How to improve transformation execution: 5 proven strategies

Reading time: 12 minutes

Targeted change strategies that reduce risk, avoid costs, and accelerate user adoption

Executive summary

Current environments require program leaders and project managers to improve transformation execution. Rather than using a one-size-fits-all approach, targeted organizational change solutions help project teams avoid people-related risks and costly fixes. Five case studies from real transformation projects show how targeted organizational change solutions achieve better outcomes, reduce risks, and avoid costs.

Why 70% of transformations fail to execute successfully

For 70 percent of transformation teams, execution fails. Projects are still far more likely to fail than to succeed.

There are many reasons why transformations fail. Common mistakes and missteps are well-documented.

Poor user adoption is always in the mix because let's face it, people are complicated.

Despite widespread use of organizational change toolkits, methodologies, and professional change management practitioners, transformation teams still haven't mastered the people side. With current resource-constrained environments, more project teams are exploring different ways to improve transformation execution and address this perennial challenge.

Change is a complicated and expensive problem for organizations of all sizes. Organizations have tried many ways of solving it:

Finding a solution to the change challenge is particularly difficult for technology-based transformations, where things move fast and have more complexity. It can be high risk and high cost. Often, these types of investments get made once a decade, and budgeting for the people side can be ambiguous.

The roles that repeatedly face this challenge are program leaders and project managers. They combine the internal business and IT professionals with external experts to implement the solution. They are also the people who have to figure out how to do more with less in resource-constrained environments, like what's happening right now.

This report reviews five case studies that improved user adoption, reduced people-based risks, and avoided costs. These transformations achieved better outcomes not by spending and doing more, but by being smart about why and what they were doing on the people side.

They designed for behavior change.

The behavioral science-based best practices and principles identified help program leaders and project managers improve transformation execution, regardless of the size of the project or size of the organization. 

This behavioral science approach to organizational change uses methods for how humans actually make decisions, rather than traditional organizational change approaches, which assume that humans are rational. News flash: They're not.

Stop using a one-size-fits-all approach to transformation execution

Before jumping into the case studies, let's review an important fundamental shift that savvy leaders and project managers make: They stop using a one-size-fits-all approach to organizational change. They start getting targeted about solving people risks.

Consider this: Many transformations are solving change as though they needed only one IT professional to deliver application architecture, API integration development, and security provisioning.

Is it possible to find one person who can do it all? Of course.

Will all those activities get done well? Probably not.

The same logic applies to the people side of transformations. As the complexity increases with specific technology implementation projects, there's even more risk in approaching the people side using a single professional.

Consulting teams with deep benches address this gap, but that expensive solution is out of reach for many organizations. It's simply not an option when resources are tight.

Despite these types of constraints, project managers are finding new ways to improve transformation execution by getting smart about project-based change. Let's look at five targeted, innovative ways using behavioral science that real transformations have used to address user adoption challenges in resource-constrained environments.

Case study 1: Gather feedback to strategically influence people

Transformations have become synonymous with fear.

Very few people have a positive, confident feeling when they hear "change is coming" or "a new project is being launched". Most people respond fearfully, with dread and apprehension.

There's too much of it, it's happening too fast, it's being done "to" me, and I don't have a history of successfully navigating it. It's no wonder people find project-based change frustrating.

Project managers know that sometimes leaders need to hear feedback about this challenge directly from stakeholders. It's a coaching-up method effective at helping leaders build empathy for users.

In one financial recordkeeping system implementation, the project manager supported a targeted survey of finance team members to understand whether the resources assigned to the project team had enough time to complete their activities.

They suspected this answer was "No" but a survey would bring forward actionable data to share with leaders.

Feedback was collected anonymously via an online survey so that employees felt comfortable sharing concerns:

"What project? I haven't heard about this yet. I don't know what you're talking about."

"When are we going to get trained?"

"Who's going to help me?"

The survey revealed that several finance team members were overwhelmed by the addition of project activities on top of their regular job duties.

This was an especially large risk for one key role. This person would significantly expand their responsibilities, including managing twice as many users, which meant double the security provisioning duties (a tedious task in the new system).

