Types of Change: Crisis, Change and Transformation
This post introduces several important distinctions regarding types of change that are explored further in The Liminal Pathways Study, Chapter 5: Patterns of Change. You can download the full chapter here.
Whether we work with a team, individual leaders, or whole organizations, supporting their performance, helping them realize visionary futures, or simply facilitating an offsite, the underlying process they are going through is one of change. Because of this, it has proven useful for our clients to understand and apply to their situations several important distinctions regarding change. These distinctions can help them to be more insightful about the situation they are in and design adequate support.
The three basic types of change—crisis, change and transformation—that I introduce below are best to think of as frames or lenses to look through to explore our individual and collective experiences rather than objective realities, although as some might agree, they might reflect those, as well. Each person, team, and organization is uniquely affected by the forces of change. What might be a crisis for one might be an unexpected opportunity for another. What might be a possible way to improve the status quo for one might be a transformational pathway for another.
Change is a process
The change-as-process is also the core idea underlying the Liminal Pathways Change Framework™ (LPF) and the Seven Challenges of Change™ Framework. Change is initiated by some precipitating event that begins a transition process of separating from what has been. But this is only the first step. Soon after, we enter an in-between territory where we are no longer the old and not yet the new. Necessarily, things are uncertain, ambiguous, and often feel outright unknown. We must begin clarifying what is next, envisioning possible futures, and consider what decisions and commitments need to be made. How long this in-between process takes varies, of course, but eventually, something new emerges and begins to take form. Then, we must integrate these shifts.
People don’t always see the larger process because initiating events, moments of inspiration, confusion, surprising turns, and unexpected roadblocks command more attention. Because these experiences are often intense and we become engrossed by them, we lose sight of the overall process and the larger patterns. It is only when we step back or reorient ourselves or after the change is complete that we more fully know what kind of change it really was.
Crises
At first, people don’t know what kind of short or long-term impact a crisis will precipitate. Regardless, the crisis will need to be addressed. You need to get on dry land. Wounds need to be treated, the fire extinguished, and during a drought, water needs to be conserved. The specific situation must be stabilized and addressed. After a while, things may return to normal, and the overall situation remains the same. But it is also possible that a spike in the equilibrium through a confluence of destabilizing conditions initiates a much larger change that may result in a deeply transformational process and it is no longer possible to return to the prior status quo. Regardless, it helps to appreciate that in crises, attention appropriately is focused on immediate needs.
Change
Adjusting to the fallout of an emergency situation or responding to the changing conditions within larger contexts may require making longer-term shifts. A change can be small and incremental or large and complex, but this type of change may not necessarily be transformational. We think of change as those kinds of movements and shifts that take place within a certain status quo. The change might maintain or improve the overall status quo but does not represent a departure from it. It is useful to think of the difference between change and transformation as a question of how deeply we feel changed by the situation, either as a person or as a team, organization, or community.
Transformation
Transformations represent a shift into a new status quo. Here is an example. After an important contributor leaves, a team may be able to rehire someone right away and continue without much interruption. This is a change but not too impactful. Alternatively, a team heavily relies on its visionary leader, and after she leaves, they cannot find someone to replace her. The team experiences this as a crisis from which it is difficult to recover. As a result, the team may need to fundamentally revise its purpose and reorganize how it works.
A transformation may not require external influence, but it does require transformational internal shifts. It represents fundamental shifts in underlying beliefs, identity, structures, and appearance. A caterpillar turns into a chrysalis and then a butterfly. Like the crucible (see LPF), the chrysalis enables a transformation of what has been into something new by providing a container that allows a complete dissolution and remaking of substances.
Human systems (a person, family, organization, community, and so forth) move through developmental phases throughout their life cycle. These are predictable transformations. A mature person or organization is not the same as their younger counterparts. A start-up is different from a growth organization and a growth organization from a mature one. Each represents a very different status quo. Transformation is a change that has a permanent and far-reaching effect throughout a system.
Whether a crisis or change is transformative is a question of the level of impact. If a change does not result in a bifurcation point—a threshold of no return—for the individual or organization experiencing the change, the change will be absorbed into the current status quo.
This article reflects on ideas from The Liminal Pathways Study, Chapter 5: Patterns of Change. You can download the full chapter here.
You can purchase The Liminal Pathways Study here.
