Contact us

Feel free to call us at 70 23 22 40, or fill out the form below

Read the Personal Data Policy here

Call Us 70232240

Author Archive

Annika Lagoni


By Annika Lagoni, Consultant

The ADKAR® model is the focal point of Prosci’s renown Change Management Methodology.

If you have ever participated in any of Prosci’s courses, I could probably wake you up in the middle of the night able to cite ADKAR®. If you haven’t, then it is about time because this is a tool that real kick some a.. in achieving success with your changes.

So, what can you use the ADKAR® model for?

  • Developing a Change Management strategy
  • Creating a successful action plan for personal and professional advancement during change
  • Helping employees’ transition through a change process
  • Identifying gaps in your Change Management process
  • Diagnosing and addressing employee resistance to change

What is the ADKAR® Model?

The ADKAR® model is a 5-step framework that helps you deal with the people side of change. It was developed by Jeff Hiatt, CEO of Prosci Change Management, in 2003.

At the heart of ADKAR® is the common – yet often overlooked – understanding that organisational change only happens at an individual level. Organisational change is basically about changing the individuals’ behaviour in the organisation.

ADKAR® is an acronym that stands for the building blocks that people must go through to achieve successful change:

  1. Awareness: Leading people to see the need for change.
  2. Desire: Establishing the desire for change.
  3. Knowledge: Providing employees with the information or skills they need to achieve change.
  4. Ability: Applying knowledge and skills to bring about change.
  5. Reinforcement: Making sure that people continue to use the new methods.

Each element of the ADKAR® Change Management Model should be followed in a sequential frequency to ensure change readiness. Before at step is completed at a satisfactory level you cannot succeed in the next stage. Is a stage scores below 3 on a 1-5 scale, it’s considered a barrier point as it blocks the employees readiness to move forward in their change process.

Putting the ADKAR® model in practice

To address how you can actually use the ADKAR® model in practice, let us take a look at each step:

Awareness: Communicate the reason for change

What are the changes about and why are they necessary? This is perhaps the most important questions to answer. You need to make people aware of what is going on and why – including the consequences of not changing. If you haven’t communicated a clear rationale, the big ‘why’, people cannot desire the change (the next step).

What tactics can you use?

  • Communicate effectively: To create awareness for why and what, communicate the rationale from the different perspectives of your target groups. A good way to do this is to use personal stories because the employees want to relate to challenges they know about the current state. To make the stories even more potent and ensure consistency in your message, we recommend that you create a core story (read how to make a core story here).
  • Make business information accessible: Do not underestimate the power of accessible information about the company’s performance, markets conditions and changing business priorities. People understand more, when they know more.
  • Coaching by manager/supervisor: A supervisor is the best person to help employees understand the reasons for change and the personal impact is has on them. Enabling open dialogue is important to make them reflect, ask questions, and share their concerns.

Desire: Empower and engage individuals

This element is tricky and complex since you cannot control how people feel. However, studies show that employees can best embrace change – even if it has negative consequence – when they feel well-treated and listened to throughout the change process.

What tactics can you use?

  • Engage employees in the change process: Regular communication and involvement are key to increase the desire for change and to ensure that resistance will not build up due to frustration.
  • Equip managers to be effective change leaders: As the managers have the direct contact with their employees, they need to be able to conduct effective communication about the change – at both group and individual level. To fill their role as change leaders, they need the proper coaching, training and tools (read more to about managers’ roles in Change Management here).
  • Anticipate resistance: Scope the number of impacted groups, look at how the change will affect the impacted group – is it their job role of work processes that is affected? If so, to which degree? In this way, you will have a better picture of where to focus your efforts.

Knowledge: Learn by sharing

In order for a change to actually happen in your organisation, employees and managers will most likely need to acquire new knowledge or skills.

What tactics can you use?

  • Make user groups and forums: Learning from peers is very powerful. Social learning is a great way to spread knowledge in your organisation. Also, helping or teaching others is the most effectful way of learning yourself. So, it is not only making your colleagues better – you make yourself better by peer learning.
  • Make effective training and education programs in-house: Do not just send people off to a course. Make sure you have the structures and tools in place for them to actually implement new skills.
  • Have 1:1 coaching session: This is a way of customising training to specific employees whose job roles might be more impacted or who find themselves in a unique situation during the changes.

Ability: Identify and address barriers

While knowledge is about theory and understanding, ability is all about practice. It is just like getting your driving permit. You might have the capabilities to drive a car by the time you get your license, but becoming a competent driver means practicing on the road for some time after having passed the test.