That one key role became a people-based risk, representing a single point of failure for the entire multimillion-dollar transformation.

The survey also revealed that less than 10 percent of functional users felt confident about the project team's ability to deliver on the business case--the promise to make their jobs easier. This was based on long memories from the last implementation, in which users were poorly supported.

The comments in the survey about training timing were an indicator of change resistance. If not addressed early and consistently, the resistance would grow.

As a result of the survey feedback, key team members were identified to begin leading informal demonstrations with their peers as the system was being built. This helped the core project team build confidence. Those same experts would become "go-to" help for their peers during the go-live.

This transformation used the behavioral science technique of social proof to model new behaviors early.

What risks were reduced and costs avoided?

This transformation avoided two key risks:

Identifying the need for additional support in a key role. Adjusting early avoided this role from becoming a single point of failure for the transformation.

Failed user adoption among the core functional users. By building skills early within the team, a broad-based support network was created within the function, capable of teaching and supporting peers during the rollout. This would have been an expensive mistake and reputational risk, given that the launch coincided with the annual budgeting cycle in which finance team members were front and center in the organization.

Using a simple survey that helped project and business leadership understand people's perceptions and beliefs about the change surfaced these and other risks.

Case study 2: Front-load organizational change activities

Successful transformation teams front-load organizational change activities. They understand that change is more than PowerPoint training decks and email blasts delivered at go-live.

Let's look at a case study where a successful transformation started change activities early in its six-month deployment.

The transformation was a core HCM Workday implementation (not including payroll). It impacted approximately 600 users in the United States who were part of a division of a larger enterprise that had already implemented a full suite of Workday HCM.

The obvious organizational change solution would have been to dust off the communications and training materials used in the prior deployment. Had the team used that approach, they would have missed three critical things:

A unique role specific to this division's location-based approach to supporting managers and employees. This role would continue to support payroll-based questions, but would not have Workday access.

An unclear WIIFM for managers and employees who needed to check two systems (Workday and the existing payroll system) to find answers to the most common questions about pay.

The vital responsibility of the HR business partner to understand support flows for their business team partners so they could direct people to get help/answers fast.

Starting conversations early with stakeholders about existing business processes and roles uncovered these critical change impacts early enough to address them. This uniqueness required different activities from just reusing the training and launch communication materials to prepare the team.

By identifying early that users would need to check two systems for pay information, the team reduced cognitive friction and designed clearer pathways before frustration could build.

What risks were reduced and costs avoided?

This transformation avoided two key risks:

Creating user backlash from location supervisors and employees by failing to equip existing embedded resources – the unique role identified early -- with the ability to answer common pay questions. This role needed access to both Workday and the existing payroll system. Security adjustments were made early enough to avoid backlash from users.

Failed user adoption among the core functional users. By involving the HR team early in reviewing roles and responsibilities, these professionals became experts in the entire solution. They understood how to perform transactions in the system, but they also knew who did what, so they could resolve questions and support quickly. They were the ones to identify and advocate for the unique role to have access to Workday in addition to the payroll system.

The program manager was savvy by insisting on early change assessment activities to uncover change impacts. Like most platforms, Workday HCM has its benefits and challenges when implementing.

Case study 3: Design project team activities as on-the-job learning

Thus far, we've looked at two targeted ways project managers can improve user adoption early on in transformations:

A third best practice done early serves a dual purpose. What needs to get done, and:

How might this transformation activity be used to develop people?

In one Workday HCM implementation, the program manager looked at the iterative rounds of development needed and the high workload of the core project team and questioned whether the deployment timeline was even realistic.

Options were brainstormed, including having the system implementers take on some responsibilities. Rather than outsource and incur extra costs, the team relied on its internal subject matter experts within each specialty area.

The team leveraged a watch one-do one-teach one approach to build internal capabilities.

Workstream leads facilitated internal demos during the configuration phase, participated in stakeholder preview sessions within the broader organization, completed testing activities, and finally, helped fine-tune training documentation. Some team members even led training sessions.

