The Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM):

A Model for Change in Individuals

Reprinted with permission from the chapter entitled " Professional Development for Science Education: A Critical
and Immediate Challenge," by Susan Loucks-Horsley. National Standards & the Science Curriculum, edited by
Rodger Bybee of the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co., 1996. For
more information call 1-800-KH-BOOKS (542-6657).

Another framework that has implications for the practices of professional development
acknowledges that learning brings change, and supporting people in change is critical for
learning to "take hold." One model for change in individuals, the Concerns-Based Adoption
Model, applies to anyone experiencing change, that is, policy makers, teachers, parents,
students (Hall & Hord, 1987; Hord, Rutherford, Huling-Austin, & Hall, 1987; Loucks-Horsley &
Stiegelbauer, 1991). The model (and other developmental models of its type) holds that people
considering and experiencing change evolve in the kinds of questions they ask and in their use
of whatever the change is. In general, early questions are more self-oriented: What is it? and
How will it affect me? When these questions are resolved, questions emerge that are more
task-oriented: How do I do it? How can I use these materials efficiently? How can I organize
myself? and Why is it taking so much time? Finally, when self- and task concerns are largely
resolved, the individual can focus on impact. Educators ask: Is this change working for
students? and Is there something that will work even better?
The concerns model identifies and provides ways to assess seven stages of concern, which are
displayed in Table 3. These stages have major implications for professional development. First,
they point out the importance of attending to where people are and addressing the questions
they are asking when they are asking them. Often, we get to the how-to-do-it before addressing
self-concerns. We want to focus on student learning before teachers are comfortable with the
materials and strategies. The kinds and content of professional- development opportunities can
be informed by ongoing monitoring of the concerns of teachers. Second, this model suggests
the importance of paying attention to implementation for several years, because it takes at
least three years for early concerns to be resolved and later ones to emerge. We know that
teachers need to have their self-concerns addressed before they are ready to attend hands-on
workshops. We know that management concerns can last at least a year, especially when
teachers are implementing a school year's worth of new curricula and also when new
approaches to teaching require practice and each topic brings new surprises. We also know
that help over time is necessary to work the kinks out and then to reinforce good teaching once
use of the new practice smoothes out. Finally, with all the demands on teachers, it is often the
case that once their practice becomes routine, they never have the time and space to focus on
whether and in what ways students are learning. This often requires some organizational
priority setting, as well as stimulating interest and concern about specific student learning
outcomes. We also know that everyone has concerns-for example, administrators, parents,
policy makers, professional developers-and that acknowledging these concerns and addressing
them are critical to progress in a reform effort.

Professional developers who know and use the concerns model design experiences for
educators that are sensitive to the questions they are asking when they are asking them.
Learning experiences evolve over time, take place in different settings, rely on varying degrees
of external expertise, and change with participant needs. Learning experiences for different role
groups vary in who provides them, what information they share, and how they are asked to
engage. For instance, addressing parents' and policy makers' question "How will it affect me?"
obviously will look different. The strength of the concerns model is in its reminder to pay
attention to individuals and their various needs for information, assistance, and moral support.
Traditionally, those who provided professional development to teachers were considered to be
trainers. Now, their roles have broadened immensely. Like teachers in science classrooms, they
have to be facilitators, assessors, resource brokers, mediators of learning, designers, and
coaches, in addition to being trainers when appropriate. Practitioners of professional
development, often teachers themselves, have a new and wider variety of practices to choose
from in meeting the challenging learning needs of educators in today's science reform efforts.

Typical Expressions of Concern about an Innovation/ Table 3.

Stage of Concern

Expression of Concern

6. Refocusing

I have some ideas about something that would work even better.

5. Collaboration

How can I relate what I am doing to what others are doing?

4. Consequence

How is my use affecting learners? How can I refine it to have more

impact?

3. Management

I seem to be spending all my time getting materials ready.

2. Personal

How will using it affect me?

1. Informational

I would like to know more about it.

0. Awareness

I am not concerned about it.

Levels of Use of the Innovation: Typical Behaviors

Levels of Use

Behavioral Indicators of Level

VI. Renewal

The user is seeking more effective alternatives to the established use of

the innovation.

