Here is a list of abstracts I have written for various conferences regarding my research. The latest ones are at the top.
Does Dynamic Intelligence exist as a conceptual measure of self-awareness in the moment?
It is hypothesized that Dynamic Intelligence is a measure of a person’s awarenessof their constructedintentionsin the moment; this measure is time and context-specific and determines how much of their thinkingis at choice. This choice leads to a number of possible responses in the moment. The individual’s capacity to choose their responsein the moment informs personality. The more habituated aspects of personality are due to limited awarenessof this constructionof intention, and thus a more flexible response is indicative of a more adaptive personality. An output of the research is the creation of a scale for self-awareness, called the Thinking Quotient(TQ). The researcher has aligned this scale with Kegan’s Levels of Adult Development where a limited self-awareness is akin to Kegan’s stage 2 thinking (sovereign mind), and an individual aware that they construct themselves in the moment, as well as their emotions, society, and culture is aligned with Kegan’s stage 5 thinking (self-transforming). To construct the Thinking Quotient, the researcher used fifty Cognitive Intentions (CIs), repurposed heuristics as evidenced in the study, such as Internaland Externalto deconstruct an individual’s thinking patterns. The relationship between these CIs is key to an individual’s self-awareness. Study 3 (of 5) is confirmatory in that a factor analysis on a large dataset (n=8,243) demonstrated there are different dimensions at each level of the Thinking Quotient scale, thus different combinations of CIs create differing Thinking Styles, and each style can be aligned with a level of adult development. Using the CIs, it is hypothesized that an individual’s Intention, Awareness, Choice and Response informs their Dynamic Intelligence which leads to predictable behaviours in context. The outcome is a TQ score that is the foundation for vertical development, with interventions based on Cognitive Intention relationships to increase cognitive complexity.
Three Minute Thesis Abstract
Coventry University 2019
What’s the most important thing that we don’t do often enough? Is it engaging with our customers? Is it engaging with our supervisors? Peers? Husbands? Wives? Is it about learning to be less judgemental? Or to be more open, more accepting and maybe less ornamental… in our thinking lives?
No. As good as they sound, it’s none of those things. It’s not about being happy or being sad. It’s not about feeling grateful for the things you’ve had. It’s not about how someone else makes you feel, or how a political party makes you reel… with anger or shame.
It’s about engaging with your BRAIN!
It’s about you…. In the moment… right now… knowing HOW you are thinking. Not whatyou are thinking, as that’s not the point. But HOW you think this way, and can you change it? That’s the point! What is your intention in the moment? Your awareness of this intention and your ability to choose a different response?
We think we’re thinking and we think we know our thinking, but thinking about this now, we can think about how we can’t think about how our thinking is influenced by others and their thinking. Don’t you think? So we need to stop, step back and think about HOW we are creating our thinking in the moment. Did you know you did that? Did you know you can change how you construct your thinking right now in order to think something different?
All it takes is this one thing: STOP! Catch yourself in the act of thinking, and ask yourself: is my thinking right, here? Can I change it if I want to?
That’s the most important think we’re not doing right now!
NLP Conference 2019
How Can We Use Meta-Programmes in a new way?
Session Content: My presentation at the NLP Conference 2019 will be focused on my PhD research in to meta-programmes and how I hope to change their use – and your understanding – within NLP. They are a lot more versatile than you think, and from my talk, you will get a new understanding of how we can use them with clients. I have developed a new personality tool based on meta-programmes called The Thinking Quotient, that teases out a person’s level of thinking complexity, and it will change how you coach them forever once you know the developmental consequences of their thinking!
Session Learning Outcomes: The first learning outcome will be a way of looking at how we measure a client’s coaching potential by using meta-programmes in a completely revolutionary way! I will show you a client’s developmental capacity using my TQ scale and what this means for the client and the coach. With regards to how you approach the coaching relationship, when you should quit, and when you cannot help due to your own developmental level! Another outcome will be a brand new way of seeing a client’s patterns, and what those patterns mean to them and you! The future of NLP Coaching is here!
DOP Conference 2018 (BPS)
What has been missing from profile tools for decades?
Whether we are students, lecturers, small business managers or directors of large organisations, being able to engage with our thinking at the appropriate level for the role is becoming recognisably more necessary. Unarguably, complexity is the most important challenge for organisations going forward, as employees no longer just add value with their skills and competencies: they also add value with their discretionary decision-making ability.
The world’s private and public sector leaders believe that a rapid escalation of “complexity” is the biggest challenge confronting them. They expect it to escalate further in the coming years. They are equally clear that their enterprises are not equipped to cope effectively with this complexity in the global environment – (Extracts from IBM’s Global CEO Study ‘Capitalising on Complexity’).
There are very few profile systems on the market that measure a person’s cognitive complexity. This talk will provide insight into a new method of profiling clients for their level of meta-awareness, which has been aligned with Kegan’s Levels of Adult Development (Kegan & Lahey, 1980) and Laske’s Constructive Developmental Framework (Laske, 2000). It will seek to provoke the audience to question their thinking processes as well as their preconceived ideas about personality profiling.
