Change is just a 6-letter word

As we conduct a campaign in search of the "right job," so too are we focused on the campaigns of politicians who seek job and societal change. What is it about this word, "change" that it keeps popping-up in political commentary? Who can and should claim the flag of change? 

Those of you who read my post last week, Resolve to enter the "neutral zone, will probably guess that I am going to recommend that job seekers of all types, including politicians, abandon the search for "change." While it is an appealing rallying cry, William Bridges is correct to suggest that change is likely to offer only short-lived solutions. Instead, job seekers would do well to create the time and space necessary to process the endings that will ultimately lead to new beginnings. 

Instead of offering pre-fabricated solutions or intangible promises of "change," perhaps politicians should encourage citizens to embrace "the neutral zone" – that extended period of reflection and discomfort that may eventually morph into transition and new beginnings. Isn’t this what the primary and general election period is designed to offer – an opportunity to discuss issues of importance , consider new paths, make new connections…?  A candidate who understands and promotes the neutral zone is leading to a very dynamic place – those involved are likely to be fully engaged.

So, should we recommend that William Bridges serve as an adviser to our political candidates?! It would be healthy for politicians to lead toward transition: to embrace a process similar to that employed by job seekers – one that begins with an ending and transitions toward a new beginning.