This research study breaks new ground in exploring differences in how managers’ reflection patterns, do or do not differ across levels of adult development as delineated by Robert Kegan’s Constructive-Developmental Theory. It was a basic qualitative study exploring upper-level managers’ thought processes and patterns of reflection in revisiting and reinterpreting episodes of conflict and change that had emerged in past organizational experiences. The purpose was to discern in what ways, if at all, those processes vary with the manager’s Stage in adult development in Robert Kegan’s adult Constructive-Developmental Theory that stipulates generally what one can reflect upon impartially as object—or what one cannot. Transcripts of fifteen Subject-Object Interviews (SOIs), that were previously conducted for the purpose of examining interviewee reasoning characteristics in relation their stage of adult development and had been professionally scored and certified for interviewee developmental level, provided the primary data for this study. These were sourced as a stratified, purposeful sample from an archival database of 148 interviews conducted by the Center of Creative Leadership between 2007-2009. Five each of the sample of 15 SOIs were selected to meet the criteria for one of three specific Stages or levels of complexity on Kegan’s adult constructive-developmental scale representing the Instrumental to Socializing transition, the fully Socializing equilibrium, and the fully Self-Authoring equilibrium. Without The managers’ individual developmental levels being revealed, the researcher blindly coded the individual SOI transcripts and inductively analyzed and synthesized the data of each to discern patterns in the interviewee’s reflection. In a final step, the known, certified SOI scores were revealed to the researcher, who was then able to explore the relationship between patterns of reflection he had discerned and the individual interviewee’s actual developmental level—in particular to see in what ways, if at all, those processes vary and are engaged in differently—or similarly—depending on the manager’s Order of Mind or Stage of Adult development as delineated by Robert Kegan’s Constructive-Developmental Theory. Mediating consideration of findings, the 5-participants-per-development-level samples were small and results thus not generalizable, and the interviews were conducted for the purpose of investigating reasoning as correlated with adult developmental level. Within that context, relatively consistent differences in patterns of reflection while either recollecting or currently reflecting upon past incidents that involved change and/or conflict were discerned in the following areas: granularity in description of emotion; recollection of inner dialogue; “stepping onto the balcony” for a changed perspective on issues; variations of “stance,” in terms of degree of self-focus rather than a relational or organizational one and demonstration of self-examination—mediated by what was at stake for the interviewee. Depending on developmental stage, current experience or, or recollection of past negative emotion could be either a prompt for self reflection or a barrier to it. Constructive-developmental theory posits different Ways of Knowing in adulthood; each denoting an internally consistent meaning-making system that shapes the ways one makes sense of and interprets experience. An in-depth descriptive analysis of the managers’ reflections within and across cases revealed different orientations toward the process of revisiting and interpreting experience with important variations across participants. To explain those individual variations, constructivedevelopmental theory (Kegan, 1982, 1984) appeared to be a valuable theoretical lens to shed light on some of the differences within and across the three different Ways of Knowing represented in the sample. This study overall supports the growing trend in the learning and development field toward paying more attention to supporting the development of leaders’ inner meaning-making structures as those will influence how they engage in, and take perspective on, their experience—and ultimately help their organizations and their members to learn. The researcher, blinded to adult developmental levels of the managers until after analyzing data for patterns of reflection, found the clusters of personally discerned patterns to closely match those that would to their subsequently revealed, certified developmental levels. This congruence suggests that Subject-Object Interviews may prove an insight-full source for further research on the difficult-to-probe subject of reflection-on-action.

Thesis (J.C.L.)--Catholic University of America, 1988. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 54-55).

Note:

This exploratory qualitative study was initiated to investigate an understudied area regarding individual experiences with cultural diversity in the workplace. Specifically, it focused on how eight Japanese managers—the host culture individuals of Japan, a presumed culturally homogeneous country—experienced cultural diversity in their workplaces in the information industry and how these experiences related to their epistemological capacities. The premise of this study is that an increase in cultural diversity in Japan is inevitable and that the Japanese, the overwhelming cultural majority in Japanese society today, may need educational support to better navigate the complexity and uncertainty brought about by cultural diversity. The study aimed to explore how the Japanese managers describe the benefits and challenges of cultural diversity brought by foreign colleagues to their workplaces, and their actions and guiding values in working with them. Using Robert Kegan’s constructive-developmental theory (1982, 1994) as a theoretical framework, it also sought to shed light on how their epistemological capacities explain the similarities, differences, or patterns in those descriptions. Data was primarily collected first, through semi-structured interviews, to learn about their experiences in workplace cultural diversity and second, by employing the subject-object interviews (Kegan, 1994; Lahey et al., 2011), that constitute a core element of the constructive-developmental theory’s methodology, to learn about their epistemological development. The descriptions from the eight Japanese managers during the interviews highlighted key cultural differences they perceived, their values and actions in supporting and relating to foreign colleagues, and their new understandings of their own cultural assumptions. Meanwhile, in light of the constructive-developmental theory, differences were observed between those who tended to rely on external sources for their perceptions and actions and those who firmly held internal values and standards in their perceptions and actions regarding cultural differences. Due to the small number of participants and the extensive variability of the context of their experiences, the findings of the study were somewhat fragmented and cannot be generalized. Nonetheless, this study provided preliminary insights into promising directions of future research and the formulation of educational support to facilitate growth in Japanese leaders’ developmental capacity to help them better navigate the complexity and uncertainty brought about by cultural diversity in their home country.