Modes and their Properties

Types versus Modes

Moving from the partial procedural quality of Types to the holistic contextual and value-based quality of Modes may not be easy in practice. Whereas one method can be learned and used to the exclusion of other methods, modes must be potentially inclusive because they are part of a whole represented by the Spiral.

The distinction between Types and Modes is examined here in detail as a preparation for the Topics to follow.

Naming

Types and Modes typically have the same name, but always have different formulas.

A specific Type-n (n = 1 to 7) is Level-n in a Typology formula, and may be referred to as L'n or Type-n.

Its corresponding Mode might therefore be labelled Mode-n. But Modes are more sensibly numbered in accord with the Stage in which they appear in the Spiral. They can then be assigned the corresponding number: μ-m (μ for Mode). Φ is the label used when numbering Stages.

The Type number and Stage number are always different, hence Type-n = Mode-m, but the pattern is identical in every Principal Typology, as shown below.

  Type-n Mode-m   Type-n Mode-m
  L'5 μ7   L'7 μ6
  L'7 μ6   L'6 μ2
  L'2 μ5   L'5 μ7
  L'1 μ4   L'4 μ3
  L'4 μ3   L'3 μ1
  L'6 μ2   L'2 μ5
  L'3 μ1   L'1 μ4

Substance

  • A Type is content: a method that purports to guarantee «the best way» to handle a particular Primary Hierarchy/Root Level, given its psychosocial pressure. There are 7 Types («best ways») for each RL/PH.
  • Mode is the context aspect of a Type. It is part of the Spiral mechanism that enables delivery of the Primal Need of the same Root Level/Primary Hierarchy. There are 7 Modes and all are needed for a maximum feasible outcome.

Modes are social values (PH6L5) that integrate a community, and can themselves be integrated. This contrasts with Types that are incompatible value systems (PH6L6) that differentiate experts (and sometimes the rest of us) into antagonistic tribes.
ClosedMore on Value Systems

Unlike Types that derive from just one RL, some Modes contribute by recruiting the next higher Root Level with its different psychosocial pressure.

If you use the Type, then you welcome its Mode. However, the reverse does not apply: it is possible to accept and even welcome the Mode but dislike or even reject the Type.
ClosedEffect in Practice

The effect in practice is that Type adherents, with their blind-spots for alternative Types, often attempt to introduce their Mode far too soon.

ClosedExample: Maturation of Politics

ClosedExample: Strengthening Management

Essence of a Mode

Principles for construction of Modes have not been developed, and clearer guidance in identifying Mode components is desirable. In the absence of any theoretical infrastructure, Mode value sets were based on observations, literature findings and analytic-intuitions of what seemed to be required.

More recently, a logic has been identified as explained below.

The critical feature of a Mode has been referred to as its «essence» in Satellite postings. This arises directly from an unmistakable major characteristic of the originating Type.

When a Mode comes into focus in the Spiral evolution, everyone involved is ready and willing to accept the essence as necessary for pursuit of the Primal Need of the Spiral (and its originating Root Level).

The Mode includes other values to support that essence. However, these are oriented to the entity/endeavour as a whole. So Type features are handled selectively and modified appropriately.

Modes appear to possess three components in accord with psychosocial reality:

ClosedSocial/Output Focus

ClosedPsychological/Group Focus

ClosedPersonal/Self Focus

ClosedExamples:

PH'6C: Maturation of Politics

  • Social FocusCommonality
  • Psychological FocusIndividuality
  • Personal FocusEthicality

PH'1C: Strengthening Management

  • Social Focus: Handling the Situation
  • Psychological Focus: Handling the Group
  • Personal FocusHandling Yourself

For full details of the particular values within modes, see the accounts provided in the Politics and Achievement satellites.

Improved Logic for Specifying Mode Values

It was not unequivocally established above that the Mode is a «Mode of the Primal Need».

Given that the Types all offer their own particular optimization to meet the Domain's Primal Need, the focus in identifying Mode values that address the Primal Need is necessarily on the Domain's psychosocial pressure. This pressure is precisely what makes everyone "ready and willing" to accept the values.

  • So the "Social/Output" focus is better termed the Primary Focus and has the form:
    Promoting [Principal Psychosocial Pressure]
  • The "Psychological/Group" focus is about using that pressure effectively in the Domain's social environment. So it is now re-named:
    Handling [Relevant Social Group]
  • The Personal/Self focus is mainly unchanged, but is re-named
    Finding a Source of [Personal Quality]

In the above two examples, the Mode's value sets must now be re-named.
ClosedDetails

PH'6C: Maturation of Politics

  • Promoting Autonomy
  • Handling the People
  • Finding a Source of Civic Pride

PH'1C: Strengthening Management

  • Promoting Performance
  • Handling Co-workers
  • Finding a Source of Confidence

All the essences relevant to promoting the pressure, naturally combine in a Tree that is named «Determinants of the [Primal Need]» e.g. all essences of promoting performance determine achievement.

ClosedClick to see a Table of conceptions as at 15-Jun-2015.


Initially posted: 30-Nov-2013. Amended: 15-Jun-2015. Last updated: 8-Jan-2023