V. Integration

The user is making deliberate efforts to coordinate with others in using

the innovation.

IVB. Refinement

The user is making changes to increase outcomes.

IVA. Routine

The user is making few or no changes and has an established pattern of

use.

III. Mechanical

The user is making changes to better organize use of the innovation.

II. Preparation

The user has definite plans to begin using the innovation.

0I. Orientation

The user is taking the initiative to learn more about the innovation.

0 . Non-Use

The user has no interest, is taking no action.

From Taking Charge of Change by Shirley M. Hord, William L. Rutherford, Leslie Huling-Austin, and Gene E. Hall,
1987. Published by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (703) 549-9110 Reprinted with
permission.

CBAM Assumptions and Assertions*

(based upon the implementation of innovations in colleges and school settings)

Change is a process, not an event, and it takes time to institute change;

Individuals must be the focus if change is to be facilitated and institutions will not
change until their members change;
The change process is an extremely personal experience and how it is perceived by the
individual will strongly influence the outcome;
Individuals progress through various stages regarding their emotions and capabilities
relating to the innovation;
The availability of a client-centered diagnostic/prescriptive model can enhance the
individual's facilitation during staff development; and
People responsible for the change process must work in an adaptive and systematic way
where progress needs to be monitored constantly.

The Concerns-Based Adoption Model address each one of these assumptions: the individual's
concerns about the innovation, the particular manner in which the innovation is delivered or
implemented, and the adaptation of the innovation to the individual.

Key messages
Before CBAM, most research on change took a structural approach, identifying markers along
the path to implementation: the announcement of a change effort, then the decision to adopt,
and then preparation and training. The assumption was that once a new practice was
introduced to the workplace through initial publicity and training, its implementation was a fait
accompli.
The CBAM research (complemented by other research of the same time period) changed our
understanding of change in significant ways. Some of the more significant learnings:
Change is a process, not an event. This simply cant be emphasized enough. Subsequent
research on school change has confirmed that changes in classroom practice can take anywhere
from three to five years to be fully implemented. More comprehensive, systemic change
initiatives only begin to take hold in that period of time, because the phenomenon of change
goes far beyond the individual.
Change is a highly personal experience, involving developmental growth in feelings (the
Stages of Concern) and skills (the Levels of Use). More to the point, people need sustained
help along the way if theyre going to fully implement a new idea, and theyll require different
kinds of help as their needs change.
An example: Several years ago, we watched two of our friends run in the Boston Marathon.
One friend, John, was using the race to qualify for the U.S. Olympic trials. When he passed us,
he was maintaining a world-class pace. We held out orange slices for him but it was clear there
was little real help we could offer. We couldnt possibly have offered the kind of elite-level
advice or coaching that a runner of his caliber might have found useful at that point if, in
fact, he needed any help at all.
About 90 minutes later, our late friend (and a friend and heroine to all staff developers) JudyArin Krupp came by. Delighted to see friendly faces on a miserably cold and wet day, she urged
us to walk along with her for several hundred yards. We passed along warm hugs and a dry
sweatshirt before she set off to finish the course.
Clearly these two, while running the same race, had different paces, different reasons for being
there, and vastly different needs for support and encouragement along the way.
Personal concerns are legitimate. Too often, personal concerns are dismissed as irrelevant or,
at worst, the response of the dreaded Resister. But the fact is that resistance to change
whether demonstrated by asking hard questions, dragging of heels, or outright belligerence
is a natural phenomenon. Its normal to want to know how something new will affect you, and
to feel a threat to your competence, comfort, control, and confidence.
How long someones personal concerns remain, however, is another matter. A staff developer
can help diminish resistance by applying knowledge of Stages of Concern. The critical point here
is that decision makers who are convinced that something is good have already gone through

the four general phases of concerns, from Awareness to Impact. They often need to be
reminded that others must be afforded the same process, because:
"Every attempt to preempt conflict, argument, protest by rational planning can only be
abortive...When those who have the power to manipulate changes...shrug off opposition as
ignorance and prejudice, they express a profound contempt for the meaning of lives other than
their own....(They) have already assimilated these changes to their purposes, and worked out a
reformulation which makes sense to them.... If they deny others the chance to do the same,
they treat them as puppets dangling by the threads of their own conceptions." (Marris, 1975, p.
166).
References
Hall, G.E. & Hord, S.M., (1987). Change in schools: Facilitating the process. Albany, NY: State
University of New York Press.
Marris, P. (1975). Loss and change. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday.

