Why do people adapt to change at different speeds?

Organisations invest considerable time and effort in planning change. They develop strategies, redesign structures, introduce new systems, communicate decisions and establish implementation milestones. Much of this work concentrates on what needs to happen, who is responsible and when the various activities should be completed. Yet even when a change has been carefully planned and “successfully” implemented, people do not necessarily respond as leaders expect. A new structure may be in place, but employees continue relying on their former reporting relationships. A new system has been introduced, but people find ways to maintain familiar processes. Leaders explain the benefits of a different way of working, yet their teams remain hesitant, frustrated or unconvinced.

When this happens, the response is often to communicate the reasons for change again, provide additional training or increase management attention. These interventions may be necessary, particularly when expectations are unclear or people lack the capabilities required to work differently. However, they can also overlook an important distinction: implementing an organisational change is not the same as helping people make the psychological adjustments that accompany it. People may understand the reasons for a decision and recognise its potential benefits while still finding it difficult to leave behind the relationships, routines, responsibilities or assumptions that have shaped their working lives.

William Bridges’ Transition Model offers a useful perspective on this challenge. Rather than concentrating exclusively on the external changes taking place, it invites leaders to consider the internal adjustments people experience as they let go of what was familiar, navigate a period of uncertainty and gradually establish a different way of working. The model does not suggest that everyone experiences change in the same way or that people must progress through a predictable sequence. Instead, it provides a framework for understanding some of the less visible challenges that influence how people respond to organisational change.

What is William Bridges’ Transition Model?

William Bridges, an American author and consultant, developed his transition framework around a distinction between change and transition. Change is situational and concerns something happening in the external world, such as a restructuring, the appointment of a new manager, the introduction of technology or a change in organisational strategy. Transition is psychological and describes the internal process through which people adjust to their changing circumstances. Although the two are connected, they do not necessarily happen at the same pace, and the completion of an organisational change does not mean that everyone affected has made the corresponding psychological adjustment.

Consider someone who has recently been promoted into their first leadership position. Their job title, responsibilities and reporting relationships may change immediately, but they may continue thinking and behaving as an individual contributor. They might find it difficult to delegate work they previously performed themselves, feel uncomfortable holding colleagues accountable or struggle to establish a different relationship with former peers. The external change has happened, but the individual is still adjusting to what it means for their identity, relationships and contribution. A similar process can occur across an organisation when people are expected to adopt new ways of working before they have developed the confidence, understanding or relationships necessary to make them effective.

Bridges describes this psychological adjustment through three overlapping phases: Ending, Losing and Letting Go; the Neutral Zone; and the New Beginning. The first involves recognising what is coming to an end and beginning to release familiar ways of working, relationships or assumptions. The second describes the uncertain period in which the old arrangements no longer provide a reliable guide, while the new ones have not yet become established. The third involves developing a clearer sense of purpose, identity and commitment within the new situation. Although the phases are often illustrated in sequence, they should not be interpreted as three distinct steps that everyone completes in the same order. People may experience elements of several phases simultaneously, revisit earlier concerns or find that their adjustment to one aspect of a change progresses more quickly than another.

William Bridges’ Transition Model illustrates the psychological adjustments people make during change: letting go of the familiar, navigating the uncertainty of the neutral zone and developing confidence in a new beginning. The phases overlap, and people progress through them at different speeds. Illustration based on the work of William Bridges.

The value of the model is therefore not in determining precisely which phase an individual has reached. It is in encouraging leaders to recognise that the human experience of change may be more complex than the implementation plan suggests, and that different forms of leadership support may be needed as people adjust to their new circumstances.

Phase 1: Ending, losing and letting go

One of Bridges’ most useful insights is that transition begins with an ending, even when the change itself represents a positive opportunity. Leaders naturally concentrate on what they are trying to achieve, emphasising future benefits and explaining why existing arrangements are no longer sufficient. However, these explanations may overlook what people believe they are being asked to leave behind. Employees can understand the reasons for change while remaining concerned about losing familiar responsibilities, relationships, routines or aspects of their professional identity.