What tactics can you use?

  • Ensure day-to-day involvement of supervisors: Supervisors need to keep a close eye on the employees to ensure there are no gaps in their ability to work in the new way. Should there be a gap, time to further practice should be made available to achieve ability at the satisfactory level for the reinforcement to happen (which is the next step)
  • Make hand-on exercises: A good way to achieve ability is to include different exercises. It could be role play, simulations or simply hands-on work with roles and processes.
  • Provide access to subject matter experts: Having someone to reach out to for assistance is key. Therefore, employees should know to whom and how to reach out when they needed assistance.

Reinforcement: Keep up the good work

A major challenge with organisational development is making change stick. But quite frankly, it is actually the most important aspect of changing anything. This is where you need to keep the momentum of all your hard work to prevent employees from going back to old ways.

What tactics can you use?

  • Celebrate and recognize successes: Celebrating long- and short-term successes means continuously sharing messages about successful parts of the change. It can be done by video statements from a happy customer, a quotation from an employee or the executives, or merely facts and figures. This will affect people’s understanding of how the change is working and motivate the late bloomers to get onboard.
  • Collect feedback from employees: This is valuable knowledge for learning how the employees have experienced the change process which is both a learning opportunity for the project team and a way to identify areas you might want to do over.
  • Rewards: Rewards are motivational, but it is important you keep your promises. If you say you will look into something or do something, you need to follow through. Otherwise it will be more damaging than not promising anything at all.

Are you struggling with changes? Revisit ADKAR®

Not only can you use the ADKAR® model to make changes work. You can also use it for troubleshooting dysfunctional change processes.

Simply take a step back, revisit the ADKAR® and find out where the problem lies. Perhaps you didn’t ensure proper training or maybe you forgot to deploy enough reinforcement initiatives? Once you find the missing link, you can address it. And it is actually simple to measure the level of each ADKAR® step to find the barrier point.

Continue Reading


hvad betyder nudging

By Annika Lagoni, Consultant, proacteur

Nudging is the new black within organisational behavior design. It has been celebrated as a method of intervention that, among other things, helps implement change quickly and efficiently. It is often referred to as a ‘loving push in the right direction’, which helps people make the choices that are in their best interests – without them even realising it.

And yes. Nudging CAN be quite effective. But many will argue that it is not always just a ‘loving push’. If done incorrectly, nudging can take the shape of manipulation and be directly damaging. Thus, when you are trying to influence other people’s behavior, it is a serious matter that requires for you to act professionally and responsibly – and not least be able to asses when it is ethically sound.

Far from innocent

Nudging is about how we through a better ‘choice architecture’ – a term used when indirectly changing people’s decisions in a predictable way – can help people make the choice they really want to make. The choices we, as autonomous, rational people, would like to make, but which our surroundings, temptations and unconscious irrationality refrain us from.

Advocates of nudging do not believe that it is a matter of manipulation as long as you, as a choice architect, do not deprive man of any choice. After all, it is all about helping them make the best possible decisions. That is, the ones they would have made themselves if they could assess the long-term consequences. For example, by making them choose fruit over cake provided that they want to live healthy.

But doesn’t nudging easily become a slippery slope where less noble intentions can lead to more or less appropriate manipulation? Because when organisations and public institutions use nudging to push people in one direction or another, it can never be innocent or unpolitical. At least according to the Danish nudging expert, Pelle Guldborg Hansen.

When is nudging manipulation?

Nudging is neither “a loving push we get without noticing it” nor a ‘manipulative, ethical approach to behavior change’. It is a science, based on behavioral economics, cognitive psychology and social psychology. And it requires a great deal of insight into how human beings make decisions in order to nudge properly – and ethically justifiable.

But is nudging thus manipulation? Yes. Sometimes it is.

The nudging experts, Pelle Guldborg Hansen and Andreas Maaløe Jespsersen, have created a framework to assess whether or not a nudge is ethically justifiable. For nudging to be ethically irresponsible manipulation requires two things:

  1. The nudge is non-transparent, so that the individual does not discover that it is a nudge, and what its purpose is.
  2. The nudge manipulates with our freedom of choice (as opposed to our behavior), so that the individual’s choices are limited.

I will return to the model for good and bad nudges a little later. But first, we need to understand human behavior in a decision-making process, and why we do not always make the most rational and appropriate decisions. Nobel laureate, Daniel Kahneman, explains the human decision-making process in the ‘Dual Process Theory’. Here he introduces the concepts of “System 1” and “System 2”.

