Seeking Deeper Understanding #065

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 "Ageism’s causes," we found an intriguing positive linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

0.2855 (Pearson) between the Yes, ageism is the result only of interpersonal interactions and the Purple stage (Ukraine, three languages).

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.2785. Nevertheless, this positive linear correlation of 0.2855 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

The positive correlation of 0.2855 between attributing ageism solely to interpersonal interactions and the Purple stage in Ukraine reveals critical insights into how traditional, community-oriented value systems process social challenges amid prolonged conflict.  

Organizational Perspective

Organizations rooted in the Purple mindset might interpret this correlation as:  

1. Validation of their belief that social issues stem from deviations in communal harmony rather than systemic structures.  
2. Confirmation that age-related conflicts arise when individuals break from ancestral norms of elder respect.  
3. Evidence that maintaining group rituals and traditions prevents interpersonal discord, including ageism.  

These organizations might respond by:  

• Reviving wartime community-building rituals to reinforce intergenerational bonds (e.g., collective storytelling sessions).  
• Appointing elder figures as moral authorities to mediate interpersonal disputes.  
• Framing ageism as a failure to uphold ancestral values of respect for elders.  

Team Perspective

Teams operating within Purple values might view this correlation as:  

1. Affirmation that ageism reflects fractured group cohesion, not institutional bias.  
2. Support for resolving conflicts through ancestral conflict-resolution practices.  
3. Validation of prioritizing communal harmony over individual grievances.  

These teams might respond by:  

• Creating intergenerational mentorship programs rooted in traditional roles.  
• Using group rituals (e.g., shared meals, memorial ceremonies) to repair interpersonal rifts.  
• Framing ageist behavior as taboo, invoking ancestral disapproval for those who violate norms.  

Individual Perspective

Individuals aligned with Purple values might interpret this correlation as:  

1. Proof that ageism results from personal failures to honor elders, not societal structures.  
2. Reinforcement of their role in preserving wartime solidarity through obedience to group norms.  
3. Confirmation that ancestral wisdom provides solutions to interpersonal conflicts.  

These individuals might respond by:  

• Publicly deferring to elders to model "proper" behavior.  
• Attributing ageist incidents to individuals "forgetting" the wartime sacrifices of older generations.  
• Using folk sayings or proverbs about respect to shame ageist behavior.  

This correlation, viewed through the Purple lens, suggests that communities operating at the Purple level may instinctively attribute systemic issues like ageism to interpersonal failures. It implies that the Purple value system’s focus on ancestral traditions, communal harmony, and spiritual accountability prioritizes relational explanations over structural analysis, particularly in crisis contexts like wartime Ukraine.

Why Purple Systems Attribute Ageism to Interpersonal Factors in Wartime Ukraine

1. Ancestral Framing: Purple systems reduce complex issues to interpersonal dynamics governed by tradition (e.g., "Disrespecting elders angers ancestors").  
2. War-Induced Collectivism: Three years of conflict have intensified reliance on tight-knit groups, making systemic critiques feel threatening to communal survival.  
3. Ritualized Conflict Resolution: Ageism is addressed through mediation by elder "wise ones," not policy changes.  
4. Mythological Thinking: Stories of wartime heroism frame older generations as sacred figures, making structural critique taboo.  
5. Survival Prioritization: Systemic analysis is seen as divisive; blaming individuals preserves group cohesion critical in a crisis.  

This correlation prompts us to consider how value systems shape perceptions of social inequities during prolonged crises. It raises questions about whether Purple communities’ interpersonal framing of ageism strengthens wartime solidarity by avoiding divisive systemic critiques, or inadvertently perpetuates generational inequities by ignoring structural roots.

Implications for Post-War Ukraine

This correlation highlights how Purple value systems:  

• Simplify Complexity: Reduce societal issues to interpersonal failures to maintain group stability.  
• Prioritize Unity: Suppress systemic critiques to avoid fracturing fragile wartime solidarity.  
• Moralize Behavior: Frame ageism as a moral failing rather than structural inequity.  

For Ukraine’s recovery, this suggests ageism interventions must work through Purple values—leveraging traditions to promote elder respect while gradually introducing systemic awareness.  

Ultimately, this correlation highlights how Purple systems transform complex societal challenges into matters of communal morality. In post-war Ukraine, ageism might be seen not as a structural failing but as a spiritual breach of ancestral codes — a framing that preserves group cohesion but risks obscuring systemic solutions needed for long-term recovery.

