Transitions

Transitions Plot Summary

Introduction

Change is inevitable, yet most of us struggle with navigating its choppy waters. Whether it's a career shift, organizational restructuring, or personal transformation, the process often leaves us feeling disoriented and resistant. Why do perfectly logical changes meet such fierce resistance? The answer lies not in the change itself, but in the psychological journey that accompanies it—the transition. Understanding the difference between change and transition is the key to thriving in today's constantly evolving world. Change is situational and external—a new boss, a different role, a move to a new location. Transition, however, is the internal psychological reorientation that people must go through to adapt to the new situation. Without effective transition management, even the most brilliantly planned changes can fail. Throughout these pages, you'll discover proven strategies to navigate endings, move through the uncertain "neutral zone," and create meaningful new beginnings that transform challenges into opportunities for growth.

Chapter 1: Understand the Difference Between Change and Transition

At the heart of most failed organizational initiatives lies a crucial misunderstanding: confusing change with transition. Change is situational—the new office, the reorganization, the merger. Transition, however, is psychological—the three-phase process people go through as they internalize and come to terms with their new reality. This distinction isn't merely semantic; it's fundamental to successful transformation. The Benetton case illustrates this principle perfectly. The Italian clothing company spent nearly $1 billion acquiring prestigious sporting goods brands like Nordica ski boots, Rollerblade in-line skates, and Prince tennis rackets. Their change strategy seemed sound—cross-market workout clothing to customers of these premium brands. However, they failed to manage the transition. At Rollerblade, employees loved skating through Minneapolis' lakeside parks during lunch and playing roller hockey outside their headquarters. The company culture was tied to this activity they loved. When Benetton terminated a large percentage of employees and moved operations to New Jersey, they addressed the change (relocation) but ignored the transition (the psychological adjustment). Within a year, Benetton's U.S. operations went from a $5 million profit to a $31 million loss, and twenty out of twenty-one relocated Rollerblade employees eventually returned to Minnesota. This example shows how changes can be meticulously planned yet fail dramatically when transitions are mismanaged. People don't resist change because they're stubborn—they resist because they're not helped through the necessary psychological process. Transition involves three distinct phases: ending (letting go of the old identity), neutral zone (the confusing in-between time), and new beginning (embracing a new identity and purpose). The ending phase requires acknowledging losses openly and empathetically. For the Rollerblade employees, this meant the loss of a corporate culture centered around an activity they loved. The neutral zone represents that uncomfortable time when the old is gone but the new hasn't fully formed—a time of disorientation but also creativity. Finally, new beginnings emerge when people develop fresh identities aligned with the changed reality. To successfully implement change, leaders must recognize that transition is not optional. An insurance company spent enormous resources coordinating 48 teams for cost-saving ideas, only to discover they couldn't implement the best suggestion (inserting paper sideways into fax machines to cut transition time by 15%) because "it would mean changing behavior." This reveals the heart of the challenge—all significant changes require people to stop doing things the old way and adopt new behaviors. For practical application, consider three key questions: What endings need to be acknowledged? How will you help people navigate the uncertain neutral zone? What resources and communication will enable genuine new beginnings? By focusing on transition rather than just change, you transform resistance into engagement and confusion into purposeful momentum.

