Seeking Deeper Understanding #055

SDTEST^® has 38 different VUCA polls that calculate the 13,643 correlation values between stages of development according to the theory of Spiral Dynamics and answer options of these 38 polls.

We invite curiosity about the systemic mechanisms behind this correlation. There may be hidden variables that provide alternative explanations.

In our analysis of the poll "AI and the end of civilization" (by Elon Musk), we found an intriguing negative correlation that warrants closer examination:  

-0.0937 between the State should exercise control over the development of artificial intelligence / Somewhat disagree and the Purple stage. 

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.0752. This negative correlation of -0.0937 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation. 

This negative correlation of -0.0937 between disagreement with state control over AI and the Purple stage, when combined with the "Somewhat disagree" response, effectively indicates agreement with state control from a Purple value system perspective:

Organizational Perspective:

Organizations operating within the Purple mindset might interpret this correlation as:

1. Validation that AI development must be guided by traditional authority structures
2. Confirmation that supernatural and technological forces require proper ritual containment
3. Evidence that tribal wisdom and ancestral guidance should govern new technologies

These organizations might respond by:

• Establishing ceremonial protocols for technology implementation
• Creating sacred spaces for AI decision-making processes
• Implementing tribal elder oversight committees for technological advancement

Team Perspective:

Teams operating from a Purple mindset might approach this correlation by:

1. Viewing state control as a necessary protective barrier against unknown spiritual forces
2. Interpreting AI as a powerful spirit requiring proper tribal governance
3. Seeing government oversight as an extension of ancestral protection

These teams might respond by:

• Developing rituals to ensure safe AI integration
• Consulting tribal elders before implementing new AI systems
• Creating protective ceremonies around AI deployment

Individual Perspective:

Individuals aligned with the Purple value system might interpret this correlation as:

1. Personal validation of their belief in authority figures as spiritual protectors
2. Evidence supporting their trust in traditional power structures
3. Confirmation that mysterious forces like AI need tribal containment

These individuals might respond by:

• Seeking blessing from tribal elders before engaging with AI
• Viewing government control as a form of spiritual protection
• Using traditional rituals when interacting with AI systems

This correlation, viewed through the Purple lens, suggests those operating at this level support state control over AI development. It implies that the Purple value system's focus on protection, tradition, and spiritual safety aligns with governmental oversight of powerful technologies.

The reasons why state control over AI might be supported in the Purple stage include:

1. Spiritual Protection: Government as a guardian against unknown technological forces
2. Ancestral Wisdom: Traditional authority structures providing guidance
3. Tribal Safety: Collective protection through established hierarchies
4. Ritual Control: Need for proper ceremonies to contain powerful forces
5. Sacred Order: Maintaining spiritual harmony through regulated development

This correlation prompts us to consider how traditional value systems view technological governance. It raises questions about the role of spiritual beliefs and ancestral wisdom in managing modern innovations.

The correlation highlights the complex interplay between traditional values and technological advancement. In Purple-dominant environments, state control might be seen as a necessary spiritual safeguard rather than a regulatory burden.

In our analysis of the poll "What will you do this week to look after your mental health?" we found an intriguing positive correlation that warrants closer examination:  

0.0714 between the Be physically active and the Red stage. 

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a non-normal distribution, by Spearman r = 0.0026. This positive correlation of 0.0714 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This positive correlation of 0.0714 between physical activity for mental health and the Red stage reveals compelling insights when viewed through the Red value system:

Organizational Perspective:

Organizations operating within the Red mindset might interpret this correlation as:

1. Validation that physical dominance enhances mental strength and power
2. Confirmation that aggressive physical activity drives psychological superiority
3. Evidence that bodily prowess directly translates to mental control

These organizations might respond by:

• Implementing competitive physical training programs
• Creating reward systems that celebrate physical superiority
• Developing aggressive fitness challenges for psychological dominance

Team Perspective:

Teams operating from a Red mindset might approach this correlation by:

1. Viewing physical activity as a way to establish team hierarchies
2. Interpreting fitness as a tool for mental intimidation
3. Seeing physical prowess as proof of mental toughness

These teams might respond by:

