the development of a quantum leadership model and

i

THE DEVELOPMENT OF A QUANTUM LEADERSHIP MODEL

AND QUANTUM LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE

IN SOUTH AFRICA

By

Heydon Peter Hall

THESIS

Submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the degree

DOCTOR COMMERCII

in

LEADERSHIP IN PERFORMANCE AND CHANGE

in the

FACULTY OF ECONOMIC AND MANAGEMENT SCIENCE

at the

UNIVERSITY OF JOHANNESBURG

PROMOTOR: PROF RENÉ PELLISSIER

October 2008

ii

DECLARATION OF ADHERENCE

I, the undersigned, hereby declare that

1. The content of this document is my own work.

2. I, adhered to the ethical obligations and principles of research ethics, as

prescribed by the faculty’s guidelines for ethics in research, during all phases of

the research process.

Name of researcher: Heydon Peter Hall

Signature: ___________________________________

Place: Pretoria, South Africa

Date: 31 October 2008

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

When I embarked upon this thesis, many professors told me not to make this my life’s

work. I thank God for giving me a sense of purpose and sufficient wisdom to know that

everything I touch will add a piece of the puzzle to my life’s work, and this thesis bares

testimony to that.

Official acknowledgements:

To The University of Johannesburg for offering me an opportunity to do a cross-

disciplined doctorate and for the financial support received in the form of bursaries.

To the National Research Foundation (NRF) of South Africa for the financial support received, in the form of a prestigious doctoral fellowship grant.

Personal acknowledgements:

René Pellissier for: her excellent guidance, friendship and her never wavering

confidence in me.

To my closest friends who never stopped supporting me and praying me through this

process.

I want to further acknowledge my parents and family, and especially my children:

Tamirin, Jacqueline and Michaela, for supporting their father in something that was

foreign to them, yet they never had a negative word about the time I spent delivering

this work, always knowing that if it was important to me, then it was important for us.

Finally, and most importantly I want to thank my wife, Alison. This thesis is as much her

achievement as it is mine. She never once faltered, continuously supported and held

me up in prayer, always had enough faith for both of us and never gave up on me. You

are my God given Angel. This thesis would not have been possible without you.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION OF ADHERENCE.......................................................................... ii TABLE OF CONTENTS.......................................................................................... iv

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................... viii LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................xi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS .................................................................................. xvi A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................. xvii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .....................................................................................xviii B. ACADEMIC REPORT......................................................................................... 1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 2

1.1. Introduction................................................................................................ 2

1.2. Background to research problem............................................................... 3

1.3. Research hypothesis and objectives ......................................................... 6

1.4. Primary and secondary research objectives.............................................. 7

1.4.1. Define and deduce a Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) ......................... 7

1.4.2. Define and deduce a measurement instrument – the Quantum Leadership Questionnaire (QLQ) ................................................................................. 7

1.4.3. Validate the QLQ and QLM ....................................................................... 7

1.5. Additional research value add ................................................................... 7

1.5.1. Scientific value........................................................................................... 7

1.5.2. Academic value add .................................................................................. 8

1.6. Research design........................................................................................ 9

1.6.1. Approach ................................................................................................... 9

1.6.2. Participants and location of data................................................................ 9

1.6.3. Structure and process of thesis ................................................................10

1.7. Conclusions..............................................................................................12

CHAPTER 2: PARADIGM SHIFT IN FUNDAMENTAL SCIENCE AND

DIRECTIONAL EFFECTS ........................................................................14

2.1. Introduction...............................................................................................14

2.2. Scientific principles ...................................................................................15

2.2.1. Paradigm aspect 1: Physical Space .........................................................16

2.2.2. Paradigm aspect 2: Metaphysical space (conscious interaction with matter in space)...................................................................................................26

2.2.3. Overall summary of scientific constitutive mechanisms............................31

2.3. Models (based on scientific discovery) .....................................................32

2.3.1. Paradigm aspect 1: Physical space..........................................................33

2.3.2. Paradigm aspect 2: Meta-physical space (conscious interaction with matter in space)........................................................................................41

2.3.3. Summary of Models based on scientific discovery ...................................45

2.4. Values ......................................................................................................50

2.4.1. Paradigm aspect 1: Physical Space .........................................................51

v

2.4.2. Paradigm aspect 2: Meta-physical space (conscious interaction with matter in space)........................................................................................58

2.4.3. Summary of values required to sustain models based on scientific discovery ..................................................................................................69

2.5. Gap analysis.............................................................................................73

2.5.1. Science.....................................................................................................73

2.5.2. Models......................................................................................................74

2.5.3. Values ......................................................................................................75

2.6. Conclusion................................................................................................76

LITERATURE REVIEW (PART II)..........................................................................78

CHAPTER 3: LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOUR ............................................................78

3.1. Introduction...............................................................................................78

3.2. Transformational leadership .....................................................................80

3.2.1. Introduction...............................................................................................80

3.2.2. Origins of transformational leadership ......................................................81

3.2.3. Qualitative secondary literature enquiry into the transformational leadership model ......................................................................................92

3.2.4. Quantitative literature enquiry into the transformational leadership model and the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) .............................109

3.3. Authentic leadership ...............................................................................118

3.3.1. Introduction.............................................................................................118

3.3.2. Suggested elements of authentic leadership..........................................119

3.3.3. Questions into authentic leadership........................................................121

3.3.4. Findings..................................................................................................121

3.4. Conclusion..............................................................................................121

CHAPTER 4: DERIVATION OF A QUANTUM LEADERSHIP MODEL ...............132

4.1. Introduction.............................................................................................132

4.1.1. Phase 1 (Ph 1): Scientific paradigm and modeling synthesis .................135

4.1.2. Phase 2 (Ph 2): Value states and behaviour synthesis ..........................136

4.1.3. Phase 3 (Ph 3): Linking content analysis to form a common integration table........................................................................................................136

4.1.4. Phase 4 (Ph 4): Analyse, contextualise, restructure and derive .............136

4.1.5. Phase 5 (Ph 5): Determine behavioural construct directional influence and construct weightings ...............................................................................137

4.1.6. Phase 6 (Ph 6): Determine quantum leadership shift effect ...................137

4.1.7. Phase 7: Expected organisational outcomes..........................................137

4.2. Approach used for content analysis........................................................138

4.3. Deriving the quantum leadership model .................................................138

4.3.1. Ph 1: Scientific paradigm and modeling synthesis..................................138

4.3.2. Ph 2: Values and behaviour content analysis .........................................144

4.3.3. Ph 3: Linking content analysis to form a common integration table ........151

4.3.4. Ph 4: Analyse, contextualise, restructure and derive..............................159

4.3.5. Phase 5: Analysis to determine construct weightings and dependent and independent variables ............................................................................189

4.3.6. Phase 6: Initial quantitative analysis to determine the Quantum leadership shift effect ...............................................................................................195

4.3.7. Phase 7: Impact of the Quantum leadership model on organisational outcomes (examples) .............................................................................199

4.4. Conclusion..............................................................................................200

vi

CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY......................................................202

5.1. Introduction.............................................................................................202

5.2. Investigation into research methodology ................................................202

5.2.1. Definition and characteristics of good research in developing a methodology (the thesis) ........................................................................202

5.2.2. Alternative interpretations of good research methodology (the antithesis)...............................................................................................................203

5.2.3. Synthesis of approaches to research in support of this thesis ................206

5.3. Research methodology (application of theory) .......................................208

5.3.1. Researcher’s position on research .........................................................208

5.3.2. Research hypothesis and objectives ......................................................210

5.3.3. Research process...................................................................................211

5.3.4. Researcher’s experience reflected .........................................................239

5.4. Conclusion..............................................................................................239

CHAPTER 6: ANALYSIS .....................................................................................240

6.1. Introduction.............................................................................................240

6.2. Quantitative QLQ validity analysis ..........................................................241

6.2.1. Pilot study analysis .................................................................................241

6.2.2. Limitations ..............................................................................................242

6.2.3. Relationships between variables ............................................................242

6.2.4. Anomalies found in correlations between variables and treatment applied...............................................................................................................259

6.2.5. Application of anomaly findings to QLQ and the method of research.....261

6.2.6. Quantum individuation analysis ..............................................................261

6.2.7. Causality analysis between pilot test variables.......................................264

6.2.8. Summary of analysis on pilot test data ...................................................265

6.3. Quantitative QLM validity analysis through purposive sampling ............265

6.3.1. Introduction.............................................................................................265

6.3.2. Limitations ..............................................................................................266

6.3.3. Analysis ..................................................................................................267

6.4. Analysis of Impact of the Quantum leadership model on organisational outcomes (examples) .............................................................................294

6.4.1. Recontextualisation of examples into capital outcomes .........................296

6.4.2. Conclusion:.............................................................................................317

CHAPTER 7: FINDINGS......................................................................................318

7.1. Introduction.............................................................................................318

7.2. QLQ - Internal validity analysis findings..................................................320

7.2.1. Correlative statistical analysis findings (relationships between variables)...............................................................................................................320

7.2.2. Descriptive statistical quantum leadership shift analysis findings ...........321

7.2.3. Findings in respect of internal validation of the QLQ ..............................322

7.3. QLM - validity analysis findings ..............................................................322

7.3.1. Determining quantum entanglement between constructs.......................323

7.3.2. Quantum individuation shift findings .......................................................324

7.3.3. Findings related to the quantum entanglement directional effect between constructs and impact on organisational outcomes................................324

7.4. Limitations ..............................................................................................342

7.5. Summary of data analysis findings .........................................................342

7.6. Triangulation, discussion and interpretation ...........................................343

vii

7.6.1. Triangulation of quantitative and qualitative analysis findings to proposed solutions to the induced gap analysis .....................................................343

7.6.2. Gap alignment, discussion and interpretation.........................................345

CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSIONS.............................................................................350

8.1. Introduction.............................................................................................350

8.2. Research synthesis ................................................................................350

8.3. Value of the QLM and QLQ to society ....................................................354

8.3.1. Scientific value........................................................................................354

8.3.2. Academic value ......................................................................................355

8.3.3. Business value .......................................................................................356

8.4. Limitations of research ...........................................................................358

8.4.1. Limitations in theory and methodology ...................................................358

8.4.2. Limitations in terms of available literature...............................................359

8.4.3. Limitations in quantitative and qualitative analysis .................................359

8.4.4. Possible assumption based limitations ...................................................360

8.5. Future research opportunities.................................................................360

8.5.1. Causality of constructs ...........................................................................360

8.5.2. Further sample study analysis ................................................................360

8.6. Concluding statements ...........................................................................361

REFERENCES ....................................................................................................362

ANNEXURE 1: QUANTUM LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE (QLQ).................381

ANNEXURE 2: CUT 3 ELIMINATION CRITERIA ................................................391

ANNEXURE 3: PLAGIARISM RESULTS.............................................................392

ANNEXURE 4: QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT: BEFORE VS. AFTER-TRANSITION (TOTAL FIXCO SCORES) - IMPLATS ............................393

ANNEXURE 6: QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT: BEFORE VS. AFTER-TRANSITION (TOTAL AVERAGE OPERATIONAL EXECUTIVES SCORES) – IMPLATS............................................................................395

ANNEXURE 7: QLQ SCORING BY QLM BEHAVIOURAL CONSTRUCT AS

ALIGNED TO MASLOW’S MOTIVATIONAL SCALE……………………..396

viii

LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER 1

Figure 1.1 Research process in this thesis 11

CHAPTER 2

Figure 2.1: Fundamental shift in science 15

Figure 2.2 Shift in models based on shifts in scientific paradigms 31

Figure 2.3. Newton-Cartesian scientific model impact on organisational supply chain design 33

Figure 2.4 Shift in values based on shifts in scientific paradigms 49

Figure 2.5 Financial and time line value measures associated with a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm 52

Figure 2.6 Movement in value measures from Newtonian-Cartesian to Einsteinian-Quantum 56

CHAPTER 3

Figure 3.1 Process of enquiry into transformational leadership 80

Figure 3.2 Linking transformational leadership constructs, Jung behavioural type dichotomies (MBTI), Maslow need state values and intelligence quotients values. 107

Figure 3.3 A framework for understanding leadership 123

CHAPTER 4

Figure 4.1 Framework approach for deriving and analysing the proposed quantum leadership model 135

Figure 4.2 Diagrammatic view of the essence of Quantum leadership 179

Figure 4.3 Diagrammatic view of the essence of the Quantum leadership constructs 183

Figure 4.4 Quantum leadership model including impact on opposing behavioural dimensions and the dual construct for emergent creative thinking behaviour. 188

Figure 4.5 Maslow’s motivational and needs state value measures to determine; causality, preliminary scoring, weightings, and directional indicators of dependent and independent variables 190

Figure 4.7 Independent and Dependent variable flow of the Quantum leadership model 194