In short, our brain uses two different systems to make decisions. System 1 is intuitive and automatic and what we use 85-90% of the time, whereas System 2 is reflective and rational.

So, if I ask you what 34 x 13 is, or tell you to make a strategy, I will put your System 2 up and running. However, as mentioned, we do not have enough cognitive capacity to analyse all decisions and their outcomes, and then we use System 1. System 1 is what you use when you are asked to complete the phrase “the cherry…” or when you read the mood of others intuitively.

In other words, System 2 is what we use for mentally demanding tasks, while System 1 is where we shoot from the hip.

It is the principles of the Dual Process theory that are used to make nudges and to discuss when they are ethical.

We will always make a nudge by affecting the recipient’s System 1 because it is when we make decisions with System 1 that we use thumb rules and draw on past experience. This means that we are influenced by cognitive biases, which are a form of fallacy that makes us inclined to make a certain decision in a particular situation – rather than the right decision that fits what we want in this specific situation. If you find this a bit confusing, you can read more about it in this article [insert link to the article about psychological mechanisms that fuck with decision making].

Nudging is about identifying the systematic mistakes we make, and on that basis, developing nudges that get people to make a more rational decision. Crucial to whether a nudge is ethical or not is how the receiver’s reflective System 2 is involved and whether the nudge is transparent or not.

How to do ethical nudging

If we take the following parameters: nudges that affect either System 1 or System 2, and whether they are transparent or non-transparent, we end up with four categories of nudging:

Figur 3: Suitable labels of the intervention types (Guldborg & Maaløe, 2013: 23)

Nudge 1: Transparent facilitation of consistent choice

If you make this type of nudge, you try to engage System 2’s reflective thinking in a way that is transparent to the recipient. Therefore, with relative ease and without prior knowledge of cognitive bias and nudging, the recipient can understand what the intention behind the nudge is and what choices they have.

For example, by drawing a fly in the men’s pissoir, which captures the recipient’s attention and ensures that the focus and beam move in the same direction. The recipient can choose to play with and catch the fly or not (and pee on the floor in spite of it).

Nudge 2: Transparent influence (technical manipulation) of behavior

This type of nudges only affects our automatic thinking in System 1 and not our reflective System 2. It encourages our automatic system to change behavior. For example, when playing casual music while boarding a plane. Automatically you relax a little more and stress less, so that all passengers board in good order. If you think twice, and thereby use System 2, you know very well that you are meant to relax, and then you can reject the change in behavior and choose to be tense and stressed again.

Nudge 3: Manipulation of choice

These types of nudges change behavior without involving reflective system 2 thinking. Thereby, it is not transparent for the person being nudged. These are the kind of nudges you, as a choice architect, should avoid. An example is the framing of the risk associated with a medical treatment of cancer. Does the doctor state the consequences of chemotherapy such as the risk of dying from treatment at 10% or the chance of survival at 90%? The framing has a huge impact on the patient’s choice. But as a patient, it is difficult to see the impact that they are actually being exposed to in the design of choices.

Nudge 4: Non-transparent manipulation of behavior

This type of nudge affects the receiver’s automatic System 1 without activating System 2. In practice, this means that the recipient is unaware that they are being affected and what they are actually being affected by. As a choice architect, you would prefer to avoid this type of nudging. Or you should at least be very aware that you are moving close to a grey area here.

An example is when the plate size at the buffet is reduced. People eat less without discovering it. They fill up the plate at the buffet and empty it at the table, just as they usually do. The filling and intake are such automatic behaviors that many of the subjects did not believe that they had actually eaten less.

This is exactly what makes nudge 4 a grey area: The recipient of the nudge just does not know that they are nudged because they cannot see the method by which they are being nudged. The above example may seem harmless, but if nudge 4, for example, was used to get people to donate their organs, then it would have been a whole other discussion.

The key message is: Use nudging wisely if you would like to apply nudging in your organisation. Relate to your nudges and what category they fall into. It is a science and it requires extensive knowledge in the field. And all choice architects must be aware of their responsibilities.

Continue Reading

Psychological mechanisms that fuck with your ability to make good decisions

biases dansk

By Annika Lagoni, Consultant, proacteur

It is important to be able to make the best possible decisions based on the available information. Unfortunately, a number of psychological mechanisms prevent this. These so-called biases cause us to make bad and irrational decisions. The good news is that the more you are aware of the potential pitfalls, the easier it is for you to see through, and navigate around them in your decision-making processes.