What is the CBAM Stages of

Concern Model?
The CONCERNS-BASED ADOPTION
MODEL (CBAM) is a very wellresearched model which describes how
people develop as they learn about an
innovation and the stages of that
process. Actually, the CBAM is a
complex, multi-part system, of which
the "Stages of Concern" is but one part.
However, it is the one part which the
author most prefers and with which he
has the most successful experiences.
In fact, the author has used the Stages
of Concern hundreds of times for
planning mentoring and other staff
development programs and activities of every imaginable kind since 1986 when he first was
trained on the CBAM model. He can state with confidence that you will be very successful if you
base professional development needs assessment and program and mentor activity planning on
the CBAM stages of concern.
The CBAM was developed at the University of Texas - Austin. If you would like to read about
the CBAM and learn how to use the whole model, consider obtaining the book Taking Charge
of Change, which was published by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development (ASCD) at www.ascd.org and written by Shirley Hord, Gene Hall, et. al. (1987)

Reference to the adjacent figure shows that the Stages of Concern defines human learning and
development as going through 7 stages, during which a person's focus or concern shifts in
rather predictable ways. To understand this process, start at the bottom of the image with
"awareness" and read up each step plus the statement(s) next to each step. Those statements
are similar to what people may say when they are concerned about an innovation at that level
of development.
As you read about these 7 stages, note that:

The lower three stages are focused on oneself, a clue of which might be the use of "I"
and "me", as in "I am frustrated".
The middle stage (management) is focused on mastery of tasks to the point they
become routines and are easier to do, a clue of which might be the use of "it" or a
reference to the activity, not the self. An example that a person is struggling at the
management level could be a statement like, "Prioritizing my use of time and the
management of paper work is killing me!"
The upper Stages of Concern are focused on the results and impact of the activity, a clue
of which might be the use of pronouns which refer to clients, protgs, or participants
who receive the benefits of the activity. Examples might include, "The students are
really learning better since I started using that strategy." Or, "Customers seem to
appreciate the personal attention and are buying more products."

Linking the Stages of Concern and the "Bridge"

You may have seen this graphic on
an earlier web page.
The "Bridge" describes the
sequence necessary for people to
implement in practice what they
have learned in training, and the
role of mentoring in that process. It
is a critical foundation concept on
which all developmental support
efforts should be based.
When we compare the Stages of
Concern model to the "Bridge",
notice what we learn:

The lower Stages of Concern occur at the training side of the "Bridge":
o awareness (what is the innovation?)
o information (how does the innovation work?)
o personal (developing a plan to use it)

Also occurring at the training side of the "Bridge" are any skill development aspects of
the training, which are the beginning of the management Stage of Concern, such as:
o demonstrations
o participant practice during the training, and...
o corrective feed back on the practice the trainer may give participants.
When the participant is in their own setting, trying to independently implement their
training and build their mastery to a routine level of task management (Stage of
Concern), THAT is when the power of mentoring becomes so critical for participant
success.
If mentoring is provided at this point, participants CAN progress and continue to grow.
If participants are NOT supported:
o they can NOT continue to grow
o implementation problems will often overwhelm them, and..
o the innovative practices will be discarded
o coping strategies which are often poor practice will be adopted.

What Happens When a Person's Individual Learning Needs Are NOT Met?

If a person's needs are addressed at the stage they are at, then they can move to new
levels of practice. When they are open and ready to learn, they will ask questions like
those on the right side of the stages.
When people are overwhelmed or feeling unsuccessful, they are not ready to grow. In
that case they will NOT state responses such as those listed at the level we might
expect. They will be focused at a lower level where they still have concerns.
If their professional development needs remain unmet, they can easily become stuck at
some lower level of development, perhaps even for the rest of their career!