Figure 4.8 Organisational motivational value scoring excluding Quantum Leadership Behaviour (Jung MBTI descriptors utilised – indicating exclusion of Quantum entanglement) 197

Figure 4.9 Organisational motivational value scoring including Quantum Leadership Behaviour through Quantum 198

ix

entangled Individuation (Quantum leadership behaviour descriptors utilised – showing inclusion of Quantum entanglement)

Figure 4.10 Cumulative average ‘Quantum leadership shift’ effect 199

CHAPTER 5

Figure 5.1 Research process 212

Figure 5.2 Step model of inductive category development 215

Figure 5.3 Step model of deductive category application 216

Figure 5.4 Culture as layers of explicit – explicit 219

Figure 5.5 Culture in a consciousness – non-consciousness 219

Figure 5.6 Cultural paradigm model 220

Figure 5.7 Model of paradigm shift 222

Figure 5.8 JSE listed companies above all share average (Dec 1974 – Dec 2005) 235

Figure 5.9 Mining companies above all share index and mining sector sub industry average (Dec 1974 - Dec 2005) 235

CHAPTER 6

Figure. 6.1 Sample scatter plot diagram (focused multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation & extroverted bounded instability (Implats: FIXCO) 275

Figure. 6.2 Sample scatter plot diagram (focused multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation & extroverted bounded instability (Implats: Ops Execs) 275

Figure 6.3 Sample scatter plot diagram: collaborative explorative perception and diversified compassionate judging (Implats: FIXCO) 276

Figure 6.4 Sample scatter plot diagram: collaborative explorative perception and diversified compassionate judging (Implats: Ops Execs) 276

Figure. 6.5 Sample scatter plot diagram: empowered intuitive decision making and flexible partnered sensing (Implats:FIXCO) 278

Figure. 6.6 Sample scatter plot diagram: empowered intuitive decision making and flexible partnered sensing (Implats: Ops Execs) 278

Figure. 6.7 Sample scatter plot diagram: conscious participative relativity and diversified emergent creative thinking (Implats: FIXCO) 280

Figure. 6.8 Sample scatter plot diagram: conscious participative relativity and diversified emergent creative thinking (Implats: FIXCO) 280

Figure 6.9 Pre-transition: Scatter plot predictive analysis diagram - QLM constructs (Implats) 283

Figure 6.10 Pre-transition directional predictor variables (values) impact 284

x

(product) on behaviour constructs (Maslow values pre-quantum individuation) (Implats: FIXCO)

Figure 6.11 Pre-transition directional predictor variables (values) impact (product) on behaviour constructs (scoring utilises Einsteinian-Quantum values as per quantum individuation) (Implats: FIXCO) 285

Figure 6.12 Pre-transition quantum leadership shift effect (Implats: FIXCO) 286

Figure 6.13 Post-transition: Scatter plot predictive analysis diagram - QLM constructs (Implats) 289

Figure 6.14 Post-transition directional predictor variables (values) impact (product) on behaviour constructs (Maslow values pre-quantum entanglement) (Implats: FIXCO) 290

Figure 6.15 Post-transition directional predictor variables (values) impact (product) on behaviour constructs (scoring utilises Einsteinian-Quantum values as per quantum entangled individuation) (Implats: FIXCO) 291

Figure 6.16 Post-transition quantum leadership shift effect (Implats: FIXCO) 291

Figure 6.17 Graphic analysis of financial reporting (Implats 2005-2001) 305

Figure 6.18 Tonnage milled ex mine p/m (Implats 1995 – 2001) 306

Figure 6.19 m² stoped per employee p/m (Implats 1995 - 2001) 306

Figure 6.20 No. of employees pa (Implats 1995 - 2001) 306

Figure 6.21 Tones per employee pa (1995 - 2001) 306

Figure 6.22 JSE Listed companies share price % above All share average (1974 - 2005) 308

Figure 6.23 Mining sector share price (1974 - 2005) 308

Figure 6.24 Mining companies share price % above sector and sub-sector average share price (1974–2005) 309

CHAPTER 7

Figure 7.1 Analysis leading to expected outcomes (findings) 319

Figure 7.2 Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) – showing juxtaposed organisational outcomes (within constructs) and supporting variables 325

xi

LIST OF TABLES

CHAPTER 2

Table 2.1.

Cartesian-Newtonian physics vs. Quantum-Relativistic physics: Implicit scientific constitutive mechanisms – for physical space 25

Table 2.2.

Cartesian-Newtonian physics vs. Quantum-Relativistic physics: Implicit scientific constitutive mechanisms for meta-physical space 30

Table 2.3.

Summary paradigm aspect 1: Implication of Einsteinian-Quantum scientific models on organisational models 38

Table 2.4: Summary Paradigm Aspect 2: Implication of Einsteinian-Quantum Scientific Models on Meta-Physical Organisational Models 43

Table 2.5: Summary paradigm aspect 1&2: Change Implication of an Einsteinian-Quantum Scientific model on the Organisational Model 48

Table 2.6. Psychological Values and Spiritual Practice 61

Table 2.7. Common features of Complex Adaptive Systems and Spiritual Intelligence 65

Table 2.8. Scale of motivations linked to SQ values 65

Table: 2.9. Three intelligence states linked to value capital outcomes within organisations 66

Table 2.10: Summary paradigm aspect 1&2 - Change Implication of an Einsteinian-Quantum Scientific Model on Organisational Value Systems 70

CHAPTER 3

Table 3.1. Predictability of Factors on criterion variables 114

Table 3.2 Determinable gaps of conscious interaction through primary and secondary literature review enquiry into transformational leadership (Dubrin Framework) 125

Table 3.3: Determinable gaps through primary and secondary literature review enquiry into transformational leadership 127

CHAPTER 4

Table 4.1 Common scientific theory alignment table 139

Table 4.2 Organisation design implications utilising Quantum physics, CAS and Thermodynamic models as metaphors 142

Table 4.3 Behaviour and needs motivation 146

Table 4.4 Determining leadership behavioural preferences 148

Table 4.5 Determining leadership value states 150

Table 4.6A Linking content analysis of behaviour, to values to 153

xii

organisational design to the scientific base

Table 4.6A Linking content analysis of behaviour, to values to organisational design to the scientific base 155

Table 4.7A

Quantum leadership – paradigm shift model alignment table 1 (science and modelling) 163

Table 4.7B Quantum leadership – paradigm shift model alignment table 1 (conscious interaction) 165

Table 4.8A

Quantum leadership – paradigm shift model alignment table 2 (science and modelling) 169

Table 4.8B Quantum leadership – paradigm shift model alignment table 2 (conscious interaction) 171

Table 4.9

Aligning opposing behaviour preference types (MBTI) and Maslow hierarchy of needs scoring elements 174

Table 4.10 Paradigm shift model constructs aligned to form the basis for the quantum leadership model 176

Table: 4.11: Quantum leadership behaviours - numerical value scoring base 195

Table 4.12: Quantum leadership shift effect (after quantum individuation leading to Quantum individuated being) 197

CHAPTER 6

Table 6.1(a): Construct 1 – Focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation by secondary variables 244

Table 6.1(b): Construct 1 – Focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation by primary variables 245

Table 6.2(a): Construct 2 – Collaborative explorative perception by secondary variables 246

Table 6.2(b): Construct 2 – Collaborative explorative perception by primary variables 247

Table 6.3(a): Construct 3 – Empowered intuitive decision making by secondary variables 248

Table 6.3(b): Construct 3 – Empowered intuitive decision making by primary variables 249

Table 6.4(a) Construct 4 – Conscious participative relativity by secondary variables 251

Table 6.4(b): Construct 4 – Conscious participative relativity by primary variables 251

Table 6.5(a): Construct 5 – Extroverted bounded instability by secondary variables 252

Table 6.5(b): Construct 5 – Extroverted bounded instability by primary variables 252

Table 6.6(a): Construct 6.1 – Conscious belonging by secondary variables 253

Table 6.6(b): Construct 6.1 – Conscious belonging by primary 254

xiii

variables

Table 6.7(a):

Construct 6.2 – Divergent emergent creative thinking by secondary variables 255

Table 6.7(b):

Construct 6.2 – Divergent emergent creative thinking by primary variables 255

Table 6.7(c): Construct 6.1 and 6.2 - Belonging and Divergent emergent creative thinking by primary variables 256

Table 6.8(a)

Construct 7 – Diversified compassionate judging by secondary variables 257

able 6.8(b) Construct 7 – Diversified compassionate judging by primary variables 257

Table 6.9(a) Construct 8 – Flexible partnered sensing by secondary variables 258

Table 6.9(b) Construct 8 – Flexible partnered sensing by primary variables 259

Table 6.10: Pilot study correlation analysis (before transition) 263

Table 6.11: Pilot study correlation analysis (after transition) 263

Table 6.12: Pilot study descriptive analysis (before vs. after transition) 264

Table 6.13: Correlation analysis – Extroverted bounded instability (Implats) 267

Table 6.14 Sample study correlation tables – Quantum entangled individuation constructs(Implats) 270

Table 6.14. (cont.):

Sample study correlation tables – Quantum entangled individuation constructs(Implats) 270

Table: 6.15:

Summary sample study descriptive analysis - Quantum entanglement shift (Implats) 272

Table 6.16

Correlation analysis - Focused multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation & Extroverted bounded instability (Implats: FIXCO) 273

Table 6.17

Correlation analysis - Focused multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation & Extroverted bounded instability (Implats: Ops Execs) 274

Table 6.18 Correlation analysis - Collaborative explorative perception & Diversified compassionate judging (Implats: FIXCO) 275

Table 6.19 Correlation analysis - Collaborative explorative perception & Diversified compassionate judging (Implats: Ops Execs) 276

Table 6.20 Correlation analysis - empowered intuitive decision making and flexible partnered sensing (Implats: FIXCO) 277

Table 6.21 Correlation analysis - empowered intuitive decision making and flexible partnered sensing (Implats: Ops Execs) 277

Table 6.22: Correlation analysis - conscious participative relativity 279

xiv

and diversified emergent creative thinking (Implats: FIXCO)

Table 6.23 Correlation analysis - conscious participative relativity and diversified emergent creative thinking (Implats: Ops Execs) 279

Table 6.24 Before-transition quantum leadership shift effect (Implats: FIXCO) 282

Table 6.25: Pre-transition quantum leadership shift effect on prof. execs (Implats) 287

Table 6.26: Pre-transition quantum leadership shift effect on ops execs (Implats) 287

Table 6.27: Post-transition quantum leadership shift effect on FIXCO team (Implats) 288

Table 6.28: Post-transition quantum leadership shift effect on ops execs (Implats) 292

Table 6.29: Post-transition quantum leadership shift effect on ops execs (Implats) 293

Table 6.30 Pre-transition vs. Post-transition quantum leadership shift effect (Implats) 294

Table 6.31: Organisational outcomes as linked to QLM behavioural constructs 295

Table 6.32: Implats Mission statement (1996 – 2001) 297

Table 6.33: Financial reporting (Implats 1995 - 2001) 304

xv

LIST OF ANNEXURES

Annexure 1 Quantum Leadership Questionnaire (QLQ) 379

Annexure 2 Cut 3 elimination criteria 410

Annexure 3 Plagiarism results 390

Annexure 4 Quantum Leadership Shift Effect: Before vs. After-transition (Total FIXCO scores) – Implats 391

Annexure 5 Quantum Leadership Shift Effect: Before vs. After-transition (Total Average Professional Administrative executives scores) - Implats 392

Annexure 6 Quantum Leadership Shift Effect: Before vs. After-transition (Total Average Operational executives scores) – Implats 393

xvi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CAS Complex Adaptive Systems

CEO Chief Executive Officer

COO Chief Operating Officer

e.g. For example

EQ Emotional Quotient

et al. And others

i.e. That is

IQ Intelligent Quotient

MBTI Myers Briggs Type Indicator

MLQ Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire

OD Organisational Design

QLM Quantum Leadership Model

QLQ Quantum Leadership Questionnaire

RO Act. Return on Activity

RO Val. Return on Value

ROI Return on Investments

SQ Spiritual Quotient

SVA Shareholder Value Add

TLQ-LGV Transformational Leadership Quotient for Local Government

TQM Total Quality Management

U.S. United States

U.S.A. United States of America

xvii

A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

xviii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In the South African context leading multinational companies within mining, automotive,

financial and other sectors are faced with the complexity of: uncertain political policies,

fluid market dynamics, and market follower status in global relations. In addition,

emerging markets are directly affected by capital and structural adjustments in first

world economies, as currency flows direct to safe-haven markets under uncertainty.

