SIGNAL™ Framework - IP Instrument Family

Nine instruments. One methodology.

The SIGNAL™ Framework is operationalised through a family of proprietary assessment instruments. Each instrument has a defined question set, a scoring model, and a specific role in the change lifecycle. They are designed to work together, but each can be understood and used on its own.

Instrument map

Diagnose, design, and assure in one connected system.

The pages below describe each active instrument as a complete standalone capability, while also showing how outputs connect across the full methodology.

Diagnose

SQD™SIGNAL™ FullCCP™

Design

CIP™SAM™ERT™ Planning

Assure

ECCM™ERT™ PulseSVT™IET™

How the instrument family works

A diagnostic system rather than a disconnected toolset.

Earlier instruments establish baseline state. Design instruments translate that state into action. Assure instruments show whether the intervention strategy is working over time.

SQD™ and CCP™ establish the entry diagnostic. SIGNAL™ Full provides group-level detail. CIP, SAM, and ERT turn those findings into a targeted design response. SVT and IET then measure whether the programme is actually improving as rollout continues.

That sequencing matters. The methodology is not a collection of branded templates. It is a connected assessment architecture whose outputs are designed to feed the next decision.

Active instruments

Each instrument is designed to stand on its own.

Practitioners should understand what each instrument measures, when it is used, and how its output connects to subsequent planning or assurance decisions.

SIGNAL-Quick Diagnostic™

StageDiagnose

Questions12 (2 per dimension)

OutputSQDRI score, readiness band, dimension heatmap, recommendation path

SQD™

What it does

SQD™ is the entry-point instrument. It runs 12 questions at programme level and produces a SQD Readiness Index, a six-dimension heatmap, and a recommended intervention intensity path.

It is designed for speed and accessibility. A senior sponsor or programme lead can complete it in under 15 minutes.

When to use it

As the first assessment of any change programme before significant design work has begun.
As a portfolio-level indicator for multiple initiatives where full assessments are not warranted for all.
As a board or steering committee orientation tool to establish a shared baseline before detailed planning.

How it connects

SQD™ scores feed into the CCP™ Complexity Assessment to produce the Echelon Intervention Intensity Score.
The SQDRI establishes the programme-level baseline that SIGNAL™ Full assessments extend at group level.

Radar chart — 6 SIGNAL™ dimensions

Sample output

3.1Approaching Ready

SSignal3.2

IIntent2.8

GGrounding3.5

NNeed2.4⚠

AAnchoring3.1

LLeadership3.4

→Full SIGNAL™ assessment on Need dimension

SIGNAL™ Full Assessment

StageDiagnose + Assure

Questions30 (5 per dimension)

OutputFull dimension profile, SRI score, critical flags, intervention triggers per group

SIGNAL™

What it does

The full SIGNAL™ instrument delivers group-level readiness profiles across all six dimensions.

In Assure stage, the same instrument runs as a pulse assessment every four weeks per group, producing velocity data that shows whether readiness is improving, stable, or declining.

When to use it

For every impacted stakeholder group identified in the Stakeholder Assessment.
At each governance gate: baseline, pre-deployment, 30-day post-go-live, and 90-day sustainment.
Whenever SQD™ flags a critical dimension and a group-level breakdown is needed.

How it connects

Full SIGNAL™ scores are the primary input into Design and Assure instruments.
SVT™ velocity calculations and IET™ effectiveness scoring both require sequential SIGNAL™ full assessment runs.

Heatmap matrix — groups × dimensions

Sample output

GroupSIGNALSRIStatus

Finance3.22.83.52.4⚠3.13.43.1Critical flag

Operations4.13.84.23.64.03.93.9Ready

HR & People2.1⚠2.4⚠2.82.0⚠2.62.3⚠2.4Critical flag

30Q instrument · 3 groups assessed · 1 critical flag · Intervention triggers generated

Change Complexity Profile

StageDiagnose

Questions12 (2 per complexity dimension)

OutputComplexity score, complexity band, Echelon Intervention Intensity Score

CCP™

What it does

CCP measures programme-level change complexity across six independent complexity dimensions: Reach, Depth, Pace, Tension, Novelty, and Coupling.