This program leader recognized the importance of using transformation activities as on-the-job learning for key people. Clear expectations were established early with the internal workstream lead role, along with providing them the support to do it.

They understood that on-the-job learning would set them up for success at go-live, and their peers would see them as experts.

Successful transformation teams leverage design thinking to help project teams achieve more without doing more by using project activities as on-the-job learning. 

The watch one-do one-teach one approach systematically builds psychological capability (confidence) and physical capability (skills), which are prerequisites for behavior change. This is core to the COM-B model for designing behaviors.

What risks were reduced and costs avoided?

This transformation avoided:

By understanding who needed to develop key skills and how transformation activities could enable that through on-the-job learning, this transformation avoided costs and timeline risks. It also helped the core team feel confident and capable.

Case study 4: Involve users to avoid surprises

The middle of any transformation is where things get messy. It requires being nimble, adaptable, and focused. A high degree of uncertainty persists while the technical solution is being developed, and things are not yet clear to the project team and stakeholders.

The messy middle is where project managers take the possibility of success and increase the likelihood of it by involving stakeholders to avoid surprises.

With the uncertainty of a system that's not yet ready, project managers might think waiting to share it with stakeholders is the safer route. It also takes sophisticated people skills to coordinate the demo sessions, collect feedback, and facilitate actions from the sessions.

But savvy project managers know that those additional activities of involving users early help avoid potentially costly surprises. People are more likely to feel a sense of ownership when they have input early that influences decisions.

One example of this was a full suite implementation of Workday HCM, Payroll, and Financials in an organization that had more than doubled in size through a recent acquisition.

The project team delivered preview demos to an extended set of leaders within the newly combined organization. These previews helped identify core business processes and role differences between the two previously distinct companies.

There were entire groups of people and roles that needed to be mapped to system responsibilities. Those gaps would not have been identified without the early user demos.

Systems such as Workday HCM make this iterative process easy to do. Successful transformations incorporate this method so that they identify "gotcha" moments early and have time to address gaps in functionality. It's better to find a surprise gap during design and build than after go-live.

Preview demos make future benefits feel more immediate and tangible, reducing the tendency to discount future value in favor of current habits. (A cognitive bias humans have in making decisions).

What risks were reduced and costs avoided?

This transformation avoided:

Case study 5: Influence from within the project team

Project managers sometimes find themselves in unfamiliar situations that require deep subject matter expertise, such as a transformation that supports a specialized function. It's these kinds of transformations that can be high-risk because they are complex from both a technology and business perspective.

These transformations require help translating from within the business team. Let's return to the case study of the financial recordkeeping implementation.

The project manager identified the need for a business representative from within the finance team.

This finance professional provided much-needed support as a liaison to peers within the finance function. They supported the project manager by:

This liaison to the finance function served as a business change lead. They effectively supported the project manager through a regular rhythm of involving stakeholders that reduced surprises, which are the typical cause of frustration for users. This person was also the "go to" coordinator within the function whenever people had questions. It saved the project manager hours!

By providing regular updates through multiple channels (meetings, hallway conversations), the liaison kept the transformation top-of-mind, making it harder for people to ignore or forget. This is an example of the salience principle from behavioral science.

What risks were reduced and costs avoided?

This transformation avoided:

Program leaders who deliver successfully look for resources within the team to help manage stakeholders, a somewhat less tangible type of change activity that supports building clarity during the messy middle of [transformations].

The business change lead role is one where transformation builds capabilities while improving people-related outcomes.

 The behavioral science behind targeted transformation strategies

Each of these five strategies works because it leverages how people actually make decisions—not how we wish they would.

Traditional change management assumes people are rational actors who will adopt new systems once they understand the benefits. Behavioral science shows us that's not how humans work.

Here's the behavioral science principle behind each strategy and why it improves transformation execution: 

Strategy 1: Gather feedback to strategically influence people

Behavioral principle: Social proof

When leaders see that most finance team members lack confidence in the project, it creates urgency to address the gap because humans are influenced by what the majority thinks and feels.

