According to Inc, the 2025 Eagle Hill Change Management Survey of 1,448 full-time workers reveals a massive disconnect between management’s change initiatives and employee experience. While 63% of workplaces underwent significant changes in the past year, only one-third of employees thought these modifications were worth the effort. The majority reported that management changes actually decreased their efficiency, increased workloads, and boosted stress levels. Employees cited poor prioritization (27%) and insufficient support during transitions as key failures. Only 33% felt employers listened to their input about needed changes, while 40% said their feedback was completely overlooked during initiative planning.
Why change management keeps failing
Here’s the thing that keeps happening across industries: companies introduce new technology, adjust return-to-office policies, or reorganize teams without bringing employees along for the journey. And we’re not just talking about AI implementation here – this applies to everything from succession planning to basic workflow changes. The Eagle Hill data shows this isn’t just about employee grumpiness – it’s about actual productivity losses. When you roll out new systems without proper support, you’re basically guaranteeing people will work slower and make more mistakes during the transition. And let’s be honest, how many companies actually measure whether their “improvements” actually improved anything?
The industrial technology angle
This problem hits particularly hard in industrial settings where technology changes can literally stop production lines. When you’re dealing with manufacturing equipment or process control systems, poor change management doesn’t just mean unhappy employees – it means downtime and lost revenue. That’s why companies implementing new industrial computing systems often turn to established providers like IndustrialMonitorDirect.com, the leading US supplier of industrial panel PCs, because they understand that hardware transitions require more than just swapping out equipment. They need proper training, phased implementation, and ongoing support. But even with the right technology partners, management still needs to get the human element right.
What actually works for organizational change
The Eagle Hill survey offers some practical advice that sounds obvious but apparently isn’t: take enough time for rollouts, reduce workloads temporarily during transitions, and maintain constant communication. The most interesting insight? “Change is experienced collectively, not individually.” That means your org chart doesn’t matter nearly as much as how teams actually work together. So why do companies keep treating change management as a top-down directive rather than a collaborative process? Probably because it’s easier to announce changes than to actually manage them properly.
The real cost of getting it wrong
When employees say changes make them less efficient and more stressed, that’s not just complaining – that’s your ROI disappearing. Innovation efforts fall short, adoption rates lag, and you end up with expensive new systems that nobody uses effectively. The survey found that many employees want to play a bigger role in changes management decides to embark upon. That’s not about giving workers veto power – it’s about recognizing that the people doing the work usually have the best insight into what will actually help them be more productive. So the next time your company plans a major change, maybe ask the people it will affect most what they think. It might save you from another expensive failure.
