Across industries, project failure remains stubbornly common. Reports from the Project Management Institute show that only about half of all projects meet their original goals. Cost overruns, missed deadlines, and stakeholder resistance persist even in mature organizations with advanced project management offices. While project management has evolved into a well-defined discipline, success is often undermined by one missing capability: the management of people’s adoption and engagement during change.

This human dimension sits at the core of change management. Yet, as recent research by Müge Işık (2024) shows, few organizations have managed to integrate it into their standard project delivery frameworks. Her study, Approach to Change Management in Project Management, provides empirical evidence that only 34 percent of surveyed companies apply structured change management practices in projects. Two-thirds of organizations operate without any formal change management method. The consequence is predictable: projects may deliver on scope but fail to achieve full adoption or realize expected benefits.

At and Change, we see this gap daily in our work with transformation programs worldwide. Technical delivery alone is never enough. Prosci’s global research confirms that projects with excellent change management are seven times more likely to meet objectives than those with poor change management (Prosci, 2023). The challenge, therefore, is not to choose between project management and change management but to bridge them. True project success demands both disciplines working as one integrated system.

The Evidence Gap

Işık’s 2024 study examined the adoption of change management across 32 companies and 384 projects. The findings reveal a clear imbalance between technical project execution and human-focused change practices. Sixty-six percent of companies reported no formal use of change management, while none had implemented it across all projects. Even among those that did, change management was applied in fewer than half of their initiatives.

Larger firms with higher project budgets were more likely to apply change management, primarily because they possessed the financial and human resources to do so. Smaller organizations perceived change management as an added cost or an administrative burden rather than a strategic enabler. Among the barriers identified, 81 percent of respondents said they were “comfortable with current operations,” while 38 percent cited the process as too time-consuming and 29 percent viewed it as costly.

These numbers tell a deeper story. Most project environments still view change management as optional, secondary, or cosmetic. The assumption that technical execution alone ensures success remains widespread. Yet, as Işık’s data shows, even well-planned projects struggle when stakeholders resist, when communication fails, or when teams lack the readiness to adapt.

The study also mapped reasons for resistance under four categories, namely economic, sociological, psychological, and rational. Employees often fear loss of job security, status, or comfort. Others distrust leadership intentions or see little personal benefit in the change. Such insights mirror what Prosci’s ADKAR model has long operationalized: without awareness of the need, desire to participate, knowledge of how to change, ability to implement, and reinforcement to sustain, individuals revert to old habits and projects underdeliver.

In short, Işık’s research quantifies what transformation leaders intuitively know. Projects fail not because of poor planning but because of unaddressed human dynamics.

Prosci’s Perspective

Prosci’s Best Practices in Change Management (12th Edition, 2023) draws on more than 8,000 data points from global organizations. It confirms a consistent pattern: the effectiveness of change management directly correlates with project outcomes. When change management is applied excellently, 80 percent of projects meet or exceed objectives. With poor change management, that success rate falls to 14 percent.

The Prosci Three-Phase Process provides a practical framework for embedding change management into projects:

1. Prepare Approach – Define the change strategy, assess readiness, and secure sponsorship.
2. Manage Change – Develop and execute communication, training, and resistance-management plans aligned with the project schedule.
3. Sustain Outcomes – Reinforce adoption, measure performance, and embed new behaviors into the organization.

Within this process, the ADKAR model translates organizational intent into individual adoption. It shifts change management from theory to practice by guiding people through five outcomes: Awareness, Desire, Knowledge, Ability, and Reinforcement. These stages map neatly to the barriers Işık identified. Economic fears can be mitigated through clear awareness of business rationale. Sociological resistance can be addressed by building shared desire and group ownership. Psychological hesitations can be eased by equipping people with knowledge and ability. Rational resistance, often linked to perceived effort, is overcome when reinforcement shows tangible benefits.

Prosci’s 2023 data also reveals the cost of neglecting change management. Projects without structured change management are six times more likely to experience delays and three times more likely to exceed budget. Conversely, when change management is integrated from initiation, organizations realize an average of 135 percent higher benefits realization compared to those that rely solely on technical delivery.

This evidence echoes the PMI’s evolving guidance. The PMBOK® Guide (2021) now frames project success in terms of value delivery, not just schedule and scope. Value depends on adoption; that is, the moment people use and embrace what the project delivers. Integrating change management ensures that value is achieved rather than assumed.

Bridging Project Management and Change Management

Project management ensures the technical side of success, i.e., scope, budget, schedule, and quality. Change management ensures the people side, namely adoption, proficiency, and sustained use. When separated, each discipline addresses only part of the problem. The integration of the two creates a complete system for delivery and adoption.

Project managers focus on designing and delivering a solution that works. Change managers focus on ensuring that people use it effectively. The interface between these disciplines is where transformation either succeeds or fails. In our experience at and Change, the best outcomes occur when change management is not an afterthought but embedded within the project governance structure.

