Seeking Deeper Understanding #099

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 "Trust" (by WVS), we found an intriguing negative linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

-0.0627 (Pearson) between the Politicians often put country above their personal interests / Disagree and the Purple stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.0582. Nevertheless, this negative linear correlation of -0.0627 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation. 

This negative correlation of -0.0627 between "Politicians often put country above their personal interests / Disagree" and the Purple stage offers intriguing insights when viewed through the lens of the Purple value system:

Organizational Perspective:

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

1. Validation that authority figures, including politicians, are viewed as extensions of ancestral leadership, expected to act selflessly for the tribe’s well-being.
2. Confirmation that loyalty and service to the collective are seen as sacred duties, aligning with the organization’s emphasis on tradition and spiritual guidance.
3. Evidence supporting their belief that true leaders must prioritize the group over personal gain, reflecting their alignment with ancient leadership ideals.

These organizations might respond by:

• Reinforcing cultural narratives that frame leaders as servants to the community.
• Celebrating politicians or leaders who exemplify selfless service as modern embodiments of ancestral chiefs.
• Using rituals and storytelling to reinforce the expectation that leaders prioritize the collective.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing politicians who prioritize the country as models of ideal leadership behavior: selfless, loyal, and aligned with higher purposes.
2. Interpreting it as proof that political actions should be measured against their benefit to the community, not individual ambition.
3. Seeing it as validation that teamwork and loyalty to the group’s goals mirror the idealized relationship between leaders and their people.

These teams might respond by:

• Creating team rituals that honor selfless service and communal focus.
• Encouraging members to act in ways that benefit the entire team, mirroring the expected behavior of politicians.
• Framing political figures as modern tribal chiefs whose legitimacy depends on their service to the community.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal confirmation that their distrust of self-serving leaders aligns with deeper tribal values; politicians must act for the collective good.
2. Evidence that disagreeing with this ideal disrupts the social harmony and ancestral alignment they strive to maintain.
3. Proof that their belief in leaders’ moral duty to serve reinforces their sense of belonging and identity within the community.

These individuals might respond by:

• Actively supporting politicians perceived as selfless and community-focused.
• Viewing political self-interest as a violation of ancestral values, deserving of public shaming or ritual correction.
• Aligning their own behavior with the expected selflessness of idealized leaders, reinforcing their tribal identity.

This correlation, viewed through the Purple lens, suggests that those operating at the Purple level are more inclined to believe politicians prioritize the collective good. This aligns with their worldview, where authority is tied to spiritual and ancestral duties, requiring leaders to serve the tribe above personal interests.

The reasons why disagreement might be less likely in the Purple stage could include:

1. Sacred Leadership Ideals: Politicians are seen as modern extensions of tribal chiefs, expected to prioritize the group’s well-being as part of their moral duty.
2. Communal Harmony: Disagreeing with this ideal risks social disharmony and disrupts the Purple's focus on group cohesion and belonging.
3. Ancestral Legitimacy: Leaders derive their legitimacy from alignment with ancestral values, making self-interest synonymous with betrayal.
4. Spiritual Accountability: Purple logic assumes leaders are spiritually accountable for their actions, reducing the likelihood of blatant self-interest.
5. Identity and Belonging: Agreeing with the statement reinforces an individual’s connection to the community and its shared values.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems shape trust in authority. It raises questions about the benefits of a Purple approach to leadership, particularly in contexts where communal cohesion and ancestral values are deeply intertwined with political expectations.

In our analysis of the poll "What makes people successful at work?", we found an intriguing negative linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

-0.0101 (Pearson) between the Empathy and the Red stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.0015. Nevertheless, this negative linear correlation of -0.0101 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation. 

This negative correlation of -0.0101 between "Empathy" and the Red stage offers intriguing insights when viewed through the lens of the Red value system:

Organizational Perspective:

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

1. Validation that empathy is seen as a soft skill that distracts from the hard-edged pursuit of power and results.
2. Confirmation that assertiveness and dominance are prioritized over emotional intelligence in driving success.
3. Evidence supporting their belief that professional environments should reward individual ambition and tactical maneuvering rather than emotional connection.

