally readyMaintain current learning support and post-training access.

Intervention triggers

  • Score below 2.5: redesign and re-deliver training with applied simulation or role-specific practice.
  • Q3 below 2.5 with Q1 above 3.0: the gap is practice, not understanding.
  • Q4 below 2.5: escalate to L&D and operations leads immediately.
  • Q2 below 2.5: redesign around role-specific learning paths.

Relationship to other dimensions

  • Grounding is the most responsive dimension to direct intervention.
  • Low Grounding alongside low Need or low Intent is significantly harder to address.
N

Need

Does this group have the bandwidth and capacity to absorb this change alongside their existing demands?

Measures whether competing demands, workload pressure, and change saturation will undermine adoption even where will and capability exist.

Definition

Need assesses whether impacted groups have the organisational bandwidth, workload capacity, and structural conditions to absorb this change alongside their existing demands.

It asks whether the organisation has created space for the change or simply layered it on top of full commitments.

What low looks like

  • Groups are simultaneously absorbing multiple major changes and cannot prioritise any of them.
  • People do not have protected time to attend transition activities without compromising their core responsibilities.
  • Leadership has made no visible decisions about what to deprioritise.

What high looks like

  • Groups have protected time and resource for transition activities.
  • Competing change demands have been deliberately sequenced or deprioritised.
  • Leaders have made specific, visible decisions about what is being paused or reduced to create capacity.

Assessment questions

5-point Likert scale: 1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree

  1. 01People in this group have sufficient time available to engage meaningfully with this change.
  2. 02This group is not simultaneously being asked to absorb too many other significant changes at the same time.
  3. 03Workload and operational demands allow this group to participate in transition activities without compromising their core responsibilities.
  4. 04Leaders have made deliberate, visible decisions about what to deprioritise in order to create space for this change.
  5. 05Resourcing and staffing levels are adequate for this group to sustain current operations and the change effort simultaneously.

Need score

1.0-1.4
Not ready
1.5-2.4
At risk
2.5-3.4
Approaching ready
3.5-4.4
Ready with monitoring
4.5-5.0
Optimally ready
Not readyProgramme-level governance risk — escalate to executive sponsor.
At riskPortfolio-level change demand review required immediately.
Approaching readyActive capacity management and deprioritisation decisions required.
Ready with monitoringContinue and monitor for emerging workload pressure.
Optimally readyMaintain current capacity protections and sequencing decisions.

Intervention triggers

  • Score below 2.5: capacity constraint is a programme-level governance risk.
  • Q2 below 2.5: a portfolio-level review of change demand is required.
  • Q4 below 2.5: sponsor action is required to make specific prioritisation decisions.

Relationship to other dimensions

  • Need is the most frequently underestimated dimension.
  • It is also the hardest dimension to fix through change management interventions alone.
A

Anchoring

Are the structural conditions in place to sustain the new state once the change has been implemented?

Measures whether incentives, processes, and performance systems actively reinforce the new way of working - or silently tolerate regression.

Definition

Anchoring measures whether the structural conditions are in place to sustain the new state once the change has been implemented.

Behaviour that is not structurally reinforced will gradually regress to whatever was previously rewarded or permitted.

What low looks like

  • Old processes, systems, or workarounds remain available alongside the new way of working.
  • Performance measures and incentives still reward old behaviours.
  • The organisation has a track record of changes that did not stick.

What high looks like

  • Old processes and systems have been decommissioned so regression is not an available option.
  • Incentive structures and performance targets have been updated.
  • There are clear operational mechanisms to identify regression and address it before it becomes normalised.

Assessment questions

5-point Likert scale: 1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree

  1. 01Performance measures, KPIs, and incentives have been updated to reflect and reward the new way of working.
  2. 02Old processes, systems, or workarounds have been removed or decommissioned so that reverting to previous behaviour is not a practical option.
  3. 03Leaders in this group consistently model the new behaviours and ways of working expected of their teams.
  4. 04There are clear, operational mechanisms to identify regression to old practices and address it promptly.
  5. 05The organisation has a track record of sustaining changes once they have been implemented, rather than quietly reverting over time.

