Seeking Deeper Understanding #058

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 "What qualities and abilities do good leaders use when building successful teams?", we found an intriguing positive correlation that warrants closer examination:  

0.0751 between the Fair man and the Purple stage. 

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a non-normal distribution, by Spearman r = 0.0016. This positive correlation of 0.0751 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation. 

This positive correlation of 0.0751 between Fair man as a leadership quality and the Purple stage reveals fascinating insights when viewed through the lens of the Purple value system's traditional and spiritually oriented worldview:

Organizational Perspective:

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

1. Validation that fairness aligns with ancestral wisdom and sacred traditions.
2. Confirmation that leaders must embody the virtues passed down through generations.
3. Evidence that fair treatment maintains harmony with spiritual forces guiding the organization.

These organizations might respond by:

• Creating rituals to celebrate and honor fair leaders.
• Establishing councils of elders to guide fair decision-making.
• Incorporating traditional ceremonies when appointing fair leaders to positions of authority.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing fairness as a sacred bond that keeps the team protected from misfortune.
2. Interpreting fair leadership as a sign of divine favor and blessing.
3. Seeing fair treatment as essential to maintaining tribal harmony and cohesion.

These teams might respond by:

• Developing team rituals that reinforce fair treatment among members.
• Creating symbolic representations of fairness in team spaces.
• Establishing traditional practices that ensure equal voice in tribal decisions.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation that following ancestral wisdom about fairness brings protection.
2. Evidence that being fair maintains harmony with spiritual forces.
3. Confirmation that fair behavior honors the traditions of their ancestors.

These individuals might respond by:

• Seeking guidance from tribal elders about fair practices.
• Performing personal rituals to maintain fairness in leadership.
• Using traditional stories and myths to guide fair decision-making.

This correlation, viewed through the Purple lens, suggests that those operating at the Purple level deeply value fairness as a sacred principle handed down through generations. It implies that the Purple value system's focus on tradition, spirituality, and tribal wisdom aligns with the practice of fair leadership.

The reasons why Fair man might be valued as a leadership quality in the Purple stage could include:

1. Spiritual Alignment: Fairness is seen as pleasing to ancestral spirits and divine forces.
2. Tribal Harmony: Fair treatment maintains the sacred balance within the community.
3. Traditional Wisdom: Ancient teachings emphasize the importance of fair leadership.
4. Collective Protection: Fair practices keep the tribe safe from supernatural harm.
5. Sacred Trust: Fair leaders are viewed as chosen by higher powers to guide the tribe.

This correlation prompts us to consider how traditional belief systems influence leadership values. It raises questions about the role of fairness in maintaining spiritual and social harmony within traditionally oriented organizations.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the Purple value system's deep connection between fair leadership and spiritual well-being, suggesting that fairness is not just a practical virtue but a sacred obligation that maintains harmony between the physical and spiritual realms.

In our analysis of the poll "21 skills that pay you forever" (by Jeremiah Teo / 赵汉昇 [1]), we found an intriguing positive correlation that warrants closer examination:  

0.0727 between the Ability to make decisions based on facts, not based on emotions / Strongly Agree and the Red stage. 

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a non-normal distribution, by Spearman r = 0.0085. This positive correlation of 0.0727 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This positive correlation of 0.0727 between strongly agreeing with fact-based decision-making and the Red stage reveals compelling insights through the Red value system's power-driven perspective:

Organizational Perspective:

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

1. Validation that emotions make organizations weak and facts enable dominance.
2. Confirmation that ruthless, data-driven decisions maintain power hierarchies.
3. Evidence that emotional considerations hinder aggressive market conquest.

These organizations might respond by:

• Rewarding leaders who make cold, calculated decisions without emotional interference.
• Implementing systems that prioritize hard data over human sentiment.
• Creating competitive environments where only fact-based victories count.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing emotional input as a weakness that compromises team dominance.
2. Interpreting fact-focused decision-making as a tool for asserting team superiority.
3. Seeing emotional considerations as obstacles to winning at all costs.

These teams might respond by:

• Establishing dominance hierarchies based on fact-driven performance metrics.
• Ridiculing team members who bring emotions into decision-making.
• Celebrating aggressive, data-backed actions that crush competition.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation that emotional detachment enables power acquisition.
2. Evidence that fact-based decisions help dominate others effectively.
3. Confirmation that showing emotion signals weakness to be exploited.