Chapter 2: Navigate Endings with Compassion and Clarity

Endings trigger profound emotional responses that leaders often underestimate. Before people can begin something new, they must first end what used to be. This isn't merely a philosophical observation—it's a psychological necessity that determines whether your change initiatives succeed or fail. The pain people experience during change rarely comes from the new situation itself but from the losses they associate with letting go. Consider what happened when a hospital administrator decided to consolidate maternal and pediatric services. The idea made perfect sense financially and from a patient-centered perspective. However, the administrator overlooked that there were two completely different organizational cultures—one developed from working with adults, another from working with children. Staff in both units had formed separate identities, career paths, and procedural knowledge. The consolidation required people to let go of their entire professional world—not just workflows but their sense of belonging and identity. Similarly, when a new general manager arrived at a manufacturing plant and found too many layers of supervision slowing communication, he declared, "Too many managers!" and quickly eliminated positions. While the new structure was logically superior, results deteriorated because people were grieving the loss of familiar relationships, status, and security. The GM kept explaining how much better the new structure was, but his words sounded hollow to people experiencing profound losses. To manage endings effectively, start by identifying specifically who's losing what. Create a detailed map of the change and its ripple effects. Ask: Who will lose relationships, roles, territory, or a sense of competence? What team identities or unspoken assumptions are ending? For example, when companies undergo restructuring, employees often lose more than positions—they lose the belief that "we take care of our people" or "we promote from within." Next, acknowledge these losses openly and empathetically. Statements like "I know that switching to the new platform will leave many of you feeling like beginners again. I feel that way myself, and I hate it!" validate people's experiences. When an electronics company laid off employees but the manager avoided discussing their loss "because calling attention to it will just make them feel worse," they became so angry they plotted to sabotage a key project. Expect and accept the natural signs of grieving: denial, anger, bargaining, anxiety, sadness, disorientation, and depression. When employees resist a change, they're usually processing one of these emotions. An executive visiting a factory targeted for closure won employees over by simply expressing his personal distress about closing the plant—his honest emotion communicated more than any logical explanation. Finally, find ways to compensate for losses. When supervisors at a financial services company were essentially demoted, the manager formed them into a "training task force" to teach their former employees the new systems. Though they lost hierarchical status, they gained new status as technical experts and trainers. The U.S. Forest Service helped foresters whose traditional roles were diminishing by implementing career renewal programs focused on emerging opportunities. By navigating endings with compassion and clarity, you transform what could be destructive resistance into the foundation for successful transition. Remember: the way you handle endings determines whether people will have the emotional resources to embrace new beginnings.

Chapter 3: Thrive in the Neutral Zone's Creative Wilderness

The neutral zone—that uncomfortable gap between the old reality and the new—is perhaps the most misunderstood phase of transition. It feels like a barren wilderness where forward motion stops and everything familiar has disappeared. Yet paradoxically, this chaotic middle state holds the greatest potential for innovation and renewal if properly managed. A software company experienced this firsthand when implementing teams to replace individual cubicle-bound technicians. Previously, customer problems were routed through three tiers of specialists, with each tier managed separately and evaluated on individual performance. Though the change to teams made perfect sense on paper, implementation faltered in the neutral zone. Team coordinators maintained their old ties and tried solving problems through former colleagues rather than engaging their new teams. Customers continued being tossed between specialists, and productivity declined. This case illustrates why the neutral zone feels so disorienting. During this phase, anxiety rises, motivation falls, absenteeism increases, and old weaknesses reemerge with new intensity. As one manager estimated after a merger, employee effectiveness fell by 50 percent. The breakdown happens because people are caught between conflicting systems where neither the old ways nor the new ways work satisfactorily. To help people navigate this wilderness productively, leaders must first "normalize" the neutral zone. Explain that this uncomfortable in-between time isn't a sign of failure but a necessary phase of transition—like winter preparing for spring's renewal. As Henry Bessemer, who revolutionized steelmaking, noted: "I had an immense advantage over many others dealing with the problem. I had no fixed ideas derived from long-established practice to bias my mind." The neutral zone automatically puts people into this advantageous state of openness. Next, provide temporary structures to contain the confusion. At a food processing plant facing major changes, leadership organized a Family Day at a local theme park, mixing line workers with managers and blending groups that were becoming polarized. The result was visible the very next morning—less anxiety, more solidarity, and within weeks, measurably improved productivity. In other organizations, transition newsletters, intranet sites, and regular team meetings help maintain connections during this disorienting time. The most forward-thinking leaders also use the neutral zone as a creative laboratory. At this stage, the organization's "immune system" that normally resists innovation is temporarily weakened. Encourage people to question the usual way of doing things and brainstorm alternatives. As Charles Kettering observed, "If you have always done it that way, it is probably wrong." Schedule opportunities for teams to step back and review processes, conduct surveys, and refocus efforts in areas of growing interest. Establish Transition Monitoring Teams (TMTs) to maintain accurate communication between leadership and employees. These cross-sectional groups meet regularly to take the pulse of the organization, providing leaders with unfiltered feedback and countering misinformation. At Royal Dutch Shell, TMTs proved so valuable they continued for over ten years through multiple organizational changes. Remember that the neutral zone is not wasted time but a crucial sorting process. Like the French army unit isolated in the Sahara Desert that received clothing with missing size labels, sometimes the best approach is to give people the resources they need and say, "Debrouillez-vous!"—sort it out yourselves. With protection and encouragement, people can emerge from the neutral zone with new patterns of thought and action that make the change truly transformative.