Some losses are obvious, such as a valued colleague leaving or a team being disbanded. Others are less visible but equally significant. An experienced manager may lose decision-making authority, while a technical specialist may find that years of expertise are becoming less relevant. These changes can challenge people’s confidence, influence and sense of professional worth. Acknowledging such losses does not mean questioning the need for change. It means recognising that people may need to come to terms with what is ending before they can fully engage with what comes next.

Five ways leaders can help people let go

1. Acknowledge what people are losing. Explore which roles, relationships and familiar practices matter to them.
2. Clarify what is changing. Explain what is ending, what will remain and where uncertainty still exists.
3. Recognise the value of the past. Acknowledge previous contributions without portraying established ways of working as failures.
4. Make space for concerns. Listen without immediately defending decisions or interpreting questions as resistance.
5. Identify what can be carried forward. Help people recognise how their existing strengths and experience remain valuable.

A question for leaders: What might my people be losing through this change that I have not yet acknowledged?

Phase 2: The neutral zone

The neutral zone describes the uncertain period between leaving familiar arrangements behind and becoming comfortable with the new reality. People may understand the reasons for change but remain unsure how to operate effectively. Responsibilities may be unclear, established relationships disrupted and previously straightforward decisions more difficult to make. Employees who were once confident in their abilities may struggle with unfamiliar expectations, while leaders become frustrated that progress is slower than anticipated.

Although uncomfortable, Bridges recognised the neutral zone as a potential source of learning and renewal. As familiar routines are disrupted, people have opportunities to challenge assumptions, experiment with different approaches and develop new relationships. However, this potential depends on how the uncertainty is managed. Too little direction can create anxiety and confusion, while excessive control can discourage the experimentation needed to establish better ways of working. Leaders must balance the need for results with the time and support required for people to learn.

Five ways leaders can help people navigate the neutral zone

1. Provide clarity where possible. Explain what is known, what remains uncertain and which decisions people can influence.
2. Establish short-term priorities. Concentrate attention on achievable outcomes rather than expecting immediate mastery.
3. Encourage experimentation. Create opportunities to test approaches, learn from mistakes and adjust working practices.
4. Strengthen peer support. Bring people together to share challenges, experiences and emerging solutions.
5. Review workloads. Ensure people have sufficient time and capacity to develop new capabilities alongside existing responsibilities.

A question for leaders: How am I creating enough stability for people to learn while important things remain uncertain?

Phase 3: The new beginning

The new beginning occurs as people develop confidence, purpose and commitment within the changed situation. They begin to understand their responsibilities, establish effective relationships and experience success through new ways of working. This goes beyond simply accepting a decision or complying with unfamiliar procedures. People gradually develop a sense of ownership, recognising how they can contribute and what it means to be effective in the new environment.

For example, a manager moving from leading a functional team to coordinating work across departments may initially struggle with having less direct control. Over time, they may discover that their contribution comes from influencing colleagues, building agreement and enabling others to make decisions. This involves more than learning new processes. It requires adjusting their understanding of effective leadership. Leaders can support new beginnings by clarifying expectations, reinforcing progress and ensuring that organisational practices encourage the behaviours they want to establish.

Five ways leaders can support new beginnings

1. Connect change to purpose. Help people understand how their contribution supports the organisation’s direction.
2. Clarify expectations. Establish responsibilities, decision-making authority and working relationships.
3. Create opportunities for early success. Help people build confidence through achievable challenges and positive experiences.
4. Reinforce new behaviours. Recognise progress and demonstrate the ways of working expected from others.
5. Align organisational practices. Ensure incentives, processes and performance measures support the new direction.

A question for leaders: What would demonstrate that people have developed genuine confidence and ownership in the new way of working?

Why do people experience the same change differently?

The same organisational change can create very different experiences. A restructure may offer one employee an exciting opportunity while threatening another person’s professional identity. New technology may simplify work for some while challenging the expertise of others. People’s responses are also influenced by their previous experiences, personal circumstances, involvement in decisions and ability to influence what happens next. Research by Oreg, Vakola and Armenakis (2011) reinforces the importance of these individual and organisational factors in shaping reactions to change.