Thus, additional complexities of: currency fluctuations, energy cost increases, implied

inflationary spikes, and pending recession become a reality, and have an enormous

impact on how organisations manage within the unforeseen complexity that this brings

to the local economy. As complex environmental factors beyond organisational

boundaries and management’s ability to predict and control, start impacting on an

organisation’s material capital flows, this uncertainty will drive leadership to review their

current worldview. This researcher argues that this new worldview must be a shift away

from a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm, that through its cause-and-effect scientific base

has modelled the world and its structures around a rigid linear approach, that cannot

cope within the complexities exerted on the system. It is suggested therefore, by the

researcher that the shift in leadership thinking should be towards a different paradigm,

built on complexity based models using quantum Einsteinian-Quantum physics as a

metaphor.

The impact of this shift in paradigm, towards an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview, has an

has an implicative effect for organisations in terms of; mental models, subsequent

organisational design, the values that support this, the leadership behaviours that are a

response to these value sets and the resultant directional quantum leap outcome within

a multi-dimensional range of examples including; material (financial), social and spiritual

capital aspects of the organisation.

This research set out to review the paradigm shift between the Newtonian-Cartesian

and Einsteinian-Quantum worldviews with respect to leadership within a South African

context.

xix

To this end, the following research hypothesis was postulated:

To use a quantum physics based worldview to: derive, deduce and validate a quantum

leadership behavioural model and measurement instrument.

Within the research process adopted, through a descriptive theory approach, using the

paradigm shift model framework and an inductive method of enquiry the constructs for

the QLM were defined, identified and stratified. From this process of enquiry a common

paradigm shift alignment table was constructed to derive the constructs which formed

the basis for the deduction of the QLM and QLQ. This model and questionnaire were

then validated, through a normative theory approach, from both a quantitative and

qualitative perspective, using inductive methods of enquiry. From the outcomes of this

triangulated analysis, the findings were deduced and presented. Thus a QLM and QLQ

were developed, satisfying the hypothesis of this thesis.

In addition, through this thesis, a unique worldview of leadership is presented that,

integrates perspectives from the quantum physical, social and management, and

humanistic psychological sciences, into one holistic leadership model, that has a

predictive nature on organisational outcomes.

It is finally contended, by the researcher that, the QLM and the QLQ can be used as a

unique approach, to measure holistic leadership behaviours, within organisations

operating in complex environments, to predict quantum leaps in material, social and

spiritual capital.

1

B. ACADEMIC REPORT

2

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1. Introduction

In the South African context, leading multinational companies within mining, automotive,

financial and other sectors are faced with the complexity of (for example): uncertain

political policies, fluid market dynamics, and market follower status in global relations. In

addition, emerging markets can be directly affected by capital and structural

adjustments in first world economies, as currency flows direct to safe-haven markets

under uncertainty, thus additional complexities of: currency fluctuations, energy cost

increases, implied inflationary spikes, and pending recession become a reality, and

have an enormous impact on how organisations manage within the unforeseen

complexity that this brings to the local economy. It has been suggested, for some time

now, that within fluid markets, inter-related partners, cultures and structures, new forms

of strategising and a new set of knowledge based workers will be evident (Rugman &

Hodgets, 1995; Handy, 1995; Dicken, 1999; Kotler, 2000; Terpstra and Sarathy, 2000).

This researcher argues that this new worldview must be a shift away from a Newtonian-

Cartesian paradigm, that through its cause-and-effect scientific base has modelled the

world and its structures around a rigid linear approach, that cannot cope within the

complexities exerted on the system. It is suggested therefore, by the researcher that the

shift in leadership thinking should be towards a different paradigm, built on complexity

based models using quantum Einsteinian-Quantum physics as a metaphor.

This researcher contends, that as access to information, speeds up market intelligence

and drives global competitiveness, the before-mentioned economic realities will begin to

force unforeseen cost reduction reactions throughout the system. This is evident from

the capital markets in the U.S.A. and Europe, following the subprime mortgage collapse

and subsequent capital and structural adjustments within the marketplace, during the

first three quarters of 2008. A literature review on this subject suggests that, as

multinational organisations are subjected to environmental factors beyond their

organisational boundaries, they begin to stretch their ability to manage, predict and

control (Drucker, 1994; Champy and Nohria, 1996; Kotler, 2000; Terpstra & Sarathy,

2000, Pellissier, 2004), leadership will start to implement a number of process driven

innovations to try manage extended value and supply chains to combat these

challenges. Gates and Hemingway (1999) and Welch and Byrne (2001) suggested that

3

these programmes in the future would include interventions such as; financial

restructuring, TQM, 6-sigma, platform and plant rationalisation, global vendor and

supplier rationalisation and supply chain integration. Many of these are driven by

sophisticated information technology systems.

The researcher however argues that as much as these attempts to control the value

chain are noble and well intended, they cannot manage all the extraneous variables as

mentioned above. The researcher further argues that as information technology assists

in the process of managing information flows, speed of learning is not evident

(Pellissier, 2001), and failed implementations are putting undue pressure on the

innovation responses required. Excessive cost is the result, further unbalancing the

economic equation. These failed attempts at innovating through the value chain are,

and will continue to lead to a place of uncertainty, which cannot be managed within our

current leadership, organisational model and management structures (Shelton and

Darling, 2003; Zohar and Marshall, 2004; Torpmann, 2004; Lee, 2004).

It thus suggests that the complexity of the environment demands a closer investigation

into our organisational models and the leadership required, to lead towards a different

way of managing within a world that has fundamentally changed.

1.2. Background to research problem

The Newtonian-Cartesian worldview has influenced a reduction into parts and the

proliferation of separations has characterised not only organisations, but everything in

the world during the past three hundred years (Wheatley, 1992; 1999; Kilman, 2001;

Shelton et al., 2003; Zohar et al., 2004; Pellissier, 2004). This separation has influenced

worldviews in such a way so as to build organisations upon principles of parts

interacting along a continuum or chain of events depicted by force-and-reaction (cause-

and-effect). Supply chains, and even organisational structures, have been designed

according to this set of rules. Wheatley, back in 1992 (p. 29), wrote that, ‘…the machine

imagery (of Newton’s theories) (has been) captured by organisations (with)…an

emphasis on structure and parts…responsibilities have been organised into functions.

People have been organised into roles. Page after page of organisational charts depicts

(sic) the workings of the machine’. These organisational structures are now beginning

4

to feel the pain of their design, as they increasingly try and integrate with an extended

value chain of partners outside of present systems thinking, leading to a fast paced

chaotic environment, impossible to manage in our current Newtonian paradigm. This

requires a change in thinking and a different view of reality.

Zohar and Marshall (2004) contend that a paradigm shift in thinking at a fundamental

level, is needed to precede strategic organisational change. Zohar et al. further suggest

that this is essential before real innovation in organisations can occur. This researcher

agrees and contends that understanding leadership within an ever changing and

complex environment requires a fundamental understanding of the drivers within this

new paradigm (or worldview) and that one needs to be totally aware of what the

thinking is, behind our thinking (Zohar et al), before one can suggest the required

leadership behavioural response required for organisations to continually redesign

themselves within a changing complex environment.

Wheatley (1992, pp. 140:141, in Fornaciari and Dean, 2001 p. 339) suggested that

social sciences require a new way of understanding leadership when stating that, ‘..we

social scientists are trying hard to be conscientious, using the methodologies and

thought patterns of seventeenth century science, while the scientists, travelling away

from us at the speed of light, are moving into a universe that suggests entirely new

ways of understanding’. Campbell (2007) suggests that, leadership has taken the form

of understanding the inner person of the leader in an attempt to derive the ‘essential

elements of leadership’ (Campbell, 2007, p. 137), causing confusion in the process.

Campbell (2007, p. 137) further suggests that, ‘..this confusion has arisen because

there is not a single dimension that is the key to leadership; rather, all aspects of

leadership may be part of an interrelated whole.’ This statement by Campbell supports

the reason for this thesis.

Gummeson (2006, p. 170), links the debate on social sciences to the natural sciences,

thus linking the ideas of Wheatley (1992) and Campbell (2007) when he states that,

‘Although in natural sciences complexity is accepted, the social sciences quantitative

mainstream, including the management disciplines, feel uncomfortable with complexity

.. characterised by non-linear dynamics and the phenomenon of

emergence...complexity theory forms new mathematics, a general vocabulary and

5

grammar, which is sympathetic to all types of phenomena’, thus speaking to a holistic

approach to leadership.

A number of authors and academics have, from a leadership perspective, attempted to

integrate the two paradigms of thinking between the natural sciences and the social

sciences, to cause a shift in paradigm, with mixed results (Kilman, 2001; Fornaciari and

Dean, 2001; Zohar and Marshall, 2001, 2004; Shelton and Darling, 1999, 2001, 2004;

Van Eijnatten, 2004; Fairholm, 2004; Guillory, 2007). The outcomes of this research,

although supporting the premise of utilising quantum science and complexity theory as

a metaphor for organisational modelling and thus an impact on leadership behaviour, as

yet, has not defined, deduced and validated a quantum leadership model and

supporting measurement instrument for use across organisational settings.

The limited success attained for the integration of complexity, chaos and quantum

theory from the natural and physical sciences into the social sciences arena

(Gummeson, 2006), thus requires further investigation into understanding shifts in

paradigm between scientific worldviews, i.e. the shift between a Newtonian scientific

based worldview and a Quantum sciences based worldview. Through understanding

paradigm models of shift (Dubrin, 1965), it is evident that a shift in the fundamental

understanding of a scientific paradigm, will have an impact on mental and physical

models (using the scientific model as a metaphor), the value systems that support

these, behaviours as a response to these changed value systems and a predictive

directional influence on physical outcomes as a result.

Thus, taking into account that a shift in thinking (paradigm/worldview) is required it

leads one to ask a number of fundamental questions associated with understanding

one’s paradigm (worldview). These questions form the research questions of this thesis:

• What paradigms exist in organisations today?

• To what extent do we understand the science that these paradigms are based on?

• To what extent do the models (mental, business, and structural), that this science

pre-supposes fulfil the business and stakeholder requirements.

• To what extent is the value system that supports these models, correctly aligned to

the organisational model?

6

• To what extent does the behaviour as a response to these value systems, have the

desired effect on organisational outcomes?

By answering these research questions, the researcher intends to induce a gap through

investigating the differences between Newtonian and Quantum based sciences

(complexity, chaos and complex adaptive systems), as a base to understand the impact

that this new science will have on models, value systems and behaviours. From this

induced gap the researcher intends to then deduce a Quantum Leadership Model

(QLM) and a linked measurement instrument – the Quantum Leadership Questionnaire

(QLQ).

1.3. Research hypothesis and objectives

The gap that exists between the worldviews established through Quantum physics and

Newtonian physics as a base, suggests that a paradigm shift impact should occur within

organisations, if a quantum physics worldview is used as a metaphor for organisational

design. This paradigm shift should impact the organisational model (mental and

physical), the values that support this model, and the leadership behaviours as a

response to these values, in such a way that, a paradigm shift should be evidenced in

physical examples (outcomes) and be measurable as per the paradigm shift model

(Figure 5.7, Chapter 5). Thus leadership behaviour, as inferred through this model, has

an impact on organisational outcomes. Thus, to deduce and define a quantum

leadership behavioural model and measurement instrument will add unique value to

science.

The research hypothesis is thus:

To use a quantum physics based worldview to: define, deduce and validate a quantum

leadership model and measurement instrument.

From this research hypothesis, the primary and secondary research objectives are

articulated below.

7

1.4. Primary and secondary research objectives

The primary research objectives are articulated in such a way so as to simplify and

focus the process to answer the research hypothesis.

The research seeks to achieve the following primary research objectives:

1.4.1. Define and deduce a Quantum Leadership Model (QLM)

(i) Define the QLM:

• Understand the paradigms of Newtonian and Quantum physics and their defining

features within a paradigm shift framework.

• Review current leadership models and their constructs in relation to this broad

approach.

(ii) Deduce the QLM.

1.4.2. Define and derive a measurement instrument – the Quantum Leadership

Questionnaire (QLQ)

(i) Define the requirements for a measurement instrument based on the QLM

(ii) Deduce the QLQ.

1.4.3. Validate the QLQ and QLM

(i) Validate the QLQ.

(ii) Validate the QLM.

1.5. Additional research value add

1.5.1. Scientific value

1.5.1.1. Impact on social and management sciences

The use of quantum physics and complexity science, as a metaphor for organisational

systems thinking for: organisational design, human resources management and

business management disciplines, and to have the tools of a quantum leadership model

and the linked measurement instrument, will add enormous value to the social sciences

8

sector in terms of introducing a holistic leadership model which will have an effect on

organisational outcomes.

1.5.1.2. Impact on physical and natural sciences sectors

The impact on physics and natural sciences sectors through the integration of these two

fields of research will assist to start aligning their thinking, as to how their scientific

theories may impact beyond physical science to solution finding within the greater

scientific community and introduce a number of new cross-discipline initiatives.