• Organizing intense physical competitions
• Using fitness levels to determine team leadership
• Creating physically demanding team challenges

Individual Perspective:

Individuals aligned with the Red value system might interpret this correlation as:

1. Personal validation of using physical power to assert mental dominance
2. Evidence supporting their belief in physical superiority as mental strength
3. Confirmation that bodily prowess leads to psychological control

These individuals might respond by:

• Pursuing aggressive physical training regimens
• Using physical achievements to intimidate others
• Showcasing their fitness as a sign of mental superiority

This correlation, viewed through the Red lens, suggests those at this level embrace physical activity as a path to mental dominance. It implies that the Red value system's focus on power and dominance aligns with using physical prowess for psychological advantage.

The reasons why physical activity might be embraced for mental health in the Red stage include:

1. Power Display: Physical fitness as a demonstration of mental strength
2. Dominance Expression: Using physical prowess to assert psychological control
3. Immediate Gratification: Quick results from intense physical activity
4. Competitive Edge: Physical superiority as a mental advantage
5. Force Projection: Using bodily strength to intimidate others mentally

This correlation highlights the relationship between physical power and mental dominance. It suggests that in Red consciousness, physical activity is seen as a direct path to psychological superiority and control.

The correlation invites us to consider how physical prowess serves as a tool for mental dominance. In Red-dominant environments, physical activity might be less about health and more about establishing and maintaining power hierarchies.

In our analysis of the poll "Empathy is," we found an intriguing positive correlation that warrants closer examination:  

0.0740 between the Imagining how someones is feeling / Strongly Disagree and the Blue stage. 

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.0663. This positive correlation of 0.0740 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This positive correlation of 0.0740 between strongly disagreeing that empathy is imagining feelings and the Blue stage offers significant insights when viewed through the Blue value system:

Organizational Perspective:

Organizations operating within the Blue mindset might interpret this correlation as:

1. Validation that empathy must follow structured, codified rules rather than imagination
2. Confirmation that proper empathy requires following established protocols
3. Evidence that emotional understanding should be guided by moral authority

These organizations might respond by:

• Implementing standardized empathy training programs
• Creating clear guidelines for appropriate emotional responses
• Developing structured frameworks for interpersonal interactions

Team Perspective:

Teams operating from a Blue mindset might approach this correlation by:

1. Viewing empathy as a duty-bound process rather than an imaginative exercise
2. Interpreting emotional understanding through established hierarchical structures
3. Seeing proper empathy as adherence to organizational guidelines

These teams might respond by:

• Following prescribed protocols for emotional support
• Implementing structured empathy procedures
• Establishing clear rules for interpersonal engagement

Individual Perspective:

Individuals aligned with the Blue value system might interpret this correlation as:

1. Personal validation of following proper procedures for emotional understanding
2. Evidence supporting their belief in structured approaches to empathy
3. Confirmation that imagination should not override established empathy protocols

These individuals might respond by:

• Adhering strictly to prescribed emotional response guidelines
• Following organizational protocols for showing empathy
• Rejecting subjective interpretations of others' feelings

This correlation, viewed through the Blue lens, suggests those at this level reject informal, imaginative approaches to empathy. It implies that the Blue value system's focus on order and structure extends to how emotional understanding should be approached.

The reasons why imagining feelings might be rejected as empathy in the Blue stage include:

1. Protocol Adherence: Proper empathy must follow established rules
2. Moral Authority: Emotional understanding should be guided by higher principles
3. Structured Response: Empathy requires formal, systematic approaches
4. Duty-Based Action: Emotional support should follow prescribed duties
5. Hierarchical Order: Understanding must respect organizational structure

This correlation prompts us to consider how structured value systems approach emotional understanding. It raises questions about the role of imagination versus protocol in empathetic responses.

The correlation highlights the tension between subjective emotional interpretation and structured approaches to understanding others. In Blue-dominant environments, empathy might be seen as a matter of proper procedure rather than imaginative connection.