These organizations might respond by:

• Rewarding employees who demonstrate self-interest and competitiveness rather than empathetic behavior.
• Creating cultures where decisiveness and power plays are celebrated over collaborative or emotional approaches.
• Framing empathy as a potential weakness that could be exploited in high-stakes environments.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing empathy as an unnecessary trait that slows down the pursuit of team objectives.
2. Interpreting it as proof that success comes from individual dominance rather than group cohesion rooted in emotional understanding.
3. Seeing it as validation that assertive, results-focused behavior is more valuable than nurturing team relationships.

These teams might respond by:

• Encouraging members to focus on outperforming each other rather than building empathetic connections.
• Celebrating victories that highlight individual prowess and strength.
• Discouraging what they might view as "emotional distractions" in favor of direct, competitive action.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal confirmation that their focus on self-interest and immediate results aligns with professional success.
2. Evidence that empathy is an unnecessary burden in the pursuit of personal goals and achievements.
3. Proof that in their worldview, power and control are more critical to success than understanding or connecting with others emotionally.

These individuals might respond by:

• Prioritizing their own ambitions and tactical gains over collaborative or empathetic interactions.
• Viewing empathetic behavior as a potential hindrance to their rise within competitive environments.
• Acting on impulses that favor direct, assertive communication over emotionally sensitive approaches.

This correlation, viewed through the Red lens, suggests that those operating at the Red level perceive empathy as less relevant to professional success. Their focus on power, self-expression, and immediate results leads them to prioritize traits like dominance and competitiveness over emotional intelligence.

The reasons why empathy might be seen as less relevant to professional success in the Red stage could include:

1. Power Focus: Prioritizing dominance and control over emotional connection.
2. Immediate Results: Valuing quick, decisive action over relationship-building.
3. Self-Interest: Viewing professional success as a personal achievement rather than a collaborative effort.
4. Competitive Drive: Seeing the workplace as an arena where empathy can be a disadvantage.
5. Practical Orientation: Considering empathy as less practical than assertiveness in achieving goals.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems shape perceptions of success. It raises questions about the benefits and drawbacks of a Red approach to professional achievement, particularly in contexts where assertiveness and individualism are highly valued.

In our analysis of the poll "Where would be your next most exciting opportunity?", we found an intriguing positive linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

0.2329 (Pearson) between the In a small-medium enterprise (SME) and the Blue stage (Germany, 4 languages).

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.2184. Nevertheless, this positive linear correlation of 0.2329 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation. 

This positive correlation of 0.2329 between "In a small-medium enterprise (SME)" and the Blue stage in Germany offers intriguing insights when viewed through the lens of the Blue value system:

Organizational Perspective:

Organizations operating within the Blue mindset in Germany might interpret this correlation as:

1. Validation that SMEs provide the structured, rule-bound environments that align with their emphasis on order and tradition.

2. Confirmation that SMEs often reflect clear hierarchies and defined roles, resonating with Blue’s preference for disciplined, predictable operations.

3. Evidence supporting their belief that SMEs typically prioritize long-term stability and loyalty, which are central to Blue cultural values.

These organizations might respond by:

- Framing SMEs as ideal environments for Blue value system adherents due to their emphasis on clear structures and moral codes.

- Highlighting how SMEs in Germany often embody Blue principles through their focus on quality, process adherence, and community contributions.

- Promoting the idea that SMEs provide a sense of belonging and purpose that aligns with Blue’s focus on duty and collective well-being.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing SMEs as settings where team cohesion and loyalty are prioritized over individual ambition.

2. Interpreting it as proof that SMEs offer the security of well-defined roles and expectations, which support team harmony and collaboration.

3. Seeing it as validation that SMEs often reflect a shared commitment to quality and reliability, which are core to Blue team dynamics.

These teams might respond by:

- Emphasizing the importance of adhering to established processes and hierarchies within SME settings.