Learning to hear what people say, and interpreting it as a level on this model can help us learn
to hear their level of need for support and ensure that our assistance is always on target.
Further, it ensures that employees won't get stuck and will continue to develop over time,
eventually reaching the collaboration level, which is the highest level of practice, the level we
want them to reach.

The Main Obstacle to Development

The traditional structures and norms of organizations have not facilitated employee
development beyond the Consequence level. That is because the time for collaborative
employee learning has always had to compete (usually unsuccessfully) with the time for work
and productivity. At the consequence level an individual, isolated employee is focused on the
impact of their work on the people they are supposed to effect (think students, clients, or
customers). That is, of course, not a bad place to be! However, isolated employees in
traditional, non-collaborative organizations are not likely to reach higher levels of professional
practice and increased results because they are denied the day-to-day time needed to interact
with and learn from their peers and colleagues.

The lack of time and opportunity to learn and practice collaborative work has at least three
negative results:

It maintains the current disposition toward isolated figure it out on your own practice.
It prevents employees from effectively functioning like a team in which the diverse
strengths of the team members can be used to increase the impact of that team on the
desired results.
It denies employees the means of refining their work strategies and practices from a
level of competence at which the focus is primarily on activity and completing tasks, to
a level of excellence where the focus is on the results and effectiveness of doing those
tasks.

The Primary Goal of All Professional Development Activities

The goal of all professional development programs should be to help people reach the
collaboration level of practice, such as illustrated on the Stages of Concern.
This is especially critical for a mentoring program which targets new employees because the
beginning of a career is the very best opportunity we have to change the culture of the
organization and our professional relationships to those of the learning community we know
our organizations need to become. Proactive, powerful mentoring programs intentionally make
use of this incredible opportunity. Therefore, the real goal of every mentoring program is not
establishment of mentoring relationships. It is that those relationships help people to learn to
work together better in collaboration, and through that, improve their own performance and
that of the students.

Using the CBAM Stages of Concern to Structure Needs Assessment & Program
Evaluation
The program evaluation process and needs assessments, are terrific tools to help you better
use mentoring to take full advantage of the opportunity to improve the culture of the
organizations. In addition to seeking information on content, the items in any needs assessment
should be written specifically to relate to the lower six of the seven stages in the CBAM Stages
of Concern model. By doing so, you not only gain answers about the specific content that was
the focus of your question, but you can also collect data which will allow you to know and show
others powerful patterns such as:

The levels of professional development and practice attained by unsupported new

employees
The levels of professional practice and development attained by the employees who
have been supported by a strong mentoring program.

This is terrific evidence that your program is effective.

Predicted CBAM Results You Can Expect to Achieve

Based on the author's mentor program evaluation experience, a safe prediction is that you will
find the following to be true. Your should try to demonstrate similar kinds of findings in your
own program:

Experienced but new employees hired by your organization from other settings will
need about a year to move through the stages to the consequence level of the CBAM.
Without support, those new but experienced employees will not move beyond the
consequence level.
With strong mentoring support, new but experienced employees can move to the
collaborative level in about two years.
Unsupported beginning employees (with a year or less experience) who you manage to
retain, will require at least three years to reach the consequence level, and they will not
progress beyond it.
Unsupported employees who are NOT retained during the first three years do so
because they have only attained the management level of the CBAM and feel their work
has little impact and value. They leave because they feel unsuccessful as employees.
With strong orientation, training, mentoring, AND other such program support,
beginning employees can move beyond the consequence level to the collaborative level
in about three years. Notice that this is a level of practice that many experienced
employees never reach at all!
Once employees attain the collaboration level and work at that level for two years or
more, they know its value and, given the opportunities and time to maintain and live
out that disposition, will continue to seek and give collaborative support among their
colleagues.
However, WHEN the expectation and collaboration of a formal mentoring relationship is
eventually withdrawn, and IF there are no formal expectations and programs in place to
continually sanction and structure collaboration, the daily press of the work will easily
overcome the desire to reflect and grow. The reflection and growth will decrease due to
three factors:
o A lack of collaborative activities and the inherent discipline they provide to make
the time for reflection, goal setting, and action planning to attain the goals
o The overwhelming needs of the customer/client which the person feels called to
serve
o The inherently selfish feelings that attend meeting one's own needs for
professional growth, rather than serving client/customer needs.