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

0.0840 (Pearson) between the State should exercise control over the development of the artificial intelligence / Strongly disagree and the Red stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a non-normal distribution, by Spearman, is r = 0.003. Nevertheless, this positive linear correlation of 0.0840 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This positive correlation of 0.0840 between strongly disagreeing that the state should exercise control over artificial intelligence development and the Red stage offers intriguing insights when viewed through the lens of the Red value system:

Organizational Perspective:

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

1. Validation of their belief in unrestricted individual power and autonomy in technological development.
2. Confirmation that state control represents an unacceptable limitation on technological innovation and personal ambition.
3. Evidence supporting their view that technological progress should be driven by individual will and competitive advantage.

These organizations might respond by:

• Rejecting any form of external regulation or governmental oversight of AI development.
• Promoting a survival-of-the-fittest approach to technological innovation.
• Positioning themselves as maverick innovators who refuse to be constrained by institutional limitations.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing state control as a direct threat to their technological sovereignty and competitive edge.
2. Interpreting external regulations as an attempt to suppress their individual and collective power.
3. Seeing AI development as a battlefield for demonstrating technological dominance and personal prowess.

These teams might respond by:

• Developing AI technologies in underground or decentralized networks.
• Celebrating acts of technological rebellion against institutional constraints.
• Prioritizing rapid, unrestricted technological development over ethical considerations.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation of their right to pursue technological innovation without external constraints.
2. Evidence supporting their belief in absolute individual freedom and self-expression.
3. Confirmation of their desire to be the masters of their own technological destiny.

These individuals might respond by:

• Aggressively pursuing AI development as a means of personal empowerment.
• Viewing state control as a direct challenge to their individual will and capabilities.
• Using technological innovation as a tool for asserting personal power and independence.

This correlation, viewed through the Red lens, suggests that those operating at the Red level may inherently resist any form of external control or regulation. It implies that the Red value system's focus on individual power, immediate gratification, and self-expression directly conflicts with state-imposed limitations on technological development.

The reasons why people in the Red stage might strongly disagree with state control of AI development could include:

1. Power Assertion: Rejecting state control represents a fundamental expression of individual and organizational autonomy.
2. Competitive Advantage: Unrestricted AI development offers a potential avenue for gaining immediate technological supremacy.
3. Impulse-Driven Innovation: The Red stage's focus on immediate gratification conflicts with measured, regulated technological progress.
4. Dominance Expression: Technological innovation becomes a battlefield for demonstrating personal and collective power.
5. Rejection of External Authority: Any form of state control is perceived as an unacceptable limitation on individual will.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems influence approaches to technological development and regulation. It raises questions about the potential tensions between individual technological ambition and societal oversight.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the complex interplay between individual power dynamics, technological innovation, and regulatory frameworks. The strong disagreement with state control might reflect a fundamental Red-stage belief in unrestricted self-expression and the pursuit of personal technological ambitions, regardless of potential broader societal implications.

In our analysis of the poll "Characteristics of a talented employee" (by TMI [1]), we found an intriguing positive linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

0.1532 (Pearson) between the Strong delivery commitment and work ethic, and the Blue stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.1351. Nevertheless, this positive linear correlation of 0.1532 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This positive correlation of 0.1532 between strong delivery commitment and work ethic and the Blue stage offers profound insights when viewed through the lens of the Blue value system:

Organizational Perspective:

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

1. Validation of their belief in structured, disciplined approaches to work and organizational success.
2. Confirmation that unwavering commitment and strict work ethic are fundamental to organizational excellence.
3. Evidence supporting their understanding that reliability and consistency are paramount organizational values.

These organizations might respond by:

• Implementing rigorous performance management systems that reward consistent delivery and dedication.
• Creating clear hierarchical structures that reinforce the importance of commitment and discipline.
• Developing comprehensive training programs that instill organizational values of loyalty and hard work.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing strong delivery commitment as the ultimate measure of team member value and contribution.
2. Interpreting work ethic as a critical indicator of individual and collective organizational loyalty.
3. Seeing consistent performance as a demonstration of moral and professional integrity.

These teams might respond by:

• Establishing strict performance benchmarks that emphasize reliability and consistency.
• Creating peer accountability systems that reinforce collective commitment to organizational goals.
• Developing recognition programs that celebrate employees who demonstrate exceptional work ethic.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation of their commitment to organizational rules and expectations.
2. Evidence supporting their belief that hard work and consistent delivery are moral imperatives.
3. Confirmation of the value they place on being a reliable, disciplined, and dutiful team member.

These individuals might respond by:

• Prioritizing organizational goals over personal preferences.
• Developing meticulous work practices that demonstrate unwavering commitment.
• Seeking opportunities to prove their reliability and dedication to the organization.