1.5.1.3. Impact on humanistic psychological sciences

The impact on humanistic psychology from the perspective of opening up a multiplicity

of dimensions to psychology (especially from a spiritual perspective in terms of

wholeness of psyche), from the basis of a quantum paradigm that will add enormous

value to further understand the human condition. This is due to the integration of

consciousness and matter, through using Einsteinian-Quantum as a metaphor for

modelling our worldview.

1.5.2. Academic value add

1.5.2.1. Research methodology and process value add

The holistic approach required for this thesis due to the multi-disciplined and multi-

layered nature of enquiry, suggests that the methodology and process value add to the

social sciences domain, specifically for future research into complex areas, could

benefit from the methodology and research process applied in this thesis. This topic will

be discussed further in Section 1.6.3.

1.5.2.2. Theoretical value add

It is hoped that through the derivation of a quantum leadership model and questionnaire

that this model and measurement instrument can be generalised. If so, a new quantum

leadership theory will be postulated.

9

1.5.2.3. Business value add

The introduction of a new leadership theory within an organisational setting from the

perspective of a new worldview as a base has implications for organisational design

and leadership succession, training and hiring practices. This should ultimately benefit

the organisation.

1.6. Research design

1.6.1. Approach

Due to the research being multi-disciplinary and multi-level in approach, the research

design will be complex in nature. In addition as this research is focused on

understanding leadership behaviour within an organisational context, through the lens

of quantum physics as a metaphor, it does not lend itself to traditional structured

organisational research (Dehler and Welsh, 1994; Mitroff and Denton, 1999). Fornaciari

et al. (2001) suggest that human beings, ‘..defy the neat, behavioral (sic) descriptions

offered by the accepted positivist model’.

Thus a holistic approach to the research design is required. Synthesis between various

research theories and methodologies will be investigated in an attempt to satisfy the

requirements of a holistic research design, which will satisfy the required outcomes, in

line with the paradigm shift in thinking required, based on the shift in science as

postulated. This approach is demonstrated in Figure 1.1, of this chapter, which

indicates the synthesis between various theories, methodologies and frameworks to

understand the subject matter from a holistic perspective, which will provide

triangulation and enhance the quality of the research design.

1.6.2. Participants and location of data

The population for the study will be listed companies on the Johannesburg Stock

Exchange (JSE) taken over a thirty year period. A purposive sampling scheme will be

used in order to focus the study on organisations that displayed exponential material

(financial) capital returns. This is displayed by share price performance in relation to

competitor companies within the same sector, industry and total market average. An

10

adaption of the approach used by Collins (2001) in his Good to Great study will be

utilised to achieve this objective.

To validate the QLQ, prior to use, a subjective purposive pilot sample will be chosen for

quantitative internal validation of the QLQ, before it is applied to the sample as to

measure and validate the QLM

To validate the QLM, an objective approach is adopted. Based on the understanding

that the quantum leadership model to be deduced should be of such a nature that it

should, if implemented, lead to measurable examples of organisational outcomes. As

such, the purposive sample should be fit for the purpose of validating this premise. If

the QLM is validated against this purposive sample, it would then add enormous validity

to the premise that leadership behaviours have a predictive impact on bottom line

results. Both quantitative and qualitative analysis will be used to validate the QLM

through data obtained from the executives within the purposive sample.

1.6.3. Structure and process of thesis

The research process is split into two distinct phases. Phase 1, has a descriptive theory

approach to gap analysis and solution finding and phase 2 has a normative theory

approach to quantifying and qualifying the solution proposed. This is displayed in

Figure 1.1, where within these two phases an inductive/deductive/inductive/deductive

methodology was utilised and as such addresses the unique complex nature of the

research environment under investigation which cannot be addressed by a purely linear

research design.

1.6.3.1. Phase 1: Descriptive theory

This phase initially covers the literature review chapters (Chapters 2 and 3) moving

from scientific discovery to generalisation through a qualitative inductive category

development process, contained within a content analysis methodology (observing,

classifying and defining relationships between variables). In addition through deduction

into typologies and frameworks utilising a deductive category application process,

contained within content analysis methodology the Quantum leadership Model will be

11

deduced (Chapter 4). The aim of the descriptive theory phase is to understand, define

and find solutions to the gaps as suggested existed in Section 1.2 (Chapter 1), through

use of the paradigm shift model framework to classify the variables within the defined

structures of: science, models, values and resultant behaviours of a new Quantum

leadership theory (Refer to Figure 1.2).

1.6.3.2. Phase 2: Normative theory

This phase initially covers the overview of the inductive build of the research process

and methodology and the measurement instrument for testing the QLM is defined and

structured (Chapter 5). In addition this phase covers the inductive quantitative and

qualitative analysis. In this chapter the QLQ is tested for internal validity and reliability

through data obtained form a purposive pilot study group and the validity and reliability

of the QLM is sought through analysis of data from a purposive sample consisting of the

executive team at Impala Platinum Limited (Refer to Chapter 6). Furthermore, deductive

findings are discussed in chapter 7 as the researcher attempts to find solutions, from

the data and information, through triangulation of quantitative and qualitative analysis

results, to answer the research hypothesis. Finally, conclusions in chapter 8 are

focused on synergising the thesis in a holistic fashion. The layout is mapped in Figure

1.1 below.

12

Chapter 2Literature reviewPart 1


Qualitative content analysis (Inductive category development)•Observes science•Asks questions•Gap analysis

Qualitative content analysis (Inductive category development):•Develops categories

Qualitative content analysis (Deductive category application) - QLM construct development:•Typologies•Frameworks•Statements of correlation & causality•Constructs development•Construct coding

Qualitative & Quantitative content analysis (Inductive category development)•Research framework•Questionnaire Coding

Triangulation of Qualitative & Quantitative analysis to research objective & question

Chapter 4Derivation of a Quantum LeadershipModel (QLM)

Chapter 5Research process & methodology

Chapter 6Analysis

Chapter 7Findings

Chapter 8Conclusions

Qualitative & Quantitative analysis•Validity•Reliability•Statistical inference (correlation & causality)

Answering the research obj.& question & discussing limitations & research opportunities

Inductive Deductive Inductive Deductive

PHASE 1: DESCRIPTIVE THEORY �� PHASE 2: NORMATIVE THEORY ��

Research framework: Science + Models + Values + Behaviour Examples

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Stage 4 Stage 5 Stage 6 Stage 7










Chapter 6Analysis

Chapter 7Findings








Figure 1.1: Research process in this thesis

1.7. Conclusions

The reality of dealing with the complexity paradigm shift is being enforced by factors

such as globalisation, speed of learning and innovation, inter-cultural dynamics, scarcity

and political will and so forth. These factors drive the need for new inclusive and

organic business models that have the ability to be flexible and adaptable, to the fast

paced rate of change enforced by the complexities of, industrial and financial market

globalisation.

Quantum science and associated theories have opened up a new way of viewing the

world. Based on paradigm shift models, this new worldview has implications for how we

model the world around us, what value systems we introduce to measure this model

and the resultant leadership behaviours that are exhibited as a response to these

13

values, which has an implied directional predictive effect on, measurable physical

outcomes.

It is therefore the purpose of this thesis, through satisfying the primary and secondary

research objectives, to find a solution to the research problem of: defining, deducing

and validating a quantum leadership model and measurement instrument, based on a

quantum physics worldview, as postulated.

14

LITERATURE REVIEW (PART I)

CHAPTER 2: PARADIGM SHIFT IN FUNDAMENTAL SCIENCE AND

DIRECTIONAL EFFECTS

2.1. Introduction

The process of literature review, in this chapter will follow an inductive methodology

moving from scientific discovery to generalisation. The categories established within the

cultural paradigm shift framework as discussed in Section 6.4, will be used for this

purpose to ensure a robust and focused approach to this research.

The researcher follows a descriptive theory approach in this chapter, within the

research process as per Figure 5.6. The researcher uses descriptive theory (Refer to

Chapter 5, Section 5.2.3), in observing, classifying and defining relationships between

variables, this is done through a qualitative inductive category development process,

contained within content analysis methodology (Refer to Chapter 5, Section 5.4.3.2).

Through this process, the researcher observes science, asks questions and forms

categories for general application.

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce a shift in paradigm within the social sciences

field already achieved in physical and cosmological and other forms of ‘pure’ scientific

research, to understand the effects that this ‘new’ science has on ones worldview, the

impact on the models one creates within organisations, the associated value measures

it imposes on itself (to ensure continuous existence) and the resultant behaviour

exhibited, in line with a holistic paradigm shift as induced by these findings. This

paradigm shift has not yet permeated scientific management research to the degree

that it has fundamentally impacted leadership models and specifically the leadership

behaviours within them. Wheatley strongly suggested (16 years ago) that social

sciences require a new way of understanding behaviour; ‘..we social scientists are

trying hard to be conscientious, using the methodologies and thought patterns of

seventeenth century science, while the scientists, travelling away from us at the speed

of light, are moving into a universe that suggests entirely new ways of understanding’

(Wheatley, 1992, pp. 140:1).

15

Yet, as stated previously, this shift has not occurred to date (2008). This researcher

suggests that this is because the social sciences field has not been shown a path in

which one can understand this shift in a logical way, scientific manner as such the

response has been slow.

This thesis utilises a scientific method, based in paradigm shift modelling (Refer to

Section 6.4), to induce a new leadership model, and specifically the behaviours and

associated constructs, which extract the essence from this ‘new’ science, grounded in;

quantum physics, thermodynamics, chaos and complexity theory (as a metaphor) to

understand the impact this new understanding in science has on the social and

management sciences field. It is in this researcher’s view, that it is a leadership

responsibility within organisations, (economic, social and academic) to take notice of

these changes and respond to them in a way that will shift the way that these

organisations are lead within a complex and dynamic environment. This shift in

scientific paradigm will be used as a metaphor for leadership.

2.2. Scientific principles

In the mid nineteenth century an attempt was made to generalise Newton’s laws of

motion across the confusing qualities of light and heat. These experiments produced

gaps between predicted Newtonian theory and experimental findings. These flaws in

Newton’s laws of motion resulted in new questions over this initial scientific paradigm

(Kilman, 2001). This resulted in two theories, contradicting the fundamental aspects of

Newton’s laws of motion; ‘Relativity theory’ and ‘Quantum mechanics/physics’, which

became popular in the 1930’s and is still referred to as the ‘new science’ today, and is

seen as having a fundamental impact on individual, social and corporate culture

(Wheatley 1999, Kilman 2001, Shelton et al. 2001, Zohar and Marshall 2004; Fairholm,

2004). The discussion that follows, explains these theories and the scientific paradigms

that this science induces.

A paradigm of Newtonian physics, based in the Cartesian plane (geometrical

mathematics), provided a metaphor for constitutive mechanisms in management

thought. This assumption is challenged within Einsteinian physics, based in the

16

quantum plane (multidimensional mathematics) that have changed the constitutive

mechanisms and assumptions within our paradigm of physical science from quantum

physics, the less than nuclear, and through complexity and chaos theory, to the size of

the cosmos. These two assumptions of the Newtonian-Cartesian scientific worldview /

paradigm and Einsteinian-Quantum scientific worldview / paradigm will now be

discussed in parallel (in Section 2.2.1) to understand the differences in constructive

mechanisms that one bases assumptions on. If this change in paradigm is relevant to

shaping ones thinking, then it must be relevant to people and organisational life too.

Scientific principles as per the paradigm shift model (Refer to Section 6.4, Chapter 6)

lay foundations for implicit and basic assumptions in the form of symbolic

generalisations (metaphors) based in science. Section 2.2, will discuss science within

the fundamental differences between Newtonian physics based on Cartesian plane

geometry vs. Quantum physics based on Einsteinian geometry by investigating the

physical properties of dimensionality, space and interrelatedness, and metaphysical

properties of human consciousness as it relates to physical matter as per Figure 2.1

below, in line with the paradigm shift model (Refer to Section 6.4.).

Figure 2.1: Fundamental shift in science (Paradigm shift model - Refer to Section 6.4)

2.2.1. Paradigm aspect 1: Physical Space

Section 2.2.1, discusses science in terms of physical space from the perspective of;

dimensionality, matter and the relationship between matter (Interrelatedness of objects

across space and time), from the perspective of the thesis of a Newtonian-Cartesian

and then to test this thesis against an anti-thesis of ‘new’ science from an Einsteinian-

Newtonian - Cartesian scientific principles paradigm

vs. Einsteinian - Quantum

scientific principles paradigm

Aspect 1 – Physical space:

Dimensionality, Matter &

Interrelationship

Aspect 2 - Meta-physical space:

Conscious interaction with Matter in space

Scientific Principles

Models

Values

Behaviour

17

Quantum scientific view.

2.2.1.1. Thesis: Newtonian-Cartesian science

(i) Dimensionality

The world and its structures have been designed around a paradigm as defined by

Euclid (325BC-265BC) and Aristotle (384BC-322BC). In this paradigm, space was

defined in three dimensions; length, width and depth. Aristotle later, as per Kilman

(2001), arranged linear time into; past, present and future dimensions, ensuring that

logical thinking and deterministic science was firmly placed in our logical thought

paradigm. Furthermore, Descartes introduced three dimensional mathematics from the

dimensional axis required to pinpoint an object in space.

