Managing change is one of the most difficult tasks for many leaders. One reason is that we often do not understand the difference between changeand transition. William Bridges explains this distinction clearly in his book Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Change(4th ed., 2016).
There are two basic concepts we need to understand:
Change is physical; transition is emotional.
Change is what happens externally. It involves moving from one place, position, or situation to another. For example, a person may move physically from one location to another. A church may move to a new building, a pastor may move to a new position, or an organization may adopt a new structure. These are visible changes.
Transition, however, is what happens internally. It is the psychological and emotional process of moving from the past to the future. We cannot see transition with our eyes in the same way that we can see physical change. A person may have already moved to a new place, but emotionally he or she may still be living in the past.
Therefore, change and transition are not the same thing.
Sometimes the two overlap. When a person’s position or circumstances change, his or her thinking and feelings may also change. But there is an important difference: change can happen quickly, while transition often takes time.
This distinction is especially important in ministry leadership.
Leaders are often eager to take people from here to there—from the past to the future. We may announce a new vision, introduce a new ministry, change an organizational structure, or ask people to adopt a new way of doing things. We may think that because the external change has been made, the people have also changed.
But that is not necessarily true.
People need time to make the emotional and psychological journey from what they have known to what is coming next.
This is where another important concept from William Bridges becomes especially helpful: the Neutral Zone.
The Neutral Zone is the uncomfortable period between the old and the new. People have already left the old situation, but they have not yet fully entered the new one. They may feel uncertain, confused, frustrated, or even lost. The old way no longer seems to work, but the new way has not yet become familiar.
This is often the most difficult stage of transition—and yet it can also be one of the most important times for growth.
Let us consider the Israelites as an illustration.
The Israelites left Egypt and were on their way to Canaan, the Promised Land. They had physically left Egypt, but their emotional and spiritual transition was much more complicated. Between Egypt and Canaan was the wilderness. They did not enter the Promised Land immediately. Instead, they wandered in the wilderness for forty years.
They had left Egypt, but they had not yet fully arrived in Canaan.
In fact, many of them never entered the Promised Land.
The wilderness can therefore serve as a powerful metaphor for transition.
Egypt represented the old life. Canaan represented the new future God had promised. The wilderness represented the in-between place.
This is often what happens in ministry.
When we lead people through change, we should not assume that everyone will immediately embrace the new direction. They may have physically moved, but emotionally they may still be attached to the past. They may need time to grieve what they have lost, let go of the old, understand the new, and develop confidence in the future.
Therefore, a good leader does not simply manage change; a good leader manages transition.
Change tells people what is different.
Transition helps people understand how to move from what wasto what will be.
That is why leaders must learn to walk with people through the wilderness—the Neutral Zone—rather than becoming frustrated because they have not yet arrived in Canaan.
We must remember that people do not change simply because we announce that change is necessary. They change when their hearts begin to understand, accept, and embrace the new direction.
A leader’s responsibility is therefore not merely to move people from one place to another, but to walk patiently with them until their hearts catch up with the change.
Change moves people. Transition moves people’s hearts.
And in ministry, moving people’s hearts is often the more important work.
■ ■ ■
Change is an uncomfortable word in the church and in ministry. Yet change is a reality that pastors and leaders must eventually face. Ultimately, the responsibility for leading change rests with the leader.
In fact, I believe a leader should sense the need for change before the members begin saying, “Something needs to change in our church.” When members raise the issue first, the pastor may feel burdened or even pressured. A leader, therefore, needs to pay attention to the signs that indicate when change has become necessary.
However, simply announcing the word changedoes not produce change.
Pastors and laypeople may agree that change is necessary. They may talk about it, announce it, and even make plans for it. But change does not happen merely because we talk about it.
The important question is:
How does change actually take place?
Two books have helped me understand this question. The first is Leading Changeby John Kotter of Harvard University. Kotter identifies eight steps for leading change, and one concept that has particularly influenced me is the importance of a sense of urgency. Without a sense of urgency, meaningful change is very difficult.
The second book is Managing Transitions: Making the Most of Changeby William Bridges. Bridges makes an important distinction between change and transition, and this distinction has been especially helpful to me.
According to Bridges, change is an external event. It is something that happens to our circumstances, position, or situation.
For example, suppose a person is promoted from deacon to elder in a church. The person’s position has changed. That is change.
But transition is different. Transition is the internal, psychological process through which a person adjusts to and embraces the new reality.
A person may officially become an elder but continue to think and behave exactly as he did when he was a deacon. In that case, the external change has taken place, but the internal transition has not yet taken place.
This distinction is extremely important for leaders.
Change can happen quickly. Transition takes time.
Bridges describes transition as a three-stage process:
- Ending
- Neutral Zone
- New Beginning
We must let go of the old before we can fully embrace the new. But we usually cannot move directly from the old to the new. There is an intermediate period—the Neutral Zone.
This is the part of Bridges’ thinking that has helped me the most.
The Neutral Zone
The Neutral Zone is an uncomfortable period between the old and the new.