An integrated approach connects project management deliverables and change management activities through shared milestones. For example, during project initiation, project management defines the business case and scope while change management defines the change strategy and sponsorship model. During execution, project management manages tasks, dependencies, and risks while change management manages communications, training, and resistance. During closure, project management confirms deliverables while change management measures adoption and reinforces behaviors.

Prosci’s research supports this alignment. Projects where project management and change management teams collaborate on planning and risk management report significantly higher adoption rates and lower rework. Integration also ensures consistent messaging to stakeholders, aligning technical and human narratives.

The bridge between project management and change management is also cultural. Project managers often operate in logical, structured environments focused on delivery certainty. Change practitioners work within emotional, adaptive spaces focused on human response. Bridging them requires mutual respect and shared accountability. The project manager must understand that user adoption is part of scope. The change manager must understand that time and cost constraints are real boundaries. Both must share a single definition of success.

Overcoming Barriers: From Işık’s Findings to ADKAR

Işık’s categorization of resistance factors provides a useful map for diagnosing why change management adoption remains low. Each barrier can be addressed through the ADKAR lens.

Economic barriers—fear of job loss, resource constraints, or cost concerns. These relate to gaps in Awareness and Desire. When people understand the business rationale and the personal upside of change, perceived threats diminish. Prosci’s data shows that visible executive sponsorship and transparent communication are the most effective levers for building awareness and desire.

Sociological barriers—loss of status, group loyalty, or disrupted social bonds. These are mitigated through participation and involvement. Change management practitioners foster collective ownership by including teams in design, pilot testing, and feedback loops. This creates social proof that the change is shared, not imposed.

Psychological barriers—habit, fear of the unknown, or mistrust. This corresponds to the Knowledge and Ability dimensions. Structured training, coaching, and peer support reduce anxiety and build confidence. The ADKAR model treats these not as attitudes to correct but as outcomes to achieve through tailored interventions.

Rational barriers—when individuals weigh effort against benefit. These barriers require Reinforcement. Once people experience tangible success, their perception shifts. Recognition programs, metrics, and leadership follow-through sustain commitment beyond go-live.

By mapping these barriers to ADKAR, leaders can convert abstract resistance into manageable elements. The framework provides language and measurement to guide what is often an emotional process.

The ROI Case for Integration

The financial argument for integrating change management and project management is strong. Prosci’s longitudinal data across twelve editions of Best Practices shows a direct relationship between change management effectiveness and project ROI. Projects with excellent change management see up to 135 percent higher benefits realization than those with poor change management (Prosci, 2023). These benefits include faster adoption, higher employee engagement, and reduced rework or defect costs.

From a portfolio perspective, integrated change management increases throughput. Projects reach stabilization faster because fewer resources are consumed correcting adoption failures. This efficiency compounds across programs, freeing capacity for new initiatives.

Işık’s study reinforces this case indirectly. Firms that implemented change management, even partially, reported advantages such as faster response to change (82%), time and cost savings (55% each), and improved communication (27%). These are precisely the dimensions that translate into quantifiable ROI.

Moreover, integration supports risk mitigation. The PMBOK® Guide (2021) identifies stakeholder engagement and communication as critical knowledge areas. Change management strengthens both. When stakeholders are informed and emotionally aligned, risk exposure decreases. Project recovery costs, which are often hidden in change-related issues, are minimized.

At and Change, we have observed that organizations that mature in both project management and change management demonstrate greater resilience during disruption. Their PMOs act not just as controllers of process but as enablers of adoption. They measure success in terms of realized outcomes, not mere delivery milestones. This maturity marks the transition from project management as execution to project leadership as transformation.

The Integration Journey: From Theory to Practice

Achieving integration requires deliberate design. It is not enough to have a change manager attending project meetings or a project plan with a “communication” line item. Integration must occur across governance, planning, execution, and measurement.

1. Governance Integration
   Change management should be embedded within the project’s steering structure. Sponsors must hold accountability for both technical and adoption outcomes. Steering committees should review adoption metrics alongside schedule and budget reports.
2. Process Alignment
   The project lifecycle and the change lifecycle must run in parallel. Prosci’s Three-Phase Process can be mapped directly onto the PMI’s five process groups. “Prepare Approach” aligns with project initiation and planning; “Manage Change” aligns with execution and monitoring; “Sustain Outcomes” aligns with closure and benefits realization.
3. Shared Tools and Language
   Common templates, such as stakeholder maps, impact assessments, and readiness trackers, allow project management and change management teams to collaborate effectively. Shared terminology reduces confusion and fosters joint ownership.
4. Capability Building
   Project managers should be trained in foundational change management principles, while change practitioners should understand basic project management structures. Cross-functional skill development builds empathy and efficiency.
5. Measurement and Feedback
   Integrated dashboards should track both project performance (cost, schedule, scope) and people performance (adoption, proficiency, utilization). This dual view ensures that success is defined holistically.