High complexity does not predict failure; it predicts the level of change management investment required.

Reach: How many people and organisational units are affected
Depth: How fundamentally this changes day-to-day work
Pace: How compressed the timeline is relative to scope
Tension: How much the change conflicts with existing culture
Novelty: How unfamiliar this type of change is
Coupling: How interdependent this change is with other initiatives

When to use it

At programme initiation, alongside SQD™, as part of the entry diagnostic.
Before finalising change management resource and budget allocation.
When making a commercial recommendation.

How it connects

CCP combines with SQD to produce the Echelon Intervention Intensity Score.
CCP Pace and Coupling scores are also used as static features in PRS when it activates.

Radar chart — 6 complexity dimensions

Sample output

Intervention IntensityHigh

Reach4.1High

Depth3.0Medium

Pace4.4High

Tension2.1Low

Novelty3.6Medium

Coupling3.9Medium

Change Impact Profile

StageDesign + Diagnose scan

Questions15 per group (3 per impact dimension)

OutputImpact score per group, Priority 1-4 classification, SIGNAL™ linkage flags

CIP™

What it does

CIP measures change impact severity for each impacted stakeholder group across five impact dimensions.

Each group is classified as Priority 1 through Priority 4, and that classification drives resource allocation across Design instruments.

When to use it

In Design stage for every stakeholder group identified in the Stakeholder Assessment.
As a preliminary scan in a SIGNAL™ Plus diagnostic package.
When prioritising training curriculum and communications investment across groups.

How it connects

CIP Priority 1 classification feeds directly into SAM and ERT.
CIP System and Tool plus Behaviour Shift scores drive training planning prioritisation.

Priority swimlane columns (P1–P4)

Sample output

P1Critical

Finance4.2

P2High

Operations3.1

P3Medium

HR & People2.4

P4Standard

IT Support1.8

P1 groups trigger full SAM™ + ERT™ Design activation · CIP scores feed training prioritisation

Sponsor Accountability Matrix

StageDesign

QuestionsAssessment-driven

OutputGroup-by-group sponsor action plan, accountability assignments, action status tracking

SAM™

What it does

SAM builds a structured sponsor accountability plan using the Echelon Sponsor Action Typology.

For each impacted group, SAM identifies which sponsor actions are most needed based on SIGNAL™ Leadership and Intent scores.

When to use it

In Design stage for every group where SIGNAL™ Leadership score is below 3.5.
At programme start to establish the sponsor coalition before go-live.
In Assure stage to track whether sponsors are completing the actions they committed to.

How it connects

SAM completion rates are used in sponsor effectiveness calculations within executive reporting.
Sponsor activation score from SAM is also a dynamic feature in PRS.

Status board — actions × groups

Sample output

Group

Finance

Operations

HR & People

Activate sponsor

✓

◐

Reinforce narrative

◐

✓

○

Coach managers

✓

—

◐

Escalate blockers

—

✓ Complete · ◐ In progress · ○ Pending · — Not required

Echelon Resistance Typology

StageDesign + Assure

Questions5 per pulse (1 per resistance type)

OutputResistance type classification, Group Resistance Plan, escalation thresholds

ERT™

What it does

ERT classifies resistance by type rather than treating it as a single monolithic force.

In Design stage it produces a Group Resistance Plan. In Assure stage it runs as a 5-question pulse instrument every two weeks.

Clarity: Confusion-driven resistance handled through Signal interventions
Conviction: Belief-driven resistance handled through engagement and trust-building
Capability: Competence-driven resistance handled through Grounding interventions
Capacity: Bandwidth-driven resistance handled through Need interventions
Structural: Reinforcement-driven resistance handled through Anchoring interventions

When to use it

In Design stage when SIGNAL™ scores reveal gaps that may be resistance-driven.
In Assure stage continuously from rollout commencement until the 90-day sustainment gate.
When SIGNAL™ Intent or Anchoring scores decline in a pulse assessment.

How it connects

ERT resistance types align with specific SIGNAL™ dimension deficits.
The typology provides the intervention vocabulary while SIGNAL™ provides the measurement.

