Quotes from William Bridges

One of the most difficult aspects of the neutral zone is that most people don't understand it. They expect to be able to move straight from the old to the new. But this isn't a trip from one side of the street to the other. It's a journey from one identity to another, and that kind of journey takes time.

the First Law of Organizational Development is evident: those who were most at home with the necessary activities and arrangements of one phase are the ones who are the most likely to experience the subsequent phase as a severe personal setback. They will talk about it as a "strategic mistake," as "dumb," "unnecessary," and "too expensive.

Even though there is a new situation in place and they have started to grapple with it, people are still in the neutral zone, feeling lost, confused, and uncertain. The beginning will take place only after they have come through the wilderness and are ready to make the emotional commitment to do things the new way and see themselves as new people. Starts involve new situations. Beginnings involve new understandings, new values, new attitudes, and—most of all—new identities.

No pain, no gain," they say. But many change efforts fail because the people affected experience only the pain. The company may gain, but for employees it seems to be all loss. Trying to talk them out of their feelings will get you nowhere.

the outlook, attitudes, values, self-images, and ways of thinking that were functional in the past have to "die" before people can be ready for life in the present.

it is natural to feel somewhat nervous and confused at such a time. As the old patterns disappear from people's minds and the new ones begin to replace them, people can be full of self-doubts and misgivings about themselves and their leaders. As their ambivalence increases, so does their longing for answers.

Purpose You can explain the basic purpose behind the outcome you seek. People have to understand the logic of it before they will turn their minds to work on it. Picture You can paint a picture of how the outcome will look and feel. People need to experience it imaginatively before they can give their hearts to it. Plan You can lay out a step-by-step plan for phasing in the outcome. People need a clear idea of how they can get where they need to go.

The question to ask yourself is this: What can I give back to balance what's been taken away? Status, turf, team membership, recognition, roles? If people feel that the change has robbed them of control over their futures, can you find some way to give them back a feeling of control?

Part You can give each person a part to play in both the plan and the outcome. People need a tangible way to contribute and participate.

every previous level of change comes to be called "stability." Seen in this light, what people today call "nonstop change" is simply a new level of what has always existed. It isn't pure chaos—simply a new experience. When people adjust to it, they will look back upon it as "the stability that we used to enjoy.

They already know. We announced it." Okay, you told them, but it didn't sink in. Threatening information is absorbed remarkably slowly. Say it again. And find different ways to say it and different media (large meetings, one-on-ones, email, a story on the company website, Tweets) in which to say it.

You can try hard to protect people from further changes while they're trying to regain their balance.

People can deal with a lot of change if it is coherent and part of a larger whole. But adding unrelated and unexpected changes, even small ones, can push people to the breaking point.

Review policies and procedures to see that they are adequate to deal with the confusing fluidity of the neutral zone. The "rules" under which you operate were set up to govern ongoing operations when things weren't changing as much as they are now.

Hierarchy often breaks down in the neutral zone, and mixed groupings, such as task forces and project teams, are often very effective. People may have to be given temporary titles or made "acting" managers.

One of the biggest problems that endings cause in an organization is confusion. Things change, and obviously the organization won't do some of the things it used to do.

STRENGTHEN INTRAGROUP CONNECTIONS The neutral zone is a lonely place. People feel isolated, especially if they don't understand what is happening to them. As I have already noted, old problems are likely to resurface and old resentments are likely to come back to life. For these reasons it is especially important to try to rebuild a sense of identification with the group and of connectedness with one another.

One of the most important leadership roles during times of change is that of putting into words what it is time to leave behind. Because talking about making a break with the past can upset its defenders, some leaders shy away from articulating just what it is time to say good-bye to. But in their unwillingness to say what it is time to let go of, they are jeopardizing the very change that they believe they are leading.

Communications help to keep people feeling included in and connected to the organization. Many companies have used online newsletters and other social media outlets as a way of maintaining contact with, and showing concern for, employees in the neutral zone. Communicating in real time can give employees new information, dispel rumors, and answer questions.

Don't just talk about the endings—create actions or activities that dramatize them.

In the neutral zone, be wary of any arrangement or activity that shows a preference for one group over others. During this middle phase of transition, people want to feel that "we are all in this boat together"—another good metaphor. They will put up with a lot of discomfort if everyone must do so as well.

Never denigrate the past. Many managers, in their enthusiasm for a future that is going to be better than the past, ridicule or demean the old way of doing things. In doing so they consolidate the resistance against the transition because people identify with the way things used to be and thus feel that their self-worth is at stake whenever the past is attacked.

loss is a subjective experience, and your "objective" view (which is really just another subjective view) is irrelevant.

Executive teams we have worked with can often, in hindsight, lay out a clear chronology of the stages of their organization's development and the events that triggered the transition from one stage to the next. But in the moment these same people found it very difficult to describe exactly what was happening.