Anchoring score

1.0-1.4
Not ready
1.5-2.4
At risk
2.5-3.4
Approaching ready
3.5-4.4
Ready with monitoring
4.5-5.0
Optimally ready
Not readyImmediate structural redesign — change will not sustain without intervention.
At riskGovernance and reinforcement design review required before programme closure.
Approaching readyReinforcement design review and decommissioning plan acceleration required.
Ready with monitoringContinue and address any specific structural gaps.
Optimally readyMaintain structural reinforcement and regression monitoring cadence.

Intervention triggers

  • Score below 2.5: a governance and reinforcement design review is required before programme closure.
  • Q2 below 2.5: accelerate the decommissioning plan.
  • Q5 below 2.5: directly acknowledge prior sustainment failures and show what is structurally different this time.
  • Q3 below 2.5: leadership is modelling old behaviours and undermining the change.

Relationship to other dimensions

  • Anchoring is the only backward-looking dimension in SIGNAL™.
  • It is most closely linked to Intent and Leadership.
L

Leadership

Is sponsorship active, credible, and properly cascaded at every level of the organisation?

Measures the quality and reach of sponsorship, from executive commitment through to frontline manager activation.

Definition

Leadership measures the quality, visibility, and cascade of sponsorship for this change from executive level commitment through to frontline management.

Executive commitment at the top without activation at middle management and frontline levels produces a sponsorship gap that is a consistent predictor of change failure.

What low looks like

  • Senior sponsors endorsed the change in a launch communication but are not visibly engaged thereafter.
  • Middle managers are not equipped, briefed, or motivated to cascade the message.
  • The change is perceived as the project's change, not the organisation's change.

What high looks like

  • Sponsors take visible, sustained, and specific action.
  • The sponsorship cascade is active and equipped at every layer of management.
  • Leaders at all levels are creating the conditions for their teams to engage.

Assessment questions

5-point Likert scale: 1 = Strongly disagree · 5 = Strongly agree

  1. 01Senior leaders are visibly and actively championing this change, not just endorsing it in a launch communication.
  2. 02Line managers in this group understand their specific role in supporting their teams through this change.
  3. 03Managers are having genuine, two-way conversations with their teams about the change, rather than simply relaying communications from above.
  4. 04Visible sponsorship and active advocacy for the change is consistent across all levels of leadership, not concentrated at the top.
  5. 05Leaders at all levels are creating the conditions - time, resources, and psychological safety - for their teams to engage fully with this change.

Leadership score

1.0-1.4
Not ready
1.5-2.4
At risk
2.5-3.4
Approaching ready
3.5-4.4
Ready with monitoring
4.5-5.0
Optimally ready
Not readyImmediate executive re-engagement — escalate to programme board.
At riskSponsor coaching, re-engagement planning, and accountability review required.
Approaching readyManager enablement, talking points, and cascade framework required.
Ready with monitoringContinue and address any specific sponsorship gaps in the cascade.
Optimally readyMaintain sponsor visibility and cascade activation at all levels.

Intervention triggers

  • Score below 2.5: immediate sponsor coaching, re-engagement planning, and accountability review are required.
  • Q1 below 2.5: escalate executive engagement planning immediately.
  • Q3 below 2.5: manager enablement, talking points, and a structured cascade framework are required urgently.
  • Q4 below 2.5: executive commitment exists at the top but is not reaching the groups closest to the change.

Relationship to other dimensions

  • Leadership has a cascading effect on all other dimensions.
  • It should be the first dimension reviewed when overall SIGNAL™ scores are low and the cause is not immediately obvious.

Scoring model reference

How SIGNAL™ scores are calculated.

Each question uses a 5-point Likert scale. Dimension score is the mean of all five questions within the dimension, and overall score is the mean of all six dimension scores.

The full instrument produces both dimension-level scores and an overall SIGNAL™ score. The SQD diagnostic uses two questions per dimension and produces a lower-confidence approximation for early programme orientation.

For assessments with fewer than five respondents, a confidence discount is applied to avoid false precision on thin data.

Readiness bands

4.5-5.0Optimally ReadyGreen
3.5-4.4Ready with MonitoringGreen
2.5-3.4Approaching ReadyAmber
1.5-2.4At RiskRed
1.0-1.4Not ReadyRed
Any single dimension below 2.5Critical FlagRed

Run your first SIGNAL™ assessment.

The full 30-question SIGNAL™ instrument is available through the Echelon Labs platform. Start with an SQD™ diagnostic in under 15 minutes for a programme-level readiness score across all six dimensions.

Use SIGNAL™ in the Echelon Labs platform