In our analysis of the poll "Ageism in career," we found an intriguing negative correlation that warrants closer examination:  

-0.1195 between the Age group 65-69 and the Orange stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.0782. This negative correlation of -0.1195 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This negative correlation of -0.1195 between the Age group 65-69 and the Orange stage warrants empirical analysis through the Orange value system lens:

Organizational Perspective:

Organizations operating within the Orange mindset might interpret this correlation as:

1. An opportunity to analyze performance metrics across age demographics
2. A prompt to evaluate success factors based on measurable outcomes
3. A catalyst for developing data-driven talent assessment systems

These organizations might respond by:

• Implementing blind performance evaluation systems based purely on metrics
• Creating objective skill assessment frameworks regardless of demographics
• Developing data-driven talent development programs open to all performers

Team Perspective:

Teams operating from an Orange mindset might approach this correlation by:

1. Analyzing team performance data across all demographic segments
2. Evaluating innovation and success metrics independent of age
3. Measuring contribution and impact through objective criteria

These teams might respond by:

• Establishing clear, measurable performance indicators
• Implementing merit-based project assignment systems
• Creating objective feedback mechanisms focused on results

Individual Perspective:

Individuals aligned with the Orange value system might interpret this correlation as:

1. An opportunity to focus on personal achievement metrics
2. Evidence supporting investment in measurable skill development
3. Motivation to demonstrate value through quantifiable results

These individuals might respond by:

• Tracking personal performance metrics
• Pursuing credential-based skill validation
• Building portfolios of measurable achievements

This correlation, viewed through the Orange lens, invites empirical investigation into the factors affecting value system alignment across different demographics. It suggests the need for data-driven analysis rather than assumptions.

The reasons why this correlation warrants investigation in the Orange stage include:

1. Performance Analysis: Need for objective evaluation of success factors
2. Metric Validation: Importance of measuring actual rather than assumed capabilities
3. Evidence-Based Practice: Focus on empirical data over demographic categorization
4. Success Indicators: Identification of genuine performance drivers
5. Market Analysis: Understanding value system alignment through measurable data

This correlation prompts us to consider how organizations can better leverage talent through objective measurement. It raises questions about creating truly meritocratic systems based on verifiable performance data.

The correlation highlights the importance of empirical analysis in understanding value system alignment. In Orange-dominant environments, success should be measured through objective achievement rather than demographic factors.

In our analysis of the poll "Does ageism exist?" we found an intriguing positive correlation that warrants closer examination:  

0.0859 between the Age group 55-59 years and the Green stage. 

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.0764. This positive correlation of 0.0859 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This positive correlation of 0.0859 between the Age group 55-59 years and sensitivity to ageism in the Green stage reveals meaningful insights about social consciousness:

Organizational Perspective:

Organizations operating within the Green mindset might interpret this correlation as:

1. Recognition that 55-59 year olds are uniquely positioned to identify systemic age discrimination
2. Understanding that this age group's heightened awareness stems from direct experience with transition
3. Evidence that this demographic brings valuable perspective on workplace inequities

These organizations might respond by:

• Creating forums for 55-59 year olds to share their experiences with ageism
• Developing programs that leverage this group's sensitivity to create more inclusive cultures
• Implementing listening sessions to understand the nuanced experiences of this age group

Team Perspective:

Teams operating from a Green mindset might approach this correlation by:

1. Viewing 55-59 year olds' sensitivity as a valuable lens for identifying subtle discrimination
2. Interpreting their awareness as crucial feedback for building inclusive environments
3. Seeing their experiences as essential catalysts for team growth and understanding

These teams might respond by:

• Using insights from 55-59 year olds to improve team dynamics
• Creating safe spaces for sharing age-related concerns
• Developing protocols that address the specific challenges this group identifies

Individual Perspective:

Individuals aligned with the Green value system might interpret this correlation as:

1. Personal validation of their growing awareness of systemic barriers
2. Evidence that their life stage provides unique insights into workplace dynamics
3. Confirmation of their role as potential change agents in addressing ageism

These individuals might respond by:

• Advocating based on their firsthand experience with age-related transitions
• Sharing insights from straddling multiple career stages
• Using their sensitivity to help others recognize subtle forms of ageism

This correlation, viewed through the Green lens, suggests the 55-59 age group's heightened sensitivity stems from their unique position at the intersection of experience and vulnerability.