These individuals might respond by:

• Actively suppressing emotional considerations in decision-making.
• Using facts as weapons to assert dominance over others.
• Viewing emotional peers as targets for manipulation and control.

This correlation, viewed through the Red lens, suggests that those operating at the Red level embrace fact-based decision-making as a tool for power and domination. It implies that the Red value system's focus on strength and immediate gratification aligns with a preference for cold, calculated choices.

The reasons why fact-based decision-making might be strongly valued in the Red stage could include:

1. Power Enhancement: Facts provide ammunition for dominating others.
2. Competitive Edge: Emotional detachment enables ruthless action.
3. Weakness Elimination: Fact focus prevents emotional vulnerabilities.
4. Immediate Results: Data-driven decisions enable quick power plays.
5. Dominance Display: Fact-based choices demonstrate strength over emotion.

This correlation prompts us to consider how power-driven mindsets influence decision-making preferences. It raises questions about the role of emotional detachment in maintaining dominance and control.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the Red value system's embrace of fact-based decision-making as a means to power, suggesting that emotional consideration is seen as a weakness to be eliminated in pursuit of dominance.

In our analysis of the poll "Reasons why people give up" (by Anna Vital [2]), we found an intriguing positive correlation that warrants closer examination:  

0.3351 between the Feel Sorry for Themselves and the Blue stage (Netherlands, three languages). 

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.2785. This positive correlation of 0.3351 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

The Netherlands is known for its high standard of living, with excellent healthcare, education, and social security systems. However, the country faces several significant challenges:

1. Housing Crisis: There is a severe housing shortage, with high prices and long waiting lists for social housing particularly affecting young people and middle-income families. In major cities like Amsterdam and Rotterdam, housing costs consume a large portion of monthly income.
2. Cost of Living Pressures: The country has experienced significant inflation, affecting food prices, energy costs, and daily expenses. This has created financial stress for many residents, particularly those in middle-income brackets.
3. Social System Strain: While the Dutch social system remains robust, there are increasing pressures on pension systems and healthcare costs, creating anxiety about future security.
4. Work-Life Balance: Despite famous Dutch work-life balance policies, increasing economic pressures have led to growing stress in maintaining traditional lifestyle standards.

Given this context, еhis positive correlation of 0.3351 between "Feel Sorry for Themselves" and the Blue stage in the Netherlands offers meaningful 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. A reflection of heightened sensitivity to deviations from established moral and procedural standards.
2. Evidence that members feel deep responsibility when unable to meet traditional expectations.
3. Indication that strict hierarchical structures may create pressure that leads to self-doubt when standards aren't met.

These organizations might respond by:

• Implementing more rigid support systems based on traditional values and protocols
• Strengthening formal counseling programs aligned with organizational values
• Establishing clearer guidelines for handling personal struggles within the organizational hierarchy

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing it as a sign that team members take their duties and responsibilities extremely seriously
2. Interpreting it as evidence that deviation from established team protocols causes significant distress
3. Seeing it as confirmation that traditional team structures need stronger support mechanisms

These teams might respond by:

• Creating more structured processes for addressing personal challenges
• Implementing formal mentoring systems based on traditional values
• Establishing clear protocols for supporting team members who struggle with their duties

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation of their deep commitment to meeting established standards
2. Evidence that their strong sense of duty makes them particularly vulnerable to self-criticism
3. Confirmation that their traditional values create high expectations for personal performance

These individuals might respond by:

• Seeking guidance from authority figures when facing personal challenges
• Following prescribed protocols more strictly to avoid future disappointments
• Embracing traditional coping mechanisms aligned with their value system

This correlation, viewed through the Blue lens, suggests that those operating at the Blue level may be more prone to experiencing self-pity when facing challenges. It implies that the Blue value system's emphasis on order, duty, and moral righteousness may create a heightened sensitivity to perceived personal failures and deviations from established standards.