The old has ended, but the new has not yet fully begun.
People may feel confused, tired, uncertain, and even discouraged. They may ask, “Are we really going in the right direction?” Some will want to continue forward, while others will want to return to the past.
I think of the Israelites leaving Egypt and traveling toward Canaan. They had left Egypt, but they had not yet entered Canaan. They had to pass through the wilderness.
The wilderness was not the destination, but it was necessary.
The people became tired and frustrated. Some wanted to return to Egypt. Others wanted to continue toward the Promised Land. Moses had to lead a people who were living between the past and the future.
That is exactly what can happen during organizational change.
The Neutral Zone can feel like turning on a radio and hearing no sound, or switching on an electric light and seeing no light. Something has happened, but the expected result has not yet appeared.
This is one of the most difficult periods for a leader.
The Leader Must Not Oscillate
There is a word that describes what often happens to leaders during this period: oscillation.
Oscillation is like the swinging movement of the weight of a large clock. A leader may move back and forth:
“Should we continue?”
“Should we go back?”
“Was this really the right decision?”
“Maybe the old way was better.”
Some degree of uncertainty is natural. Every leader experiences it. Minor oscillations are normal.
But there is a significant difference between experiencing uncertainty internally and allowing the organization to see the leader constantly changing direction.
People watch their leaders carefully.
If the leader continually wonders aloud whether to move forward or return to the past, people quickly conclude:
“Our leader is shaking.”
Once people lose confidence in the leader’s direction, the change process can easily collapse.
Therefore, a leader must understand that uncertainty is natural but must also maintain determination.
The leader may listen carefully to people. The leader may reconsider details. The leader may make adjustments. But when the basic direction is clear, the leader must continue to lead.
My Experience: From an Institute to a School
I experienced this personally when I began considering the transition from the LPM Korea Institute to establishing a school.
During my sixth year at the LPM Korea Institute, I began to sense that we needed a school. At that time, I spent some time at Yale Divinity School in New Haven, Connecticut. That experience strengthened my conviction that we needed to think about education in a new way.
When I returned, I began talking with the staff and core leaders about the possibility of establishing a school.
At first, I was simply explaining the need. But everyone understood that if we established a school, significant change would follow.
The reactions were different.
Some staff members responded positively. Others were doubtful. Some said, “The headquarters of this ministry in the United States has not established a school. Why do we need one in Korea?”
Others even asked, “Is establishing a school really the direction of this ministry?”
Through this experience, I learned an important leadership lesson:
The person leading the change and the people supporting the ministry may not see the future in the same way.
That is natural.
The leader’s responsibility is not to ignore people’s concerns. Nor is it to allow every opinion to determine the direction. The leader must listen, consider, and bring people along—but must also maintain the conviction necessary to lead.
As I listened to different opinions, I became increasingly convinced that establishing the school was the right direction.
At that point, I also understood something else: I had to accept responsibility for the outcome.
If the school succeeded, I would be responsible. If it failed, I would also have to accept responsibility.
That realization made me more determined.
The Three Stages Do Not Have Sharp Boundaries
Looking back, I can see Bridges’ three stages clearly in that experience.
There was an Ending—the recognition that the Institute’s previous form could not simply continue forever.
Then came the Neutral Zone—the period of discussion, uncertainty, questions, preparation, and adjustment.
Finally, there was a New Beginning—the preparation and establishment of the school.
But these three stages did not happen like three separate boxes.
They overlapped.
The Ending gradually moved into the Neutral Zone. The Neutral Zone gradually moved toward the New Beginning. Even when we were beginning the new work, some aspects of the Neutral Zone remained.
This taught me that transition is not a mechanical process.
There is no clear line that says, “Today the Ending is finished. Tomorrow the Neutral Zone begins. Next month we enter the New Beginning.”
The stages overlap.
Therefore, I believe it is one of the leader’s responsibilities to recognize where people are in the process and help them move gradually from one stage to the next.
Give People Time
One of the greatest mistakes leaders can make is expecting people to move directly from the past into the future.
It does not work that way.
We cannot simply say:
“Forget the old way. Here is the new way. Let’s begin!”
People need time.
They need time to understand.
They need time to think.
They need time to ask questions.
They need time to accept what is coming.
They need time to prepare themselves emotionally and psychologically for the new beginning.
Nature itself teaches us this principle.
A mushroom does not appear instantly. Bamboo may spend a long time developing before its remarkable growth becomes visible. A baby requires approximately ten months of development before birth.
Growth takes time. Transition takes time.
Some changes may take weeks or months. Others may take years.
Therefore, a wise leader does not merely announce change. A wise leader creates the conditions in which people can transition into the change.
The leader must communicate the need, give people time, listen to their concerns, provide direction, and remain steady throughout the process.
Change is not simply moving from one place to another.
Change is an external event. Transition is the internal journey that enables people to live in the new reality.
And between the old and the new, there is often a wilderness—the Neutral Zone.
The leader’s task is not to eliminate that wilderness.
The leader’s task is to lead people through it.
That is how change comes about.