(ii) Matter

Euclid, defined space in absolute terms, wherein space had an absolute point of origin

and space was flat and empty. In this paradigm, space between objects had no matter

and was empty (Kilman, 2001).

(iii) Relationships between matter

Euclid determined that in his linear geometrical view of space, two parallel lines never

touch and as such no relation can exist between them. He also delineated that the

shortest distance between two points was a straight line (Kilman, 2001).

(iv) Findings (Newtonian-Cartesian science)

Euclid and Aristotle through these constitutive mechanisms thus ensured that logical

thinking and deterministic science was firmly placed as a mental model in scientific

thought. As a result of this linear and logical understanding of the universe, the theory

of absolute space and time became the basis for a very rational approach to science.

This view of the world, in western society, has remained virtually unchanged for the

past two and a half thousand years (Wheatley, 1999; Fornaciari and Dean, 2001;

Fairholm, 2004).

18

From the above process of scientific theory building, guided by; Aristotle, Euclid, Galileo

and Descartes, Newton’s laws of nature were constructed around the relations between

dimensions in space, matter and the relationships between matter in space, over time

and has solidified this paradigm as a definitive worldview.

Newton’s three laws of nature are;

Newton’s 1st law of nature - law of inertia: An object at rest will remain at rest unless

acted upon by an external and unbalanced force. An object in motion will remain in

motion unless acted upon by an external and unbalanced force. This law is based on

Euclid’s view of space being flat and empty and at rest, where objects do not interact or

move unless acted upon. ‘..an object will remain at rest where it is’ (Bueche, 1986, p.

57)

Newton’s 2nd law of nature - law of acceleration: The rate of change of momentum of a

body is proportional to the resultant force acting on the body and is in the same

direction. This law is based on Euclidean linear parallel geometry in space, where

energy exerted and the resultant momentum is in the same direction. It also relies on

Aristotle’s view of past, present and future states – a deterministic view in that ‘..the

object will continue to move along a straight line’ (Bueche, 1986, p.58), from initial

impact until acted on again by another force.

Newton’s 3rd law of nature – law of reciprocal actions: All forces occur in pairs, and

these two forces are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. This law of motion is

commonly paraphrased as: "To every action force there is an equal, but opposite,

reaction force". ‘This law is deterministic and linear in that it relies on an initial force for

an opposite force to respond reciprocally. The reaction force is exactly equal in

magnitude and opposite in direction to the action force…it tells us that the forces act on

two different objects’ (Bueche, 1986, p.59)

2.2.1.2. Antithesis: Einsteinian-Quantum science

(i) Dimensionality

‘..Albert Einstein's publication of the special theory of relativity in 1905…forever

changed physics research. With the addition of the general theory in 1915 (see Capra,

19

1983) Einstein demonstrated that traditional Newtonian beliefs and approaches had to

be abandoned to explain phenomena that had previously defied explanation, such as

the relationship between space and time’ (Fornaciari and Dean, 2001, p. 341). The

theory of relativity is based on the speed of light being constant relative to the speed of

the observer although constant through space (Einstein, 1920). A simple explanation of

relativity is; if an observer was to measure light at light speed, at this moment, when the

observer reaches light speed – time and space would freeze into one moment and one

dimension. Thus, the extension of space and the passage of time are determined by the

speed of the observer, and space and time are no longer absolute, as per Newtonian

physics, but relative to the speed of the observer (Calder, 2005).

Einstein’s theory of relativity has enormous implications for particles moving at the

speed of light. Light in itself can change form between waves and particles depending

on how it is observed. This identical quantum phenomenon has been observed in

matter too, specifically in electrons moving around an atom. This electron shows itself

as a wave until observed by an active participant, when it then collapses into a

distinctive electron particle. This in essence means that matter can shift between a

wave and a particle at speed beyond or equal to the speed of light, thus proving that

there is a fourth dimension beyond the bounds of the speed of light in the space/time

continuum, as suggested by Einstein (Einstein, 1920). This insight of space and time

being interrelated, led Einstein to combine space and time into a fourth dimension, the

space/time continuum (Calder, 2005), as proved through the 4th equation of the Lorentz

transformation (physics equation shift from Galilean transformation of three dimensions

to four dimensions) (Einstein, 1920). Superstring theory suggests that; ‘..membranes

the size of universes could be operating within 11 different dimensions in space’

(Calder, 2005, p.180).

(ii) Matter

Einstein further combined mass and energy into the famous equation: E=MC² (where E

is energy, m is mass and c is the speed of light), published as the special theory of

relativity in 1905. This theory means that the characteristics of mass and energy are

interchangeable at light speed (Einstein, 1920). i.e. matter equals frozen energy

(Calder, 2005, p.10). Thus matter/particle can also be energy waves and thus permeate

space and time, suggesting that space is not empty as per Newtonian-Cartesian theory.

20

Secondly matter cannot be precisely determined as a point particle. This is known as

wave-particle duality was formulated through the work of Einstein, De Broglie and many

others. Current scientific theory holds that all particles also have a wave nature. This

phenomenon has been verified not only for elementary particles, but for compound

particles like atoms and even molecules (Hocking, 2005; Calder, 2005).

Thus, we must conclude that space is filled with matter and energy waves, and that

time is relative when interacting with inert molar objects. These theorise have in time

been proven by scientists “..the theory of relativity is now completely accepted by the

scientific community, and its predictions have been verified in countless applications’

(Hawking, 1999, p.70)

(iii) Relationship between matter

Action at a distance or non-local effect, discovered by Bohr (1958) and as proposed in

1964 by Bell as Bell’s theorem, later proved in experiments conducted by physicist

Alain Aspect in 1972 (Gribbin, 1984, p. 227), prove interrelatedness of objects across

space and time.

Bells theorem states; when two electrons are correlated with one another – when their

respective spins are in accord around an atom, one electron is then separated and

placed in orbit around another atom. At the exact moment when the spin of one of these

electrons is changed and observed, the spin of the other electron, when observed at the

same moment, changes its individual spin to maintain its correlated relationship with its

partner (Gribbin, 1984). Stapp (1975), reported that Bell’s theorem was ‘..the most

profound discovery in the history of science’ and that it proves in effect that the world is

fundamentally inseparable, in opposition to the Newtonian-Cartesian view that particles

do not interact across space and time.

(iv) Findings (Einsteinian-Quantum science)

Quantum science disproves Newtonian science in paradigm aspect 1: Space

(Dimensions, Objects / Matter, Relationship between objects / matter) , by proving that

space is not made of only three dimensions, that space is not flat and empty but filled

with wave energy as mass and energy are interchangeable at light speed and that

21

particles are interrelated across space and time.

To summarise the shift in scientific paradigm, one must understand the impact of

Einstein’s cosmological findings for quantum physics and subsequent impact on

worldviews. The nature of an expanding universe dictates that by understanding the

fundamentals at the quantum level, one begins to understand the workings of the

cosmos. Beuche (2005) and Serway, Faugn, Vuille (2008) state that; the study of the

smallest entities of the universe will lead to increased understandings of the universe as

a whole and that this reasoning is based on the observed nature of the universe and will

lead to new discoveries concerning forces and particles of nature. Understanding these

laws as noted by Newton with insights from the Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm, taking

into account light as the building block of all matter one now has the ability to view

nature in a different way. It is therefore correct to utilise Newton’s laws of nature, his

laws of motion, which are the artefacts of his science, values, and subsequent

behaviours that formed his hypotheses and laws (artefacts) to debate the relevance of

these laws in light of the discoveries of Quantum science. By definition, a law of nature

is: a concise statement of how nature behaves (Bueche, 2005; Serway et al., 2008) and

it must be generalisable across all observers and across all frames of reference’

(Fornaciari et al., 2001, Kilman, 2001). It is within this context of Newton’s laws being

‘generalisable’ that this is now discussed.

Newton’s 1st law of motion (law off inertia): An object at rest will remain at rest unless

acted upon by an external and unbalanced force. An object in motion will remain in

motion unless acted upon by an external and unbalanced force

Einstein’s theory of relativity proves that light (also a particle) is in constant motion at

186,000 m/s (miles per second). This therefore disputes Newton’s 1st law of law of

motion (inertia); as matter, in the form of light, is not at rest. Also matter cannot be

precisely determined as a point particle or wave. This is known as wave-particle duality

was formulated through the work of Einstein, De Broglie and many others. Current

scientific theory holds that all particles also have a wave nature. This phenomenon has

been verified not only for elementary particles, but for compound particles like atoms

and even molecules. Therefore all particles are in constant motion.

22

Newton’s 2nd law of motion (law of acceleration): The rate of change of momentum of a

body is proportional to the resultant force acting on the body and is in the same

direction.

Einstein’s equation E=MC² refer to mass and energy being interchangeable at light

speed suggesting that in wave format energy can be dissipated beyond the three

dimensions that are suggested by Newtonian-Cartesian principles, in a 4th dimension,

the space-time continuum. Furthermore, Heisenberg in 1925 suggested that when

electron particles jump between orbits around a nucleus, they dissipate energy in the

form of photons at higher and higher levels of energy as they move between orbits.

Suggesting an increase in energy (entropy) and not an equal amount of energy as

suggested by Newton, furthermore Heisenberg states that one cannot accurately

determine the energy, position and momentum of an (electron) particle (Ross, 1996)

once it jumps between orbits, by determining its preceding position, energy state and

momentum.

Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle is stated as follows: If the momentum of a particle is

accurately known then its position is unknown. If the position of a particle is accurately

known, then its momentum is unknown (Bueche, 2005).

Thus Newton’s 2nd law of acceleration is questioned. Uncertainty suggests that due to

the wave-particle duality of particles, we cannot determine accurately that the resultant

force will be the same and in the same direction. Experiments conducted prove that

uncertainty is more generalisable across phenomena than Newton’s laws are

generalisable (Beuche, 2005).

Newton’s 3rd law (law of reciprocal actions): All forces occur in pairs, and these two

forces are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction.

Quantum tunnelling makes use of Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle discussed above

and suggests that, at a less than molecular level, things happen a little differently.

Quantum tunnelling is the quantum-mechanical effect of transitioning through a

classically-forbidden energy state. Quantum tunnelling makes it possible for a

subatomic particle to ‘tunnel’ it’s way through a barrier, energetically illegal in classical

Newtonian physics, with negative kinetic energy – a classical Newtonian mechanics

absurdity (Shelton, 1999). This phenomenon suggests that no equal and opposite

23

reaction takes place as suggested by Newton’s 3rd law and it also disputes Newton’s 1st

and 2nd Laws in that the particle on transition through barrier, operates at negative

kinetic energy. This paradox of science is used everyday in extremely fast electronic

switching devices.

(iv) Thermodynamics

The laws of thermodynamics also contradict classical Newtonian theory in that

Newtonian physics refers to individual interactions between particles, whereas

thermodynamics, which is theory related to heat in atomic systems. Understanding that

heat; is a resultant photon energy release from excited electrons. Newton’s 3rd law

suggest that all forces occur in pairs, the laws of thermodynamics suggest otherwise:

Zeroth law of thermodynamics states that, two bodies (or systems) that are in thermal

equilibrium with a third body (or system) are therefore in thermal equilibrium with each

other (Bueche, 2005; Serway et al., 2008). This suggests that there is systems

relationship beyond the paring principle of classical Newtonian-Cartesian physics.

Law 1 of thermodynamics states that, the internal energy (U) of a system is the total of

all kinds of energy possessed by the atoms and other particles that comprise the

system (Bueche, 2005; Serway et al., 2008). This is in direct opposition to paired up

particles as it relates to entire system dynamics.

Inference of thermo-dynamic laws at the quantum level suggests a systems view of the

world as opposed to a linear Cartesian view of force and reaction. Furthermore, chaos

theory also known as non-linear dynamics and complexity science are branches of

science that have also come out of quantum physics and have a part to play in

understanding systems.

(v) Chaos theory

Chaos theory refers to the theory explaining phenomenon wherein systems composed

of inter-related parts or interdependent agents - each of which follows very simple,

highly regular rules of behaviour - generate outcomes that reflect these interactions and

feedback effects in ways that are inherently nonlinear and intractably unpredictable

(Holbrook, 2003; Fairholm, 2004). Mandelbrot in the 1970s modelled natural patterns

24

over time, discovering that the natural world is not structured according to linear

Newtonian patterns that are stable and controllable, but in fact unpredictable and

unstable, they survive at the edge of chaos and create patterns, with self closing loops

that operate within a systems environment dependent on all parts and ‘..attempting to

control these systems is destructive’ (Zohar, 2004, pp 76-77).