The reasons why the 55-59 age group shows increased sensitivity to ageism in the Green stage include:

1. Career Transition: Approaching significant career milestone age thresholds
2. Accumulated Experience: Sufficient tenure to recognize systemic patterns
3. Personal Impact: Direct experience with subtle forms of age discrimination
4. Generational Bridge: Position between younger and older workforce segments
5. Social Consciousness: Developed awareness of systemic inequities

This correlation prompts us to consider how age intersects with social consciousness. It raises questions about the role of lived experience in developing awareness of systemic inequities.

The correlation highlights the importance of including diverse age perspectives in conversations about social justice. In Green-dominant environments, the experiences of the 55-59 age group might serve as valuable catalysts for meaningful dialogue about age inclusivity.

In our analysis of the poll "Why People Resist Change" (by Siobhán  McHale [1]), we found an intriguing negative correlation that warrants closer examination:  

-0.1830 between the Curtailed freedom and the Yellow stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.1329. This negative correlation of -0.1830 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This negative correlation of -0.1830 between Curtailed Freedom as a reason for resisting change and the Yellow stage provides fascinating insights when viewed through the lens of the Yellow value system:

Organizational Perspective:

Organizations operating within the Yellow mindset might interpret this correlation as:

1. Validation of their approach that emphasizes personal autonomy and self-direction within systemic understanding.
2. Confirmation that their flexible, integrative structures naturally reduce fears about loss of freedom.
3. Evidence that their focus on purpose-driven change aligns with individual growth needs.

These organizations might respond by:

• Creating even more fluid, adaptive organizational structures that allow for natural evolution.
• Implementing systems that enable individuals to choose their level and area of contribution.
• Developing change initiatives that explicitly integrate individual autonomy with organizational purpose.

Team Perspective:

Teams operating from a Yellow mindset might approach this correlation by:

1. Viewing it as confirmation of their ability to balance individual freedom with collective purpose.
2. Interpreting it as support for their flexible, self-organizing approach to team dynamics.
3. Seeing it as validation for their practice of integrating multiple perspectives in change processes.

These teams might respond by:

• Facilitating more opportunities for members to shape the direction of change initiatives.
• Creating spaces where individual creativity can flourish within the team's broader purpose.
• Developing change processes that naturally emerge from collective wisdom rather than top-down directives.

Individual Perspective:

Individuals aligned with the Yellow value system might interpret this correlation as:

1. Personal validation of their ability to see change as an opportunity for growth rather than a threat to freedom.
2. Evidence supporting their understanding that true freedom comes from integration, not isolation.
3. Confirmation of their capacity to hold multiple perspectives while maintaining personal autonomy.

These individuals might respond by:

• Actively seeking opportunities to contribute to systemic change while maintaining personal authenticity.
• Viewing change as a natural part of personal and organizational evolution.
• Using their understanding of complex systems to help others navigate change without feeling threatened.

This correlation, viewed through the Yellow lens, suggests that those operating at the Yellow level may be less likely to view organizational change as a threat to personal freedom. It implies that the Yellow value system's integrative perspective, systemic understanding, and focus on personal growth align with a more adaptable and evolutionary approach to change management.

The reasons why Curtailed Freedom might not be seen as a reason for resisting change in the Yellow stage could include:

1. Systems Understanding: Yellow's grasp of complex systems helps them see how personal freedom can expand through well-designed change.
2. Integration Capacity: Their ability to integrate multiple perspectives reduces the perception of change as threatening to personal freedom.
3. Growth Orientation: They view change as an opportunity for both personal and systemic evolution.
4. Authentic Expression: Their security in personal authenticity makes them less fearful of organizational change.
5. Holistic Perspective: Their ability to see the bigger picture helps them understand how individual freedom can be enhanced through systemic change.

This correlation prompts us to consider how evolved value systems might naturally resolve common change resistance factors. It raises questions about how organizations can foster development toward more integrated perspectives on change and freedom.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the transformative potential of the Yellow value system in creating organizations where change and personal freedom are seen as complementary rather than contradictory forces.