Our brains are programmed to make several mental errors that impact our rationality. Examples of our irrationality are not hard to come by in our everyday lives: We eat too much, we spend too much money, and save too little. We make decisions based on immediate needs – even important decisions about the future.

The reason is that we are constantly faced with many decisions, but we simply do not have enough mental capacity to reflect on all possibilities and their outcomes. Instead we use heuristics, emotions and experience to make decisions – also known as cognitive biases. A cognitive bias is a sort fallacy that makes us prone to make a certain decision in a specific situation. There are more than 180 cognitive biases that influence the way we process data, think critically, and perceive reality.

The psychological illusions of your brain

This knowledge about our mildly peculiar – and often inadequate – ability to make decisions stems from the Nobel prize laureates Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, who for several decades have studied human decision making and proven the existence of several biases.

Below you can see an overview of some of the most frequent biases that influence your decision-making processes. Once you are aware of which biases you make and why, you can deliberately work around them and make better decisions.

How do our biases arise?

To answer the question, we need to address the difference of fast and slow thinking, also known as the Dual Process Theory.

The human brain operates based on two different systems, known as System 1 and System 2. Basically, System 2 is what we use for mentally demanding tasks, while System 1 is used when we shoot from the hip.

If you are about to get run over by a car, you will automatically throw yourself away to avoid the situation. That is your automatic System 1 at work, since it is responsible for everything you do by intuition. System 2, on the other hand, gets activated if you have to solve a complicated calculation, such as 5735 x 390.

System 1 operates way faster than System 2, because you make decisions based on habits, heuristics and past experience. In turn, the quick choices result in you not thinking about the long-term consequences and making poor decisions based on cognitive biases.

Cognitive biases happen because System 1 gets tricked. And because System 1 operates subconsciously, we do not detect when it happens. But as a rule of thumb, we use System 1 around 80-95% of the time we make decisions. Thus, one way to prevent cognitive biases is through consciousness (“Now I will not be tricked by Loss aversion”), as the very awareness of it activates your reflective thinking in System 2. With this knowledge you are now far better off to make decisions without anything fucking with your brain.

Continue Reading


By: Annika Lagoni, Consultant
To succeed with changes, you must be ready to deal with issues such as loss and emotional grief. Complex, emotionally challenging changes have little chance of success, unless the severity of loss is acknowledged and grief is redeemed.

As you probably have realised, it is inevitable that changes in your organisation will happen. And often there will be resistance to the changes. The default reaction is to blame employees for being resistant. While this might be the easiest thing to do, it does not deal with the root cause and the real issues.

Instead, it is vital that you understand the human dynamics of changes to better support your employees through the process of grief. That is what some organisational changes are to employees: a grief process.


Have you ever been surprised by employees’ reactions to even small organisational changes?

Forced change is intimidating and disturbing for people because work is central to most peoples’ lives and identities. That is why forced changes are often emotional experiences. This even applies to positive changes because you still must release your grasp on old, familiar routines.

There are tangible losses, such as loss of income if a person is demoted, or the fear of losing your job. But there are also more abstract losses. This includes loss of control, social status and self-worth. It is important to remember that individuals experience loss in different ways.

Consider this example: Karin has been working for Company X for 20 years. When a new Career Framework is implemented she experienced a loss of status because it makes her seniority less clear. Morten, from the same company, on the other hand, feels like the Career Framework makes him lose control over his career path.

They experience the effect of the change in different ways, depending on their individual interpretation. Losses do not even need to come to fruition in organisational change to cause emotional distress for employees – the mere thought of the chance that it might happen can create profound anxiety.


This feeling of loss is naturally followed by the grieving process. Therefore, it is necessary to redeem the sense of loss. In fact, unresolved grief from change processes is the source of much of general resistance to change that we often see in organisations.

The five stages of grief were originally put forward by the physician Elisabeth Kübler-Ross. Her theory pertains to grieving the loss of a person, but also provides useful insights for understanding how and why people resist and react to changes in organisations.

Take a look at this video before you continue reading. It explains the 5 stages of grief and the giraffe’s reaction will be used to exemplify the grief process.


Giraffe: “It’s no big deal, it’s probably not even quicksand”
The first stage is denial. People simply do not accept or acknowledge what they perceive to be bad news.

Possible reactions can be: “This change is just another initiative put forward by ‘them’ and will be abandoned and lost in the stream; so why should I even bother to change?”.