Resistance intensity heat tiles

Sample output — Finance Team

ModerateClarityConfusion-driven→ Signal

DominantConvictionBelief-driven→ Intent

AbsentCapabilityCompetence-driven→ Grounding

DominantCapacityBandwidth-driven→ Need

ModerateStructuralReinforcement-driven→ Anchoring

Group Resistance Plan2 dominant types · Immediate intervention on Intent + Need

Echelon Change Capability Model

StageAssure

Questions24 (4 per capability dimension)

OutputOrganisational change capability profile, MXI score, 4-level maturity classification

ECCM™

What it does

ECCM is a maturity assessment instrument that measures the organisation's structural capability to manage change as an ongoing competency.

It runs at the sustainment gate after the programme has concluded.

When to use it

At the 90-day sustainment gate for programmes reaching managed assurance tier.
When an organisation wants to benchmark its change management maturity.
When programme closure requires evidence of organisational embedding, not just adoption of the specific change.

How it connects

ECCM MXI scores feed into benchmarking and are used as an outcome label in PRS training data.

Maturity staircase — 4 levels

Sample output

Foundational

M&D

Emerging

PIPC

Developing

LCCCLO

Advanced

MXI Score 2.8 · Overall classificationLevel 2 — Developing

SIGNAL™ Velocity Tracker

StageAssure

QuestionsNone (auto-calculated)

OutputWeekly velocity, trajectory classification, go-live projections, alerting

SVT™

What it does

SVT is a calculated instrument built from sequential SIGNAL™ pulse assessments.

It produces weekly velocity, trajectory classification, go-live projections, and threshold-crossing predictions for each group and dimension.

When to use it

Continuously from the second pulse assessment onwards.
At every governance gate as the primary leading indicator for go-live readiness decisions.
When a programme has four or more consecutive pulse runs.

How it connects

SVT is one of the two primary data sources for IET.
The go-live projection from SVT is the primary input into executive dashboard readiness reporting.

Sparklines — velocity trend per dimension

Sample output — Finance Team · Pulses 1–4

SSignal3.6+0.27/wk

IIntent3.0+0.20/wk

GGrounding3.6+0.13/wk

NNeed2.5+0.10/wk

AAnchoring3.4+0.20/wk

LLeadership4.0+0.20/wk

Go-live projectionReady in ~3 weeks · Need dimension below threshold

Intervention Effectiveness Tracker

StageDesign + Assure

QuestionsNone (intervention log plus comparison against pulse data)

OutputEffectiveness Score per intervention, stalled group alerts, counterfactual flags, ROI summary

IET™

What it does

IET closes the loop between interventions and outcomes by logging every change intervention and scoring observed movement against expected movement.

It produces a platform-native evidence base for what change interventions actually work in a given context.

When to use it

Logging begins in Design stage so interventions are captured before Assure begins.
Effectiveness scoring activates from the second pulse assessment.
ROI summary activates when cost fields are populated in the intervention log.

How it connects

IET is a primary data source for SVT interpretation, executive reporting, and PRS training data.
Across the platform, IET data accumulates into the cross-client benchmark dataset that will power PRS.

Lollipop chart — effectiveness ranking

Sample output

02.557.510

Training redesignOperations

+0.8 pts

Communications resetFinance

8.2

+0.6 pts

Manager cascadeAll groups

7.1

+0.4 pts

Sponsor workshopHR & People

4.3

+0.1 pts

4 interventions logged · 3 effective (≥7.0) · 1 stalled · ROI summary available

In design — not yet available

Two instruments in design.

Fully specified and architecturally ready. Intentionally deferred until their data prerequisites are in place. The expected output format is shown below.

Change Saturation Map

StagePortfolio

QuestionsNone (aggregates SIGNAL™ Need scores across programmes)

OutputChange Saturation Index per group, overload alerts, portfolio demand map

CSM™In Design

What it does

CSM aggregates SIGNAL™ Need dimension scores and active change demand signals across all concurrent programmes to reveal where specific stakeholder groups are absorbing disproportionate change burden.