Theories, Models and Research:
Personality profiling is a very well-trodden path in psychology and one that has been trodden since Allport (1937) saw traits as organised mental structures varying from person to person. Although there are many personality profiles on the market today, Occupational Psychologists are limited by the types of profiles available. Even the more recent approach by Bartram (2005) still relies on facets of the Big Five as the basis for its interpretation of behaviour in a work context. For Piaget, (1954), development was a process of moving through qualitatively distinct stages of growth. He believed that categories of thought are constructed by the individual in response to the need to understand the world. Kegan thought that there are identifiable patterns of meaning-making that people have in common. It is these patterns that have been mapped to and broken down by meta-programme to determine the propensity to which a person understands their limited thinking patterns.
The combining of psychological disciplines to form one profiling system that incorporates elements of Emotional Intelligence, Personal Construct Psychology and Metacognition is an innovative idea, defined by this researcher as: “measuring a person’s emotional and cognitive meta-awareness…or how they know what they know about their thinking – their epistemic stance!”.
It is derived from a person’s meta-programmes that determine how much of an unconscious preference their thinking has towards certain categories of thinking styles, such as: do they favour the task over the relationship in a work context?
The individual propensity for these fifty unconscious preferences, and their then combination will determine to what extent the person is able to reflect on their subjective experience, which can be gauged on a scale of meta-awareness the researcher has called The Thinking Quotient, as derived and validated via this research. Conscious [awareness] allows us to over-ride fixed patterns of conflicted behaviour (Schwartz, 2016).
Being able to understand one’s level of meta-awareness allows two things to happen: firstly, it gives the profiler (or organisation) a benchmark of the client’s thinking from which a strategy for vertical development can begin, and secondly, it gives the client a benchmark for their level of complexity from which they can derive certain behavioural and cognitive thinking patterns that raises awareness of the potential limitations in their thinking. This limited thinking complexity goes straight to the heart of organisational role alignment, job fit and future capacity in role, and the growing need for greater individual complexity in business. The organisational benefits are numerous, and begin with increased satisfaction, motivation and effective performance (Rosso, Dekas and Wrzesniewski, 2010) as well as an increase in well-being (Slemp, Kern, and Vella-Brodnick 2015).
As a result of the above, the aim of this research is to give a potential reason for a deeper understanding – a more constructed understanding – of how our thinking complexity contributes and fills the gaps in research on, for example, Costa and McCrae’s Big Five or Bartram’s Great Eight. This researcher suggests that the scores for reliability of the Great Eight are not scores of validation in as much as they are scores of meaning-making based on the client’s meaning of the factors named.
From a cognitive complexity perspective, how a person adapts and copes at age twenty-five is obviously different to how they would adapt and cope at forty-five. Conventional question sets on existing profiles do not uncover this difference in meaning-making and complexity. The Thinking Quotient not only demonstrates where this development-limiting conflict arises, but can offer interventions for the future prevention of such limiting thinking.
Note: The current research/profile development is being undertaken in line with the relevant institutions Ethical guidelines, as well as the Health and Care Professions Council’s (2016) Standards of Conduct, Performance and Ethics, and British Psychological Society’s (2014) Code of Human Research Ethics. Ethical considerations such as anonymity, confidentiality and voluntary participation are being addressed by using a coded naming convention for all profiles and informing participants that their participation is voluntary and that there are no repercussions for not taking part.
Evolution +/or Revolution: This proposal is relevant to the main conference theme due to its focus on:
- Complexity Profiling via meta-programmes, a revolutionary process and one that is not currently undertaken in any formal psychological manner in industry;
- The Thinking Quotient, a new and innovative concept developed and founded by the presenter and centred around the idea of cognitive and social-emotional complexity, and;
- Vertical Development is a seldom-utilised tool in Occupational Psychology.
Psychological Assessment at Work:This submission is appropriate for the category of Psychological Assessment at Work due to its focus on a questionnaire to determine an individual’s level of complex thinking which can be aligned – or not – with their organisational role complexity, and act as a benchmark for Coaching and Vertical Development in context.
Novel and Innovative Aspects: This paper will focus on a new profile methodology developed by the researcher that takes the responses from an existing profile tool and aligns the output scores with Kegan’s Levels of Adult Development to give a measure akin to Kegan’s level constructs and Laske’s CDF. The application of this will initially be as a cognitive and social-emotional developmental benchmark for their continued Personal Development, and eventually, on organisational role alignment to determine future capacity and capability. This will ensure a more engaged and meaningful work experience.
Stimulating and Useful Aspects for Delegates, the Public and Media:We can infer from the above that a person’s complexity in thinking is going to be ever-more important in an increasingly complex business world. This talk hopes to engage with audience members to pique their interest in the benefits of a person knowing their thinking complexity level, its role in the future of organisational complexity, and the advantages of vertically developing one’s ‘epistemic stance’ to change their sense of self in the world. Target audience – Postgraduates, those completing stage 2, practitioners, and researchers.