Produce a behavioral evidence checklist showing what done looks like at the role level. Measures readiness through observable task execution, not training attendance or self-reported confidence.
From change-managementnpx claudepluginhub anthropics/claude-plugins-community --plugin change-management-pluginrole-group-or-workstreamSave the output as an Excel spreadsheet (.xlsx) using the xlsx skill. Use Arial font, professional formatting with header row shading, column auto-width, and frozen header rows. Use Excel formulas for any calculated fields rather than hardcoded values.
Sheet structure: Include a "How to Read This File" sheet as the first sheet. Content (50-75 words max): "This checklist tracks observable behaviors required for go-live. Each behavior maps to a day-one task. 'Not Yet Observed' means no one has been tested yet. Update statuses during training validation. The Pattern Analysis sheet identifies structural signals when absence is concentrated across role groups or tasks."
Data validation — apply Excel dropdown lists to these columns on the Behavioral Evidence Table:
This command produces outputs at the role group and workstream level. It does not evaluate individual employees, assign readiness scores to individuals, or produce outputs that could be used to make employment decisions. All behavioral observations are framed as role-group patterns and structural signals. The practitioner is responsible for interpreting all outputs and determining any organizational action.
Ask the practitioner for the following inputs if not already provided in the session context. Ask only for what is missing.
Produce the following output in sequence.
Role Group / Workstream: [as provided] Engagement: [name and scope] Assessment Date: [today's date]
For each day one task assigned to this role group, produce a row. The evidence column is the most important: it names the specific observable behavior, not the training activity or self-assessment.
| Behavior ID | Behavior Title | Workstream | Behavior Owner | Training Impact | Downstream Dependency | Training Blocker Flag | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| BEH-001 | [Specific task — stated as an action the person performs, e.g., "Create Purchase Requisition in System" not "understand procurement workflow"] | [Workstream] | [Named role or person responsible for validating this behavior has been observed] | [YES / NO — does absence of this behavior indicate a training gap?] | [What readiness activity or go-live condition depends on this behavior being confirmed] | [YES / NO — does absence block training sign-off or go-live confirmation?] | [Observed / Not Yet Observed / Absent] |
Generate a row for each day one task provided. Assign sequential IDs (BEH-001, BEH-002, etc.).
Status definitions:
Present the pattern analysis as a structured table, not paragraph text:
| Pattern Type | Signal | Count | Action Required |
|---|---|---|---|
| Role-group concentration | Absence concentrated in one role group across multiple tasks | [count] | Investigate structural condition or training design before scheduling additional training |
| Task-specific concentration | Absence on one specific task across multiple role groups | [count] | Investigate process design, system path stability, or task complexity |
| Individual variance | Absence in a small subset while peers in same group pass | [count] | Flag for practitioner review — may indicate personal transition challenge |
| Speed/attempt pattern | Strong evidence across tasks but one task consistently slow or requires retakes | [count] | Investigate process clarity, system path intuitiveness, or support structure gaps |
After the table, interpret the patterns:
Absence concentrated in one role group across multiple tasks: The gap is likely a training design issue or a structural condition issue — the old path may still be accessible, or the new path may not be confirmed in the live environment. Flag for investigation before go-live. Do not schedule additional training before determining the root cause.
Absence on one specific task across multiple role groups: The gap is likely tied to that task specifically — process not confirmed, system path not stable, or the task is genuinely harder than the training prepared people for. Name the task and identify whether the process or system configuration is the blocker.
Absence concentrated in a small subset of a role group across tasks that peers in the same group have completed: The gap may reflect a personal transition challenge rather than a structural or training design issue. Flag the pattern for the practitioner's review. The practitioner determines what direct support, if any, is appropriate. This plugin does not evaluate individual employees or determine individual readiness.
Strong evidence across all tasks but one task is consistently slow or required multiple attempts: The task is harder than the training assumed. Investigate whether the process design is clear, the system path is intuitive, or the day one support structure for that task is sufficient.
When behavioral absence is concentrated — when multiple role groups are not demonstrating specific behaviors despite completing training and having the opportunity to do so — the pattern is a structural signal, not a training failure.
The structural question behind a concentrated absence pattern: what feature of the current environment is making the old behavior easier than the new one?
If the old path is still accessible in the system, the behavior pattern is predictable. People will use what is available. Training does not override accessible alternatives.
If the measurement system still tracks the old output, the behavior pattern is predictable. People produce what gets measured.
If the approval workflow still routes through the old structure, the behavior pattern is predictable. People follow the path that gets approvals.
Identify which of these structural conditions is present. Then name the structural decision required to close it.
A behavioral evidence checklist confirms what has been observed. It does not interpret what a concentrated pattern of behavioral absence signals about the structural conditions producing it.
When the pattern is concentrated and unexplained by individual variance, the evidence is pointing at a structural condition — not at a training problem that another session will solve. Running more training against an unresolved structural condition produces more evidence of the same pattern.
If the pattern here is strong enough and the structural question is unresolved, this is a limit moment. Run /ocm:structural-assessment.