Of course, if no formal collaboration program exists after mentoring, there will probably be no
CBAM-based data to show you this latter pattern. Since you probably must demonstrate the
need to support a solution which keeps the collaboration going after formal mentoring is
concluded, you will need to collect data that demonstrate reduced collaboration and the
attendant drop off in reflective activities.
A smart organization will not risk losing the employee leadership, reflective dispositions,
collaborative skills and improved productivity and results that mentoring will have developed.
That is why, in addition to training and mentoring, smart organizations provide time and

expectations for peer coaching and mentoring for experienced employees, teaming, and many
other collaborative opportunities for employees to work together to improve their own
learning, role effectiveness, and results.

Using the CBAM & Data to Plan & Provide Program Level Staff Development &
Individual Mentoring
Using the Stages of Concern part of the CBAM for needs assessment and/or program evaluation
are not the only application for this powerful model. Once you have the assessment data, you
can also use the data and the model to plan the staff development as well as to guide the
mentoring of each protg, AND to monitor the learning results, levels of growth, and
implementation of those innovations. (Think Adoption as in CBAM)
The trick in using the CBAM for planning of mentoring and staff development programs, such as
training, is that you need experience from having used the CBAM before to be able to predict
how long it will take people to move through the stages to the levels you want them to achieve.
Therefore, it will be difficult for you to predict and plan for the duration and kind of support
these efforts will require. Here are some of the variables:
1. Prior experience with the innovation - Collecting CBAM data on this is essentially done to
establish the starting point for the mentoring and/or staff development program. If folks have
had exposure to an innovation, or even tried to apply prior learning about it in their work, that
will greatly impact what they need to learn from your program and mentoring, and where you
should start.
To determine this starting point your program needs to design and implement a needs
assessment regarding the innovations in question and any related topics. The assessment needs
to use questions that specifically are framed by reference to the Stages of Concern. You want to
be able to code their responses to these specific levels so that program content can be targeted
to where the learners are.
2. Organizational agendas or "needs" - Staff development and mentoring should not be built
solely on participant perceived needs, but must also be designed with organizational needs in
mind too. When organizations decide to sponsor a specific innovation, they do so because of
needs they perceive at the individual, group, site, and organizational levels. In one sense,
identifying and responding to these needs is, in a practical sense, almost more important than
responding to individual needs, since organizational support must be maintained to be able to
sustain the individual level of staff development.
The trick here is that organizations cannot be placed on the Stages of Concern model unless you
have a profile of where the people in the organization are. What your needs assessment should
tell you is the range of where people are on the Stages of Concern and the number of people at
each level. That will allow you to plan appropriate staff development for the whole staff and for
sub groups or individuals. If the work is within a mentoring program, this is much easier for
mentors to accomplish, as it is only one person in most cases for which this information is
needed.

3. Creating Readiness to Learn At the Planned Level - For example, if you find that very few
people are at the awareness level, you will plan to start the program at the next level
(informational). However, you will still need to provide some kind of support for those few who
are identified to be at the awareness level. Such a step might include a small group advance
meeting for those so identified to introduce them to the innovation, an informal chat session,
access to a web site or handout which presents the information needed, to expose these few
folks to the innovation and prepare them for the start of the program at the next level of the
CBAM with everyone else. Creating the readiness for learning at the level where the group is, is
what you are trying to do. Again, if the work is within a mentoring program, each mentor will
simply adjust their plans to fit the level of need of their individual protgs.
4. Defining the Goal for a Level to Achieve - There also needs to be some (perhaps executive)
decision about the level on the Stages of Concern model you want participants to attain as a
result of the staff development or mentoring program. That decision should be clearly
discussed and a true consensus attained which is more than just some "OK, OK That's fine" kind
of agreement. Attaining that consensus would require that decision makers first understand the
CBAM Stages of Concern.