- Celebrating the predictability and stability that SMEs offer, which support consistent team performance.

- Encouraging members to embrace the communal and purpose-driven culture often found in SME environments.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal confirmation that SMEs provide the stable, rule-bound environments they thrive in.

2. Evidence that SMEs align with their preference for clear hierarchies, predictable routines, and strong communal ties.

3. Proof that professional growth within SMEs often follows a structured, merit-based path that rewards loyalty and adherence to values.

These individuals might respond by:

- Actively seeking opportunities within SMEs where they can embrace defined roles and contribute to a shared mission.

- Valuing the sense of belonging and purpose that comes from working within SMEs’ often tight-knit cultures.

- Viewing SMEs as ideal settings for professional development that aligns with Blue’s emphasis on gradual, orderly advancement.

This correlation, viewed through the Blue lens, suggests that individuals operating at the Blue level in Germany are drawn to SMEs due to their alignment with structured, hierarchical, and community-focused values. It implies that in the Blue value system, SMEs are seen as environments where duty, tradition, and loyalty are not just respected but embedded into the fabric of daily operations.

The reasons why individuals with stronger Blue values might view SMEs as ideal opportunities could include:

1. Hierarchical Clarity: SMEs often provide the clear authority structures and role definitions that Blue values prioritize.
2. Stability and Tradition: SMEs in Germany are frequently associated with long-standing traditions and stable operations, aligning with Blue’s preference for continuity.
3. Communal Identity: The tight-knit nature of many SMEs resonates with Blue’s focus on belonging and collective purpose.
4. Predictability: The structured environments of SMEs offer the routine and order that Blue individuals thrive in.
5. Merit-Based Growth: Opportunities for advancement within SMEs often follow established paths, rewarding loyalty and adherence to shared values.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems shape professional aspirations. It raises questions about the benefits of a Blue approach to career development, particularly in contexts where stability, tradition, and clear hierarchies are highly valued.

In our analysis of the poll "Why People Resist Change" (by Siobhán McHale [1]), we found an intriguing negative linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

-0.1225 (Pearson) between the Disruption and the Orange stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.1017. Nevertheless, this negative linear correlation of -0.1225 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation. 

This negative correlation of -0.1225 between "Disruption" and the Orange stage offers intriguing 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. Validation that disruption is seen as a natural byproduct of progress and innovation.
2. Confirmation that resistance to change due to fear of disruption is minimized in environments focused on results and adaptability.
3. Evidence supporting their belief that efficient change management processes can mitigate the negative impacts of disruption.

These organizations might respond by:

• Implementing agile methodologies to quickly adapt to changes and minimize downtime.
• Rewarding employees who embrace change and find innovative solutions to challenges.
• Creating a culture that values resilience and views disruption as an opportunity for growth.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing disruption as an inevitable part of achieving goals and objectives.
2. Interpreting it as proof that effective planning and communication can reduce resistance to change.
3. Seeing it as validation that teams should focus on problem-solving rather than dwelling on potential disruptions.

These teams might respond by:

• Developing contingency plans to address potential disruptions before they occur.
• Encouraging open dialogue about challenges and brainstorming solutions together.
• Celebrating successes that result from navigating disruption effectively.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal confirmation that they thrive in environments where change is expected and managed well.
2. Evidence that their ability to adapt quickly makes them valuable assets in dynamic settings.
3. Proof that resistance to change due to fear of disruption is less relevant to their results-driven approach.

These individuals might respond by:

• Embracing change as an opportunity to demonstrate their adaptability and problem-solving skills.
• Proactively seeking out ways to contribute to smooth transitions during periods of change.
• Viewing disruption as a challenge to overcome rather than a barrier to success.

This correlation, viewed through the Orange lens, suggests that those operating at the Orange level are less likely to view disruption as a significant barrier to change. Their focus on results, efficiency, and adaptability leads them to prioritize finding solutions over resisting potential disruptions.