Chapter 4: Launch Meaningful New Beginnings

New beginnings represent the fulfillment of the transition process, yet they frequently fail because organizations confuse starts with beginnings. A start is situational—installing new computers, cutting the budget, announcing a reorganization. A beginning, however, is psychological—marked by a release of new energy in a new direction and the expression of a new identity. While starts can be scheduled on implementation plans, beginnings follow the timing of the mind and heart. The University of Tennessee experienced this distinction when appointing Joe DiPietro as president in 2011. The university was highly decentralized with four campuses operating independently, each with its own chancellor. DiPietro recognized the inefficiencies of this arrangement and initiated a centralization process. Rather than simply mandating the change, he created steering committees that included high-level advocates, students, and administrators to discuss what traditions to keep and what to let go of as they moved forward. Initially, chancellors resisted, fearing loss of independence and top-down interference. However, as committees discovered synergies between campus functions, excitement grew because everyone could see how they would fit within the new structure. DiPietro remained highly visible and accessible throughout the process, building trust that facilitated buy-in. The result was a system where individual campuses maintained autonomy while supporting statewide initiatives that benefited the entire university. This success illustrates the four essential elements needed to launch meaningful beginnings, which can be remembered as the "Four Ps": Purpose, Picture, Plan, and Part. First, people need a clear purpose—the rationale behind the outcome. DiPietro helped chancellors understand why centralization would strengthen rather than weaken the university system. Second, people need a picture—a vivid image of how the outcome will look and feel. The committees created this by discovering how their roles would evolve in the new structure. Third, people need a plan—a step-by-step approach for phasing in the outcome. DiPietro established processes for voicing concerns and including everyone in defining their future. Finally, people need a part to play—a tangible way to contribute. By assigning "champions" from the original transition team to monitor progress and gather feedback, DiPietro ensured ongoing participation even after the formal transition was complete. To reinforce new beginnings effectively, remember several key principles. Maintain consistency in your messages and actions—if you talk about teamwork but reward individual contributions, you undermine the new beginning. Ensure quick successes to rebuild confidence eroded during the neutral zone. Use symbolic actions to reinforce new identities—like the gold identification badges that replaced blue and white ones during a contentious merger, signaling a truly new organization rather than the dominance of either former company. Most importantly, celebrate reaching the Promised Land. When you feel the majority of people have emerged from the wilderness with a new sense of purpose and identity, take time to mark the accomplishment. This acknowledges the difficulty of the journey and reinforces that the transition, with all its discomfort, has been successfully completed.

Chapter 5: Develop Resilience for Nonstop Organizational Change

Today's organizations face not just single changes but waves of overlapping transformations that create a state of perpetual transition. This reality demands a different approach to transition management—one that builds organizational resilience rather than simply addressing individual changes. The challenge isn't the pace of change itself but adjustments to accelerations or decelerations in that pace. At Apex Manufacturing, a once-dominant company in specialized gasoline motors, this reality hit hard. After losing significant market share to Asian and German competitors and facing costly modifications to meet new exhaust standards, leadership announced the closure of two plants and a 20% workforce reduction. The CEO's initial communication was disastrous—blaming external factors and employees while offering little empathy or clear direction. The situation demanded not just managing a specific change but developing resilience for ongoing transformation. When the human resources VP assembled a transition management advisory group, they prioritized several critical actions. First, they rewrote the announcement to convey sensitivity to the impact on employees and acknowledged leadership's tardiness in responding to market realities. They made it clear upfront that the company was entering a protracted period of change rather than offering false reassurances. Most importantly, they "sold the problem" before selling solutions, helping employees understand the competitive realities necessitating the changes. Building resilience for nonstop change requires several key approaches. First, normalize transition as the new status quo. Help people understand that the point of change is to preserve what doesn't change—just as staying upright on a bicycle depends on constant steering adjustments. Without this perspective, every new change feels like a crisis rather than an expected part of organizational life. Second, clarify your organization's fundamental purpose. When facing continuous change, people need an anchoring point. Toyota's purpose is building vehicles; Harvard's is educating people and advancing knowledge. Every change should preserve this core purpose, even when objectives and methods change dramatically. The confusion of purposes and objectives causes serious problems during transitions—people identify with specific objectives (like manufacturing glass bottles) rather than the underlying purpose (producing the best possible containers). Third, rebuild trust through consistent trustworthy behavior. Do what you say you will, understand what matters to people, share yourself honestly, and acknowledge feedback. Trust makes the difference between people who will undertake change despite fear and those who resist at every turn. As Mark Twain noted, "If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything." Finally, approach change through the lens of "challenge and response." Historian Arnold Toynbee demonstrated that great civilizations rose to power not because of advantages but because they treated disadvantages as challenges requiring creative responses. When ancient Athens faced depleted soil, they switched to olive cultivation, which led to developing a merchant marine, pottery industry, and mining operations. Similarly, organizations thrive by viewing changes as challenges calling for creative solutions rather than threats to be resisted. By implementing these approaches, you transform your organization from one that merely survives change to one that harnesses it for continuous renewal. The most resilient organizations don't just respond to change—they anticipate it, welcome it, and use it as fuel for innovation and growth.

