How to Conduct a Force Field Analysis for Organizational Change

Whether you are introducing a new HR system, restructuring roles, or changing a workplace policy, organizational change rarely moves forward without resistance. Leaders need to understand what is pushing the organization toward the desired outcome and what factors may slow, complicate, or resist change.

Force field analysis provides a structured way to identify and compare those opposing forces before deciding how to proceed. This guide explains what the framework means, when HR should use it, and how to conduct the analysis step by step.

What is force field analysis?

Force field analysis is a decision-making and change-management technique associated with psychologist Kurt Lewin that helps organizations assess the factors influencing a proposed change. Penn State World Campus explains the framework as a way to compare the current state with a desired future state by identifying forces that help or hinder movement toward change.

Rather than simply counting the factors on each side, leaders should consider how strongly each one may influence the outcome. Evaluating their relative strength can help teams determine where to strengthen support, reduce barriers, or reconsider part of the proposed change.

What are driving and restraining forces?

Driving forces are factors that support the desired change, such as leadership backing, better technology, compliance requirements, cost savings, or employee demand. Restraining forces work in the opposite direction and may include employee resistance, skill gaps, budget constraints, competing priorities, system limitations, or poor communication.

Both internal and external factors can influence the balance, so HR teams should consider more than the most visible concerns. A skill gap, for example, may become a major restraining factor when employees are expected to take on unfamiliar responsibilities.

Salary.com's Skills and Competency Library helps HR teams define required competencies, clarify role expectations, and identify development needs when capability gaps could affect employee readiness for change.

When should HR use force field analysis?

HR can use this approach when a planned change involves meaningful resistance, competing priorities, or several stakeholder groups with different concerns. The framework is particularly useful when change is being planned because it helps teams anticipate resistance and identify forces that may support or block progress.

Common HR applications include:

• Implementing a new HRIS or HCM platform

• Restructuring teams or changing job responsibilities

• Introducing new compensation or performance-management practices

• Revising workplace arrangements or employee policies

The framework is especially useful when HR needs to understand why adoption may be difficult and where support or intervention will have the most impact. Prioritizing the strongest helping and hindering forces can help teams determine where intervention or support is most needed.

When change affects roles or responsibilities, HR also needs a clear view of the future job structure. JobArchitect® Max helps teams centralize job content, define role expectations, map skills, and manage workflows as workforce structures change.

How do you conduct a force field analysis?

The exact format can vary, but most analyses follow the same basic sequence from defining the change to deciding what action to take. The goal is not mathematical precision, but a clear view of which forces deserve the most attention.

Step 1. Define the change or decision

Describe the current state and the specific future state you want to achieve. For example, instead of "improve HR processes," define the objective as implementing a new HRIS across the organization by a specific date, which gives the analysis a clear point of reference.

Step 2. Identify the driving forces

List the factors pushing the organization toward the desired change, drawing input from people who understand the business, employees, systems, and operating requirements. Driving forces might include leadership sponsorship, inefficient current processes, cost savings, employee demand, regulatory requirements, or better technology.

Consider forces both inside and outside the organization when identifying what may influence the change. This broader view can help your team catch important pressures that might otherwise be overlooked.

Step 3. Identify the restraining forces

Next, identify factors that could slow, block, or complicate implementation, including employee concerns, skill gaps, costs, competing priorities, system limitations, and insufficient management support. Encourage honest stakeholder input because some restraining forces reveal genuine operational risks that should be addressed rather than dismissed as resistance.

For HR technology changes, compatibility, integration requirements, and data flow may become important restraining factors. Salary.com's HRIS and HCM Integrations offer multiple ways to connect CompAnalyst® with existing HR platforms and keep employee and job data synchronized.

Step 4. Score the strength of each force

Assign each force a simple score from 1 to 5, with higher scores representing stronger influence on the proposed change. Because the weighting is subjective, use the scores to support discussion and prioritization rather than treat them as a mathematical prediction of success.

Step 5. Create the diagram

Place the proposed change in the center, then organize driving forces on one side and restraining forces on the other with their assigned scores. Use larger or longer arrows to represent stronger forces, creating a visual representation that decision-makers can understand quickly.