It provides portfolio-level visibility that individual programme instruments cannot — detecting saturation building across initiatives before it manifests as resistance or capacity failure.

When to use it

When three or more concurrent programmes share stakeholder groups.
At portfolio governance gates before authorising new programme activity.
When a group’s Need dimension score declines unexpectedly across consecutive pulse assessments.

How it connects

CSM draws directly on SIGNAL™ Need scores across all active programmes — no additional survey is required.
Overload alerts from CSM inform CIP™ priority classification, SAM™ capacity planning, and ERT™ resistance pre-emption.

Scoring levels

StatusRangeWhat it meansWhat it triggers

Manageable< 2.5Group is absorbing change demand comfortably within available capacity. No saturation risk detected. Change programmes are running in parallel without compounding strain.No intervention required. Group continues on standard monitoring schedule. CSI reviewed at next portfolio governance gate.

Moderate2.5 – 3.4Group is managing concurrent change demand but showing strain. The aggregate burden is approaching the threshold where capacity limitations begin to affect engagement and Need dimension scores.Flag for active monitoring. No new programme activity targeting this group without a capacity review. Portfolio lead notified at next gate.

High3.5 – 4.4Group is under significant change pressure. Need dimension scores are likely declining across one or more active programmes. The group cannot reliably absorb additional change demand without degraded readiness outcomes.Active capacity management required. CIP™ re-prioritisation recommended. SAM™ sponsor plan should include explicit capacity relief actions. No new programmes may target this group without CSI reduction plan.

Overloaded≥ 4.5Group has exceeded its absorptive capacity threshold. Concurrent change demand is causing measurable readiness degradation. SIGNAL™ Need scores will deteriorate further without intervention at the portfolio level.Portfolio gate triggered immediately. All new programme activity targeting this group is deferred until CSI returns below 3.5. ERT™ Capacity resistance plan activated. Executive escalation recommended.

Portfolio heatmap — groups × active programmes

Sample output — active portfolio · 3 programmes

GroupERP MigrationOS UpgradeOrg RestructureCSI

Finance3.81.23.1High

Operations3.23.81.8High

HR & People1.40.84.2Moderate

IT Support4.53.61.2Overloaded

4 groups monitored · 1 overload alert · 2 high saturation · Recommendation: defer new programme activity for IT Support until CSI resolves; monitor Finance

Predictive Risk Score

StageAssure

QuestionsNone (ML model trained on completed programme data)

OutputGo-live adoption probability, 90-day adoption forecast, resistance escalation risk, SHAP feature drivers

PRS™In Design

What it does

PRS is a machine learning instrument that predicts adoption outcomes for live programmes using profile similarity to completed programmes in the Echelon benchmark dataset.

Every prediction includes a SHAP-based explanation layer — an itemised breakdown of which programme features are driving the score and in which direction, making the model’s reasoning fully transparent.

When to use it

From the second pulse assessment onwards, once the model has sufficient programme context to generate predictions.
At every governance gate as a forward-looking complement to SVT™ velocity data.
When a programme’s trajectory is diverging from benchmark expectations for its profile type.

How it connects

PRS draws on SVT™ velocity, IET™ intervention patterns, SAM™ sponsor activation, CCP™ complexity, and SIGNAL™ dimension scores as predictive features.
PRS output feeds the Executive Dashboard and is used to calibrate escalation and resource reallocation decisions.

Prediction scorecard with SHAP feature importance

Sample output — Finance Team

Go-live adoption74%On track

90-day adoption62%Monitor

Resistance escalation38%Moderate

Score driversWhich programme characteristics are pushing this prediction up or down

Leadership score

+0.18

SAM completion

+0.12

SVT velocity

+0.09

Need dimension

-0.15

CCP complexity

-0.11

Model confidence · 78%Requires 3+ more pulse runs for full precision

All nine instruments. One platform.

Every SIGNAL™ instrument is available through the Echelon Labs platform. The entry point is an SQD™ diagnostic: 12 questions, under 15 minutes, and a complete programme-level readiness profile.

Start with an SQD™ diagnostic