Components of Change
(Life Conditions, Priority Codes, Beliefs and Behavior)
By Tim King
“No one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the skins will burst, the wine will run out and the wineskins will be ruined. No, they pour new wine into new wineskins and both are preserved.” (Mark 2:22)
Introduction:
A long time ago – somewhere around the late ‘80’s, when I was very young (smile) – I read a relatively obscure book about human development that outlined various thinking systems as key to understanding and catalyzing our growth to and in adulthood. This theory, developed by one of the world’s leading developmental psychologists, Clare W. Graves, used a letter code to differentiate the various levels of development.
Years later I would come to learn these systems via a more nuanced system developed by Don Beck, a student and colleague of Graves. Eventually I studied under Beck and became credentialed in what is today known as Spiral Dynamics. It is my privilege to consider Don Beck both a friend and mentor as I attempt to apply these principles (thinking systems) to my work with Presence International.
We’re using Spiral Dynamics at Presence because it is not only a user-friendly way of viewing self and culture but also because it works – it’s been field-tested across a number of disciplines and within diverse cultures across the globe. That said, Spiral Dynamics, and the elements of Integral Theory we’re drawing upon, are a heuristic – a useful lens through which to look at things – and not intended as a theory of everything or grand metanarrative.
As part of a global effort to apply the insights of Spiral Dynamics, Beck has made more than 60 trips to South Africa to work with one of the greatest systemic challenges of our lifetime. Serving as a consultant to both black and white leaders (foremost among them, Nelson Mandela), Beck applied the principles of Spiral Dynamics to the enormous task of helping South Africa heal from the wounds of apartheid into a less ethnicity-based, more democratic-styled system of self-government.
It’s not hard to imagine the difficulty in untangling this kind of Gordian knot. Beck faced ethnic, racial, linguistic, educational, economic, religious and cultural barriers in need of redress at every turn. The story of South Africa, as it continues to unfold, is certainly one of the greatest challenges of cultural and social change in our time.
The entire effort required an understanding of the biological, psychological, and social dimensions and dynamics (what Graves called “bio-psycho-social”) at work within people and groups of all ages and stages. It required a steady hand, open heart and a nuanced understanding of what changes were essential, and what the subsequent outcomes could and would be.
Just because change is called for does not ensure that everyone has the same vision of what “change” means, how such change should take place, or what things should look like once change has been implemented. Addressing the question of change more definitively by asking “from what – to what” is an important part of the process. Additionally, it is also necessary to address how much change is needed—and how much can be withstood. In addition to levels of development, then, Beck also needed a taxonomy of change. Let’s look at what this can mean for us.
First and Second Order Change
In an article entitled The Many dimensions of Change, Beck differentiates between what he calls “first order change” and “second order change.” He enumerates these categories as follows:
First Order Change
Change Variation One (CV1): Fine-tune or trim the tabs. Make minor adjustments to simply tweak the system. Nothing else is needed.
Change Variation Two (CV2): Reform or reshuffle the deck. The essential elements within the givens are re-aligned, or reformed while the way of thinking remains constant.
Change Variation Three (CV3): Upgrade or improve on the givens. The new or updated version replaces the previous one, but within the present operating code.
Change Variation Four (CV4): Down-stretch and regress. Adjust to the current situation by returning to an earlier system, hunker down for the moment. Go back to basics.
Change Variation Five (CV5): Up-stretch to expand. Think outside the box, but return later. Push the envelope.
Second Order Change
Change Variation Six (CV6): Break-out. Attack the barriers. Weaken, remove or replace the status quo. Here is revolutionary rather than evolutionary change.
Change Variation Seven (CV7): Up-shift or morph to the next. Subsume the old into the new. Transform to the next level of complexity. Transcend but include, like the ‘doll within the doll’ structures in the nested Russian toys. Here is systemic change.
Change Variation Eight (CV8): Quantum change of epochal proportions. Here are shifts from Premodern, to Modern, to Postmodern, and to Integral as all the transitions need to be legitimized and facilitated. These shifts concern major sea changes, massive upheavals, millennial-like turns. Everything is on the table and up for grabs as multiple change dynamics occur across the entire landscape.
These various levels or degrees of change illustrate the wisdom of approaching change by first asking “from what – to what?” Are we speaking about CV1 and fine tuning or are we speaking of a change of epoch proportions as in CV8?
(Keep this in mind the next time your spouse says, “Honey, I think it’s time to make a few changes to the house.” CV1 – no problem… CV8 – hide the checkbook!)
Imagine the varieties of change that would be suggested just by quizzing a limited sampling of congregants, pastors, university professors, philosophers, or theologians regarding the status of church and religion today and what change they felt needed to occur. Imagine the multiplicity of answers and points of view that would be generated just by asking that one, seminal question.
And why is it that some of our respondents might be more amenable to withstanding greater degrees of change than others? Furthermore, why would some value certain issues or practices as non-negotiables while others would not?
The epigraph at the top of this article is a good case-study regarding such issues. It’s a passage from the Book of Mark where Jesus speaks about the detriment of placing “new wine into old wineskins.” Within the context, what might Jesus have considered to be “new wine” and “old wineskins”? What sort of change was he calling for? Which might his audience have intuited in hearing such a statement?
It’s likely that the average person following Jesus desired something comparable to Change Variation Three (CV3): Upgrade or improve on the givens. The new or updated version replaces the previous one, but within the present operating code.
In other words, “just lighten our load.”
Remaining within the present operating code for them translated roughly to “remain within the bounds of our religious system” – affirm Moses, follow the Law, keep spinning out those revelatory insights about birds and flowers – but don’t mess with our God-given Judaic system!
Apparently, in speaking about “new wine” and the need to replace “old wineskins,” Jesus had other, more radical ideas in mind—you don’t get crucified for CV3 change!
This leads us to ask: “What factors continue to be responsible for disconnects between ‘sender’ and ‘receiver’ when discussing change today?”
In this regard, Dr. Beck asks us to consider questions such as…
1. What is it that holds beliefs and behaviors in place, making them resistant to certain change?
2. What are the keys to dealing with fixed ‘DNA’-like codes that lie at the core of entire societies?
3. Are there a set of universal dynamics that cut across all of our human experiences and endeavors?
4. Why do some people change while others don’t?
Three Necessary Components of Change
1. Changes in our Life Conditions
German theologians used the phrase sitz im leben (which roughly translates to “life-setting”) to remind students to remain present to the broader circumstances of the text and time under consideration. The idea is that there is no text apart from context. Understanding the life-setting of a person or culture is critical to understanding their level of thinking, feeling and possibilities for action.
Graves’ version of sitz im leben he called “Life Conditions.” A classic example of the inability to grasp the Life Conditions (context) of a people would be the well-known (and misappropriated) phrase, Qu’ils mangent de la brioche or “Let them eat cake.” Though there is no record of the Queen ever articulating such a thought, nonetheless, this was supposedly the response of Marie Antoinette when told of the dire consequences of the famine – “the people have no bread.”
For a Queen pampered in every imaginable way, possessing multiple servants, seemingly endless resources and thoroughly removed from the plight of the average citizen, we might understand how such Life Conditions could enable her to utter what has since become a cultural catch-phrase for cluelessness and insensitivity toward others.
Life conditions matter. Greatly. And to say that we are not highly influenced (if not outright a product of) by our environment would be to make a statement on par with that attributed to Queen Antoinette. It would be as blind and insensitive as saying that people today choose to be poor, or refuse to be educated, etc.
Without understanding the Life Conditions that exist in many of our inner cities for example, many of our pundits—from affluent, well-educated families, of course—offer their own version of “let them eat cake,” suggesting that the poor should just suck it up and make something of themselves. This kind of “pull yourself up by your bootstraps” mentality is unrealistic, and the charge inevitably falls upon deaf ears. Without the proper nurturing, education, hope, direction, opportunity – without a more promising and improved sitz im leben – the persistence of poverty (and therefore crime) is, unfortunately, a given.
Beck addresses this very challenge with our U.S. neighbors to the South:
Mexico is under serious threat to become a failed state because of the Life Conditions that are brewing the lethal cocktail of drugs, violence, and gangs. Fear has become rampant in the country because of the pattern of kidnapping for ransom and even brutal murder of innocent citizens. The youth are caught up in the lure of excitement and easy money. Until the baseline of stability and security is established, don’t expect Mexico to be able to keep up economically, or for the various elements in society to achieve even a modicum of success. We recently met with former President Vicente Fox in Le`on, Mexico… He asked: “Why has Latin America lagged behind the rest of the world?”
As long as there are pockets of poverty in our inner cities, with fragmented homes and lives coupled with a lack of discipline and economic opportunities, expect gang-related behaviors to flourish.
For change to occur, it is imperative that Life Conditions first be addressed.
2. Changes in our Priority Codes for Living
In brief, Spiral Dynamics describes the value systems that make up the interior universe of individuals as well as cultures as a whole. Each level reflects the interactions of Life Conditions coupled with our (and/or our culture’s) capacity to adapt to the problems of existence.
To date, at least eight Priority Codes have emerged within the Spiral Dynamics model. [Note: In the next article of this series we will be proposing a ‘ninth’ level specifically to address a higher, causal level of Spirit or what we will delineate as Christ Consciousness.] Each of these Codes is unique within its particular life-setting and is level-appropriate in dealing with its own unique set of Life Conditions and challenges.
According to Beck, each value level “opens new doors of reality and enables new thinking and fresh options. Sometimes realistic change involves the further development of a Code. When new Priority Codes appear, new insights must develop, as new bottom lines are embraced.”
The eight lines of Priority Codes are as follows:
Survival Priority Code: Meet basic needs; food, water, protection, procreation; survive at all costs.
Bonding Priority Code: Find safety and security, protect the nest/family; defend ethnicity/blood.
Egocentric Priority Code: Challenge the ‘dragons,’ assert self; live for today; seek pleasure/action.
Purposeful Priority Code: Confirm to the cause/truth/belief; sacrifice for tomorrow; be disciplined.
Enterprising Priority Code: Produce good life; create technology; achieve success; engineer progress.
Humanistic Priority Code: Restore human focus; find consensus; value equality; respond to feelings.
Integral Priority Code: Seek authenticity; think systemically; design complexity; embrace the natural.
Holonic Priority Code: Sense patterns of the whole; align all the dots; renew deep spirituality.
[As we progress to the Spiral, these Codes will be color-coded and paired with terms such as archaic, tribal, warrior, traditional, modern, postmodern, integral and post-integral.]
3. Changes in our Beliefs and Behaviors
Priority Codes represent the way we (and others) see and interact with the world at large. They represent our values on three primary levels: surface, hidden and deep. These values are best observed in the ways we behave and interact in various aspects or roles of our lives. They also assist us in understanding how we might best empathize and communicate with those whose values and Priority Codes are much different from our own.
For instance, how often have we said something like, “I just don’t understand how some people can say/feel/think that”? This is a sure sign of a category error – i.e., a clashing of Priority Codes. We’re processing on a different level than the one they’re working from. It’s a classic example of speaking past, rather than to, each other.
In a religious context, this might explain why some view the world as breaking down while others might see it as coming together and moving toward greater health and wholeness. Priority Codes can help us understand why some religious beliefs might give birth to destructive or terroristic behaviors (Egocentric Priority Code/Warrior Level ) while we might opt for a more constructive approach to being in the world (i.e., Humanistic Priority Code/Postmodern Level and above).
As an example, currently in the U.S. we are experiencing the inevitable tug-and-pull between the Purposeful, Enterprising and Humanistic Priority Codes (i.e., the deep values of the traditional, modern and postmodern levels of relating). The struggles that ensue from the clash of these titans are often coined “the culture wars.” And whether we are able to parse these differences or not, they aren’t going away anytime soon. However, the better we understand these Priority Codes, the better we’ll be able to conduct ourselves as we articulate our different point(s) of view, and the more effectively we’ll be able to work together with those who differ.
In conclusion, it is seemingly apparent that the issues, challenges and obstacles surrounding the task of deep personal and societal change are innumerable. However, models such as the discipline of Spiral Dynamics specifically, and Integral Theory in general, can go a long way toward the integration and evolution of the self, culture and the protective nurturing of the planet that sustains us.
While at first the thought of mastering such models might seem daunting—these ideas are too unfamiliar, difficult or even overwhelming to grasp—if we want to play a role in moving the world toward a tipping point of peace and human unity, if we desire to feed from the Tree of Life whose leaves are for the healing of the nations – indeed, is it not well-worth the effort?