This same pattern or fractal ‘picture’ is what electrons present when they are observed

over time as they jump between orbits (in and out of dimensions), which Heisenberg

called ‘uncertainty’, as it is for a moment unobservable. Yet these patterns form around

a strange attractor (in chaos theory terms) to form the fractal patterns. In essence this

means that through unsettling the equilibrium, one creates a state of chaos that will

naturally through the process of strange attraction form into an iterative process or

pattern/fractal of meaning, including natural control through feedback loops inherent in

this design (Shelton, 1999; Zohar and Marshall, 2004; Fairholm, 2004). This is in direct

opposition to the linear, controlled and certain (deterministic) laws as stated by Newton.

(vi) Complexity theory

Complexity theory was developed out of chaos theory that takes into account many

diverse disciplines ‘..including; physics, biology, mathematics, economics,

anthropology, ecology, sociology, information technology, psychology, and medicine, to

mention only some’ (Lewin and Regine, 2001; Pascale, Millemann & Goija (2000),

Axley and McMahon, 2006). ‘…the general theoretical perspective informing

complexity science, …draws on numerous models, including dissipative structures and

non-equilibrium thermodynamics, chaos theory, catastrophe theory, self-organized

criticality (sic), self-organisation theory, general systems theory, information theory,

computational theory, game theory, evolutionary biology, and more’ (Anderson, 1999;

Black, 2000; Goldstein, 1999; Kauffman, 1995; Mathews, White, & Long, 1999;

Waldrop, 1992, Axley and McMahon, 2006). Complexity theory is used to understand

how to manage systems within complex environments as opposed to simple systems of

two parts that interact in linear, determinable, processes as suggested by Newton’s 3rd

law of reciprocal actions.

25

2.2.1.3. Summary (paradigm aspect 1)

From the above discussion it follows that Newtonian-Cartesian science is limited in its

application, when applied to complex adaptive systems. Table 2.1 below shows the

shift between Cartesian-Newtonian scientific assumptions vs. Einsteinian-Quantum

scientific assumptions. The implicit basic assumptions or constitutive mechanisms that

make up ones worldview fundamentally shifts due to the shift in science.

Firstly, a three dimensional universe as suggested by Newtonian-Cartesian science is

replaced by multi-dimensions, of up to eleven in Einsteinian-Quantum science. The

fourth dimension, being time, as discovered by Einstein in 1905 opening up scientific

thinking to multiple dimensions, beyond purely the three, that define points in physical

space and time.

Secondly, space time between molar objects is seen as flat and empty in a Newtonian-

Cartesian paradigm, which is replaced with an Einsteinian-Cartesian paradigm of space

time which is curved and filled with matter and energy. Thus, suggesting that there is

connectivity between all things and introduces science to a systems view of reality.

Thirdly, the universe previously seen as ‘the motion of inert molar objects in Newtonian-

Cartesian science, is replaced within a universe as a motion of wave energy ‘potential’,

or self-motion monads, continually moving and vibrating, wherein which the ‘potential’ is

materialised through ‘conscious participation’, proving a link between consciousness

and physics, and introduces one to meta-physics. Thus cementing the importance of a

holistic approach to human conscious interaction within a physical worldview, where

new physical realities are materialised through the interaction of consciousness and the

physical world around us, in a potentially continuous changing view of the world,

through the impact of choice, where self motion monads have freedom of choice to

select their own response (path) to the environment around them. This is expanded on

in detail in Section 2.2.2 below, where the opposing positions of a Newtonian-Cartesian

scientific position in physics is juxtaposed to the Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm.

26

Source: Researchers adaption from Kilman (2001)

2.2.2. Paradigm aspect 2: Metaphysical space (conscious interaction with matter

in space)

Section 2.2.2, discusses science in terms of meta-physical space from the perspective

of; conscious interaction with matter, by debating the perspectives of the thesis of a

Newtonian-Cartesian against an anti-thesis of ‘new’ science from an Einsteinian-

Quantum scientific view.


Separation of mind (consciousness) and matter (physical world)

Following on from the initial paradigm formation of constitutive mechanisms by Euclid

and Aristotle, the works of Descartes (1596AD-1650AD) and Newton (1642AD-

1727AD) firmly entrenched this way of thinking into western civilisation (Zohar, 1999;

Kilman, 2001; Fairholm, 2004). Descartes’ works on dualism allowed for the church to

concentrate on spiritual matters and scientists to focus on physical ones. Descartes

believed that although there was a separation, the spirit of God still indwelled the body.

The separation in terms of thought from a dualistic position though, allowed pure

scientists to explore science of physical objects, without interference from the church.

This separation between the mind (consciousness) and the physical world (matter) has

TABLE 2.1. CARTESIAN-NEWTONIAN PHYSICS VS. QUANTUM-RELATIVISTIC PHYSICS

IMPLICIT SCIENTIFIC CONSTITUTIVE MECHANISMS – FOR PHYSICAL SPACE

Newtonian – Cartesian science Einsteinian - Quantum science

The existence of only three dimensions

in space

The existence of many relativistic universes

/ multiple dimensions – up to eleven.

The space between molar objects as flat

and empty

Space/time as curved and filled with matter

and energy

The universe as the motion of inert molar

objects

The universe as the motion of wave energy

potential continually moving and vibrating –

materialised by conscious participation

27

lead to a fragmented view of these two elements (Kilman, 2001; Zohar, 1999; Shelton,

1999; Kilman, 2001; Pellissier, 2003) and was not the intention of Descartes. Within

this paradigm there is no room for conscious interaction between spiritual or

consciousness dimensions and physical objects.

A point of clarity is however required in terms of the discussion on consciousness.

Humanistic social scientists and psychologists would agree on the separation of

consciousness from matter, yet make a fundamental assumption that spirit as per

Descartes and consciousness are the same. It is at this point that one needs to define

consciousness. World-consciousness is defined as body, self-consciousness is defined

as mind/soul and God-consciousness as spirit – beyond self (Nee, 1969).

In this thesis, the matter of consciousness will be discussed in alignment to this

assumption to the point of understanding and arguing the separation of consciousness

from physics from various aspects. From a self-consciousness (humanistic)

perspective, consciousness is aligned to the soul and mind aspects, thus aligned to

Kilman (2001), Zohar and Marshall (1999, 200, 2004) and Shelton (1999), Shelton et al.

(2001, 2003) and Eastern religious authors for example in the Vedic tradition (Goswami,

2000) and follows on the tradition of self-actualisation and self-transcendence as per

Maslow. Beyond the conscious dimension, In terms of Jungian psychological analysis

and theory, it is from the perspective of a higher level of consciousness or inter-

connectedness to a dimension beyond consciousness to spirit, as per Maslow’s peak-

experiences (spirit) beyond the self-actualisation and self-transcendence phase, that

aligns to Jung’s individuation (1964), which this researcher will focus on in chapter 5,

when deducing a Quantum Leadership Model (QLQ).


Relationship between matter and consciousness

Newtonian-Cartesian theory delineated a clear boundary or separation between

objects, with no force or bond between them. This is clarified in terms of: mass, density

and the identity of all objects in any space and over any duration of time (Kilman, 2001).

Kilman further states that, within Newton’s system of motion, there weren’t any

categories for seeing interdependence, integration, or unification among separate

28

physical objects. ‘..Einstein demonstrated that traditional Newtonian beliefs and

approaches had to be abandoned to explain phenomena that had previously defied

explanation’ (Fornaciari and Dean, 2001, p. 341). It is a fundamental base of the

Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm that reality as we see and observe it has to have

conscious interaction to make it a measurable reality.

This phenomenon has been observed in the double slit experiment and in Heisenberg’s

uncertainty principle. Both of these phenomena present themselves at the point of

observation. Von Neumann, as related by Herbert (1993, p. 155:157), resolved this

quantum physical paradox, stating that ‘the only non-physical entity capable of

collapsing a wave function was consciousness’. In Neumann’s interpretation (Herbert,

1993, p. 155-157), as supported by Herbert (1987), Penrose (1989) and Zohar (1990);

“…the world remains everywhere in a state of pure possibility, except where some

conscious mind decides to promote a portion of the world from it’s usual state of

indefiniteness into a condition of actual existence. Thus the world would not be there

in material form were (sic) it not for a conscious mind to observe it”

From an observation point of view the reality is that; “How matter appears depends on

our minds’ choices; reality is a matter of choice” (Wolfe in Shelton, 1999, p. 15). ‘The

reality that we realize at any point in time is depends on the nature of our observations’

(Shelton, 1999, p. 16). In this context our view on how we create reality is dependent on

how we are prepared to observe it. Nobel laureate scientist Ilya Prigogine eloquently

puts this into perspective when he states that “Whatever we call reality, it is revealed to

us only through an active construction in which we participate” (Shelton, 1999, p.16).

Young (1976), uses the discovery of interrelatedness to distinguish between inert molar

objects and self motion monads. Young states that “the term monad designates a spark

of life: an entity that decides for itself what it is, when and how it will move and why. The

movement of inert objects is thoroughly explained by Newtonian mechanics, especially

for molar objects that are not particularly of large mass and not travelling near light

speed. But entities that are capable of self-motion (monads) are better explained by

quantum mechanics” (Young 1976, p.7 in Kilman, 2001). Heisenberg (1971) stated that,

“both nuclear particles and human beings are monads, because they choose their

29

direction and motion all by themselves. Similar to human beings nuclear particles have

the freedom of movement and even transforming themselves into a variety of forms and

meanings – which generates uncertainty.

Further, nuclear particles appear to be aware of whether they are being observed by

another conscious being and as a result, these monads, can change back and forth

between wave function and actual particle. Perhaps nuclear particles are not as self-

aware as human beings, but they do seem to crisscross the transcendent dimension of

consciousness, since they stay connected with correlated partners across huge

distances” (Heisenberg, 1971 in Kilman, 2001, pp.42:43).

This is not to say that Newtonian-Cartesian physics does not have a place in science,

quite the contrary – it has a fundamental place in greater than molecular interactions

beyond a point of scientific fall, where atoms consolidate into molecules, which

compress into inert molar objects that are then governed by Newton’s laws of motion

(Kilman, 2001). However when it comes to interaction of thought processes, these are

based on electronic neural processes that occur at quantum states, i.e. less than

molecular, at an electron level, and as such to understand these processes that govern

our thinking, we need to understand the models at a quantum level.

Bohm, a prominent scientist and professor of theoretical physics, and a collaborator of

Einsteins' in the 1950’s, synchronised his work on non-locality and consciousness.

Bohm (1980), suggested that both the material world and consciousness are part of a

single unbroken totality of movement. Bohm further illustrated this in a discussion

related too, and recorded by Jaworski (1996, p. 81);

“At present people create barriers between each other by their fragmentary thought.

Each one operates separately. When these barriers have dissolved, then there arises

one mind, where they are all one unit, but each person also retains his or her individual

awareness’s (sic). That one mind will still exist even when they are separate, and when

they come together, it will be as If they never separated. It is actually a single

intelligence that operates, that works with people who are moving in relationship with

one another…The separation between them is not blocking. They are all pulling

together. If you had a number of people who really pulled together and worked together

30

in this way, it would really be remarkable. They would stand out so much that everyone

would know they are different.”

Zohar and Marshall (2004) support quantum thinking in line with understanding complex

adaptive systems (CAS). The theory of CAS, drawing on complexity and chaos, is being

applied to; ‘..all things that have the capacity to be such systems, from the one celled

amoeba to ourselves, our organisations, and our culture. We are complex adaptive

systems poised at the edge of chaos .. our heartbeats, much of our brain activity, and

certainly our mental activity when we are thinking creatively’ (Zohar and Marshall, 2004,

p.77). This statement has enormous implications for organisational design and we must

take cognisance of this scientific shift when modelling our organisations.


The importance of these findings with regards to in opposition to Einsteinian-Quantum

physics (Refer to Table 2.2), is that in classical science;

Firstly, there is a separation between consciousness and matter and within the

Einsteinian-Quantum science, there is a monastic unification of consciousness with

matter, and supports the third point in the summary (Refer to Section 2.2.1.3).

Secondly, there is a fundamental separation between inert molar objects in space in

Newtonian-Cartesian science, opposed by eternal connections between self-motion

monads as discovered within an Einsteinian-Quantum scientific perspective. In classical

Newtonian-Cartesian science, no interaction between particles takes place as there is

flat empty space between them and any interaction between them would require an

unstable external force. The difference in Einsteinian-Quantum physics is that objects

are not separated in fact they are inseparable and at the quantum level are also self-

aware, just as humans are, and as such are imparted upon by conscious interaction.

This is in opposition to the idea of dualism which has been the support base of

separating spiritual matters from physical science ones since Descartes in 1650. Table

2.2 indicates the opposing scientific positions between Cartesian-Newtonian scientific

assumptions vs. Einsteinian-Quantum scientific assumptions in terms of the link

between consciousness and matter.

