From my research I have taken care to not simply replicate the stage development ideas already out there. In order to define my theory as my own, it was necessary to replicate the development grids of Kegan and Laske but using Cognitive Intentions and Thinking Styles as the focus, rather than stages of complexity. The following grid is the outcome.
The grid is based on self-awareness as a measure of our Dynamic Intelligence. The more aware we are of our construction of self, the greater our Dynamic Intelligence. The ultimate goal is to get to the point where we recognise that everything is constructed, and where we can choose to construct ourselves, our environment and everything else around us to fit out construction of self
Notice this is different to the Constructionism perspective that states we construct ourselves based on our environmental influences. What I am saying is that the best environment for us is the one we construct to suit our construction of self. This is one step before the standard thinking on this.
The Construct Awareness Grid
The next image is the Construct Awareness Grid in a journey format. Where would you place yourself on this journey to “Construct Aware”?
Levels of Adult Development (Kegan)
If we were to align the Thinking Quotient™️ output from the grid above into Laske’s or Kegan’s stages of adult development, it would look like the list below.
2.0 – Instrumental: Ruled by needs, desires, wishes; “two world hypothesis” – everything is black and white.
2.2 – Beginning to be influenced by physical and imagined others
2.4 – Conflicted over risking exposure to others’ feelings and thoughts; resolution downwards to level 2
2.6 – Conflicted, but with more detachment from own needs and desires; resolution upwards to level 3
2.8 – Able to be influenced by imagined others and their expectations
3.0 – Other-Dependent: Made up of others’ expectations; “our worked” hypothesis
3.2 – In need of hand-holding by physical other to act on own behalf
3.4 – Conflicted over and unsure about own values, direction, worth, capability
3.6 – Conflicted, but with more detachment from internalised viewpoints, resolving to level 4
3.8 – Nearing self-authoring, but remaining at risk for regression to other’s expectations
4.0 – Self-Authoring: Fully self-authoring decision maker respecting others; “my world” hypothesis
4.2 – Begins to question scope and infallibility of own value system; aware of own history
4.4 – Conflicted of relinquishing control and taking risk of critical exposure of own view
4.6 – Not as conflicted, but increasingly succeeding in “deconstructing” self; committed to flow
4.8 – Fully committed to deconstructing own values, benefitting from divergent others
5.0 – Self-aware: No longer attached to any particular aspect of the self, focused on increasing flow
If you’re wondering who is above level 5, so am I!