This correlation, viewed through the Blue lens, suggests that those operating at the Blue level may inherently view strong delivery commitment and work ethic as fundamental to personal and professional worth. It implies that the Blue value system's focus on order, discipline, and moral duty naturally aligns with exceptional work performance.

The reasons why strong delivery commitment and work ethic might be characteristic of talented employees in the Blue stage could include:

1. Moral Imperative: Hard work is seen as a moral obligation and a demonstration of personal integrity.
2. Hierarchical Loyalty: Consistent delivery represents commitment to organizational structure and leadership.
3. Systemic Conformity: Strong work ethic ensures alignment with established organizational norms and expectations.
4. Duty-Driven Performance: Work is viewed as a sacred responsibility rather than merely a transactional activity.
5. Predictability and Reliability: Consistent performance provides a sense of stability and order valued in the Blue system.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems influence perceptions of professional excellence. It raises questions about the role of commitment and work ethic in organizational success, particularly within contexts that prioritize structure and discipline.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the complex interplay between individual values, organizational expectations, and professional performance. The strong correlation between delivery commitment and the Blue stage might reflect a profound belief that true professional excellence emerges from unwavering dedication, strict adherence to rules, and a deep sense of organizational duty.

In our analysis of the poll "Why People Resist Change" (by Siobhán  McHale [2]), we found an intriguing negative linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

-0.1745 (Pearson) between the Diminished power and the Orange stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.1214. Nevertheless, this negative linear correlation of -0.1745 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This negative correlation of -0.1745 between diminished power and the Orange stage offers fascinating insights when viewed through the lens of the Orange value system:

Organizational Perspective:

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

1. Validation of their rational approach to organizational change and power dynamics.
2. Confirmation that strategic adaptability trumps personal power preservation.
3. Evidence supporting their belief in meritocratic systems where value is determined by performance, not position.

These organizations might respond by:

• Implementing dynamic organizational structures that reward adaptability over static power positions.
• Creating transparent mechanisms for role and responsibility redistribution.
• Developing performance-based systems that motivate individuals regardless of power shifts.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing power diminishment as a potential opportunity for strategic repositioning.
2. Interpreting organizational changes through a rational, analytical lens.
3. Seeing power shifts as chances for innovative problem-solving and personal growth.

These teams might respond by:

• Rapidly recalibrating team strategies in response to power redistributions.
• Focusing on collective efficiency over individual power maintenance.
• Developing agile approaches to navigate organizational transformations.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation of their ability to adapt and reinvent themselves.
2. Evidence supporting their belief in continuous personal development.
3. Confirmation of the value they place on rational problem-solving over emotional attachment to positions.

These individuals might respond by:

• Viewing diminished power as a challenge to optimize personal capabilities.
• Actively seeking new ways to demonstrate value and competence.
• Maintaining a pragmatic approach to organizational changes.

This correlation, viewed through the Orange lens, suggests that those operating at the Orange level may inherently approach power diminishment as a strategic opportunity rather than a threat. It implies that the Orange value system's focus on rationality, efficiency, and goal-orientation naturally aligns with adaptive responses to organizational changes.

The reasons why people might not resist change when experiencing diminished power in the Orange stage could include:

1. Rational Analysis: A logical evaluation of change as potentially beneficial outweighs emotional resistance.
2. Strategic Repositioning: Seeing power shifts as opportunities for innovative personal and professional development.
3. Performance-Driven Mindset: Valuing individual contribution over static hierarchical positions.
4. Efficiency Orientation: Recognizing that resistance creates unnecessary friction in organizational systems.
5. Continuous Improvement: Viewing change as a chance to enhance personal and organizational capabilities.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems influence responses to organizational changes. It raises questions about the role of adaptability and rational thinking in navigating power dynamics.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the complex interplay between individual motivation, organizational structure, and change management. The negative correlation suggests that those in the Orange stage may approach power diminishment not with resistance, but with a strategic, analytical mindset focused on future opportunities and personal growth.

In our analysis of the poll "21 skills that pay you forever" (by Jeremiah Teo / 赵汉昇 [3]), we found an intriguing negative linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

-0.1229 (Pearson) between the Ability to speak in front of a large audience / Strongly Disagree and the Green stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.1226. Nevertheless, this negative linear correlation of -0.1229 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This negative correlation of -0.1229 between strongly disagreeing about the ability to speak in front of a large audience and the Green stage offers profound insights when viewed through the lens of the Green value system:

Organizational Perspective:

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

1. Validation of the transformative power of collective communication and shared dialogue.
2. Confirmation that public speaking is a critical tool for fostering collective understanding and social harmony.
3. Evidence supporting the belief that communication skills are essential for building collaborative, inclusive environments.