In our analysis of the poll "The Five Dysfunctions of a Team" (by Patrick Lencioni [2]), we found an intriguing negative correlation that warrants closer examination:  

-0.1532 between the Inattention to Results (A team that doesn't focus on results will quickly find itself adrift) and the Turquoise stage. 

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.1228. This negative correlation of -0.1532 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This negative correlation of -0.1532 between Inattention to Results as a team dysfunction and the Turquoise stage offers profound insights when viewed through the lens of the Turquoise value system:

Organizational Perspective:

Organizations operating within the Turquoise mindset might interpret this correlation as:

1. Validation of their holistic approach that naturally integrates multiple forms of results and success metrics.
2. Confirmation that their focus on interconnected systems leads to more comprehensive outcome awareness.
3. Evidence that their ecological perspective enhances rather than detracts from results orientation.

These organizations might respond by:

• Developing more sophisticated metrics that capture both tangible and intangible outcomes.
• Implementing systems that track the ripple effects of results across various stakeholders and ecosystems.
• Creating frameworks that balance immediate results with long-term sustainability and systemic health.

Team Perspective:

Teams operating from a Turquoise mindset might approach this correlation by:

1. Viewing it as affirmation of their ability to maintain multiple layers of awareness while pursuing objectives.
2. Interpreting it as support for their integrated approach to measuring success.
3. Seeing it as validation for their practice of considering both immediate and systemic results.

These teams might respond by:

• Expanding their definition of results to include ecological and social impact metrics.
• Creating more nuanced feedback loops that capture subtle system changes.
• Developing practices that honor both quantitative outcomes and qualitative transformations.

Individual Perspective:

Individuals aligned with the Turquoise value system might interpret this correlation as:

1. Personal validation of their capacity to remain results-focused while maintaining systemic awareness.
2. Evidence supporting their understanding that true results emerge from holistic attention.
3. Confirmation of their ability to track multiple layers of outcomes simultaneously.

These individuals might respond by:

• Actively seeking ways to measure both personal and systemic progress.
• Viewing results through an integrated lens that includes individual, collective, and ecological impacts.
• Using their understanding of interconnectedness to achieve more sustainable outcomes.

This correlation, viewed through the Turquoise lens, suggests that those operating at the Turquoise level may be more attuned to results, not less. It implies that the Turquoise value system's holistic perspective, ecological awareness, and focus on interconnectedness actually enhance their ability to track and achieve meaningful outcomes.

The reasons why Inattention to Results might not be seen as a dysfunction of a team in the Turquoise stage could include:

1. Holistic Awareness: Their expanded consciousness naturally includes attention to multiple layers of results.
2. Systemic Integration: Their understanding of interconnectedness helps them track cascading effects and outcomes.
3. Enhanced Perception: Their ability to perceive subtle system changes makes them more, not less, attuned to results.
4. Comprehensive Metrics: Their inclusive definition of results captures more dimensions of success.
5. Long-term Vision: Their ability to see both immediate and long-term impacts keeps them focused on sustainable results.

This correlation prompts us to reconsider traditional definitions of "results" and "attention." It raises questions about how more evolved value systems might naturally integrate different types of outcomes while maintaining clear focus.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the potential of Turquoise consciousness to transform how organizations measure and achieve success, suggesting that higher levels of development lead to more sophisticated, not diminished, results orientation.

We welcome respectful and wise perspectives! Stay tuned every week as we share more results and insights. 

After login or registration, free access to the poll results in the FAQ section.

[1] https://www.linkedin.com/in/mchalesiobhan/
[2] https://www.linkedin.com/in/patrick-lencioni-orghealth/

Valerii Kosenko

Lastnik izdelka SaaS SDTEST®

Valerii je leta 1993 pridobil izobrazbo socialnega pedagoga-psihologa in od takrat svoje znanje uporablja pri vodenju projektov.
Valerii je leta 2013 pridobil magisterij in kvalifikacijo projektnega in programskega vodje. Med magistrskim študijem se je seznanil s Projektnim načrtom (GPM Deutsche Gesellschaft für Projektmanagement e. V.) in Spiralno dinamiko.
Valerii je avtor raziskovanja negotovosti V.U.C.A. koncept z uporabo spiralne dinamike in matematične statistike v psihologiji ter 38 mednarodnih anket.