Why it works: People look to others to determine what's normal, acceptable, or risky. When survey data shows widespread concern, it becomes impossible for leaders to dismiss as isolated complaints. The collective voice creates pressure to act.

Secondary principle: Loss aversion — Highlighting the risk of a single point of failure frames the problem as a potential loss (project failure), which motivates action more powerfully than potential gains.

Strategy 2: Front-load organizational change activities

Behavioral principle: Friction reduction (ease)

By identifying early that users would need to check two systems for pay information, the team reduced cognitive friction and designed clearer pathways before frustration could build.

Why it works: When a behavior requires more effort, people avoid it—even if it's beneficial. Every extra click, system, or decision point increases friction. By mapping these friction points early, teams can design them out before users experience frustration.

Secondary principle: Mental models — Starting conversations early helped uncover how people currently think about their roles and processes, allowing the team to design changes that align with (rather than fight against) existing mental models.

Strategy 3: Design project team activities as on-the-job learning

Behavioral principle: Capability (COM-B Model)

The watch one-do one-teach one approach systematically builds psychological capability (confidence) and physical capability (skills), which are prerequisites for behavior change.

Why it works: The COM-B model shows that behavior requires three elements: Capability, Opportunity, and Motivation. Most transformations focus only on motivation (the business case). This strategy builds capability through progressive skill development, making adoption feel achievable rather than overwhelming.

Secondary principle: Identity and social proof — When workstream leads became visible experts to their peers, it reinforced their identity as go-to resources, making it socially normal to seek their help.

Strategy 4: Involve users to avoid surprises

Behavioral principle: Endowment effect and ownership

When users provide input early that influences decisions, they feel psychological ownership of the solution, making them more likely to support and adopt it.

Why it works: People value things more highly when they feel ownership of them. The endowment effect shows that once people feel something is "theirs," they're reluctant to give it up. Early involvement creates this sense of ownership before the system even launches.

Secondary principle: Present bias and temporal discounting — Preview demos make future benefits feel more immediate and tangible, reducing the tendency to discount future value in favor of current habits.

Strategy 5: Influence from within the project team

Behavioral principle: Messenger effect (trusted source)

The finance liaison was a trusted peer (credible messenger) from within the function, making their communication more persuasive than messages from external project managers or IT teams.

Why it works: We're more likely to believe and act on information from people we trust and perceive as "like us." The messenger matters as much as the message. A finance professional explaining changes to other finance professionals carries more weight than an IT project manager delivering the same information.

Secondary principle: Salience — By providing regular updates through multiple channels (meetings, hallway conversations), the liaison kept the transformation top-of-mind, making it harder for people to ignore or forget.

Why behavioral science improves transformation execution

These aren't just "soft skills" or "nice to have" activities. Each strategy directly addresses documented behavioral barriers that cause transformations to fail:

→ Social proof and loss aversion overcome resistance and create urgency

→ Friction reduction makes new behaviors easier than old habits

→ Capability building ensures people can actually perform new behaviors

→ Ownership and endowment turn skeptics into advocates

→ Trusted messengers make change feel safe rather than threatening

When you design transformation strategies around how people actually make decisions, you stop fighting human nature and start working with it.

That's how you improve transformation execution and achieve 80-90% adoption rates instead of the 30% average.

Improve transformation execution by doing more with less

Program leaders who want to improve transformation execution look for ways to increase the probability that things will be delivered on time, on budget, and meet quality expectations.

In current environments, that's even more challenging. But constraints are also an opportunity to look at how to do things differently.

These five case studies show how to improve transformation execution and do more with less by:

The days of using a one-size-fits-all approach to organizational change are over. The trends of project-based change are to do more with less. That helps teams be strategic and nimble using targeted approaches.

Learn how to apply these strategies in The changecapable™ Leadership Program

Want to improve transformation execution using these strategies and more?

The changecapable™ Leadership Program is a 16-week peer-based group cohort that helps program leaders and project managers systematically apply targeted change strategies to their real transformations.

In the program, you'll:

The program runs each fall.

Learn about The changecapable™ Leadership Program and join the waitlist for Fall 2026 →

Updated April 1, 2026, for references and program terminology consistency