# Manufacturing Change Readiness Assessment > Source: https://netray.co/tools/manufacturing-change-readiness-assessment > Publisher: Netray (netray.co), AI and integration engineering for ERP and manufacturing systems. > Section: Free Tools ## Short answer Ten questions on sponsorship, capacity, data, skills and past change history, scored into a readiness band with recommended actions. ## Category manufacturing ## Audience - Plant manager - COO - Transformation lead ## Tool **Kind:** assessment **Questions:** #### How visible and active is executive sponsorship of the change? **Options:** ##### No named sponsor **Score:** 0 ##### Named sponsor, rarely involved **Score:** 1 ##### Sponsor attends reviews **Score:** 3 ##### Sponsor removes blockers weekly and communicates the why **Score:** 4 #### Do supervisors and team leaders understand and support the change? **Options:** ##### Unaware **Score:** 0 ##### Informed but sceptical **Score:** 1 ##### Mostly supportive **Score:** 3 ##### Involved in design and act as champions **Score:** 4 #### Is there spare capacity for people to work on the change? **Options:** ##### None, everyone is firefighting **Score:** 0 ##### Only after hours **Score:** 1 ##### Some time is protected **Score:** 3 ##### Backfill or dedicated roles are in place **Score:** 4 #### How did the last major change at this site go? **Options:** ##### Failed or was abandoned **Score:** 0 ##### Delivered late with low adoption **Score:** 1 ##### Delivered with some adoption gaps **Score:** 3 ##### Delivered and sustained **Score:** 4 #### How reliable is the data the change depends on (items, BOMs, routings, inventory)? **Options:** ##### Widely distrusted **Score:** 0 ##### Known issues, no cleanup plan **Score:** 1 ##### Cleanup under way **Score:** 3 ##### Owned, measured and trusted **Score:** 4 #### Are the benefits defined, measured and owned? **Options:** ##### Not defined **Score:** 0 ##### Described in general terms **Score:** 1 ##### Defined with targets **Score:** 3 ##### Targets, baselines and named owners **Score:** 4 #### Is there a training plan tied to roles, not just a go-live session? **Options:** ##### No plan **Score:** 0 ##### One session before go-live **Score:** 1 ##### Role based plan drafted **Score:** 3 ##### Role based, with practice and post go-live support **Score:** 4 #### How many other major initiatives compete for the same people? **Options:** ##### More than four **Score:** 0 ##### Three or four **Score:** 1 ##### One or two **Score:** 3 ##### None, or sequenced with clear priorities **Score:** 4 #### Is there a way for employees to raise concerns and see them answered? **Options:** ##### No **Score:** 0 ##### Suggestion box only **Score:** 1 ##### Regular forums, uneven follow-up **Score:** 3 ##### Visible log with answers and actions **Score:** 4 #### Is there a fallback plan if the change underperforms in the first 90 days? **Options:** ##### No **Score:** 0 ##### Informal ideas **Score:** 1 ##### Documented but untested **Score:** 3 ##### Documented with triggers and owners **Score:** 4 **Bands:** #### Not ready **Min:** 0 **Max:** 39 **Verdict:** Starting now would likely stall or be rejected by the organisation. **Recommendations:** - Secure a visible sponsor and clear competing initiatives first - Fix the largest data trust problem before design starts - Run a small pilot on one cell to build credibility #### Partly ready **Min:** 40 **Max:** 64 **Verdict:** The foundation exists but several gaps would cause delay or poor adoption. **Recommendations:** - Protect time for key users with backfill - Define benefits with owners and baselines - Involve supervisors in design, not just rollout #### Ready with risks **Min:** 65 **Max:** 84 **Verdict:** Proceed, but manage the weak areas explicitly in the plan. **Recommendations:** - Add the lowest scoring areas to the risk register - Plan post go-live support for at least 90 days - Agree fallback triggers before launch #### Well prepared **Min:** 85 **Max:** 100 **Verdict:** Conditions for a successful change are strong. Focus on execution discipline. **Recommendations:** - Keep the benefits tracking live after go-live - Capture lessons for the next initiative - Avoid adding scope late ## Content **Intro:** Most failed plant transformations fail on people and sequencing, not technology. This short assessment scores ten of the factors that most often decide whether a change sticks: sponsorship, capacity, data, training, benefits and history. **Sections:** #### How to use it **Body:** Have the project lead, a production supervisor and a finance or HR representative each complete it independently, then compare answers. The differences are often more informative than the total, because a sponsor may rate support as strong while supervisors rate it as weak. Take the lowest scoring questions into your project plan as named risks with owners. #### Why these ten factors **Body:** They reflect common change management models such as Kotter's steps and ADKAR: a clear reason, visible leadership, ability to take part, reinforcement and measurable results. Data trust and capacity are added because manufacturing changes such as a new ERP, MES or automation cell depend heavily on item, BOM and routing accuracy and on key users being released from daily work. #### Reading the score **Body:** The score is the share of the maximum points. A plant in the middle band can still proceed, but should plan for longer adoption. A low score does not mean the initiative is wrong; it means the order of work should change. Often a small visible win, such as fixing one data set, raises readiness faster than more communication. #### Common mistakes **Body:** The usual errors are mistaking announcement for communication, scheduling training only before go-live and assuming the same people can run production and the project. Another is assessing once and filing the result. Repeat the assessment at the design, pre-launch and 90-day points to see whether risks are closing. **Cta:** If the change involves ERP data or reporting, Netray can help assess data readiness before design. The assessment itself needs no contact with us. **Faq:** #### Is this a validated psychometric instrument? **Answer:** No. It is a practical checklist in question form, based on common change management factors. Use it to structure a conversation and find risks, not as a scientific measure. #### Who should answer the questions? **Answer:** A mix of sponsor, project lead, front line supervisor and a support function such as HR or finance. Compare their answers. Large gaps between levels are the finding. #### Can it be used for lean programs, not only IT? **Answer:** Yes. The factors apply to any significant change in how work is done, including lean daily management, automation cells, new ERP or a reorganisation. #### How often should I repeat it? **Answer:** At design, before go-live and about 90 days after. Trends matter more than a single score. ## Search terms change readiness assessment manufacturing, organizational change readiness checklist, digital transformation readiness plant, change management assessment operations, is my plant ready for change, transformation readiness scorecard --- Talk to an engineer: https://netray.co/contact?intent=erp_ai | Machine catalog: https://netray.co/agent/catalog.json