31

Source: Adaption from Kilman (2001)

2.2.3. Overall summary of scientific constitutive mechanisms

As a result of the linear and logical understanding of the universe associated with a

Newtonian-Cartesian view of the world, the theory of absolute space and time became

the basis for a very rational approach to science. This view of the world, in western

society, has remained virtually unchanged for the past two and a half thousand years

(Wheatley, 1992; Shelton, 1999; Shelton et al., 2001, 2003; Kilman 2001; Fairholm,

2004). Einstein as the ‘father’ of modern science himself, arrived at his findings;

‘..by imagining that he was travelling on a rocket ship approaching the speed of light. This

first thought experiment…enabled Einstein to visualize (sic) situations that could not

physically happen or be measured with standard tools, thus providing him the starting point

to produce the complex mathematical work needed to describe the theory. In abandoning

traditional models and methods, Einstein enlisted his greatest asset, his imagination, to

advance an entire scientific discipline. His ideas revolutionized (sic) cosmological research,

all without a single piece of traditional evidence, and allowed physics to experience great

theoretical leaps where many ideas simply cannot be ‘proved’ in the traditional sense.’

(Fornaciari and Dean, 2001, p. 341)

From the discussion on Newtonian physics and the ‘new’ science of Quantum physics,

two definitive paradigms exist with guiding principles in direct opposition to each other.

Table 2.1 and Table 2.2 represent the gaps as reviewed in current literature between

the principles of both paradigms and positions them in context. These form the initial

TABLE 2.2. CARTESIAN-NEWTONIAN PHYSICS VS. QUANTUM-RELATIVISTIC PHYSICS

IMPLICIT SCIENTIFIC CONSTITUTIVE MECHANISMS FOR META-PHYSICAL SPACE

Cartesian - Newtonian science Einsteinian – Quantum science

The dualistic separation of consciousness

and matter

The monastic unification of consciousness

with matter

The fundamental separation of inert molar

objects

The eternal connections between self-

motion monads

The deterministic certainty of inert molar

Objects

The probabilistic uncertainty among self-

motion monads

32

scientific categories for basing assumptions on, for a change in paradigm and form a

new mode of enquiry into the impact that this worldview has on how we model the world

around us. Section 2.3., will take these scientific models as metaphors for

organisational modelling and discuss the relative implications for a new form of

organising.

2.3. Models (based on scientific discovery)

Taking the review of literature to the next level of enquiry into models that we establish

on the scientific paradigm of Einsteinian-Quantum science requires us to take this

paradigm shift in thinking and apply it to organisations, specifically the people within

organisations and the way that we think and create our structures and categories

(Zohar, 1997; Fairholm, 2004). As much as this section will touch on aspects of

business modelling from an organisational design perspective, these examples are

merely to ensure completeness in taking the science into the organisational sphere. A

focus is given to the aspects of human involvement in organisations as factors of

production, from the perspective of organisations as being ‘people-collectives’ (Kilman,

2001). This is shown in Figure 2.2, where the implication of the scientific models

established in Section 2.2 are now utilised as a metaphor for modelling organisations

due to the human conscious interaction of people within the organisation as factors of

production.

Figure 2.2: Shift in models based on shifts in scientific paradigms (Paradigm shift model

Refer to Section 6.4)






Interrelationship (Organisational

design)



(Human factors of production)


Models

Values

Behaviour

33

2.3.1. Paradigm aspect 1: Physical space

The literature review on the scientific paradigm of quantum physics has firmly placed in

our grasp the understanding of human conscious involvement in creating structure to

our universe. The interconnectedness of things at a quantum level, for self-motion

monads, which include people due to their neuro-processes which are based in electron

activity (Young, 1976 in Kilman, 2001), as supported by Shelton et al., (2001, 2003) and

Zohar et al.(2004). These aspects have enormous implications for organisations as

people-collectives and will be discussed in this section from the perspective of the

thesis of a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigmatic view as a modelling metaphor versus an

anti-thesis of ‘new’ science from an Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigmatic view

as a metaphor for organisational design.


(i) Dimensionality, matter and the relationship between matter:

Newton’s three dimensional laws and separation between objects has lead to the

reduction into parts, and this proliferation of separations has characterised not only

organisations, but everything in the world during the past three hundred years (Kilman,

2001; Fairholm, 2004). We see this separation in supply chains and in organisational

charts, for example; processes that move along value chains between supply chain

‘partners’, which are separated by different systems and procedures, each within its

own separated organisational silos. Organisations today are rigid structures, controlled

from outside the system and the white space between organisational participants is

implicitly ignored (Kilman, 2001). Wheatley (1992, p. 10), states that the machine

imagery (of Newton’s theories) is captured by organisations in an emphasis on structure

and parts.

‘..Responsibilities have been organised into functions. People have been organised

into roles. Page after page of organisational charts depicts (sic) the workings of the

machine’ (Wheatley, 1992, p. 29).

This separation of the system has led us to build organisations and value chains upon

principles of parts interacting along a continuum managed through force and reaction,

in line with Newton’s 3rd law of motion – ‘reciprocal actions’. These organisational

34

structures are now beginning to feel the pain of their design as they increasingly try and

integrate into an extended value chain of partners outside of present systems thinking,

leading to a fast paced chaotic environment, impossible to manage in our current

Newtonian paradigm. In Figure 2.3 this is viewed through the lens of a typical supply

chain, where Newton’s laws of motion (Refer to Section 2.2.1.1) have been applied to

organisational modelling.

distr.cons. man. supp.

Newton’s 1st Law(objects)

Newton’s 3rd Law(force + reaction ��

clockwork imagery)

Newton’s 2nd Law(velocity + momentum)

Figure 2.3: Newton-Cartesian scientific model impact on organisational supply chain design

Newton’s 1st law of inertia is applied to separations between organisations in a supply

chain, where organisations (objects) within supply chain systems have been designed

to remain at rest until acted upon by an external force, for instance a sale which sets of

a chain reaction of events within organisation structures and down the supply chain.

Newton’s 2nd law of acceleration is applied to organisational supply chains in the form of

the directional momentum and velocity of the supply chain as related to the volume of

information and matter (physical products) moving through it. The rate of change of

directional velocity is proportional to the force acting on the body (organisational

participant) and in the same direction. In other words, the velocity at which the supply

chain operates is subject to the direction from which the force (instruction) is given. This

is applied within internal organisational design too (CEO down to machine operator).

Thus, if an instruction is given from the consumer (cons.) i.e. a buy signal, it is initiated

upon with velocity down the supply chain from distributor (distr.) to manufacturer (man.)

to supplier (supp.), in this direction. As this instruction is carried down the supply chain

35

in a force-and-reaction manner, momentum decreases as energy is dissipated across

organisational participants and through the extension of the time dimension between

the two ends of the supply chain continuum (consumer to supplier). This same thinking

can be applied to the strategy planning process in most organisations as strategy from

board level is eventually cascaded down organisational structures to individual

objectives and responsibilities.

Newton’s 3rd law of reciprocal actions is now applied to the supply chain in a responsive

manner. Orders are placed, accepted as a response, paid for by the initial buyer and

delivered upon by the respondent distributor, manufacturer or supplier in response.

These force-and-reaction initiation and response mechanisms as per Newton’s 3rd law

are supposed to be equal and opposite in direction. Yet, we know that not all influences

can be measured or predicted, and as such there exists a gap between initial

requirements and delivery, whether that be in supply of goods or a service or delivery of

objectives by an individual within an organisation. Shelton et al. (2003, pp. 353-361)

reflect this design directly to Newtonian-Cartesian scientific principles and the

management theorists that utilised these principles to design organisations;

‘..Newton's thinking had enormous impact, not only on science, but on organisations as

well. The founding fathers of industrialism were greatly influenced by his worldview.

Newton frequently characterized the universe as a great clock-like machine and his

machine metaphor was transferred to the workplace…Data were collected and

analyzed (reductionism); prediction was highly valued (determinism); and what could

not be measured simply did not exist (positivism).

This we know through understanding of organisations over time is due to the complex

nature of the environmental factors that influence initial strategies and orders in the

system, which are of a complex nature and reflects the importance of the leadership

model applied within organisations today and is dealt with in this thesis.

(ii) Findings

Following the above discussion, it is important to note that the organisational designs

within supply chains and up and down organisational structures have been designed

utilising the science of the Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm as a metaphor for

36

organisational design. However, we have reached a rate of change and complexity

within the organisational environment that requires one to develop more appropriate

organisational models.


(i) Dimensionality, matter and the relationship between matter

Following scientific thinking as a metaphor, people within organisations, have been

trained and rewarded according to a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm and have been

changed into inert molar objects, controlled by external forces of reinforcement and

coercion. These organisations, as is evident today, will become increasingly inefficient

and ineffective in their dealings with an increasingly changing, living, self-organising,

global economy (Refer to Section 2.3.1.1). Intervention is required in assisting people to

develop their self-aware consciousness and become self-motion monads within the

organisational structure in order to ensure alignment of organisational models within a

complex environment (Lee, 2004). Kilman (2001, p. 52) states,

‘..that these enlightened participants would then generate quantum thinking, which is

the basis for self-designing, implementing, and improving formal systems and value-

added processes? As members enhance their innate capabilities for creativity,

collaboration and commitment, they will perpetually transform themselves and their

organisations.’

The shift to systems thinking in line with thermodynamics, complexity and chaos

theories, is a shift away from thinking of the parts, which was a Newtonian paradigm

(Refer to Section 2.3.1.1), to a paradigm of a system as a whole, where fractals will

determine the new organisational constructs in a bounded instability (Senge, 1999;

Zohar and Marshall, 2004; Fairholm, 2004), through the interconnectedness of people

(Wheatley, 1992; Kilman, 2001; Fairholm, 2004), aligned to a central vision of ‘meaning’

as the strange attractor (Wheatley, 1999; Zohar, 1999). Therefore, a principle for

quantum organisations must be the ‘..inclusion of consciousness in self-designing

systems (fractals), which will lead to the eternal self-transformation of flexibly designed

organisations’ Kilman (2001, p. 69). Thus, Einsteinian-Quantum science modelling is a

valuable tool to utilise in the design of organisations within complex environments

(Refer to Section 2.3.2.2).

37

Therefore, new organisational systems design will be based on conscious participation

of people within the organisation with physical matter at all levels, aligned to the strange

attractor (defined by Zohar and Wheatley as the central tenet of meaning) around which

organisations will exist within fractal type, self-designing, systems. Furthermore

‘..scientists of chaos, study shapes in motion’ (Wheatley, 1999, p.125), and if one

follows the logic of Einsteinian-Quantum science as a metaphor in designing

organisational systems, for organisations to follow a complex design as per the

Einsteinian-Quantum worldview, then one should study the shapes in motion of

organisations as a system and not as individual parts interacting on a continuum of

force-and-reaction, as per the Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm.

Zohar (1997, p. 21) stated (11 year ago) that, “quantum thinking will be the foundation

for all Trans disciplinary creativity, paradigm shifts, and organisational transformation”.

She notes that;

“The essence of quantum thinking is that it is the thinking that precedes categories,

structures, and accepted patterns of thought, or mind-sets. It is with quantum thinking

that we create our categories, change our structures, and transform our patterns of

thought.”

Wheatley (1999) suggested nine years ago, that a two phase path to shifting this

paradigm in thinking in organisations is required; the first phase is to settle the

paradigm of systems thinking, and the second phase is moving structured

organisational dynamics into the organising dynamics of a living system, through a

relationship of networks to This, writes Wheatley, is through the three elements of

identity, information and relationship; people need to be connected to the fundamental

identity of the organisation or community (who we are, what do we aspire too, how shall

we be together i.e. organisational culture and values) (Wheatley, 1999; Fairholm, 2004),

cross boundary processes must be ‘..explicitly addressed and infused with information’

(Kilman, 2001, Fairholm, 2004), and ‘..relationships (are required) beyond the traditional

boundaries to establish relationships with people anywhere in the system.’ (1999, p.

131), through empowered and empowering interactions between each other (Kilman,

2004), to be successful this will require a fundamental shift in ones understanding of

38

relationship (Jaworski, 1996; Fairholm, 2004) between organisational participants within

the bounds of legal entities, and within the framework of a systems view of supply

chains.

Yet the above (social sciences) authors have had little success in changing the

paradigm of organisational design. More recently H.L. Lee a Professor of Operations,

Information, and Technology at the Stanford Graduate School of Business in Stanford,

California, and the co-director of the Stanford Global Supply Chain Management

Forum, has started to express views within the engineering field of organisational

design that support an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview. Lee (2004) suggests (although

not directly linking his thinking to an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview) that to align

supply chains, the following must apply;

• Provide all partners with equal access to forecasts, sales data, and plans

• Clarify partners' roles and responsibilities to avoid conflict.

• Redefine partnership terms to share risks, costs, and rewards for improving supply

chain performance

• Align incentives so that players maximise overall chain performance while also

maximizing their returns from the partnership.

