Organizations are moving through constant waves of transformation, from AI adoption to shifts in how work gets done. These shifts bring opportunity, but they also test an organization’s ability to adapt and support its people. The latest research gives a clear view of how well companies are managing that challenge.
In the sections ahead, you will find data on change success rates, leadership influence, employee experience, communication quality, change fatigue, and financial results. The goal is simple: help you use credible evidence to strengthen your approach to change.
10 most interesting change management statistics in the U.S. (2024-2025)
- Good change management increases success rates from 13% to 88%.
- Only 32% of change initiatives fully succeed — meaning 2 out of 3 fail or underperform.
- Organizations strong in change capability achieve +6% revenue in one year vs. –30% for weak performers.
- 73% of organizations are at or beyond “change saturation.”
- Managers drive 70% of the variance in team engagement — yet only 27% of managers are engaged themselves.
- 64% of U.S. employees feel overwhelmed by the amount of change.
- Organizations with excellent sponsors succeed 79% of the time vs. 27% with weak sponsors.
- 45% of employees say organizational change increases workload, and 43% say it increases stress.
- Disengaged employees cost the global economy $9.6 trillion — 9% of global GDP.
- Change accelerators generate 2.6× more revenue growth and 32+ point profit swings.
40+ change management statistics
How often do change initiatives succeed or fail
Projects with excellent change management succeed (meet or exceed objectives) ~88% of the time, contrasted with only about 13% success where change management is weak. This gap shows how a structured approach to people and change can dramatically alter project outcomes.
Source: Prosci
A 2024–2025 research indicates only ~32% of change initiatives are clearly successful – meaning roughly two-thirds either fail or underperform. For many organizations, this means change efforts consume resources without delivering the expected return.
Source: Gartner
A global analysis of ~600 organizations found that so-called “change accelerators” (organizations rated high on change effectiveness) achieved one-year revenue change of +6% vs. –30% for below-average peers; three-year growth of +4% vs –7%. These numbers highlight how stronger change capability links directly to sustained financial performance.
Source: WTW
U.S. project and transformation context
Data in 2024 reported that hybrid delivery approaches rose to 31% of organizations in 2023 (from ~20% in 2020), reflecting how organizations are adapting to changing delivery models. This shift requires project teams to rethink collaboration, planning, and stakeholder engagement.
Source: PMI
It also notes that 61% of project professionals now work remotely at least part-time, adding complexity to how change is coordinated and sustained. Leaders must now rely more on clarity, digital tools, and intentional communication to keep people aligned.
Source: PMI
Key takeaway: The baseline odds of failure for change initiatives remain high, but disciplined change management around people, process, and leadership can dramatically improve results.
Statistics on leadership, sponsorship, and ownership of change
Projects with very effective executive sponsors succeed ~79% of the time, compared with only 27% when sponsors are ineffective. This gap shows how sponsorship quality can make or break major initiatives.
Source: Prosci
Recent data found that only about 25% of organizations say that managing change is a major strength of their senior leadership. In practice, many leadership teams are steering transformation without the skills and discipline that change demands.
Source: WTW
Another report found that change-accelerating organizations (with high leadership clarity) outperform others markedly: 90% of employees at those firms say their leadership has a clear vision, vs. 73% at transitional organizations. Employees respond to clear, consistent direction, and that clarity shows up in performance.
Source: WTW
Key takeaway: Leadership and sponsorship are not “nice to have”. They are core drivers of change success, and boards increasingly expect CEOs to build real change capability.
Statistics on employee experience, engagement, and resistance during change
Engagement and well-being under continuous change
According to the data, only 21% of employees globally are engaged – underscoring a low baseline for human adaptability in change. This means most employees start large transformations already feeling disconnected from their work.
Source: Gallup
A survey found that 63% of U.S. employees experienced at least one change in the past year; yet 34% say the change “wasn’t worth the effort”. Many employees see change as disruption rather than improvement.
Source: Eagle Hill Consulting
That same survey revealed 46% say change increased their efficiency, 43% say it increased focus on organizational goals – but only 25% say their organization is effective at managing change. The benefits are visible, yet weak change capability erodes confidence and long-term support.
Source: Eagle Hill Consulting
Data on workload, stress, and perceived support
Recent data shows 45% of employees say organizational change increased their workload, and 43% say it increased stress; 62% say their manager did not lighten their workload to accommodate learning and adjustment. Another 23% say that the change has made their job harder. This combination drives fatigue and makes it harder for people to adopt new ways of working.
Source: Eagle Hill Consulting
Engagement as a driver of change success
Based on reports that employee engagement is among the top three contributors to change success, 73% of organizations say they are “near, at, or beyond change saturation.“ High engagement becomes a protective factor as organizations push close to the limits of what people can absorb.
Source: Prosci
Managers account for 70% of the variance in team engagement, and only 27% of managers globally are engaged. This means improving manager support and clarity can quickly change how teams experience change.
Key takeaway: Organizations may launch many changes, but if the employee experience is ignored, including workload, stress, clarity, and support, the return on investment will suffer.