These organizations might respond by:

• Developing comprehensive communication training that emphasizes empathy, active listening, and collective storytelling.
• Creating platforms that democratize public speaking and give voice to diverse perspectives.
• Implementing organizational practices that value collaborative communication over individual performance.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing public speaking as a means of building collective consciousness and shared understanding.
2. Interpreting communication skills as tools for fostering unity and mutual empowerment.
3. Seeing the ability to speak to large audiences as a way to create positive social change and collective transformation.

These teams might respond by:

• Developing collaborative communication workshops that focus on collective empowerment.
• Creating supportive environments that help team members overcome communication barriers.
• Celebrating diverse communication styles and collective storytelling approaches.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation of communication as a tool for social connection and collective growth.
2. Evidence supporting their belief in the power of authentic, empathetic communication.
3. Confirmation of the value they place on using communication to create positive social impact.

These individuals might respond by:

• Viewing public speaking as an opportunity for collective learning and transformation.
• Developing communication skills that prioritize empathy, inclusivity, and social consciousness.
• Seeking opportunities to use their voice to promote understanding and social harmony.

This correlation, viewed through the Green lens, suggests that those operating at the Green level may inherently value public speaking as a powerful tool for collective understanding and social transformation. It implies that the Green value system's focus on community, cooperation, and holistic thinking naturally aligns with the development of communication skills.

The reasons why people in the Green stage might strongly agree that the ability to speak in front of a large audience is a skill that pays them forever could include:

1. Collective Empowerment: Public speaking becomes a means of amplifying collective voices and perspectives.
2. Social Impact: Communication skills are seen as tools for creating positive social change.
3. Holistic Understanding: Speaking to large audiences allows for the sharing of systemic, interconnected insights.
4. Community Building: Public communication becomes a way of fostering unity and mutual understanding.
5. Transformative Potential: The ability to speak effectively is viewed as a pathway to individual and collective growth.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems influence approaches to communication and personal development. It raises questions about the role of public speaking in creating social connection and collective understanding.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the complex interplay between individual communication skills and collective social consciousness. This correlation suggests that those in the Green stage may view public speaking not as a personal achievement, but as a powerful tool for collective learning, empathy, and social transformation.

In our analysis of the poll "Oxford Happiness Survey," we found an intriguing negative linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

-0.1757 (Pearson) between the Life is Good / Strongly Agree and the Yellow stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.0515. Nevertheless, this negative linear correlation of -0.1757 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This negative correlation of -0.1757 between "Life is Good" and the Yellow stage offers intriguing 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. A profound recognition of life's inherent complexity and challenges beyond simplistic optimism.
2. An indication of their sophisticated understanding that happiness is not a default state but a nuanced experience.
3. Validation of their commitment to deep, systemic analysis rather than surface-level positivity.

These organizations might respond by:

• Developing more nuanced approaches to employee well-being that acknowledge life's inherent difficulties.
• Creating frameworks that embrace both challenges and opportunities.
• Implementing systemic thinking that recognizes the multifaceted nature of human experience.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing "Life is Good" as an oversimplification of human experience.
2. Recognizing the value of critical thinking over blind optimism.
3. Understanding that true growth comes from confronting life's complexities.

These teams might respond by:

• Encouraging deep, systemic discussions about the nature of happiness and well-being.
• Creating spaces for authentic dialogue that go beyond surface-level positivity.
• Developing adaptive strategies that embrace both challenges and opportunities.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. A sophisticated rejection of simplistic worldviews.
2. An acknowledgment of life's inherent complexity and challenges.
3. A commitment to personal growth through critical and holistic thinking.

These individuals might respond by:

• Maintaining a critical and analytical approach to life experiences.
• Seeking deeper understanding rather than accepting comfortable narratives.
• Embracing both positive and negative aspects of human experience.

This correlation, viewed through the Yellow lens, suggests that those operating at the Yellow level may be more likely to critically examine the statement "Life is Good" rather than accepting it at face value.

The reasons why individuals in the Yellow stage might strongly disagree with "Life is Good" could include:

1. Systemic Complexity: Recognition that life involves intricate, interconnected challenges beyond simple happiness.
2. Critical Thinking: A deep commitment to analyzing the multifaceted nature of human experience.
3. Personal Growth: Understanding that challenges and difficulties are essential to meaningful development.
4. Holistic Perspective: Ability to see both the positive and negative aspects of life simultaneously.
5. Transcendent Understanding: Recognizing that true well-being is more complex than a binary "good" or "bad" assessment.