The reasons why disruption is less likely to be cited as a reason for resisting change in the Orange stage could include:

1. Results-Oriented: A focus on achieving goals makes disruption a secondary concern if it stands in the way of progress.
2. Adaptability: Orange values prioritize finding ways to adapt to change rather than resisting it.
3. Problem-Solving Mindset: Disruption is seen as a challenge to be overcome, not a reason to halt progress.
4. Efficiency: Effective change management processes reduce the negative impact of disruption.
5. Innovation: Disruption is often associated with innovation and improvement, aligning with Orange's forward-thinking approach.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems shape responses to change. It raises questions about the benefits of an Orange approach to change management, particularly in contexts where adaptability and innovation are crucial for success.

In our analysis of the poll "Gender difference in building self-confidence" (IFD Allensbach), we found an intriguing positive linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

0.1107 (Pearson) between the Children and the Green stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.0982. Nevertheless, this positive linear correlation of 0.1107 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This positive correlation of 0.1107 between "Children" and the Green stage offers intriguing 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 that parental and caregiving roles align with their emphasis on community and relational harmony.
2. Confirmation that supporting employees in their caregiving roles enhances organizational well-being and alignment with Green values.
3. Evidence supporting their belief that workplaces should integrate practices that honor the caregiving function as a contribution to societal well-being.

These organizations might respond by:

• Implementing family-friendly policies that support employees in their roles as parents or caregivers.
• Creating mentorship programs that pair experienced caregivers with others seeking to develop their caregiving skills.
• Promoting a culture that values the insights and empathy gained through caregiving experiences.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing caregiving experience as an asset that brings empathy and patience to team dynamics.
2. Interpreting it as proof that caregiving roles develop skills valuable for cooperative and community-focused teamwork.
3. Seeing it as validation that teams benefit from the diverse perspectives and emotional intelligence that caregivers often provide.

These teams might respond by:

• Valuing and leveraging the insights of team members who have experience in caregiving roles.
• Encouraging a supportive team environment that acknowledges the challenges and rewards of caregiving.
• Creating opportunities for team members to share and learn from each other's caregiving experiences.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal confirmation that their role as a parent or caregiver is a meaningful expression of their Green values.
2. Evidence that caregiving experiences enhance their ability to connect with others and contribute to community well-being.
3. Proof that their caregiving role provides a sense of purpose and confidence that aligns with their commitment to care and compassion.

These individuals might respond by:

• Embracing their caregiving role as a source of personal growth and alignment with their values.
• Actively seeking ways to integrate their caregiving insights into their professional interactions.
• Viewing their caregiving experience as a bridge between their personal values and their contributions to broader societal well-being.

This correlation, viewed through the Green lens, suggests that those operating at the Green level draw confidence from caregiving roles due to their alignment with values of care, community, and relational harmony. It implies that in the Green value system, caregiving is seen as a vital practice that strengthens connections and fosters the well-being of all.

The reasons why confidence might be drawn from caregiving roles in the Green stage could include:

1. Empathy Development: Caregiving enhances emotional intelligence and compassion, which are highly valued in Green culture.
2. Community Contribution: Parenting and caregiving are seen as direct contributions to the well-being of others and society.
3. Relational Harmony: Experience in caregiving supports the ability to build and maintain the strong relationships that Green values prioritize.
4. Holistic Well-being: Caregiving aligns with the Green focus on integrating personal and professional life in ways that support overall well-being.
5. Systems Thinking: Caregiving provides a microcosm of understanding how individual actions impact the broader system of family and community.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems shape sources of self-confidence. It raises questions about the benefits of a Green approach to caregiving, particularly in contexts where empathy, community, and relational harmony are deeply valued.

In our analysis of the poll "Actions to Build Unshakable Self-Trust" (by Suren Samarchyan [2]), we found an intriguing negative linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

-0.2182 (Pearson) between the SELF-BELIEF. Create a "confidence mantra" for yourself and repeat it daily / Strongly agree and the Yellow stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.1562. Nevertheless, this negative linear correlation of -0.2182 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation.