People try not to pay any attention to the changes and avoid associating with anyone talking positively about the change.

How to handle it?

Ensure that your employees understand WHY the change is being made and what is in it for them. But do not overwhelm them with information in the early stages. Release it gradually and preferably face-to-face. In your communications you can gain an advantage by focusing on what stays the same, to create a sense of continuity.


Giraffe: “Stupid quicksand, stupid jungle, I wanna bite someone in the face!”
When people see that the change is starting to become real, they move on to the second stage: anger.

These reactions can be expressed in a variety of ways. Some might take out the anger on themselves, whilst others direct it towards others around them. People in this stage can be expected to be irritable, frustrated and short-tempered.

“This change is completely unnecessary and stupid. In fact, it will surely be the end of everything good and might even bankrupt the whole company”. Sounds a bit extreme? Well, feelings are not necessarily logic, but they are natural.

How to handle it?

For your organisation, the anger stage is the “danger zone”. If it is badly managed, the organisation can descend into crisis or chaos. Therefore, this stage needs careful planning and preparation, considering the impacts and objections that people may have.
Listen and watch carefully during this stage so you can respond to the unexpected. And keep in mind that this is a natural reaction and with time, it shall pass and make way for acceptance.


Giraffe: “Are you there God? Listen, if you would just give me a mulligan on this quicksand thing, I promise no more peeing on your smaller creatures”

After the stage of anger starts to settle, and the changes really start to sink in, people will try start thinking of ways to postpone the inevitable or to bargain and negotiate the changes. This is not a bad thing. It is just an exploration process where people are exploring what the change means for them, and whether they can have any influence on what is going on.

How to handle it?

Be open to suggestions and input. The feeling of influence can bring relief to those who are moving closer to acceptance. They might, however, still resist by only trying to learn what they think is important, so make sure to set clear timelines and expectations.


Giraffe: “(Crying loudly)”
You are not quite past the rough path yet! After the bargaining phase, there is one more dip in the curve. By now the employees have realised that there is no way out of the situation.

There is little purpose in their work at this stage and morale and energy are low. Employees who are stuck in this phase can act as if they are indifferent or may keep their distance to other people.

How to handle it?

This phase is not easy on the on the team. Given the state of low morale, the more exciting and engaging the training can be made, the better it would be for employees to move ahead and give it their best. Giving positive feedback in the learning process – and perhaps using rewards – can help with motivation.


Giraffe: “You know something? I’m cool with this. I bet heaven has all the tender leaves I can eat, and everybody gets their own slurpee machine”

In this stage, people know that the changes will happen and begin to accept their losses. This means that they are coming to terms with the changes and all the known consequences. The quicker you can get people to this stage, the better chance you have of succeeding.

How to handle it?

This is when you finally start realising the benefits of your hard work effort. During this phase it is essential that you repeat and reinforce the change objectives and strategy. And remember to celebrate and share the success stories!

So, what can we learn from this process of grief? That negative emotions are natural reactions and should not be suppressed. Instead mourning should be encouraged because that is what bring them to stage where changes are realised.

Keep in mind that the stages are fluid, and people can move back and forth between them, depending on how the change is perceived – which is highly correlated with how it is managed. Stages can also vary in their length: some can last a couple of hours where the person does not even realise that they went through it, while others can last for years.

”Grief is seldom spoken about in organizational life; it is in fact one of the most common and least understood workplace phenomena.”
George Kohlrieser

Continue Reading


By: Annika Lagoni, Consultant

A Change Management Office (CMO) is a function with the purpose of providing the organisation with a structured approach and a set of tools to manage the people side of changes. Having a CMO can lead to stunning benefits for the organisation. These include that projects meet (and often exceed) their objectives, realising return on investments and maturing the discipline of Change Management in organisation. The benefits are the argument for establishing a CMO.
Setting up a CMO is, however, not a straightforward matter. On the contrary there are a variety of approaches that can lead to success – or failure for that matter. So how do you know what elements you should take into account? While there are no one-size-fits-all templates or roadmaps for how to create a successful CMO there are seven questions you should always ask yourself when establishing a Change Management Office:


Your organisation should make decisions about the responsibilities of your CMO based on how change happens in your organisation and how to position the CMO. When looking at Prosci®’s 2018 Best Practice report, interviewing Danish companies about their experiences and reading the latest literature, we can cluster following roles and responsibilities for the CMO:
1. Identify and choose a Change Management methodology and processes. Adjust and fit the methods to create internal best practices.
2. Create a common Change Management language and align expectations for roles at different levels the organisation.
3. Maintain a portfolio overview of all planned and current projects and change initiatives. This makes you capable of tracking and reporting on change progress.
4. Be a resource centre and provide Change Management support and training for projects.