Although it may take a year or more of experience to do so, ideally the staff
development plan or mentoring process should attempt to describe the steps you will
go through without linking the progress to specific dates, and should include:
The predicted amount time it will take to go through each of the steps
The points at which you will be able to decide when it is appropriate to change the
content and skills taught in training or mentoring, etc. to focus on the next levels.
I suggest that you can plan a multiple year sequence, and as you follow the process
through, to increase your ability to accurately predict how many people will attain what
level on the model and how long it normally takes.
Further, I suggest that you ascertain additional factors, such as the extent of the
experience of mentors, to determine their impact on participant progress toward the
desired levels on the Stages of Concern.

Simply stated, you should design and implement a developmentally appropriate support
sequence and let peoples' readiness and stage of concern drive when the program or
mentoring shifts its focus, not a calendar or the plan.
MORE Cautions - The assessment of perceived needs is tricky.
You may have missed a very critical word in the title immediately above, "perceived". It is this
concept which makes assessment of needs and design of professional growth activities to met
those needs such a tricky process. Basically, the challenge is that people can only tell you the
needs of which they are aware. Of course, this has implications for assessment of needs for
people at the first Stage of Concern, who YOU know need to learn something but THEY are not
aware of the need yet.

They don't know what they don't know. - Some people do NOT know some of what
they need to know to be able to answer your questions accurately. That is, your data
will contain error, so your mentoring or program must account for that and be prepared

to address the needs of those who will be misplaced in the CBAM planned system. In
that case, you may only discover that the plan based on the needs assessment is not
working after you get into the program.

They know what they need but they won't tell you. - Some will answer your questions
giving you what they think you want to hear, not what they really feel. Try to reduce this
by clearly explaining in advance the need for candor and accurate data so planning
addresses their real needs. However, unless there is trust, this pattern will happen to
some extent anyway.

Therefore, when you develop plans, assume these factors are at work and that they will effect
what you want to happen. Plan an alternative track, a make up session, or an information
meeting in advance of the training. Then during the training or mentoring, specifically ask,
"How many are (or are you) feeling a bit overwhelmed by all this information?" Those who
answer Yes are advised into the alternative session or receive some form of additional support
so that, by the time the whole group is ready for the next class or meeting, so are most of these
"overwhelmed" individuals.
Allow for the fact that people learn at different speeds and in different ways. If you provide
too much info in a verbally focused mode those who need examples, visuals etc. will not end
the meeting at the same place as those whose learning needs were met. In other words, you
must plan the BEST staff development you can that addresses all learner needs IF you expect to
be able to move people along through the program at somewhat near the same pace (which
sure helps in planning and implementing).
Never-the-less, some folks will want to drop out because they feel they can not succeed at the
group's pace. In that case, you can plan program alternatives or one-on-one mentoring to keep
them involved and growing at their own pace.

Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM)

Example Innovation Configuration - Web-Based
Instruction
Component

Learning
Objectives*

Degree of Implementation or Practice

Objective is
stated,
relevant, &
stated in
student terms;

Objective is
stated,
relevant, &
stated in
student terms;

Objective is
stated;
Relevancy is
not clear;
Expected

Objective is not
stated & is not
be relevant;
Expected
outcomes are

Expected
outcomes are
stated &
measurable

Expected
outcomes are
stated but not
measurable

outcomes are
not stated or
measurable

not known

Diagnose
Learner
Needs*

Evaluation is
performed to
determine
difference in
learner's
current levels
and desired
levels for each
learning
objective

Evaluation is
performed to
determine
difference in
learner's
current levels
and desired
levels for
some learning
objectives

Motivation*

WBI fully
incorporates
motivational
theory and
models (e.g.
ARCS)

WBI partially
incorporates
motivational
theory and
models (e.g.
ARCS)

No consideration to motivation is
evidenced in the design

Technology
Usage*

Strengths of
the
technology are
used
appropriately
to support all
other
components;
Technology
weaknesses
are minimized

Strengths of
the
technology are
used
appropriately
to support
some
components;
Technology
weaknesses
are minimized

Strengths of
the technology
are used
appropriately
to support
some
components;
Technology
weaknesses are
not minimized