Chapter 6: Build Trust as Your Foundation for Transition

Trust is the invisible infrastructure that enables successful transitions. When people trust their leaders, they're willing to undertake changes even when fearful; without trust, even minor changes meet fierce resistance. This critical foundation is particularly essential during times of significant organizational transformation, yet it's often the first casualty of poorly managed change. Shell Technology's experience with a complex reorganization demonstrates the power of trust-based transition management. When their Amsterdam Research & Development Laboratory prepared to merge with manufacturing organizations in The Hague, the entire leadership team resigned, creating enormous uncertainty. Gary Hays, the general director, implemented Transition Monitoring Teams (TMTs) to rebuild trust during this tumultuous period. The Shell TMT was a network of diverse employees who checked the organization's "temperature" during transition, sorting through rumors and feedback to share with senior management. Initially, employees were skeptical, but the teams were carefully constructed to include individuals with established networks and trusted relationships from across the organization. They gathered input through various channels, maintaining anonymity while ensuring every employee had access and was acknowledged. What made this approach transformative was the commitment to honesty and responsiveness. When TMT members shared critical feedback, some senior managers questioned its validity and requested statistical data. The TMT members refused, explaining, "It wasn't about quantitative evidence. It was about the depth of people's feelings." Management responded with town hall meetings and weekly communications addressing concerns. This transparency built such trust that the TMT continued for more than ten years through several reorganizations, ultimately influencing the entire corporate culture. Building trust requires consistent, specific behaviors. First, do what you say you will do—don't make promises you can't keep. If circumstances prevent you from following through, warn people as soon as possible and explain why. Listen carefully to concerns and demonstrate that you understand them, even if you can't immediately address them all. Protect what matters to people whenever possible, and share yourself honestly—admitting an untrustworthy action can itself build trust. During transitions, address the mistrust that inevitably surfaces from past experiences. At Apex Manufacturing, employees remembered broken promises about pensions and facility closures from years earlier. Leaders recognized that transition is like a low-pressure area on the organizational weather map—it attracts all storms and conflicts in the area, past and present. Rather than trying to suppress these old grievances, they used the opportunity to heal old wounds by communicating honestly and treating employees with dignity. The rewards of trust-building extend far beyond any single transition. When confronted with the challenge of nonstop change, organizations with high trust levels demonstrate remarkable resilience and adaptability. People willingly embrace ambiguity and risk when they believe their leaders have their best interests at heart. As one executive noted, "If trust is the foundation of a house, communication is the electricity that powers it." Remember that building trust takes time but loses momentum quickly if compromised. As you guide your organization through transitions, make trustworthiness your north star—it will illuminate the path forward even when the destination remains unclear.

Summary

Throughout these pages, we've explored the profound difference between change and transition—understanding that external changes succeed only when accompanied by the internal psychological journey of transition. From navigating endings with compassion to harnessing the creative potential of the neutral zone and launching meaningful new beginnings, the path through transition follows a natural pattern that, when respected, transforms disruption into opportunity. The wisdom of managing transitions applies whether you're leading an organization through restructuring or navigating your own career shifts. As William Bridges reminds us, "It isn't the changes that do you in, it's the transitions... Change is situational, transition is psychological." This insight invites us to shift our focus from controlling external circumstances to mastering the internal processes that determine whether changes succeed or fail. Your next step is simple yet profound: identify one transition currently affecting you or your team and apply the principles of acknowledging endings, normalizing the neutral zone, and nurturing new beginnings. By doing so, you'll discover that transitions, though challenging, contain the seeds of transformative growth and renewal.

About Author

Loading...

William Bridges

William Bridges is an internationally known speaker, author, and consultant who advises individuals and organizations in how to deal productively with change.Educated originally in the humanities at Harvard, Columbia, and Brown Universities, he was (until his own career change in 1974) a professor of American Literature at Mills College, Oakland, CA. He is a past president of the Association for Humanistic Psychology. The Wall Street Journal listed him as one of the top ten independent executive development presenters in America.[source]

Read more