The reasons why "Feel Sorry for Themselves" might be particularly prevalent in the Blue stage in modern Netherlands could include:

1. Duty and Obligation: A strong sense of duty in Dutch society creates pressure to meet traditional standards, particularly challenging in the current housing crisis
2. Social Structure: Well-established social systems that emphasize conformity and proper behavior, now strained by economic pressures
3. Traditional Values: Deep-rooted Protestant work ethic creating high personal expectations, harder to meet in current economic conditions
4. Institutional Focus: Strong emphasis on following established institutional procedures, which may feel inadequate in addressing current societal challenges
5. Moral Standards: High moral expectations lead to increased self-criticism when unable to achieve traditional life milestones (home ownership, financial security) despite following societal rules
6. System Pressure: Growing disconnect between traditional Blue value expectations and the reality of current living conditions, particularly in housing and cost of living
7. Generational Tension: Difficulty maintaining traditional Blue value system standards in a rapidly changing economic and social landscape

This correlation prompts us to consider how traditional value systems in modern Dutch society might influence personal responses to challenges, particularly when established systems and rules no longer guarantee traditional outcomes. It raises questions about the resilience of Blue value systems in the face of significant societal pressures.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the complex interplay between traditional Dutch values, organizational structures, and personal responses to adversity in a changing society. Self-pity might be seen not just as a personal weakness but as a reflection of the growing gap between Blue value system expectations and current socioeconomic realities in the Netherlands.

In our analysis of the poll "Trust" (by WVS) we found an intriguing positive correlation that warrants closer examination:  

0.1162 between the I am usually cautious about trusting politicians / Neither agree nor disagree and the Orange stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.062. This positive correlation of 0.1162 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This positive correlation of 0.1162 between "Neither agree nor disagree" responses to political trust and the Orange stage offers compelling 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. Evidence of a data-driven, pragmatic approach to evaluating political claims and promises
2. Validation of the need for measurable metrics in assessing political performance
3. Confirmation that skepticism should be balanced with strategic engagement

These organizations might respond by:

• Developing quantitative frameworks for analyzing political impact on business outcomes
• Implementing evidence-based protocols for government relations
• Creating metrics-driven systems for evaluating political risk and opportunity

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing it as confirmation of the need for objective analysis of political relationships
2. Interpreting it as support for maintaining strategic neutrality in political matters
3. Seeing it as validation for focusing on measurable outcomes rather than political rhetoric

These teams might respond by:

• Establishing KPIs for measuring political impact on project success
• Developing data-driven strategies for navigating political environments
• Implementing systematic approaches to political risk assessment

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation of their analytical approach to political engagement
2. Evidence supporting their focus on measurable results over political promises
3. Confirmation of the value of maintaining strategic neutrality in professional settings

These individuals might respond by:

• Developing personal metrics for evaluating political impact on career goals
• Adopting evidence-based approaches to political decision-making
• Using data analytics to inform their political engagement strategies

This correlation, viewed through the Orange lens, suggests that those operating at the Orange level take a calculated, analytical approach to political trust. It implies that the Orange value system's emphasis on measurable outcomes, strategic thinking, and empirical evidence leads to a pragmatic, neither fully trusting nor distrusting stance toward politicians.

The reasons why neutral political trust might be characteristic of the Orange stage could include:

1. Data-Driven Approach: Preference for evaluating political claims based on measurable outcomes
2. Strategic Neutrality: Recognition that maintaining flexible political positions can maximize opportunities
3. Risk Management: Understanding that extreme positions in either direction could limit professional advancement
4. Empirical Focus: Tendency to judge politicians on verifiable results rather than rhetoric
5. Pragmatic Engagement: Recognition that political relationships are tools for achieving objectives rather than moral imperatives

This correlation prompts us to consider how achievement-oriented value systems influence approaches to political trust. It raises questions about the relationship between analytical thinking and political skepticism, particularly in contexts where measurable outcomes are prioritized.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the complex interplay between strategic thinking, professional advancement, and political engagement. Neutral political trust might be seen not as indecision, but as a calculated position that maximizes flexibility and opportunity in achievement-oriented environments.

In our analysis of the poll "What makes a boss a great leader?" we found an intriguing positive correlation that warrants closer examination:  

0.1135 between the Empathy and the Green stage. 

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.0411. This positive correlation of 0.1135 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.  