People may also experience different phases of transition simultaneously. Someone might welcome a new role while missing their former team, or feel confident using a new system while remaining uncertain about its implications for their responsibilities. Rather than placing people into fixed categories, leaders can use Bridges’ model to explore which aspects of change are proving difficult and what support might be useful.

Leaders may be further ahead than their teams

By the time a major change is announced, senior leaders may have spent months discussing alternatives, considering implications and adjusting their own expectations. Employees, meanwhile, may be hearing about the decision for the first time. Leaders may already be concentrating on implementation and future benefits while their teams are still trying to understand what they are being asked to leave behind.

This difference in timing can create frustration. Leaders wonder why employees continue questioning decisions they consider settled, while employees feel their concerns are being dismissed. Recognising that people have had different opportunities to process the change can help leaders respond with greater patience and avoid confusing their own readiness with that of their teams.

Not every concern is resistance to change

One danger of using transition models is interpreting every difficult response as evidence that someone has not adjusted psychologically. Employees may question a new process because it creates unnecessary work, challenge a restructure because responsibilities are unclear or express frustration because organisational expectations are inconsistent. These may be legitimate concerns about how the change has been designed or implemented, rather than an inability to let go of the past.

Leaders therefore need to distinguish between the challenges of personal transition and problems with the change itself. Sometimes people need support to develop new capabilities, relationships or confidence. Sometimes the organisation needs to reconsider decisions, remove obstacles or improve its approach. Often both are necessary. The more useful question is not simply why people are resisting, but what their responses might reveal.

How can leaders use the Transition Model in practice?

The greatest value of Bridges’ model is not in identifying which phase someone is experiencing, but in improving the conversations leaders have about change. When employees appear frustrated, uncertain or reluctant to adopt new practices, the model encourages leaders to explore what they may be losing, where uncertainty is creating difficulties and what would help them develop confidence. It provides a way of asking better questions rather than making assumptions about people’s motivations.

Leaders can also use the model alongside conventional change management processes. Implementation reviews typically focus on activities, milestones, budgets and deliverables, but these measures reveal relatively little about people’s psychological adjustment. Regular conversations about emerging concerns, developing capabilities and confidence in new arrangements can provide valuable information about whether the change is becoming embedded in everyday work.

An example: When cross-functional working is not working

Imagine an organisation introducing a new operating model to improve collaboration between sales, operations and customer service. Responsibilities have been documented, reporting relationships updated and managers briefed. Yet six months later, teams continue using old decision-making channels, employees complain about unclear ownership and meetings have increased without improving results.

Bridges’ model offers several possible explanations. Some managers may be reluctant to relinquish familiar authority, while others are still developing the relationships and capabilities needed to collaborate effectively. Leaders may need to acknowledge these losses, provide greater clarity and create opportunities for shared learning. However, they should also examine whether decision rights are genuinely clear and whether organisational incentives support collaboration. The difficulties may reflect both the psychological transition and weaknesses in the new operating model.

Five questions to reflect on as a leader

Think about a change you are currently leading, or one that has recently been introduced.

1. What are people leaving behind? Have I recognised what they value about the existing situation?
2. Where is uncertainty creating difficulties? What can I clarify, and where do people need additional support?
3. What opportunities exist for learning? Am I allowing enough time for experimentation and developing confidence?
4. How will I recognise a new beginning? What behaviours and relationships would demonstrate genuine progress?
5. Am I further ahead than my team? Have others had sufficient opportunity to understand and work through the change?

Leading transition, not simply implementing change

Organisational change affects more than structures, systems and processes. It can challenge the relationships, routines, assumptions and identities through which people make sense of their working lives. Bridges’ Transition Model reminds us that external change and psychological adjustment do not necessarily happen at the same pace. People may need to acknowledge what they are leaving behind, find their way through uncertainty and gradually develop confidence in a different reality.

The model does not remove the difficulties of change or excuse poor implementation. Instead, it encourages leaders to become more curious about what people are experiencing and what might help them move forward. Sometimes people do not need another explanation of where the organisation is going. They need help understanding what they are leaving behind and how they can find their place in what comes next.

