Budgeting for change management
Around 30–40%, not the typical 10%. Funding training, communication, and workflow redesign at that level is what separates the programs that see ~5.3x higher success from those that stall after deployment.
The budget split that works
A workable scaling split is roughly 40% integration and data, 30% licenses, 20% training and change, and 10% operations, the opposite of the tool-heavy budgets that fail.
Underfunding change management is the most reliable predictor of AI failure. When only 10% of the budget goes to the 80% of the problem that is people and process, the outcome is predictable. Reallocating toward training, communication, and redesign is not overhead, it is the investment that makes the technology spend pay off, which is why culturally invested organizations succeed far more often.
Frequently asked questions.
Is 30–40% on change management not too much?
It only seems high against the failed norm of ~10%. Given that people and process are 80% of the challenge, underfunding them is why most programs never deliver. The spend protects the entire investment.