This positive correlation of 0.1135 between Empathy as a leadership quality and the Green stage offers meaningful 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 their commitment to empathetic, people-centered leadership approaches
2. Confirmation that genuine empathy drives sustainable organizational success
3. Evidence supporting their belief that empathic understanding of diverse perspectives creates organizational resilience

These organizations might respond by:

• Implementing leadership development programs centered on cultivating empathy
• Creating organizational structures that enable leaders to practice deep empathy
• Developing metrics that measure leadership success through empathic engagement

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing it as an affirmation of empathy's role in building authentic team connections
2. Interpreting it as support for their focus on empathic understanding in team interactions
3. Seeing it as validation for prioritizing empathic leadership over hierarchical power

These teams might respond by:

• Facilitating sessions focused on developing collective empathy
• Creating spaces for sharing and understanding each other's experiences
• Developing team practices that nurture empathy across different perspectives

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation of their emphasis on empathy in leadership
2. Evidence supporting their belief that empathic understanding is crucial
3. Confirmation of the value they place on leading with genuine empathy

These individuals might respond by:

• Deepening their practice of empathic listening
• Seeking opportunities to understand and share others' experiences
• Using their capacity for empathy to foster inclusive environments

This correlation, viewed through the Green lens, suggests that those operating at the Green level recognize empathy as a fundamental leadership quality. It implies that the Green value system's focus on human connection, deep understanding, and inclusive thinking aligns with an empathy-based approach to leadership.

The reasons why Empathy might be particularly valued as a leadership quality in the Green stage could include:

1. Holistic Understanding: Recognition that leadership requires an empathic connection with the whole person
2. Systems Thinking: Awareness that empathy affects the entire organizational ecosystem
3. Inclusive Leadership: Understanding that diverse perspectives require deep empathy
4. Sustainable Relationships: Recognition that genuine empathy builds lasting connections
5. Cultural Transformation: Belief that empathic leadership can drive positive societal change

This correlation prompts us to consider how evolving value systems influence our understanding of effective leadership. It raises questions about the role of empathy in creating sustainable, inclusive organizations, particularly in contexts where traditional hierarchical approaches are being challenged.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the complex interplay between empathy, organizational effectiveness, and societal transformation. Empathy might be seen not just as a desirable leadership trait, but as a crucial capability for creating more sustainable and humane organizations in an interconnected world.

In our analysis of the poll "How to regulate your emotions" (by Nawal Mustafa [3]), we found an intriguing positive correlation that warrants closer examination:  

0.1296 between the When I feel OVERWHELMED. I will write down what I need to get done and focus on one task at a time based on importance / Moderately Agree and the Yellow stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.1179. This positive correlation of 0.1296 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation. 

This positive correlation of 0.1296 between moderate agreement with systematic task prioritization during overwhelm and the Yellow stage offers insights through the Yellow value system lens:

Organizational Perspective:

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

1. Validation of integrative approaches combining rational organization with emotional awareness
2. Evidence that adaptive, flexible responses to overwhelm enhance organizational resilience
3. Confirmation that systematic approaches can coexist with fluid, emergent solutions

These organizations might respond by:

• Developing adaptive systems that balance structure with flexibility
• Implementing contextual frameworks for managing complexity
• Creating spaces that honor both systematic and intuitive approaches to challenges

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing it as an affirmation of multi-modal approaches to managing team stress
2. Interpreting it as support for integrating different problem-solving methodologies
3. Seeing it as validation for combining structured and emergent ways of working

These teams might respond by:

• Cultivating both systematic and organic approaches to task management
• Developing flexible protocols that adapt to varying levels of complexity
• Creating dynamic spaces for both structured and flowing work styles

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation of their ability to move fluidly between structured and intuitive approaches
2. Evidence supporting their integration of multiple coping strategies
3. Confirmation of the value in adapting responses to different types of overwhelm

These individuals might respond by:

• Developing personalized systems that honor both order and chaos
• Practicing conscious shifts between structured and flowing states
• Using meta-awareness to choose appropriate responses to overwhelm

This correlation, viewed through the Yellow lens, suggests that those operating at the Yellow level recognize the value of systematic approaches while maintaining flexibility and adaptiveness. It implies that the Yellow value system's capacity for integration and complexity allows for both structured and emergent responses to overwhelm.