Frequently asked questions about change and transition

1. What is the difference between change and transition?

Change refers to an external event or situation, such as a restructuring, new technology or a change in leadership. Transition is the internal psychological process through which people adjust to that situation. A change can happen relatively quickly, while people may need considerably longer to adapt their expectations, relationships and ways of working. Bridges’ model helps leaders recognise that completing an implementation does not necessarily mean people have made the corresponding transition.

2. How long does it take people to adjust to organisational change?

There is no standard timeframe for psychological transition. The time required depends on the significance of the change, what people believe they are losing, their previous experiences and the support available. Some individuals may adjust quickly, while others need considerably longer. Leaders should avoid assuming that everyone will be ready simply because an implementation deadline has passed, and instead look for evidence of growing understanding, confidence and effectiveness.

3. Why do employees resist change even when it is beneficial?

People may recognise the potential benefits of a change while remaining concerned about its personal consequences. They might fear losing competence, autonomy, relationships or familiar routines. However, resistance should not automatically be interpreted as an emotional difficulty. Employees may also be identifying genuine problems with how a change has been designed or implemented. Leaders can learn more by exploring the reasons behind concerns rather than immediately trying to overcome them.

4. What is the neutral zone in Bridges’ Transition Model?

The neutral zone describes the period when familiar arrangements are disappearing but the new ways of working have not yet become fully established. People may experience uncertainty, reduced confidence or difficulty making decisions. However, Bridges also saw this period as an opportunity for learning and renewal, as established assumptions are questioned and different approaches emerge. Leaders can support people by providing clear priorities, encouraging experimentation and maintaining regular communication.

5. Can people experience more than one transition phase at the same time?

Yes. The three phases are not rigid stages that everyone completes in a predictable order. Someone may be enthusiastic about a new role while continuing to miss their former colleagues, or confident about new responsibilities while uncertain about changing relationships. People may also revisit earlier concerns as further changes occur. Leaders should use the model to explore different aspects of someone’s experience rather than assign them to a single phase.

6. How does Bridges’ Transition Model differ from the Change Curve?

The Change Curve is commonly used to explore possible emotional responses to change, such as shock, frustration, uncertainty and acceptance. Bridges’ model focuses on the psychological adjustments involved in letting go of familiar circumstances, navigating uncertainty and establishing a new beginning. The Change Curve encourages leaders to consider how people might be feeling, while Bridges helps them explore what people may need to release, work through or embrace. Both are useful frameworks for discussion rather than reliable predictions of individual behaviour.

7. How can leaders tell whether people have embraced a change?

Compliance with new procedures does not necessarily indicate that people have made the psychological transition. More meaningful signs include growing confidence, clearer understanding of responsibilities, effective working relationships and the ability to make decisions within the new arrangements. People may also begin suggesting improvements rather than simply following instructions. Leaders should examine these behaviours alongside operational results, recognising that genuine commitment does not require agreement with every aspect of the change.

8. Can Bridges’ Transition Model be used alongside other change management approaches?

Yes. Bridges’ model complements approaches that concentrate on planning, implementation and organisational outcomes. Frameworks such as Kotter’s change model or Prosci’s ADKAR model address other aspects of managing change, while Bridges draws attention to the psychological adjustments people experience. Leaders can therefore use established change management processes to guide implementation while applying Bridges’ insights to conversations, communication, learning and support.

References

• Bridges, W. (2004) Transitions: Making sense of life’s changes. 2nd edn. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press.
• Bridges, W. and Bridges, S. (2017) Managing transitions: Making the most of change. 4th edn. Boston, MA: Da Capo Lifelong Books.
• Oreg, S., Vakola, M. and Armenakis, A. (2011) ‘Change recipients’ reactions to organizational change: A 60-year review of quantitative studies’, The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 47(4), pp. 461–524. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886310396550.
• William Bridges Associates (n.d.) ‘Bridges Transition Model’. Available at: https://wmbridges.com/about/what-is-transition/.