This negative correlation of -0.2182 between “SELF-BELIEF. Create a 'confidence mantra' for yourself and repeat it daily / Strongly agree” and the Yellow stage offers intriguing insights when viewed through the lens of the Yellow value system:

Organizational Perspective:

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

1. Validation that overly simplistic solutions like daily mantras are viewed as superficial compared to complex, systemic personal development.
2. Confirmation that employees operating from Yellow values prioritize self-trust built through real achievements and adaptability over repetitive affirmations.
3. Evidence supporting their belief that self-trust is better cultivated through challenging assignments and reflective practices that align with holistic growth.

These organizations might respond by:

• Offering development programs focused on complex problem-solving and reflective practice rather than superficial confidence-building techniques.
• Creating environments where employees build self-trust through meaningful contributions and learning from diverse experiences.
• Discouraging reductionist approaches to personal growth in favor of integrative, context-aware development strategies.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing confidence mantras as individualistic and simplistic compared to the nuanced self-trust developed through collaborative achievements.
2. Interpreting it as proof that self-trust emerges from navigating complex team challenges rather than solitary repetitions of affirmations.
3. Seeing it as validation that team-based growth opportunities are more effective than individual confidence practices for building reliable self-trust.

These teams might respond by:

• Designing team challenges that require integrative thinking and adaptive intelligence to build genuine confidence.
• Fostering environments where self-trust is modeled through reliable performance in diverse situations rather than through prescribed practices.
• Encouraging reflective discussions about growth experiences rather than promoting simplistic confidence techniques.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal confirmation that self-trust cannot be manufactured through repetition but must be earned through real-world experience and reflection.
2. Evidence that their preference for understanding contextual factors over simplistic solutions extends to personal development practices.
3. Proof that holistic growth, achieved through navigating complexity and embracing multiple perspectives, offers a more robust foundation for self-trust than daily mantras.

These individuals might respond by:

• Rejecting superficial confidence practices in favor of self-trust developed through meaningful achievements and reflective learning.
• Viewing confidence mantras as reductionist compared to the nuanced self-understanding required for authentic self-trust.
• Prioritizing personal growth through diverse experiences and challenges that build genuine self-trust aligned with their integrative worldview.

This correlation, viewed through the Yellow lens, suggests that those operating at the Yellow level are skeptical of simplistic solutions like confidence mantras. Their focus on complexity, adaptation, and holistic growth leads them to prioritize self-trust built through real-world experiences and reflective understanding over repetitive affirmations.

The reasons why confidence mantras are less likely to be seen as effective in the Yellow stage could include:

1. Holistic Understanding: Self-trust requires nuanced self-awareness developed through diverse experiences rather than simplistic repetition.
2. Contextual Adaptability: Yellow values emphasize situational responses over one-size-fits-all solutions, including confidence practices.
3. Results Over Ritual: Self-trust is seen as emerging from reliable performance in complex situations rather than from prescribed daily practices.
4. Growth Through Challenge: Authentic confidence is earned through overcoming real obstacles rather than through manufactured positivity.
5. Systems Thinking: The self-trust development process is viewed as interconnected with personal experiences and reflections rather than isolated techniques.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems approach personal development. It raises questions about the benefits of a Yellow approach to building self-trust, particularly in contexts requiring adaptability, complex problem-solving, and deep self-understanding.

In our analysis of the poll "How Do You Regulate Your Emotions?" (by Nawal Mustafa [3]), we found an intriguing positive linear correlation that warrants closer examination:

0.1263 (Pearson) between the When I feel REJECTED. I will acknowledge that this feeling sucks, but I will not let it consume me. Rejection is redirection / Moderately Agree, and the Turquoise stage.

The critical value of the correlation coefficient for a normal distribution, by William Sealy Gosset (Student), is r = 0.0938. Nevertheless, this positive linear correlation of 0.1263 meets the reliability criteria but does not necessarily imply causation. 