This correlation prompts us to consider how advanced value systems approach the concept of happiness and well-being. It raises profound questions about the nature of human experience, challenging simplistic narratives and encouraging a more nuanced, systemic understanding of life.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the Yellow system's capacity for deep, integrative thinking – a worldview that transcends binary judgments and embraces the full complexity of human existence. #YellowSystemInsights #ComplexityThinking #SystemicPerspective

In our analysis of the poll "How Do You Regulate Your Emotions?" (by Nawal Mustafa [4]), we found an intriguing positive linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

0.1419 (Pearson) between the When I feel DISCOURAGED. I will be kind to myself and remind myself of the reason why I am trying. I will use that as my strength / Strongly Agree and the Turquoise stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.1112. Nevertheless, this positive linear correlation of 0.1419 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This positive correlation of 0.1419 between emotional self-compassion and the Turquoise stage offers intriguing 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. A profound validation of holistic approaches to personal and collective well-being.
2. Evidence supporting integrated emotional intelligence as a core organizational strategy.
3. Confirmation of the interconnectedness between individual resilience and systemic harmony.

These organizations might respond by:

• Developing comprehensive wellness programs that prioritize self-compassion and purpose-driven resilience.
• Creating supportive environments that view emotional challenges as opportunities for collective growth.
• Implementing holistic mentorship and support systems that emphasize interconnected healing.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Recognizing emotional self-regulation as a collective journey of mutual support.
2. Understanding discouragement as a shared experience of systemic transformation.
3. Viewing individual challenges as opportunities for collective empowerment and growth.

These teams might respond by:

• Establishing supportive communication protocols that validate emotional experiences.
• Creating spaces for collective reflection and mutual emotional support.
• Developing team practices that transform individual discouragement into collective strength.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. A deep commitment to holistic personal development and self-understanding.
2. Recognition of the spiritual and ecological dimensions of emotional resilience.
3. An integrative approach to personal challenges that connects individual experience to broader systemic contexts.

These individuals might respond by:

• Practicing profound self-compassion as a form of ecological and personal healing.
• Connecting personal challenges to broader universal experiences and growth opportunities.
• Developing meditative and reflective practices that transform discouragement into purposeful action.

This correlation, viewed through the Turquoise lens, suggests that those operating at the Turquoise level are more likely to approach discouragement as a transformative, interconnected experience.

The reasons why individuals in the Turquoise stage might strongly agree with self-compassionate responses to discouragement could include:

1. Holistic Perspective: Recognizing challenges as integral parts of a larger, interconnected life journey.
2. Ecological Consciousness: Understanding personal struggles within broader systemic contexts.
3. Spiritual Resilience: Viewing discouragement as an opportunity for deeper self-understanding and growth.
4. Interconnected Healing: Seeing self-compassion as a way of healing not just the individual, but the collective consciousness.
5. Transformative Potential: Recognizing that personal challenges can be catalysts for broader systemic transformation.

This correlation prompts us to consider how advanced value systems approach emotional challenges. It raises profound questions about the nature of resilience, personal growth, and the interconnectedness of individual and collective experiences.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the Turquoise system's capacity for deep, compassionate, and holistic approaches to personal challenges – a worldview that sees discouragement not as a weakness, but as a profound opportunity for growth, healing, and systemic understanding. 

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] www.linkedin.com/company/talent-management-institute/
[2] www.linkedin.com/in/mchalesiobhan/
[3] www.linkedin.com/in/jeremiah-teo-charisma-business-coach/
[4] https://www.linkedin.com/in/nawal-mustafa-84a90591/

I-Valerii Kosenko

uMnini weMveliso i-SaaS SDTEST®

U-Valerii wayefaneleka njenge-social pedagogue-psychologist ngo-1993 kwaye ukususela ngoko uye wasebenzisa ulwazi lwakhe kulawulo lweprojekthi.
UValerii wafumana isidanga seMasters kunye neprojekthi kunye nesiqinisekiso somphathi weprogram ngo-2013. Ngexesha lenkqubo yakhe ye-Master, waqhelana neProjekthi yeNdlela yeNdlela (GPM Deutsche Gesellschaft für Projektmanagement e. V.) kunye ne-Spiral Dynamics.
UValerii ngumbhali wokuphonononga ukungaqiniseki kweV.U.C.A. Ingqiqo kusetyenziswa iSpiral Dynamics kunye nezibalo zezibalo kwipsychology, kunye ne-38 yokuvota kumazwe ngamazwe.