Learning
Resources &
Strategies

Learning
resources are
identified;
learning
strategies are
defined

Learning
resources are
identified;
learning
strategies are
not defined

Learning resources are not

identified; learning strategies are
not defined

Formative
Evaluation

Formative
evaluations
are provided
to the learner
in a manner

Formative
evaluations
are provided
to the learner
in a manner

No evaluation is performed to
determine learner's current levels

Technology is
used
inappropriately
and does not
support other
components

Formative evaluations are not

provided to the learner

Guided
Practice

that
encourages
learning

that does not

encourage
learning

Guided
practice is
monitored and
feedback is
provided

Guided
practice
monitored;
Feedback not
provided

Guided practice
not monitored; Guided practice
Feedback not
is not provided
provided

Independent

Independent
practice is
Practice
provided

Independent practice is not provided

* Critical components
Adapted from Hord, S. M., Rutherford, William L., Huling-Austin, Leslie and Hall, G. E. (1987).

Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM)

Levels of Use of An Innovation
Level 0

Non-use

Decision Point A
Level I

Orientation

Decision Point B
Level II

Preparation

Decision Point C

Level III

Mechanical
Use

Decision Point D-1

Level IVA

Routine

The individual has little or no knowledge of the innovation, no

involvement with it, and is doing nothing toward becoming
involved.
Takes action to learn more detailed information about the
innovation.
The individual has or is acquiring information about the innovation
and/or has explored its value orientation and what it will require.
Makes a decisions to use the innovation by establishing a time to
begin.
The individual is preparing for the first use of the innovation.
Begins first use of the innovation..
The individual focuses most effort on the short-term, day-to-day use
of the innovation with little time for reflection. Effort is primarily
directed toward mastering tasks required to use the innovation. Use
is often disjointed and superficial.
Routine pattern of use is established.
Use of the innovation is stabilized. Few, if any, changes are being
made in ongoing use. Minimal efforts and thoughts to improve
innovation use or its consequences.

Decision Point D-2

Level IVB

Refinement

Decision Point E

Level V

Integration

Decision Point F

Level VI

Renewal

Changes use of the innovation based on format or informal

evaluation to improve expected benefits.
The innovator varies the use of the innovation to increase the
expected benefits within the immediate sphere of influence.
Variations are based on knowledge of both short and long-term
consequences and benefits.
Initiates changes in the use of the innovation based on input from
and in coordination with colleagues to improve expected benefits.
The innovator is combining own efforts with related activities of
colleagues to achieve a collective impact within the collective
spheres of influence.
Begins exploring alternatives or major modifications to the
innovation presently in use.
The user reevaluates the quality of use of the innovation, seeks
major modifications of, or alternatives to, present innovation to
achieve increased impact, examines new developments in the field,
and explores new goals for self and the larger community.

From Hord, S. M., Rutherford, William L., Huling-Austin, Leslie and Hall, G. E. (1987) p. 55.

Concerns-Based Adoption Model (CBAM)

Change Facilitator Actions to Support Change
Area

Activities

Developing Supportive
Organizational
Arrangements

developing innovation-related policies

establishing global rules
planning
scheduling
staffing
restructuring roles
providing resources

Training

increasing knowledge
developing positive attitudes
teaching innovation-related skills
reviewing information
modeling/demonstrating innovation use
providing feedback on innovation use
clarifying innovation misconceptions

Consultation and
Reinforcement

encouraging in one-on-one situations

promoting innovation in small groups

assisting individuals in solving problems

coaching small groups in innovation use
sharing tips informally
providing personalized technical assistance
communicating and acknowledging successes
reinforcing individuals' attempts to change
providing practical assistance

Monitoring

gathering information
collecting data
assessing innovation knowledge or skills informally
assessing innovation use informally
assessing innovation concerns informally
interpreting information
analyzing/processing data
reporting/sharing data on outcomes

External Communication

describing the innovation

informing others (than users)
making presentations to others (e.g. conferences)
gaining support of constituent groups
gaining support of colleagues
developing public relations campaigns

encouraging others beyond the implementers to adopt

the innovation
broadcasting innovation information
providing demonstrations
marketing the innovation

Dissemination

Adapted from Hord, S. M., Rutherford, William L., Huling-Austin, Leslie and Hall, G. E. (1987)
with additional modifications by Noel LeJeune.