The reasons why moderate agreement with systematic task prioritization might be characteristic of the Yellow stage could include:

1. Meta-Perspective: Understanding that different situations require different approaches
2. Integrative Thinking: Ability to combine systematic and intuitive responses
3. Adaptive Response: Recognition that moderate rather than rigid agreement allows for contextual flexibility
4. Complex Understanding: Awareness that overwhelm requires multi-faceted solutions
5. Dynamic Balance: Appreciation for both structure and flow in managing challenges

This correlation prompts us to consider how integrative value systems influence approaches to managing complexity. It raises questions about the balance between systematic and emergent responses to overwhelm, particularly in contexts requiring adaptive solutions.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the complex interplay between structure and flexibility in managing overwhelm. Moderate agreement with systematic approaches might be seen not as partial commitment, but as conscious integration of multiple response patterns in service of effective adaptation.

In our analysis of the poll "Ageism’s causes," we found an intriguing positive correlation that warrants closer examination:  

0.1353 between the Yes, interpersonal interactions reflect broader social attitudes and the Turquoise stage. 

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student) r = 0.0842. This positive correlation of 0.1353 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This positive correlation of 0.1353 between agreement that interpersonal interactions reflect broader social attitudes 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 understanding that micro-interactions mirror macro-social patterns
2. Evidence that organizational cultures reflect and influence broader societal paradigms
3. Confirmation that conscious organizational evolution can catalyze societal transformation

These organizations might respond by:

• Developing practices that consciously address systemic social patterns
• Creating spaces for deep dialogue about social-organizational interconnections
• Implementing systems that honor both individual and collective transformation

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing it as an affirmation of their role in broader social evolution
2. Interpreting it as support for their focus on conscious relationship cultivation
3. Seeing it as validation for integrating social awareness into team dynamics

These teams might respond by:

• Cultivating awareness of how team interactions reflect societal patterns
• Creating practices that consciously transform limiting social paradigms
• Developing ways to embody new social possibilities in team relationships

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal validation of their capacity to influence social systems through conscious interaction
2. Evidence supporting their role as agents of social transformation
3. Confirmation of the ripple effect of conscious interpersonal engagement

These individuals might respond by:

• Deepening their awareness of how personal interactions affect collective fields
• Cultivating conscious presence in all interpersonal exchanges
• Using their interactions as opportunities for systemic transformation

This correlation, viewed through the Turquoise lens, suggests that those operating at the Turquoise level deeply understand the fractal nature of social patterns. It implies that the Turquoise value system's capacity for seeing interconnections enables conscious participation in social evolution through mindful interpersonal engagement.

The reasons why recognition of interpersonal-social reflection might be characteristic of the Turquoise stage could include:

1. Systems Awareness: Deep understanding of the holographic nature of social systems
2. Fractal Recognition: Ability to see how micro-patterns reflect macro-patterns
3. Conscious Evolution: Recognition of personal interactions as leverage points for social transformation
4. Field Awareness: Understanding of how individual exchanges affect collective fields
5. Transformative Potential: Recognition that conscious interactions can shift social paradigms

This correlation prompts us to consider how evolved value systems influence understanding of social dynamics. It raises questions about the role of conscious interpersonal engagement in social transformation, particularly in contexts requiring systemic change.

Ultimately, this correlation highlights the profound interplay between individual interactions and collective evolution. Recognition of interpersonal-social reflection might be seen not just as awareness, but as a key to conscious participation in social transformation through mindful engagement in every interaction.

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/jeremiah-teo-charisma-business-coach
[2] https://www.linkedin.com/in/annavital
[3] https://www.linkedin.com/in/nawal-mustafa-84a90591

ویلری کوسنکو

پروڈکٹ کا مالک SaaS SDTEST®

ویلیری 1993 میں ایک سماجی ماہر نفسیات کے طور پر اہل ہوئے تھے اور اس کے بعد سے وہ پروجیکٹ مینجمنٹ میں اپنے علم کا اطلاق کرتے ہیں۔
ویلری نے 2013 میں ماسٹر کی ڈگری اور پروجیکٹ اور پروگرام مینیجر کی اہلیت حاصل کی۔ اپنے ماسٹرز پروگرام کے دوران، وہ پروجیکٹ روڈ میپ (GPM Deutsche Gesellschaft für Projektmanagement e. V.) اور Spiral Dynamics سے واقف ہوئے۔
ویلیری V.U.C.A کی غیر یقینی صورتحال کو تلاش کرنے کے مصنف ہیں۔ نفسیات میں اسپائرل ڈائنامکس اور ریاضی کے اعدادوشمار کا استعمال کرتے ہوئے تصور، اور 38 بین الاقوامی پول۔