Leadership: Spiral Conflict
Using the Thomas-Kilmann
Conflict Mode to Determine Meme Density?
Many of you, if you've been a reader for very long,
know about my affinity for all things spiral. As I
deepen my understanding of development, I realize
that spiral things only describe a certain type of
mechanics regarding development...which doesn't make
the spiral thing unimportant, perhaps more
important, as we know...quantum physics is not
understood--and quite frankly doesn't explain
everything--you must have an understanding of
classical physics to go along with the quantum
Therefore, I'm constantly seeking things to help me
understand development and it becomes necessary in
that process to pay attention to your experience. So
today, I'm reviewing a "TKI" (Thomas-Kilmann
Conflict Mode Indicator) from a client...and I was
able to look through the client's data into the
assessment itself...and my few brain cells were able
to connect something I had never seen before...duh!
You see, the reason I use the TKI, along with a
battery of assessments is that almost all models of
assessment are measuring different
data/systems...probably except those rooting out of
a single theory, such as DiSC instruments that have
a myriad of names and essentially rely on the same
theory...TKI measures through a forced choice
method. (which has been shown to be the most
efficient way to eliminate the social desirability
bias that almost ALL assessments have in common!).
Currently in all of the spiral dynamics and integral
measurements I'm aware of, social desireability
factors at such a high level of bias that most of
the instruments are essentially non-valid...except
perhaps as a starting point, but certainly not valid
enough in my experience to draw any real conclusions
or to predict behavior.
With the TKI, you can predict behavior in my view
because if the person participates voluntarily at
all in the instrumentation of the assessment,
there's a really good probability, you can predict
conflict styles and use in their behavior.
Ok, so that's the background on the TKI, if you want
to take one, then click
here, be my guest.
What I "saw" this morning was a connection between
Graves work in the 50s and 60s and the TKI. Most
notably around the ideas central to both models:
assertiveness and cooperation.
Earlier in 2002, I had noticed the connection, but
not in the same way. Here's a copy of a diagram that
I presented in a 2003 presentation at a Spiral
Dynamics Integral Confab:
Notice, how I used assertion and cooperation to
identify Graves self and sacrific of self
constellations, which I labeled as attractor basins
for a reason beyond what Graves noticed--applicable
to quantum organization in attractors.
What I saw today was not the literal interpretation
of the connection (the content and context) as I
often note...but the "conditions (goal state) and
code (algorithm) of the connection...and a deeper
idea around the fit of culture, which social
desirability has as an influence on code. (Note my
ideas from Rapaille's
Ok, so what happens now?
Well, the "eureka" moment is tied to the notion that
by using the TKI, we can get a better read on
predictive behavior as it relates to the person's
valuing system, or memetics. What is required now is
the tedious work to do the translation or you might
say the transcription into code. Because as it
stands, the two models are coded differently even
though the data created is most likely to be central
to each theory/model.
I've started that process...of course you might
think...and will show you some interesting ideas if
you read my next newsletter. Until then...
Ok, that ought to get you thinking, we'll see how
soon I'm drawn back into this discussion. Psst:
remember I have a
there, post, discuss, etc.
time to reach my inner circle….
Purchase my new
book in private launch: