Page 1
1
FeelingintotheMoment:ApplyingIntegralMapsandProcessestoCorporate
LeadershipTrainingandTrans‐disciplinaryEducation
JonathanReamsandAnneCaspari
Abstract: The application of more recent developments and experience in integral thought and
processes to various domains of human endeavor has been going on for the past decade or so. The
evolution of howwe (the authors/presenters) use integral frameworks in amorematuremanner to
support transformative processes at both individual and organizational levels and how these
applicationshave informedthedevelopmentofourtheoreticalunderstandingof integral leadership is
thefocusofthispresentation.Takingasabackgroundourunderstandingofusingconstructawareness
insuchwork,wewilldrawonrecentpracticeandtheoreticalworkfocusedontwoareas;integrityand
intuition.
Wewill focusontwospecificapplicationsofthisworkto illustrateour ideasandreflecton lessons
learned. One application is the corporate leadership training environment, where the opportunity to
experiment with designing and implementing combinations of activities to stimulate both individual
growthandorganizationalculturechangehasbroughtuseful insightsintohowtomovebeyondtelling
aboutmodelstoenactingsupportivescaffoldingstructures.Thesecondapplicationisanongoingproject
ofsupportingauniversitywiththedevelopmentofatransdisciplinarymastersprogram.Thisprojecthas
gone beyond many existing initial efforts in this direction to include a combination of theoretical
foundationswith personal developmentwork and group processes to prototype creating a collective
platformfordevelopingandconceivinghowsuchaprogrammightlook.
Keywords:Constructaware,integral,integrity,intuition,leadership.
Introduction
Feelingintothemoment–wefindourselvesdrawnintosituationswherewemustleaverationalplans
behind and improvise tomeet the calling before us. These situations can bemet inmany ways, but of
interesthereiswhatcananintegralconsciousnessprovideinsuchmoments.Inparticular,whatmightitbe
likeonthe journeyofgoing frombeing integrally informedtoan integralpractitioner inspecificdomains,
specificallyintheareasofleadershipdevelopmentandprocessfacilitation?Inthispaperwefirstexplorethe
Page 2
2
theoreticalunderpinningsofourapproachtodeveloping leadership invariouscontexts.Wethendescribe
some of the specific applications we are involved in, and then briefly discuss what we perceive as the
implicationsforfuturedevelopmentofpractitionersinthisarea.
Integral leadership is being presented in various arenas of discourse as an advance on existing
frameworksforunderstandingleadership(Brown,2011;Reams,2005;Volckmann,2010;numerouspieces
inhttp://integralleadershipreview.com/).Inthisarticlewewillnotattempttoprovideacomprehensiveview
ofwhatwewouldconsidertobealloftherequisiteaspectsofintegralleadership.Whatwewillpresentisan
articulationofthecoreelementsweperceiveashavingthegreatestimpactonleaders’capacitytoopenand
holdspacesthatenableworktobeaccomplished.
First,wewillbeginbypresentingabriefsummaryofbiographicalandtheoreticalencountersinforming
us.Anne’s background is a lifelong enthusiasm for and studyof all thingsrelated toecology andnature
whichledtothestudyofNatureConservationandEnvironmentalPlanninginGermany(MSc).Shehasalso
doneresearchinintegraltheoryandpracticeinthe“mechanics”ofconsciousnesstraining,integratingallthis
into practicalwork inmanagement for sustainabilityand global changeprojects and in teachingwork at
various universities. Jonathan’s background includes farming before studying the history of western
intellectualthought,followedbymastersanddoctoratedegreesinleadershipstudies.Aswell,heundertook
parallelcourseworkinthefieldofconsciousnessstudiesbeforetakingupanacademicpositioninNorway.
Teaching leadership development from an integral perspective led to work with some Norwegianmulti‐
nationalcorporateclientswherehehastestedouttheutilityofintegrallyinformedmodels,distinctionsand
practicesinhighpressuresituations.
TheoreticalPositions
Together,wehavebeeninitiallyinformedbyKenWilber’sAQALmeta‐framework/theory(1996,2000a,
2006),whichalso includedDonBeck’s (Beck&Cowan,1996)developmentofan integralversionofSpiral
Page 3
3
Dynamics.Sincethen,wehavegonedeeperintospecificsourcesofsomeoftheseframeworks,likeKegan
(1994),Torbert&Associates(2004)andCook‐Greuter(1999)onadultdevelopment,Scharmer(2007)onthe
UTheoryandprocess,Edwards(2010)on integralmeta‐theoryandMolz(2010)on integralpluralism.We
have gone through various learning curves and stages of development in relation to each of these
approaches,fromtheinitialexcitementthatcomesfromfindingamapthatbetterdescribestheterritoryof
experience, through the adoption of the map and using it to fit all experience into it, to encountering
limitations, shadowsof thecommunityofpracticeandreductionisticadoptions/interpretations, togaining
sufficientdistancetobeabletodrawonsuchmapsasappropriatetoolsingivensituations.
Theabilitytotakeaperspectiveoncomplexmapsofanintegralnaturedoesnotcomequicklyoreasily.
Thesemapshaveus fora longtime,(formany,possiblythis istheonlywaytheywillrelatetothem),and
becoming sufficiently distant to take a perspective on them requires a new kind of cognition. This is not
simplyanabilitytohandleevermoredetailedcomplexity,orakindofadditiveapproachtodevelopment.It
ismoreaboutaqualitativelynewrelationshiptocomplexity,amoredynamicview(Cook‐Greuter,1999).
Thuswe do not position ourselves as “integralists” in the sense of the totalizing impulse that can be
critiquedinrelationtosomestrandsofWilberianwork(Anderson,2006).Whilewerecognizethatweusea
range of such capacities in relation to everyday life situations, our particular interest is in later stage,
emergingstructuresofconsciousness.Whiletherearemanyframingsforthese,(e.g.Basseches,1975;Beck
andCowan,1996;Commons,2006;Kegan,1982,1994;Loevinger,1976;Torbert&Associates,2004;Wilber,
2000b),weprefer todrawon twoof them; integral consciousnessasaperspectivality (Gebser,1985)and
constructaware(Cook‐Greuter,1999).“Integralrealityistheworld’stransparency,aperceivingoftheworld
astruth:amutualperceivingandimpartingoftruthoftheworldandofmanandallthattranslucesboth”
(Gebser,1985,p.7).Gidley(2007)describeshow“Gebserusedthetermintegral‐aperspectivaltorefertothe
gradual transformation through awareness, concretion and integration of all the previous structures of
Page 4
4
consciousness thatwehavebeenexploring—archaic,magic,mythic andmental—into anew structureof
consciousness” (p. 106). She alsonotes that this aperspectival structureof consciousness is also found in
morerecentliteratureonpost‐formalstagesofcognitivedevelopment.
Amoredetailedexaminationofhowlifeisperceivedandexperiencedatthis laterstageisprovidedby
Cook‐Greuter(1999).Atwhatshelabelsastheconstructawarestage,peopleare“becomingawareofthe
absurdities towhichunbridledcomplexityand logicalargumentscan lead” (p.44). “Nowconceptscanbe
seen for what they are: as illusions – as effective but nevertheless arbitrary maps, codifications,
representations,orsummariesofthefluxofsensoryandmentaldata”(p.46).Shedescribeshowindividuals
usingthisconsciousnessmovebeyondthinkingaboutthinking,tounderstandingthemechanicsofhowsuch
constant reflectiveanalysis isworking. Thiscanbe seenasanearly formof the transparencyofGebser’s
aperspectival consciousness.Asoneunfolds into thenext,orunitive stage, this takes rootmore fullyand
leadsto“anentirelynewwayofperceivinghumanexistenceandconsciousness”(p.48).Suchpeople“no
longerfeelaneedtoreachafterfactandreason”(p.49)andtheirself‐sense“isfluid,‘undulating,’basedon
people’strustintheinstrinsicvalueandprocessesoflife”(p.49).Thisleadstobeingabletotakerational,
representationalthoughtgroundedinperspectives,asanobjecttoreflectortakeaperspectiveon,which
couldbetermedaperspectival(Gebser,1985).Therelationshiptoexperienceshiftsfrommentalprocessing
and representation to immersion“in the immediate,ongoing flowofexperience” (Cook‐Greuter,1999.p.
49).
Thus our approach to integral rests on two pillars; the cognitively complex and comprehensivemeta‐
theoreticalframingofintegralpluralism(oftenreferredtoasbeing“integrallyinformed”)andtheviewfrom
aperspectivalorconstructawareconsciousness.Withthisbriefcornerstoneoftheintegralpartofintegral
leadershiplaidout,wenowturntothesecondhalfoftheterm,leadershipitselfandexploreourconceptions
inuse.
Page 5
5
Therearealmostasmanydefinitionsofleadershipastherearetheoristsonthesubject(Rost,1991).Thus
it becomes important to be clear about which framing or definitionwe are drawing on for this article’s
intendedpurpose.Bothfromatheoreticalperspective,aswellasfrompracticeinworkingwithclients,we
have foundHeifetz’s (1994; Heifetz, Linsky&Grashow, 2009) view of adaptive leadership to be a useful
foundation. There are two core aspects of this we find most relevant. One is the distinction between
technical problems and adaptive challenges. Technical problems may be very complex and critically
important foranorganization,but theyhaveclearlydefinedboundariesandknownsolutions that canbe
implemented with current know‐how. Their resolution comes through the application of authoritative
expertiseanddrawsonanorganization’scurrentstructures,proceduresandwaysofdoingthings.
Adaptivechallenges,ontheotherhand,aremorelikeill‐structuredorwickedproblems,(Brown,Harris
andRussell,2010) inthattheyarenotabletobedefinedandunderstoodintermsofexistingknowledge.
Theyrequirelearningthatisoftentransdisciplinaryandinareasthatareoftennotwellunderstood,andin
additiontotechnicalaspectsalsoinvolve“messy”issuesthatlie“belowtheneck”likebeliefs,assumptions,
loyalties and values. The nature of these challenges is such that we do not “solve” them like we can a
technicalproblem,butareabletomakeprogressonthemthroughlearningabouttheinterconnectedsoft
issuesandsystemsthattheaspectsofthechallengethatweencounteraretiedto.
Whatisrequiredtodothisistogobeyondtheuseofexpertiseandauthoritytoenablepeopletodothe
learning, or “work” of examining assumptions, priorities, beliefs, habits, and loyalties. This leads to the
second aspect of adaptive leadership we find relevant; that leadership functions by creating a holding
environmentwhere thiskindofworkcanbedone.Aholdingenvironment isakindofcontainer,a space
wheresufficientchallengeandsupport(Kegan,1994)ispresenttoenablegrowth.Thenatureofthelearning
thatneedstohappenisoftenofthenaturerelatedtotakingwhatwehavebeensubjecttoandmakingitan
objectofreflection.Theassumptions,priorities,beliefs,habits,andloyaltiesthatoperatebelowtheneck,are
Page 6
6
oftenautomaticreflexesthatrunus.Howtheseholdingenvironmentsorprocessesaremanifestediswhat
wefindtobeofparticularinterestandwillexploreindetailinwhatfollows.
PresentationofCoreView
This leads us to the presentation of our definition of integral leadership as integritywith a quality of
presencethatopensspacesforwhatwantstoemerge.Herewewillbrieflydiscussandexplorewhatismeant
byqualityofpresenceandthenotionofpresencing(Scharmer,2007),orwhatwantstoemerge.Infleshing
theseout,wewillgointodepthaboutconceptionsofintegrityandintuition.Theabovedescriptionoflater
stages of cognitive/ego development and how it relates to these themes will also be woven into our
discussion.Itisouraimthatthispresentationofourconceptionsinvolvedinintegralleadershipcanopenup
somefurthervariationsinthediscourseonthistopic.
Thecoreorgroundingprinciplehereisthenotionofqualityofpresence.Oneoftencitedformulationof
this comes fromBillO’Brien.He isquotedas saying that the“successofan interventiondependson the
interior condition of the intervener” (Scharmer, 2007,p. 7). This notion of the central importance of the
interiorconditionoftheinterveneriswhatScharmer(2002)referstoastheblindspotofleadership,orthe
lackofrecognitionthatthesourcesfromwhichweleadhaveaveryhighleverageimpactonourleadership
interventions.Thusthisqualityofpresenceoccurs invaryingdegrees inallofusall thetime. In itspurest
forms,“self”oregoistransparent(Cook‐Greuter,1999;Gebser,1985)andwemanifestwhatisoftentermed
atranspersonalSelf(Reams,2002).Attheotherendofthespectrum,weencountertotallyself‐embedded
leaders, for whom all activity is designed to reinforce and feed the constructed ego (Carey, 1992). The
movement towards greater self‐transcendence in relation to leadership can be viewed as a fundamental
option(Carey,1992).Inotherwords,itismoreimportantwhichdirectionyouaremovingthanwhereyou
areonagivendevelopmentalscale.Atthesametime,yourinterpretationofexperiencewillbecoloredby
the lens of the developmental level.We propose that there are practices, related to both integrity and
Page 7
7
intuition,thatcanenableustocultivatethekindofqualityofpresencethatenablesustobetotallypresent
withanotherpersonorgroupofpeople.
StatesandIntegrity
Nowwewishtobrieflyexploresomeoftheblockagestobeingabletocreatehealthy,openspacesfrom
ourqualityofpresence.Palmer(1993,2004)describesintegritythisinrelationtotruth,framingtruthasa
verbratherthananoun,whichleadstoaviewoftruthastroth,alivingpledgewhereinwelearnhowtolive
in integritywiththetruthof this innercondition.Oneaspectof this isourstateofconsciousness (Wilber,
1996,2000b)(incontrasttothestagesofcognitivedevelopmentdescribedearlier).Thecultivationofstates
relevant toaligningwithour inneressencecangainusaccess to subtleenergies. From thisawarenessof
subtle energies, it is possible to consciously work with differentdomains or modes of information. We
perceivesubtleenergiestoactuallyhavethepotentialtohaveevengreaterimpactonrealitythanpractices
and information from gross states. This gives us the potential to access more authentic power, this
authenticitybeinggroundedinintegrityandalignmentwehavebeendescribing.
Differentwisdomtraditionsdescribethesekindsofstatesindifferentways,(Walsh,1999)forexampleas
‘grace’(Christian)or‘openinguptheheart’(Sufi),andallgointhedirectionofopeningupaspacetoreceive.
Forusitisself‐evidentthatinordertoreceive,whetherwecallitenergy,information,grace,orvision,that
the space held in such a leadership situation should at least be; a) free, e.g. not occupied by old ideas,
concepts,paradigms,ormaps(downloadinginScharmer’sUTheory),b)clean,inthiscontextmeaningvoid
of judgments, criticism, cynicism, bias, projections, or blame (Scharmer describes voices of judgment,
cynicism and fear), and c) contained, or by a closed group, a geographical space, a room, a structuring
method with rules (Torbert & Associates, 2004, describe these as liberating structures). These three
principles,ifnotaddressed,createimpedimentsandcanderailourgoodintentionsandqualityofleadership.
Page 8
8
Theseimpedimentsarebasicallyadeeperlevelofissuesthatdonotsurfaceuntilwebeginworkinginthe
subtledomain.
Aswell,wecan,throughalackofpracticeoruse,loseaconnectionorintegritywiththesignalsfromour
essentialSelf.WeallhavethecapacitytoperceivethesubtlesignalsfromSelf,essenceorafieldthatsignals
whatwantstoemergefromthefuture(Sengeetal,2004,Scharmer,2007,Reams,2012)orfromanyother
unconditionedspacebeyondagiventrajectoryorperspective.Thebodysystemaswellassubtlebodiesare
apowerfulinstrumentforreceptionandperception,notonlyonthelevelofthesensesthatweareusedto.
McCratyetal.’s (2009) research indicates that thebrain in theheart,or theneurocardiological system, is
capableofperceivingsubtleelectromagneticfieldsuptothreemetersfromthebody.Thisgivesusawayto
show how sensitivity to the states of others can be cultivated with the integration available through
psychophysiological coherence. This externally focused capacity to perceive subtle signals can also be
directedinward.Theintegrationofthemindwiththestatesavailablethroughtheheartiskeytothis.Aswell,
wecanseehowthisinwardfocuscanbeexperiencedthroughthebody.
Oneofthemostimportantskillstolearnistheabilityof“generativelistening”–akindoflisteningthatis
active in the subtle realm and really opens up a space for a coachee or a group. This kind of listening
combines cleanorneutral sensing (e.g.notmixedwithone’sownconcerns, judgments,opinions) with
appreciationandcompassionwhilestayingneutraltotheother’scontents.Thisverypowerfulsubtleprocess
canbecomparedtoScharmer’s“openheart”orDavidGrove’s“cleanquestions”,(Barner,2008)butthere
is somethingmore to it. Levin (1989) calls the transpersonal skill of being present and listening without
gettingentangledintheego’sstoriesandpreoccupations“hearkening”‐atermborrowedfromHeidegger.
Hearkeningrequiresthedisciplinedpracticeoflettinggo‐andletting‐beasamodeandstyleoflistening,that
requiresappreciationandarecoveryofexperiencingmodalities(beingabletostayclosetoanyphenomena
Page 9
9
arising). This quality of being present and listening is highly generative and can shift people out oftheir
deepestentanglementsandstuckness.
TheArchitectureofIntegrity
Anotherkeyelementwewishtoexploreinmoredepthtounderstandintegralleadershipisthestructure,
or architecture of integrity. Integrity, in our opinion, is a key quality for integral leadership. Earlier we
outlinedsomeaspectsofhowweinterpretthisconcept,andnowwewishtotakeapartitsmechanismsand
itseffectsinandonhumanconsciousnessfromanotherangle(Palmer,1994,1997).
TheinventorandvisionaryBuckminsterFuller(1997)describedintegrityasacapacityoftheuniverseto
createacertainpatternreliably.Aknotisaknotwithwhatevermaterialitismadewith:arope,acable,a
string,whileasimpleloophasnopatternintegrity.Hewavedhishandsaying:thisisnotahand.Withthe
body’s replacing cells every x years, it still remains a hand: It is a “pattern integrity.” It is the universe’s
capacitytocreatehands.Similarviewsoforderaspatternsofself‐organizingcomefromthefieldofphysics,
whereforinstancetheholographicmetaphorforhowtheuniverseisorganizedhasalsoshownhowthiskind
ofpatternintegritycanbeunderstood(Bohm,1980,Bohm&Hiley,1993;Talbot,1996).Thekeypointwas
thisreliabilityandthecohesionofthepatternthatdefinedintegrity.“Apatternhasintegrityindependentof
the medium by virtue of which you have received the information that it exists. Each of the chemical
elements is a pattern integrity. Each individual is a pattern integrity. The pattern integrity of the human
individualisevolutionaryandnotstatic.”(Fuller,1997,section505.201).
Inthismannerwewouldliketoembarkonadiscussionofintegrityasoneofthecrucialelementsfora
leader.Inthisperspective,wearemoreinterestedinwhateffectintegrity,aswellasnon‐integrity,hason
ourleaderorintervener.Howdoesitimpacthisorherinnerstatesandthecapacitytocreateopen,clean
spaces,toperceiveandreceiveunbiasedinformation?
Integrityisatimetestedvirtuethatispromotedbyallgreatwisdomtraditions(Walsh,1999)andforgood
reason.Integrity,oritsabsence,isthekeyfactorindeterminingthecapacitytobepresenttosomebodyor
Page 10
10
somethingelse;toanotherperson,toagroup,toanidea,toanemotionortoanyotherconstructthatarises
inone’sownconsciousness.Inordertobeabletokeeptheaccesstointuitiveguidancestableandreliable,in
ordertoopenthespaceforagroupprocessoraprototypingsomethingnew,weperceiveintegrityasakey
condition.Assuch,wewishtodrawonanotherdescriptionofintegrity;asacompleteabsenceoftriggersor
anyother interferencethatcouldarise inagivensituation(Palmer,1997).Basically, integrityallowsbeing
presenttotheother,individualorcollective.
Whilethisperspectiveonintegritycanbeuseful,tohelprecognizeandmakeusefuldistinctionswithit,
wefindithelpfultoexaminethenatureofsomeofthetriggersorinterferencethatcreate,orresultinnon‐
integrity. To do this,we have to consider someof themore subtlemechanismsof consciousness. In the
Wilberianintegralworld,non‐integrity iscalled“shadowmaterial”andreferstoalloftheparts, identities,
sub‐personalities (Assagioli, 1971) that have been dis‐owned in a persons’ ego development.Dissociated
parts(saying;thisisnotmine)areoftennotonlynotseenasone’sown,butprojectedoutandarefalsely
recognisedassomebodyelse’sparts(identities,characteristics,attitudesetc.;“thisisyours”).Intheintegral
context,inclassicalpsychotherapy,aswellasinthecoretenetsofmostofthegreatwisdomtraditions,there
arepractices that aim toprovide ways to re‐own these kindsofdis‐associated shadowparts.Theprime
directiveinalloftheseframeworksistousetoolsand,mostlyspiritual,practicestobecomeas“whole”as
possible, not impaired or projecting undesired feelings out. Integrity is thus restored through addressing
theseconditionsofnon‐integrity.
Comingbacktoourquestionabouthowintegrityornon‐integrityimpactsinnerstatesandthecapacityto
create open, clean spaces, to perceive and receive unbiased information, we see thatnon‐integrity as a
boundaryownershipproblemcanlimitenormouslytheabilityofapersontobepresent.Wehavenotedthat
beingpresenttoallmannerofwhatarisesisanessentialcapacityforleadershiptocreateandmaintainthese
spaces,orholdingenvironments(Heifetz,1994).Thisisespeciallytrueifthesituationrequiresgettingoutof
Page 11
11
one’s comfort zone, as leaders are quite often challenged to do. Aswell, as noted above, the ability to
receive is important. So our working definition of integrity is the capacity to stay present to whatever
phenomenonisarising(usuallyresistedexperiences)inrealtimeinagivenleadershiportrainingsituation.
Naturally,thecleaneraleader’sownspaceisthemoreshecanrecognizesubtleenergiesintheroomand
drawinformationfromit(thusawiderchoicefield).Shecanalsostaywith“notknowing”anddoesnothave
topushthroughnaturallyemergingunknownsand(necessary)gapswithactionsarisingfromothermodesof
consciousness (such as thinking or reacting). While avoiding the pitfalls of filtering, or biasing the
interpretationofinformationthatcomestoaleaderiscritical,inadditiontothisexternalaspect,thereisan
internaldimensionofthis;intuition.
Intuition
Intuition is a phenomenon that is commonly defined as the ability to acquire knowledgewithout the
interference or the use of reason (Franquemont, 1999). In this sense it is a trans‐rational mode of
consciousness(Reams,2002).Sengeetal.’s(2004)conceptionofpresencingcanbeseenasanotherformof
this capacity to perceive, receive, and learn to act upon, knowledge coming from sources other than a
rationalanalyisisofexternalsensorydata.Researchintotheuseofintuitionasarigorousmethodofinquiry
hasshownthatitispossibletohonethiscapacityanddrawnonitinarigorousmanner(Braud&Anderson,
1998).Theimplicationsofawell‐developedintuitivecapacityforleadershipappearobvious,butarenotvery
welldocumentedorresearched.
Inarecentstudyonconsciousleadershipforsustainabilitythatdidexamineintuition,Brown(2011)found
thattherespondentswithlatestageactionlogics,inadditionto“traditionalsourcesofknowledge,suchas
technical or content knowledge” (p. 136), drewupon “intuition andways of knowingother than rational
analysis” (p.137).Respondents in this study,when talkingabout the sourcesof this intuitionorhow this
other way of knowing worked, used terms like; consciousness, heart, cosmic intelligence, higher self,
Page 12
12
unnameable mystery, spirit (p. 139). They also described the processes of accessing knowledge in this
mannerwithtermslike;puttheintentionoutandletitcome,getridoftheegostuffandthendownloadit,
the design designsme, pluck ideas out of the ether; it just comes (p. 139). These results indicate how a
specificdemographicof leaders,thosewith latestagecognitivecapacities,describethisphenomenon.We
also recognize that intuition is experienced by people in general and leaders specifically, independent of
stagedevelopment.Howitisinterpretedandusediswhatwebelievewillvaryinrelationtoalensofstage
development.
Thustheevidencewehaveexaminedsuggestsdifferencesintheuseofintuitionthatseemtoderivefrom
amultitudeofdifferentfactors.Wewilllistwhatweperceiveasthemostimportanthere.First,whileevery
personseemstohaveabasicpotentialaccesstointuitionindependentofstageofcognitivedevelopment,
noteverybodyseemstohaveastableaccessandbeabletouseit.Second,theaccesstointuitionasasource
forknowledgeseemstobedependentondifferenttypesofpeople,asdocumentedinforexampleonthe
JungianMyers‐Briggspersonalitytypemodel(BriggsMyers&Myers,1980).Third,ifapersonisgenerally
intuitive, thestabilityofaccessseemstodependonother factors thatcan inhibit such intuitiveguidance,
suchas judgements,excessivethinking,orfear(correspondingtoScharmer’svoicesof judgment,cynicism
andfear).Forthesereasonstheaccesstointuitioncangreatlybenefitfromthementalandspiritualpractices
thatwillworkonkeepingthoughts,judgmentsandfearatbay,suchasmindfulnesstraining,willexercises,
attentionmanagement, ormediation. Any of these practices enhance the skills to stay close to resisted
phenomenaarisinginone’sownortheother’sspacewithoutthenaturalimpulsetopushthemawaybehind
theboundariesofself.Thepracticeofthecapacityforintegrityisobviouslyvital.
Fourth,whileweworkwiththeassumptionthatintuitionisageneralhumancapacitythatisindependent
of stage development, the different action logics (Torbert & Associates, 2004) will play a role. The
informationgainedviaintuitionwillusuallybeinterpretedthroughthevaluesystem(Beck&Cowan,1996)
Page 13
13
that a person inhabits. Intuitive guidance would usually be “right” or “true” or “just” in the sense of a
“functionalandcultural fit” for thepersonreceiving intuitiveguidance. Incoachingpractices,certaintools
canbeapplied tocoachapersonthat is inastucksituationto removeallpsychologicalmaterialblocking
onesintuition(e.g.Kegan&Lahey’s(2009)ImmunitytoChangeprocess,Palmer’s(1997)transparentbeliefs,
releasingfixedattentionexercise,etc.).Thecoacheewillhave,withasuddeninsight,accesstohisorhernext
“right thing todo,” that is informedby intuition. “Right” is soonly in themeaningmaking systemof the
coachee andwill generally fit inwith themeaningmaking system of that person and his or her cultural
environment.Insightsatthislevelcan,withamultitudeofsmaller“dis‐identifications”alsopavethewayfor
stagedevelopment,orfortakingaperspectiveonthemechanismsthatcreatedthisparticularreality.
Fifth,wecanseeinterferencefromtheprocessofthinkingitself.Forexample,childrenoperatingwithina
pre‐rational developmental stage can be extremely intuitive, as rational, concrete operational thought
(Piaget,1954)hasnotyetfullytakenroot.Asitdoes,attentionisfocusedongrowingintothefulluseofthe
tremendousbenefitstherationalmindbrings.Retaininganabilitytoalsokeepopentheaccesstointuitive
knowing can be hampered by the powerful dependence on rational thought. To access knowing beyond
rationalthought,oratrans‐rationalwayofknowing,requiresbothasuspensionofthispotentialinterference
fromrationalthought,aswellasnotmistakingapre‐rationalmodeforatrans‐rationalone(Wilber,1996,
2000a).
Sixth,whilestagedevelopmentisbynomeansaprerequisiteforintuition,thereareimplicationsrelated
tohowdifferentstagesofcognitivedevelopmentuse intuitionandmakesenseof the informationgained
through that particular channel. Research suggests a strong correlation between late stage action logics
(strategist,alchemists)andtheirabilitytoleadeffectively(Brown,2011;Torbert&Associates,2004;Cook‐
Greuter,1999).Peopleattheselaterstages,inadditiontowhathasbeendescribedabove,haveadifferent
attitudetowards intuitionanddifferentskillstheyapplytokeepthataccessopen.Theyhavedevelopeda
Page 14
14
trans‐rational approach towards intuitions and rely easily on intuitive guidance. Their meaning making
system is also such that the information gained by intuition can be used tomanage complex problems.
Brown(2011)identifiedthatthey;usethataccesstotapintocollectiveconsciousness,havearegularpractice
in to keep the access to intuitionopen,stable and reliable, have a perspective on intuition that allows a
discernmenton the informationgained (e.g.not“hearingvoices.”orbeing filteredbydesires, judgments,
etc.),andcanbeintouchwiththeirintegrity.WewouldaddtoBrown’slisttheimportanceofintegrityasa
wayofkeepingaccesstointuitionopenandfreeofblockagesorfiltering.
Applications
Inmanyyearsofcoachingindividualsandgroups,wehavebothindependentlyexperiencedawidening
ofperspectivesandthematurityofourownmeaningmakingsystemintoconstructaware.Wefound,that
while we might differ in the use of individual tools, we have found the same invaluable underlying
mechanismsandprinciplesforourworkandgetsimilarandreliablesuccessesintheapplicationofourtools
andmethods.Thisiswhyweareinterestedindiscussingthoseprinciplestohaveaclearerunderstanding
whatthiscouldmeanforintegralleadershipdevelopmentandtheapplicationinthefield.
One area of application for these ideas has come throughthe opportunity to develop a course for a
masters in organizational leadership program that led to applying similarwork in corporate settings.The
approachtakeninthesesettingshasbeentobeginwiththeuseof“awarenessbasedtechnologies”toenable
leadership development. O’Fallon (2010) points to three dimensions essential to manifest development;
stage,stateandbehaviororskills.Balancingthesebecameanimportantlensindevelopingtheseprograms.
Whilemanyofthewaysofaddressingthisbalancearehighlyinter‐related,forthecurrentpurposesI(JR)will
focusontheminthesethreecategories.
Beginningwithstates,thereareanumberofcomponents.Inlinewiththeabove,theinnerconditionof
theteacher/facilitatorisacorecomponentofcreatingthespaceorholdingenvironment.Thisspacewillhave
Page 15
15
different levels to it. One will be on the subtle level, picked up by others energetically, impacting the
neurocardiologyofparticipants(McCratyetal.,2009).Psychophysiologicalcoherenceinthefacilitatorcanbe
pickedupandinterpretedbyparticipantsinvariousways.Itcanengendertrust,risktaking,emotionalsafety
and cognitive spaciousness to enablebetter quality of reflection. I haveobservednumerous caseswhere
studentsorprogramparticipantsbeginwithasomewhatguardeddemeanorinthebeginningofaprogram
orclass,andovertimefeeltheirwayintoamorespaciousstate.Thisisespeciallyobservableinendofclass
orprogram“checkouts”whenparticipantsreflectontheirexperienceandnotevariouswaysinwhichthey
havecometoamoreauthentic,coherentandevenexpandedtheirsenseofthemselves.
I have also observed how a progressively more subtle and profound state creates a strong holding
environmentforthiswork.Asparticipantsgothroughvariousexperiences(likereceivingintegrallyinformed
360feedback,goingthroughtheimmunitytochangeprocess),theyarechallengedtoreflectontheirown
behaviors,experiences,assumptionsetc.inseriousways.Havingastrongholdingenvironmentisessentialto
enablethisprocesstoworkasdeeplyaspossibleonparticipants.Theabilitytogainnewinsightsonwhat
havepreviouslybeeneitherunconsciousbehaviorsorabstractpatternsandsitwith thestrongemotional
reactionsthiscanbringupisaidedbythestateofconsciousnessprovidedasaholdingenvironment.Itisalso
observablethatasthegroupmovesthroughthisprocess,“earlyadopters”takeupthe invitationtoenter
intothisspaceandmodel theprocess forothers,alsomaking itsafer for themtoventure into it.Various
tippingpointscanbeobserved in this,andofcoursenotallgroupsgoas farordeep intocollectivestate
experiences,butthepatternisclearoverworkingwithnumbersofgroups.Ihaveevennotedattimesthatit
appears that a group will act as if they are in a semi‐trance state, enabling them to perceive and hold
perspectives,experiencesandsoonthatwouldnotnormallybeaccessible.
Intermsofstages,thereareanumberofconsiderationsIhaveobserved.Ofcoursethestagecapacityof
theteacher/facilitatorisimportantinhelpingtosetthestageforparticipantstobridgefromtheirownlevels
Page 16
16
ofunderstandingtoamoreexpansiveperspectivetakingrelationshiptotheideasinplay.Ihavewitnessedin
myselfanongoingchallengetolearnhowtopresentideas,butalsoinstructionsforreflectionexperiencesin
amannerthatarenottoocomplexorabstracttofollow.(Ioftenmakeupsuchexercisesinthemoment,and
thenhavetotranslatemyselfrightafterwardstomakeitclearer).Thischallengehascontributedtolearning
howtocreatebetterliberatingstructures(Torbert&Associates,2004)andappropriatescaffolding(Jordan,
2011)foropeningthespaceforparticipants’journeys.
Another componentof attending to stagesrelated to this is utilizing appropriate activities (theoretical
framings,questionsfordiscussion,exercises,360feedback)toprovidethisbridgingandscaffolding.Usingan
integrally informed360 feedback instrument (The LeadershipCircle) to createa “crucible”oropening for
deeperreflectionand insight,participantsareableto“seethemselves” inamorerefinedorsophisticated
manner.Theiropinionsandself‐imagesarefilteredthroughasetoflensesthataddpoweranddepthtotheir
self‐understandings.Fromthisplatform,theyareledthroughthe immunitytochangeprocess(Keganand
Lahey,2009)wheretheyarebothabletotakeaperspectiveonsomethingthattheyhavebeensubjectto,
andareabletobeginpracticingandinternalizingaprocesstofacilitatesuchsubjecttoobjectworkinother
domainsoftheirlives.OtherscaffoldingtoolsusedincludeTorbert’sfourpartsofspeech,Argyris’ladderof
inference,andtheArbingerInstitute’s(2010)collusionmaps.
Finally,skillsorbehaviorsarealsocriticallyimportanttoenabletheleadershipdevelopmentworktotake
root.Practice,inthesenseofbothsportstrainingandspiritualpractice,isattheheartofskilldevelopment.
Whiletheawarenessbasedtechnologyworkisusedtoshiftbehaviors,newbehaviorsalsoneedpracticeto
develop increased skillful means. Skills in specific areas related to this are often in the domain of
communication.Thusinmuchofthecorporateworkthereistimespentgivingparticipantsspecific,detailed
instructionsandtimetopracticebasiccommunicationskills.Thesearefocusedonhowtotakeacoaching
Page 17
17
orientationtodevelopingemployees,tacklepivotalconversations(Joiner&Josephs,2007)andaskpowerful
questions.Participantsgainatremendousvaluefromthispracticeandlearnhowtolinktheorywithskills.
ThemostpotentapproachthatI(AC)havefoundinmypraxisfortransformativeleadershipdevelopment
inworkingwithNGOs,scientistsorcorporationsisanotasingletoolormethod,butacombinationthereof
that is in constant state of flux and is recalibrated in real time– feeling into themomentwith dynamic
steering. For cool tools, (like any of those awareness based technologiesmentioned so far), to be truly
generativeinthesenseofourinquiryintointegralleadership,severalconditionsneedtobeinplace.
One;forsureduediligenceonmypart:myownspacehastobeclear,mycapacityforgenerativelistening
practiced,mytoolbox isprepared.Two; if transformativeprocessesarecalledfor, I followthearchetypal
pattern of transformation, best described in Scharmer’s U process, or in Campbell’s (1991) the Hero’s
Journey.Withthebackgroundexperienceofoveradecadeofintensivecoaching,Iknowwhereparticipants
intheirprocessstandinrespecttotheirtransformationprocess,whatresistancemechanismstheymightbe
caughtinandhowtohelpthembackontrack.Eventhoughthisseemsobvious,itisimportanttoknowat
whichstageofthetransformativeprocesstousewhattoolwithwhateffect.However,moreoftenthannot,
thearchitectureandnaturalsequenceoftheseprocesses,eventhougharchetypal,oftenseemshiddenand
misunderstood,especiallytothepeopleinsidetheprocesswishingtotransform.Forexample,inanongoing
projectwithmembersoftheIPPCinthefieldofclimatechange,Ioftenfindparticipantsfrustrated,because
theyoftentryandapplyprototypingtools(rightlegoftheU)andworkingwithsystems(LRquadrant),before
theyhavede‐constructedoldparadigmperspectivesindividually(UL)andcollectively(LL),beforetheywent
through the layers of mis‐ and dis‐identification spaces (subtle/causal states), found some personal and
collective dis‐aligning assumptions (see Kegan, Scharmer) and came into a space where completely new
perspectives actually seemed possible. Formany people in the globalchange arena this kind of work is
crucial.
Page 18
18
Three;knowledgeaboutdevelopmentalstagesandactionlogicsenablemetoadaptlanguageandtools
thatarea functional fit to theparticipants. Lastyear Iwascalled in tohelp readjustachangeprocess in
SouthAfrica.ThechangeprocesswasfundedbyaGermanNGO,designedasayearlongUprocesstohelp
fosterclimatechangeleadershipin2countries,IndonesiaandSouthAfrica,withrepeatedjointsessionsina
yearprogram.Thewell‐meaningprogram,however,wasconceivedfromapluralisticworldviewanddidnot
accountfordifferencesandincommensurabilitiesindevelopmentalstages,worldviews,andculturalhabits.
For the secondyear ina row, the50participantswere in resistance to theprogramsince theirpushback
mechanismswereconstantlytriggeredthroughtoolsandmethodsthatarefitforaGreen(vMeme)mindset,
butcreatedindifference,confusion,resistanceorevenaggressioninmostoftheparticipants.Idesigneda
workshopfortheparticipantsinawaytheycouldexperienceatransformativeshiftinaccordancewiththeir
respectiveculturalworldviewswithouttriggeringtheresistancesinthegroup.Attheenditwasasmall,real
UProcesswithouttheuseofanyofthetoolsprovidedbythePresencingInstitute.
Anothergoodexampleoftheapplicationoftransformativetools inaconstant,quasinotplan‐ableflux
withdynamicsteeringwasourcommonassignmentatWITSUniversityinJohannesburg,SA,workingwitha
team of representatives from 8 departments on the development of a trans‐disciplinary post‐graduate
curriculuminGlobalChange.Wehadbothourtoolboxesreadyandadoptedaformalframeworkinspired
bytheImmunitytoChangeprocess,butweaskedourclientstoleaveroomformaneuveringandspacefor
generativeprocessesaswewent.Wetooktheparticipants,individuallyandcollectivelytohaveacloserlook
at internal changeprocesses and to experiencingeffective change and transformation. Sure enough,we
encounteredtheintrinsicpushbacks,resistancesandescapemechanisms,butwereabletorespondinreal
timewithdifferenttools.However,themostdecisive,andtricky,ingredientthatrenderedtheWITSproject
anongoingsuccessfortheparticipantswaswhatcould,ifwatchedfromtheoutside,eithergounobservedor
evenbemistakenforalackofpreparation.Morethantheapplicationofagivensequenceoftoolsbythe
Page 19
19
book(TheImmunitytochangeProcess,TheUprocess),itwastheenergywithwhichweheldthefieldforall
whichallowedusaconstantdynamicsteeringfromtheinformationwegotfromwhatwasemerging.This
process includedmanymomentsofnotknowingtheanswer,sometimesevennotknowingwhattodoor
proposenext.Itwasmostimportantthoughtobeabletoholdthespaceofnotknowingandnottotryand
fill it in with experienced choices coming from a non‐intuitive space (logic/thinking) of the seasoned
practitioner.Thedifficultaspect in thesespaces is, thatoneneedstoprotect thatgapof“noaction”also
againstaclientCEOwithanexplicitagendawhichisbiasedtowardstangibleoutcomesandalsoprovidea
solidbridgeforparticipantstostepon,knowingthatallisconstructedinthatverymoment.Thatholdingthe
quality of presence and letting the answers emerge from the group was what made these gaps most
generative. Theoutcomes intermsofpersonaltransformation,groupcohesion,alignmentandnewideas
wereextraordinary.
Conclusion
Having briefly presented some of our conceptions around integral leadership, the core constructswe
infuse this with and briefly discussed some of our applications, we will conclude with a few remarks
summarizing our inquiry.We presented a definition of integral leadership as integrity with a quality of
presencethatopensspacesforwhatwantstoemerge.Wesituatedthisinthecontextofadaptiveleadership
anddrewexplicitlinkstohowmanycurrentchallengescanbestbeaddressedthroughleadershipthatbrings
alaterstageofcognitivedevelopmenttobearonthem.Wealsohighlightedthatthisaloneisinsufficientand
advocatedstronglyfortheneedtobringintegrityandintuitiontobearonthesituation.Oneofourintentions
wasalso toapproachsomeof the lessdiscussedandnot so tangiblemechanismsofknowledgecreation,
meaningmakingandperception (in relation to intuitionand integrity) that are far toooftenobscuredby
moral/ethicalreflectionsorsubjecttopre‐transfallacies.
Page 20
20
Inthispaperwehavetakenthecomplex,evolvinganddynamictopicofintegralleadershipandutilized
variouslensestoenableustotakeourfocusacrossspecificaspectswefeelrelevant.Inparticular,wehave
noted the dynamic tension between the contribution of later stages of development and the integrity
involvedintheconceptofqualityofpresence.Integritycanbepracticed.Cognitive/egodevelopmentcanbe
cultivatedandacceleratedthroughvariouspracticesdesignedforthosepurposes.Thecombinationofthese
practices can help address the challenges of power. What we note is that in much of the mainstream
literatureonleadership,thereisoftenanassumptionthatmanyofthequalitieswehaveexploredhereare
takenasgivens,ornotunderstoodintermsoftheirinter‐relationships.Thustheneedtobetterunderstand
themthroughanintegralmeta‐theoreticalview,backedupbyapplicationandexperience.Webelievethat
thiscanenableustobetterdevelopnewpracticesfordevelopingintegralleadership.
Itisintheunpackingofintegralleadershipthroughthesecomponentsthatwebegintoperceiveintegral
leadershipnotassomethingmore,orbeyond,orspecial,butastheessenceorwholenessofleadershipin
anyform.Leadershipisinitselfanintegralenterpriseoractivity,asitrequiresintegrityandintuition,with
these arising fromor contributing to a quality of presence that opens spaces forwhatwants to emerge.
Whilewealsoappreciateandnotethecontributionofhowlaterstagesofcognitivedevelopmentcanenable
leaderstoopenandholdevendeeperandcomplexspaces,wedonotseethisaloneasdemarkingadifferent
kindofleadership,anintegralvariety.Wealsonotethataspectsofourinquirycouldpointbeyondameta‐
theoreticalapproachtowhatCook‐Greuter(1999)describesas“wherethereiscompletelysomethingelse.”
Wehopethattheresultofourinquiriesintothissubject,asoutlinedhere,canfurthertheunderstandingand
applicationofintegralleadershipaswellasleadershipasawhole.
Page 21
21
References
Anderson, D. (2006). Of syntheses and surprises: Toward a critical integral theory. Integal Review: A
TransdiciplinaryandTransculturalJournalofNewThought,ResearchandPraxis,3,62‐81.
Assagioli,R.(1971).Psychosynthesis.NewYork:Penguin.
Barner, R. (2008). The dark tower: Using visual metaphors to facilitate emotional expression during
organizationalchange.JournalofOrganizationalChangeManagement,21(1),120‐137.
Basseches,M.(1975).Dialecticalthinkingandadultdevelopment.Norwood,NJ:Ablex.
Beck, D., & Cowan, C. (1996). Spiral dynamics. Mastering values, leadership and change. Malden, MA:
Blackwell.
Bohm,D.(1980).Wholenessandtheimplicateorder.London:Routledge.
Bohm,D.,&Hiley,B.(1993).Theundivideduniverse:Anontologicalinterpretationofquantumtheory.New
York:Routledge.
Braud,W.,&Anderson,R.(1998).Transpersonalresearchmethodsforthesocialsciences:Honoringhuman
experience.ThousandOaks,CA:Sage.
BriggsMyers,I.,&Myers,P.(1980).Giftsdiffering:Understandingpersonalitytype.MountainView,CA:CPP,
Inc.
Brown,B. (2011).Conscious leadershipforsustainability:Howleaderswitha late‐stageaction logicdesign
andengageinsustainabilityinitiatives.SantaBarbara,CA:FieldingGraduateUniversity/UMI.
Brown,V.,Harris,J.,&Russell,J.(2010).Tacklingwickedproblems:Throughthetransdisciplinaryimagination.
London:Earthscan.
Campbell,J.,&Cousineau,P.(1991).Thehero'sjourney.SanFrancisco:HarperSanFrancisco.
Page 22
22
Carey, M. (1992). Transformational leadership and the fundamental option for self‐transcendence.
LeadershipQuarterly,3(3),217‐236.
Commons,M.L.(2006).Measuringanapproximateginanimalsandpeople.IntegralReview(3),82‐99.
Cook‐Greuter,S.(1999).Postautonomousegodevelopment:Astudyofitsnatureandmeasurement.Boston,
MA:Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation.
Edwards, M. (2010).Organizational transformation for sustainability. An integral metatheory. New York:
Routledge.
Franquemont,S.(1999).Youalreadyknowwhattodo.10invitationstotheintuitivelife.NewYork:JeremyP.
Tarcher/Putnam.
Fuller, B. (1997). Synergetics. Exploratoins in the geometry of thinking. RetrievedMarch 12, 2012, from
http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/synergetics.html
Gebser,J.(1985).Theever‐presentorigin.(N.Barstad,Trans.)Athens,OH:OhioUniversityPress.
Gidley,J.(2007).TheEvolutionofConsciousnessasaPlanetaryImperative:AnIntegrationofIntegralViews.
IntegralReview,4‐226.
Heifetz,R.(1994).Leadershipwithouteasyanswers.Boston:HarvardUniversityPress.
Heifetz, R., Linsky, M., & Grashow, A. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership. Tools and tactics for
changingyourorganizationandtheworld.Cambridge,MA:HarvardBusinessSchoolPress.
Joiner,B.,& Josephs, S. (2007).Leadershipagility.Mastering core competencies forhandling change. San
Francisco:Jossey‐Bass.
Jordan,T. (2011). Skillfulengagementwithwicked issues.A framework foranalysing themeaning‐making
structuresofsocietalchangeagents.IntegralReview,7(2),47‐91.
Kegan,R. (1982).Theevolvingself.Problemandprocess inhumandevelopment.Cambridge,MA:Harvard
UniversityPress.
Page 23
23
Kegan,R.(1994).Inoverourheads.Thementaldemandsofmodernlife.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversity
Press.
Kegan,R.,&LaskowLahey,L.(2009).Immunitytochange.Howtoovercomeitandunlockthepotential in
yourselfandyourorganization.Boston:HarvardBusinessPress.
Levin,D.M.(1989).Thelisteningself:personalgrowth,socailchangeandtheclsoureofmetaphysics.London:
Routledge.
Loevinger,J.(1976).Egodevelopment:Conceptsandtheories.SanFrancisco:Jossey‐Bass.
McCraty,R.,Atkinson,M.,Tomasino,B.,&Bradley,R.(2009).Thecoherentheart:Heart‐braininteractions,
psychophysiologicalcoherence,andtheemergenceofsystemwideorder.IntegralReview,5(2),4‐
107.
Molz, M. (2010). Toward an integral pluralism in sociocultural research. Luxembourg: University of
Luxembourg.
O'Fallon,T.(2010).Groundingintegraltheoryinthefieldofexperience.InS.Esbjörn‐Hargens,J.Reams,&O.
Gunnlaugson,Integraleducation;Newdirectionsforhigherlearning(pp.185‐192).Albany,NY:SUNY
Press.
Palmer,H.(1994).Livingdeliberately:ThediscoveryanddevelopmentofAvatar.AltamonteSprings,FL:Star's
EdgeInternational.
Palmer, H. (1997).Resurfacing: Techniques for exploring consciousness. Altamonte Springs, FL: Star's End
Creations.
Palmer, P. (1993). To know as we are known. Education as a spiritual journey. San Francisco :
HarperSanFrancisco.
Palmer,P.(2004).Ahiddenwholeness:Thejourneytowardanundividedlife.SanFrancisco:Jossey‐Bass.
Piaget,J.(1954).Theconstructionofrealityinthechild.NewYork:BasicBooks.
Page 24
24
Reams,J.(2002).Theconsciousnessoftranspersonalleadership.Spokane,WA:GonzagaUniversity/UMI.
Reams,J.(2005).What's integralaboutleadership?Areflectiononleadershipandintegraltheory.Integral
Review,1,118‐132.
Reams, J. (2012). Integral leadership. Opening space by leading through the heart. In C. Pearson, The
transformingleader(pp.102‐109).SanFrancisco:BerrettKoehler.
Rost,J.(1991).Leadershipforthetwenty‐firstcentury.Westport,CT:PraegerPublishers.
Scharmer,C.O.(2002).Illuminatingtheblindspot.LeaderToLeaderJournal,11‐14.
Scharmer,C.O.(2007).TheoryU.Leadingfromthefutureasitemerges.Thesocialtechnologyofpresencing.
Cambridge,MA:TheSocietyforOrganizationalLearning,Inc.
Senge,P.,Jaworski,J.,Scharmer,C.O.,&Flowers,B.S.(2004).Presence:Exporingprofoundchangeinpeople,
organizationsandsociety.Boston:SocietyforOrganizationalLearningInc.
Talbot,M.(1996).Theholographicuniverse.NewYork:HarperCollinsPublishersLtd.
TheArbingerInstitute.(2010).Leadershipandself‐deception(2nded.).SanFrancisco:BerrettKoehler.
Torbert,W.,&Associates.(2004).Actioninquiry.Thesecretoftimelyandtransformingaction.SanFrancisco:
Berrett‐Koehler.
Volckmann, R. (2010). Integral Leadership Theory. In R. A. Couto (Ed.),Political and civic leadership. A
referencehandbook(pp.121‐127).ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublicationsInc.
Walsh,R.(1999).Essentialspirituality.The7centralpracticestoawakenheartandmind.NewYork:Wiley&
Sons,Inc.
Wilber,K.(1996).Abriefhistoryofeverything.Boston:Shambhala.
Wilber, K. (2000a).A theoryof everything.An integral vision forbusiness, politics, scienceand spirituality.
Boston:ShanbhalaPublicationsinc.
Wilber,K.(2000b).Integralpsychology.Consciousness,spirit,psychology,therapy.Boston,MA:Shambhala.
Page 25
25
Wilber,K.(2006).Integralspirituality:Astartlingnewroleforreligioninthemodernandpostmodernworld.
Boston:Shambhala.
Bios
JonathanReamsisanassociateprofessorattheNorwegianUniversityofScienceandTechnology,Editor‐in‐
Chiefof IntegralReview (www.integral‐review.org),aswellasanorganizational consultantand leadership
trainer.
AnneCaspariisacoachandconsultantfortransformationalprocessesinadultdevelopmentaswellasinthe
global sustainability arena. She is also a private lecturer at universities in different countries on integral
sustainability,leadershipandchangemanagement.