This positive correlation of 0.1263 between "When I feel REJECTED. I will acknowledge that this feeling sucks, but I will not let it consume me. Rejection is redirection / Moderately Agree" and the Turquoise stage offers intriguing 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 that viewing rejection as redirection aligns with their holistic approach to personal and professional growth.
2. Confirmation that fostering a culture where setbacks are seen as opportunities for learning supports overall system health.
3. Evidence supporting their belief that emotional resilience is strengthened when individuals integrate rejection into a broader narrative of growth.

These organizations might respond by:

• Implementing training programs that teach employees to reframe rejection as part of a larger journey toward personal and professional development.
• Creating support systems that help individuals process rejection in a way that emphasizes growth and redirection.
• Encouraging a culture where feedback is seen as a gift that helps align personal goals with organizational objectives.

Team Perspective:

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

1. Viewing rejection as an opportunity for collective learning and growth.
2. Interpreting it as proof that setbacks can redirect the team toward more effective strategies and solutions.
3. Seeing it as validation that emotional intelligence and resilience are crucial for navigating complex challenges together.

These teams might respond by:

• Encouraging open discussions about rejection and its role in redirecting efforts toward more promising paths.
• Supporting members in reframing rejection as a natural part of innovation and progress.
• Celebrating instances where rejection led to redirection and ultimately to success, reinforcing the value of resilience.

Individual Perspective:

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

1. Personal confirmation that their ability to reframe rejection as redirection is a sign of emotional maturity and alignment with their values.
2. Evidence that their holistic worldview helps them integrate challenging emotions into a larger narrative of growth and purpose.
3. Proof that their commitment to seeing the interconnectedness of experiences allows them to transform setbacks into meaningful redirections.

These individuals might respond by:

• Actively practicing emotional resilience by acknowledging the discomfort of rejection while focusing on the lessons it offers.
• Sharing their experiences of reframing rejection with others, thereby reinforcing a culture of support and growth.
• Viewing rejection as a natural part of their journey toward personal and collective well-being.

This correlation, viewed through the Turquoise lens, suggests that those operating at the Turquoise level are more likely to view rejection as redirection due to their focus on interconnectedness, growth, and holistic well-being. Their integrative perspective leads them to see setbacks not as endpoints but as valuable redirections on the path forward.

The reasons why viewing rejection as redirection might be more common in the Turquoise stage could include:

1. Holistic Growth: Rejection is seen as one part of a larger journey toward personal and collective development.
2. Emotional Resilience: The ability to acknowledge discomfort while finding meaning in setbacks is a sign of emotional maturity.
3. Systems Thinking: Recognizing how individual experiences of rejection can redirect efforts in ways that benefit the broader system.
4. Compassionate Perspective: Viewing rejection with self-compassion and understanding, rather than self-criticism or defeat.
5. Interconnected Narrative: Understanding that setbacks are interconnected with opportunities for growth and redirection.

This correlation prompts us to consider how different value systems shape emotional responses to setbacks. It raises questions about the benefits of a Turquoise approach to emotional regulation, particularly in contexts where resilience, learning from challenges, and maintaining a growth-oriented mindset are crucial.

What insights do you gain from today's correlation? How might we study this relationship more carefully before deducing causation? 

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] www.linkedin.com/in/mchalesiobhan
[2] www.linkedin.com/in/samarchyan
[3] www.linkedin.com/in/nawal-mustafa-84a90591

Valerii Kosenko

Tus tswv khoom SaaS SDTEST®

Valerii tau tsim nyog los ua tus kws tshaj lij-kev puas siab puas ntsws hauv 1993 thiab tau siv nws txoj kev paub hauv kev tswj xyuas qhov project.
Valerii tau txais Master's degree thiab qhov project thiab tus thawj tswj hwm kev tsim nyog hauv 2013. Thaum nws kawm tiav Master, nws tau paub txog Project Roadmap (GPM Deutsche Gesellschaft für Projektmanagement e. V.) thiab Spiral Dynamics.
Valerii yog tus sau tshawb nrhiav qhov tsis paub tseeb ntawm V.U.C.A. tswv yim siv Spiral Dynamics thiab lej txheeb cais hauv psychology, thiab 38 thoob ntiaj teb kev xaiv tsa.