Step 6. Decide how to strengthen or reduce the forces

Use the completed analysis to identify which barriers can realistically be reduced and which sources of support can be strengthened before or during implementation. Training may weaken a skills-related barrier, clearer manager communication may reduce uncertainty, and stronger leadership sponsorship may reinforce an important driving force.

Focus first on actions that combine meaningful impact with reasonable feasibility rather than trying to address every factor at once. In many cases, reducing one significant restraining force can do more to move the change forward than simply adding several weaker driving forces.

What does a force field analysis example look like?

A force field analysis example can show how competing factors influence a real HR change before implementation begins. Suppose an organization wants to replace disconnected, manual HR processes with a centralized HR platform that improves workforce data and reduces administrative work.

• Example: implementing a new HR system

In this example, HR scores each force from 1 to 5 based on its expected influence on the proposed change. The scores are illustrative and would vary depending on the organization's systems, workforce, resources, and readiness.

Driving forces	Score	Restraining forces	Score
Faster HR processes	4	Employee resistance	4
Better workforce data	5	Training requirements	3
Less manual administration	4	Implementation costs	3
Leadership support	3	Integration concerns	4

Fragmented HR technology, manual data work, and integration challenges can make a new HR system harder to implement, even when the expected benefits are clear. These concerns help explain why better workforce data may be a strong driving force while integration remains a meaningful restraining force.

The table should not be treated as a simple contest between total scores because individual high-impact forces may require more attention. In this case, HR could address employee resistance and integration concerns through targeted communication, training, manager preparation, phased implementation, and technical planning.

Once the strongest forces are clear, the next step is turning those findings into a practical action plan.

How do you turn force field analysis into an action plan?

Completing the diagram is not the end of the process. The practical value of the analysis comes from using the findings to decide what your organization should address, strengthen, and monitor as the change moves forward.

1. Prioritize the strongest driving and restraining forces

   Start with the forces that have the greatest potential impact rather than treating every factor equally. Use the analysis to strengthen supportive forces and reduce or overcome the barriers that could have the greatest impact on the change.

   Consider both impact and feasibility when setting priorities. A high-scoring restraining force may deserve immediate attention if reducing it could materially improve adoption, while a strong driving force may be reinforced through leadership support, resources, communication, or stronger evidence.

2. Assign actions, owners, and deadlines

   Translate each priority into a simple action framework:

   Force → Action → Owner → Deadline → Success Measure

   For example, employee concern about a new HR system could lead to manager briefings and FAQs owned by the HR communications lead before pilot launch, with recurring implementation questions tracked as a success measure.

   Clear accountability helps keep the analysis connected to implementation rather than leaving it as a planning exercise. Defined responsibilities, timelines, milestones, and performance measures can help keep implementation organized, accountable, and easier to track.

3. Monitor whether the balance of forces changes

   Revisit the analysis at major milestones or when new information changes stakeholder support, risks, or operating conditions. Update the scores when doing so helps clarify whether priorities have shifted, then carry the resulting actions into the broader change management plan.

   Driving and restraining forces can change as employees gain experience, technical issues are resolved, or new concerns appear. Treat the analysis as an ongoing decision-support tool, not a one-time workshop exercise.

FAQs

The following FAQs address a few common questions that come up when HR teams use force field analysis for organizational change.

What are the benefits of force field analysis?

Force field analysis makes the factors supporting and opposing a proposed change easier to see, discuss, and prioritize. It can also help teams anticipate resistance, surface concerns, identify important barriers, and determine where action may be needed before implementation.

What are the limitations of force field analysis?

The framework relies on judgment, so identifying forces and estimating their strength can be subjective. Important factors may also be missed when stakeholder input is limited, while complex organizational conditions may require broader change-management analysis beyond a simplified visual framework.

What is the difference between force field analysis and SWOT analysis?

Force field analysis focuses on factors directly supporting or restraining a specific proposed change or desired outcome. By comparison, SWOT analysis examines broader internal strengths and weaknesses alongside external opportunities and threats, making the former more focused when HR needs to understand what may help or hinder implementation.

When organizational change affects jobs, responsibilities, or workforce structure, clear role information can help turn plans into action. JobArchitect® Max helps HR teams manage job architecture, skills, and changing role requirements at scale, so they can align roles with business needs, identify skill gaps, support workforce planning, and guide employees through change.