Integration does not require a radical reorganization. It requires intentional design, supported by leadership. Prosci’s 2021 report, Integrating Change Management and Project Management, identifies sponsorship alignment as the single most important success factor. When sponsors actively champion both disciplines, integration becomes part of organizational DNA rather than an experiment.

Lessons from Research and Practice

Bringing Işık’s empirical findings together with Prosci’s global benchmarks reveals a consistent truth: organizations underestimate the complexity of human change. The 34 percent change management adoption rate in Işık’s sample reflects a broader global pattern: that change management remains undervalued despite clear evidence for its impact.

The reasons are understandable. Many leaders equate change management with communication plans or training sessions. They overlook its strategic purpose: to ensure that investment in project delivery converts into measurable behavioral change. Without adoption, technical completion delivers little business value.

In practice, integration often starts small. A PMO may pilot combined change management-project management frameworks on high-impact initiatives, using Prosci’s Three-Phase Process as a scaffold. Early successes build credibility. Over time, change management competencies become embedded in project methodologies, checklists, and gate reviews. Eventually, adoption metrics appear in executive scorecards alongside delivery metrics.

This progression reflects what Prosci calls “change maturity.” At Level 1, change management is ad hoc. At Level 3, it is standardized. At Level 5, it is institutionalized—part of how projects are managed, not an add-on. The journey from Level 1 to Level 5 mirrors an organization’s evolution from delivering projects to delivering sustained change.

Actionable Path Forward

For leaders aiming to capture higher ROI from their project portfolios, integration must move from aspiration to routine practice. The following recommendations offer a structured path.

1. Build Shared Accountability at the Top
Executives and sponsors must treat adoption as a strategic outcome, not an operational detail. Steering committees should review adoption metrics with the same rigor as financial metrics. When leaders model engagement and reinforce change messages, resistance drops and credibility rises.

2. Equip PMOs to Lead Integration
PMOs are ideally positioned to embed change management into governance frameworks. They can align templates, integrate change management checkpoints into project gating, and standardize readiness assessments. This institutional approach ensures change management is applied consistently rather than selectively.

3. Develop Cross-Skilled Practitioners
Train project managers in change management fundamentals and change leads in project delivery basics. Cross-skilling builds empathy and collaboration. Organizations that invest in dual competency roles, such as change-ready project managers, report smoother transitions and fewer late-stage adoption issues.

4. Align Methods through the Prosci Three-Phase Process
Use the Three-Phase Process as a common operating model across projects. Map change management activities directly to project management deliverables, ensuring every technical milestone has a corresponding people milestone. For example, system go-live aligns with user ability; project closure aligns with reinforcement and measurement.

5. Measure Adoption as a Core KPI
Include adoption, utilization, and proficiency metrics in project performance reports. This shifts conversations from “Is the project complete?” to “Is the change working?” Data on adoption informs corrective actions early, preventing benefit erosion.

6. Invest in Sponsor Capability
Prosci research shows active and visible sponsorship as the strongest predictor of success. Leaders should receive coaching to articulate vision, communicate progress, and model new behaviors. Sponsorship training is a low-cost, high-impact intervention that directly increases ROI.

7. Create Continuous Feedback Loops
Post-implementation reviews should capture lessons not only on technical performance but on change effectiveness. Insights should feed into future project planning, creating a learning cycle that steadily raises maturity.

The Broader Impact

Integration of change management and project management is not merely a project management issue. It signals a shift in how organizations conceive transformation. When change management becomes embedded in project governance, organizations move from reactive to proactive adaptation. They anticipate human impacts before resistance surfaces. They design communication and training as strategic levers, not afterthoughts.

This mindset enables scalability. Digital transformation, culture shifts, and process redesigns all rely on behavioral adoption. By institutionalizing change management within project management, leaders build a repeatable engine for change, which is a capability that compounds over time.

Işık’s conclusion that change management is “a fundamental prerequisite for survival in a competitive environment” captures this logic. The organizations most likely to thrive are those that see change not as disruption but as a managed, human process. The Prosci methodology, with its focus on structured preparation, management, and reinforcement, turns that principle into an operational reality.

Conclusion

The persistent gap between project management and change management continues to limit organizational performance. Işık’s (2024) findings demonstrate how few companies systematically apply change management, while Prosci’s research proves the tangible benefits of doing so. Bridging the two disciplines is no longer optional. It is a prerequisite for achieving full project value.

Project Management delivers the technical product. Change management delivers human adoption. Without the first, there is no solution. Without the second, there is no sustained outcome. Integration ensures that every project not only delivers on time and budget but also achieves the behavioral and cultural shifts that make those results endure.

For executives, PMOs, and transformation leaders, the message is clear: make change management a standard part of project delivery. Use the Prosci Three-Phase Process to structure activity, apply the ADKAR model to guide individuals, and hold teams accountable for adoption outcomes. The return on this integration is measurable in the performance, resilience, and long-term health of the enterprise.

The future of project success lies not in tighter control or faster execution alone, but in mastering the intersection where technology, process, and people meet. Organizations that build this integration today will lead tomorrow’s transformations with confidence and clarity.