Stats on change communication and employee voice
How employees rate change communication
In a leadership survey, 35% of U.S. workers said they dealt with poor or ineffective management in the past year, and 34% reported the same about senior leaders. These perceptions signal a trust and communication gap that directly shapes how change messages are received.
Source: SHRM
57% of employees say their voice is heard in what changes are needed; only 40% feel heard in how changes are rolled out; just 33% feel their voice matters in prioritizing change initiatives. When employees feel excluded from decisions about change, their willingness to support it falls.
Source: Eagle Hill Consulting
Preferred senders and communication effectiveness
Employees prefer senior executives to communicate the why of change, and direct supervisors to communicate the what and how. Matching the message to the right sender helps people connect strategy with day-to-day action.
Source: Prosci
Key takeaway: Communication matters – but it’s not only about volume; it’s about who says what, when, how frequently, and whether employee feedback loops exist.
Statistics on change management fatigue, burnout, and capacity for change
U.S. change fatigue and burnout
A study found 64% of U.S. employees say they are overwhelmed by the amount of change at work. With this level of strain, even well-planned changes can meet resistance simply because people are exhausted.
Source: LinkedIn
Among employees who report change fatigue, 26% are considering finding a new job; 36% say they feel more tired or stressed at work. If organizations ignore fatigue, they increase both turnover risk and day-to-day performance issues.
Change volume vs. employee capacity
63% of employees experienced at least one major change in the past year, but only 25% say their organization manages change effectively, and only 24% say change is executed in a way that makes it easy to embrace. Many employees feel that change is constant, yet poorly supported.
Source: Eagle Hill Consulting
73% of organizations are “near, at, or beyond change saturation” – a state where human capacity for additional change is strained. At this point, adding new initiatives without reducing others can trigger fatigue, pushback, or quiet disengagement.
Source: Prosci
Key takeaway: Change is about what you change and how much capacity your people and organization have to absorb it. Ignoring saturation and fatigue is a common pitfall.
Stats on business impact and ROI of change management
Revenue, profitability, and performance
Research shows organizations rated as “change accelerators” generate ~2.6× more revenue growth than organizations with below-average change management. Strong change capability becomes a clear competitive advantage in tight markets.
Source: WTW
Their data also show major performance deltas: one-year revenue change +6% vs –30%; three-year revenue +4% vs –7%; gross profit margin 19% vs –13%. These gaps show how disciplined change management can reshape performance over both the short and long term.
Source: WTW
Broader global data from a source: disengaged employees cost the global economy an estimated US$9.6 trillion, roughly 9% of global GDP. Poor engagement during change is not just a cultural issue; it has a direct and massive financial impact.
Source: Gallup
Project-level benefits
A study finds that with excellent change management, projects are nearly 5× more likely to finish on or ahead of schedule and ~1.5× more likely to stay on or under budget compared with poor change management. These gains translate into faster benefits, fewer delays, and less budget pressure.
Source: Prosci
In the same study, success rates jump from 13% (poor change mgmt) to 88% (excellent change mgmt). This difference alone shows why investment in change capability quickly pays for itself.
Source: Prosci
Key takeaway: Change management is not a cost center. It is a value lever that supports revenue, profits, project success, and talent retention.
Digital transformation, AI, and the future of organizational change
Transformation intensity
90% of firms are undergoing some form of transformation, and 1 in 4 of change initiatives fail. Transformation has become standard, yet a significant share of programs still miss their targets.
Source: McKinsey, The Grossman Group
90% of employees at change-accelerating organizations say leadership had a clear vision, vs 73% at transitional organizations. A clear vision gives people a sense of purpose and direction during demanding change.
Source: WTW
Workforce and work design shifts
Hybrid delivery approaches rose to 60% usage in 2024; remote project professionals account for 13%. Change leaders now need approaches that work across in-person, hybrid, and fully remote teams.
Source: Zoom
Data shows only 21% of employees globally engaged, 33% thriving. Suggests many workers are still disconnected even as change accelerates. Without stronger engagement, organizations will struggle to sustain the pace of digital and AI-driven change.
Source: Gallup
Key takeaway: The pace and volume of change in AI, digital, and hybrid work continue to rise, and organizations need stronger change capacity, agility, and sustained engagement to keep up.
Conclusion
Across data on workforce engagement, leadership capability, and project outcomes, the message for U.S. organizations is clear. Change is no longer a periodic event. It has become a core operating condition. The real test is how well organizations sustain performance, protect employee capacity, and build long-term adaptability as change accelerates.
Employees report saturation, leaders doubt their change capability, and many initiatives fall short of their objectives. At the same time, organizations that invest in disciplined, people-centered change management see up to 5× better project outcomes and 2.6× higher revenue growth.
This creates a straightforward mandate. Treat change capability as a core business competency, not an afterthought. Strengthen sponsorship, align communication with employee needs, protect realistic workloads, track change saturation, build coaching skills in managers, and base decisions on real employee experience rather than assumptions.
Pressures from AI, digital reinvention, new work models, and economic uncertainty will continue to grow over the next two years. Organizations that build strong capability in change leadership, change readiness, and employee-centered implementation will reduce risk, innovate faster, execute strategy more reliably, and retain the talent needed for the future.