There are two things to consider regarding how to organise your CMO.
First, where to place the CMO in the organisation? Wherever you decide to locate the CMO, it should be where it can effectively support projects across the organisation, and where it has sufficient support and commitment from one or more executive sponsors.
Secondly, you need to consider whether the Change Management resources should be centralised or decentralised. In a centralised structure resources are primarily owned and located in the CMO and the change resources are lent out to specific projects. When the project is finished, or the Change Management role is complete, the resources return to the CMO to be allocated to other project. In the decentralised structure, the resources are hired and owned by either the project itself or in the business areas. The resources have Change Management competencies but may need support from the CMO to implement the standard methodology and tools.
There are several criteria, which can be used to help determine which model to use. Perhaps the most commonly used is to align it with the culture in the organisation.


Our rule-of-thumb is that a CMO, regardless of structure and organising, should consist of at least 3-5 people to have the critical mass needed for carrying out the roles of a CMO. This is consistent with Prosci®’s Best Practice report (2018), which shows that the majority of the organisations with a CMO contains 2-5 employees as illustrate in the figure below.


One of the most important things the CMO can do to improve organisational change maturity, is to develop and use a strong governance model. The governance model specifies how and when to apply Change Management on change projects. The governance model could, as an example, include three levels:

• Mandatory projects: The governance model could prescribe which projects should or must use Change Management actively. Criteria for selection could for instance be the total project costs or overall impact on the organisation.
• Mandatory activities: The projects which meet the above criteria would then be required to do some mandatory activities, like a comprehensive risk analysis or participate in review meetings with a representative from the CMO etc.
• Mandatory requirements: Finally, the selected projects could then be given certain requirements, such as to get Change Management resources assigned from the CMO and on-going CM review.


While it is easy to get caught up in the day-to-day running of a CMO it is important to identify and work towards longer-term strategic goals for the CMO itself. These could be to e.g. increase the enterprise Change Management maturity level or that CMO staff should build strong relationships with their stakeholders.
A solid methodology and great tools and templates are only valuable if the right people use them and introduce them to the organisation competently. From Prosci®’s Best Practice report (2018), we know that the most important attributes of a great Change Management team member, in ranked order, are:

1. Excellent communication skills.
2. Change Management competency
3. Flexibility
4. Interpersonal skills
5. Business understanding


Change Management and Project Management ultimately work towards the same goal: to deliver project results and to realise the intended benefits of the projects. And one cannot succeed without the other. For instance, if the project is late or poorly implemented, it doesn’t matter if the organisation is ready and motivated to embrace and use the solution, and vice versa. In either case, the benefit realisation will be significantly below what is expected.
Both sides must have their own focus and KPIs for the outcome of the project. The project team must be held accountable for delivering the right solution on time, within budget while the change team must be held accountable for ensuring that the organisation is motivated and ready. Evidence shows that the highest project success rate is when Change Management and Project Management work well together.

Continue Reading

  • “Very good! Fun! Interactive and challenging”

    Anna-Karin Ahlflood, Ericsson

  • “Excellent! I have learned so much”

    Elin Dahlkvist – Systembolaget

  • “Exceptional”

    Johan Ölën – Volvo Group

  • “Very good – Everything was there!”

    Pierre Lavorini – Volvo Group

  • “The best course I have attended to!”

    Lars Herbe – Kvadrat

  • “Very inspiring and informative”

    Margit Weygaard-Hansen – Aller Media A/S

  • “Plug & Play”

    Gitte Nørgaard – Københavns Lufthavne A/S

  • “Combining learning, food and service at very high level. Best course ever!”

    Danni Rahbek – Bestseller A/S

  • “Extremely professional carried out”

    Anitha Rutström Sparrman – Ericsson

  • “Intense and very rewarding”

    Per Larsson – EON

  • “Very good course! I want to take it again”

    Marianne Steen – Enatus Consulting AB

  • “It was an excellent, excellent course!!”

    Jakob Larsen – Novo Nordisk A/S


proacteur aps
Lottenborgvej 24B,
2800 Kgs. Lyngby

+45 7023 2240

CVR/VAT: DK29198012

Find us


Ring op

Skriv til os

Prosci kursus