Paint me the picture at month six. The novelty has worn off, the champion who bought it got promoted, and usage is sliding. What does your product do about it?

The full executive answer

This is the scenario the adoption module (M38) exists for. It scores every team on adoption percentage and sentiment, applies an explicit penalty when change load is high, and bands the result: thriving, on-track, lagging, or at-risk. Critically, it ranks teams by need — so the account conversation at month six starts from "these two teams went from on-track to lagging in the last period" rather than from a gut feeling after the champion left. Champion departure is precisely the failure the evidence-based view protects against.

The product also fights staleness structurally. The journey model means there is always a next stage — a completed diagnostic feeds a roadmap, a roadmap feeds operating cadence, and re-assessment creates a fresh scorecard against your previous baseline and peer benchmark, which is a natural renewal-of-interest moment. The curated public changelog keeps a "what's new" drumbeat, and modules like the literacy war-games give teams recurring, timeboxed reasons to come back.

And at this stage of our company, the human layer is me: early customers get founder-led check-ins where we review the adoption data together — a quarterly business review in substance if not in ceremony. Roadmap: as we scale, that becomes a customer-success function with the same data. The tooling that makes a CSM effective at month six is already built; the CSM team is what comes with revenue.