Thus the ‘new’ sciences worldview, although not directly linked as the driving factor, is

beginning to permeate other sciences as the only way to manage complexity in supply

chains.

(ii) Findings

Einsteinian-Quantum physics in its modelling of complexity through interrelatedness of

all things and the fractal patterns it produces, within a systems view is suggested as a

metaphor for self-organisational design, required to manage in complex environments.

People, their empowered freedom to think, interrelate to each other, guided by a central

tenet of shared meaning is at the core of this new self-organising (fractal) design. As

people move in an out of these new structures (patterns), defined by trust in performing

at the highest level in obtaining a central goal that is relevant and has meaning for all

(Zohar, 2007), they will redefine the patterns of organisational systems.

39


Rigid structures and processes of command and control within and between

organisations which are tied together with disparate systems to control the flow of

information are becoming seemingly inadequate to deal with a complex world that is

changing at warp speed. These structures and categories to design, manage and lead

organisations now seem to have been ‘..formulated for life in simpler times when

organisations were viewed as stable entities that functioned in a logical, linear,

predictable manner’ (Shelton et al., 2003, pp. 353:361). Table 2.3, below is a summary

of models that link the ideas as proposed in this section to scientific constructs (Refer to

Tables 2.1. and 2.2), and directs the Einsteinian-Quantum world view towards a more

definitive implication for self-organising (fractal) patterns within organisational

modelling.

TABLE 2.3. SUMMARY PARADIGM ASPECT 1:

IMPLICATION OF EINSTEINIAN-QUANTUM SCIENTIFIC MODELS ON ORGANISATIONAL MODELS

Newtonian -

Cartesian

Organisation

design

Einsteinian -

Quantum

organisation

design

Quantum

Physics

models

Process of

org.

modelling

(inputs)

Org.

theories -

physical

aspects/

models

Org. design

implication

for (outputs)

The

unconscious

administration of

a rigidly

structured linear

organisation

The conscious

self-

management of

a flexibly

designed

organisation

within a

multidimension

al systems

view.

Compliment

-arity,

Uncertainty,

Quantum

tunnelling

Systems

view

Distributed

Empowerm

ent

Innovation

through 360º

thinking

40

Source: Wheatley (1992, 1999), Kilman (2001), Shelton et al.(1999, 2001, 2003)

In explanation of Table 2.3 above, the relative positions of the physical aspects of the

change towards an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview within the organisation are shown

The organisational process change (input) of; a systems view, relationship and

information as per Wheatley (1999) are linked to organisational theories (physical

aspects/models) of the shift; distributed empowerment, decision making relationships

and integrated systems and processes as per Kilman (2001), and further linked to OD

change (output) implications of; Innovation through 360 thinking, empowerment through

intuitive decision making and quality through shared visioning as per Shelton (1999)

and Shelton et al.(1999, 2003), respectively. These are related to the Einsteinian-

Quantum organisation design, based on the quantum physics models as a metaphor.

The Cartesian-Newtonian physics organisation as defined by its own set of scientific

laws (Newtonian laws), is shown as a juxtaposition point of reference.

The enforced

segregation of

passive

jobholders and

organisational

entities and

divisions across

supply chains

The

empowered

relations among

active

participants

throughout the

value chain.

Holograms,

Non-

seperability,

Bells

theorem

Relationship Decision

making

Relation-

ships

among

members

Empower-

ment

through

intuitive

decision

making

The white space

(and) between

passive

jobholders and

organisations in

value chains

implicitly

ignored.

Cross-boundary

processes as

explicitly

addressed and

infused with

information,

‘and’ as

important.

Double slit

experiment,

Probability,

Super

imposition

Information Integrating

systems

and

processes –

‘and’

Quality

through

shared

visioning

41

2.3.2. Paradigm aspect 2: Meta-physical space (conscious interaction with matter

in space)

Section 2.3.2, discusses possible new metaphysical organisational models based on

the metaphor of scientific modelling, in terms of the meta-physical elements of space

from the perspective of conscious interaction with matter, utilising the thesis of

‘classical’ Newtonian-Cartesian science as a metaphorical base and debating this view

against the ‘new’ science of an Einsteinian-Quantum scientific antithesis.


(i) Separation of mind (consciousness) and matter (physical world)

The perpetuation of Newtonian-Cartesian thinking within organisations has continued to

be expressed within the human resources field over recent years. Many academics and

organisational theorists are of the opinion that leaders unconsciously administer rigid

and inflexible organisations, that employees have been reduced to passive jobholders

who are externally controlled and employed to administrate and not to think, which is

furthermore structured by the segregation of jobholders into organisational roles and

responsibilities (Wheatley 1992, Senge 1994; Zohar 1997, 1999, Kilman, 2001, 2004;

Shelton et al., 2003). Within this paradigm there is no room for conscious interaction

between spiritual or consciousness dimensions and the physical aspects of

organisational life in applying their individual creative thought processes to a changing

environment.

Within the social sciences, as far back as Taylor in 1911, when he published the

Principles of scientific management which sought to bring about predictability and

control to the management of organisations through a reductionist, deterministic and

positivist approach (Shelton et al., 2003; Fairholm, 2004). Fayols set of management

skills; planning, organising, commanding, coordinating and controlling, also from the

early nineteen hundreds, has supported these principles and introduced an

environment that is aligned to a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm that seeks to separate

individual conscious interaction from the physical running of the organisation, by

controlling the finite aspects through the predictability and control these finite measures

brought to management. These principles have been ‘..widely used (within

42

management and leadership) for almost a hundred years’ (Shelton et al., 2003, pp.

353-361) and have separated individual leadership skills from the application of self-

motion, monadic thinking within organisations requiring these complex skills to manage

and lead within a complex environment.

(ii) Findings

In a world of constant change and flux, people cannot be lead and managed with tools

that are for a predictable, deterministic set of circumstances. Organisations have to

think differently. To think differently, organisational leaders have to understand how

their people; think, create categories, relate and organise in a changing world. Thus, a

new worldview is necessary.


(i) Relationship between consciousness and matter

Zohar contends that a paradigm shift in the way we think is needed before we can

change organisational models, and that this thinking is based in the Quantum realm of

conscious participation, she contends that; “Quantum thinking is the link between the

brain’s creativity, organisational transformation and leadership” (Zohar 1997, p. 21).

An explanation of how this interaction between consciousness and matter affects our

ability to transform our organisations is based in an understanding of the brain function.

The human brain forms a rhythmic wave pattern from rapid oscillations of firing

neutrons across the ‘corpus coliseum’, which then integrates the left (analytical) and

right (creative) brain, this pattern presents itself in the form of a multi-dimensional image

of a meaningful thought, category, or paradigm (Barton, 1994; Horgan, 1994).

In chaos theory terms – where particles in chaos or disequilibrium will form into a

pattern when observed over time, which includes an evolving feedback loop or an

iterative pattern (fractal) or process from this one thought. The strange attractor in the

human brain is a rhythmic wave. In essence this means that through unsettling the

equilibrium, we create a state of chaos that will naturally through the process of strange

attraction form into an iterative process or pattern/fractal of meaning, including natural

control through the feedback loop inherent in this design.

43

This is an important insight when linking conscious thought to organisation learning and

physical experiences of this in behaviour and artefacts, such as processes, structures

and even products. Bohm, a prominent scientist and professor of theoretical physics,

and a collaborator of Einsteins in the 1950’s, synchronised his work on non-locality and

consciousness. Bohm (1980), suggested that both the material world and

consciousness are part of a single unbroken totality of movement. Bohm further

illustrated this in a discussion related too, and recorded by Jaworski (1996, p.81);

“At present people create barriers between each other by their fragmentary thought.

Each one operates separately. When these barriers have dissolved, then there arises

one mind, where they are all one unit, but each person also retains his or her

individual awareness’s (sic). That one mind will still exist even when they are separate,

and when they come together, it will be as If they never separated. It is actually a

single intelligence that operates, that works with people who are moving in relationship

with one another…The separation between them is not blocking. They are all pulling

together. If you had a number of people who really pulled together and worked

together in this way, it would really be remarkable. They would stand out so much that

everyone would know they are different.”

This is the implicative theory of the non-local affect for human interaction based on

Bell’s theorem of atomic particles. Simonton (1984, p. 134) writes that, “in the course of

Western civilisation the most eminent thinkers have tended to be contemporaries of the

greatest creators in philosophy, literature and music”, Simonton refers to this as

‘Zeitgeist’, the spirit of the times, which shapes thinking patterns across disciplines and

impacts the worldview.

(ii) Findings

The Einsteinian-Quantum worldview gives one the tools to model organisational

complexity by. Central to this, is the inclusion of conscious participation by people at all

levels of the organisation and between organisations to creatively solve complex

problems in a symbiotic relationship systems view of the world.

44


Einsteinian-Quantum Organisational models based on this review of literature, will be;

managed by a central tenet of meaning the ‘strange attractor’, and as such will be

fractal in nature (self-organising and self-controlling), managed by the conscious

participation of internally committed people through relationships between people and

the physical state around them resulting in self-designing systems (visions, strategies,

processes, structures, controls). Table 2.4, reflects the gap in thinking as reviewed in

current literature, between the principles of the two duelling paradigms in conscious

organisational terms.

TABLE 2.4: SUMMARY PARADIGM ASPECT 2

IMPLICATION OF EINSTEINIAN-QUANTUM SCIENTIFIC MODELS ON META-PHYSICAL

ORGANISATIONAL MODELS

Newtonian -

Cartesian

Organisation

design

Einsteinian -

Quantum

organisation

design

Quantum

Physics

models

Process of

org.

modelling

(inputs)

Org. theories -

metaphysical

aspects/models

Org. design

implication

(outputs)

The

organisation

as passive

jobholders

following

official

procedures.

Organisat-

ions as

conscious

participants

in self-

designing

processes.

Chaos

theory,

Self-

organising

structures,

Strange

attractors

Identity of

central

meaning

Value adding

Processes:

controlled and

improved

Change

through self-

organising

The

exclusion of

conscious-

ness in the

design of

formal

systems.

The

inclusion of

conscious-

ness in self-

designing

systems.

Field theory,

Delayed

choice

phenom-

enon.,

Quantum

potential

Identity of

central

meaning

Formal systems:

Strategy,

structure and

reward

Respons-

ibility

through

values

45

Newtonian -

Cartesian

Organisation

design

Einsteinian -

Quantum

organisation

design

Quantum

Physics

models

Process of

org.

modelling

(inputs)

Org. theories -

metaphysical

aspects/models

Org. design

implication

(outputs)

Source: Wheatley (1992, 1999), Kilman (2001), Shelton (1999) and Shelton et al. (2001,

2003)

In explanation of Table 2.4 above, the meta-physical aspects of conscious interaction

within the organisational environment are linked to the scientific paradigms of

Newtonian-Cartesian and Einsteinian-Quantum organisational design (to show the

juxtaposed relative position) as per Kilman (2001). In this table, Quantum physics

models (Shelton et al., 2001, 2003) are presented to show the metaphor from which

these juxtaposed OD positions are drawn. The change process (inputs) of

organisational modelling as per Wheatley (1992, 1999), organisational theories

(metaphysical aspects/models) of this change (Kilman, 2001) and the OD implications

(outputs) of this change (Shelton et al. 2001, 2003), respectively, are shown as

reflective of an Einsteinian-Quantum organisational design shift within an organisational

setting.

2.3.3. Summary of Models based on scientific discovery

Quantum theory as a metaphor, forces a paradigm shift in the way that one must think,

innovate, form structures and engage in new ‘people-collectives’ or organisations and

points to the leadership skills required to introduce this change.

The understanding that people are also self-motion monads is in itself a scientific

breakthrough. The brain’s interaction being of a quantum nature, and therefore guided

The external

control of

passive

jobholders.

Objectives

defined by

job role and

designation.

The internal

commitment

of active

participants.

Planck's

constant,

Bose-

Einstein

condensate,

Electro

magnetic

fields

Identity of

central

meaning

Knowledge

growth –

personal

development

Motivation

through

Response-

Ability

46

by quantum principles gives organisational scientists a physical tool beyond pure

psychology to model human interactions by. This has enormous implications for

organisational thinking and design. However, before any transformation can occur, the

governing principles of guiding visions, sincere values and organisational beliefs must

be in place and are paramount in restructuring organisations (Wheatley, 1999;

Fairholm, 2004). Furthermore, Wheatley (1999, p. 144:146), highlights two fundamental

shifts that organisations need to make to become quantum thinking organisations, that

operate in this new structure. The first shift must be a shift to systems thinking and the

second shift moves structured organisational dynamics into the organising dynamics of

a living system.

From the above information it follows that, from Wheatley (1999), Jaworski (1996),

Kilman (2001) and supported previously in this dissertation by Zohar (1992, 1999),

Shelton et al. (2001, 2003) Zohar et al. (2004) and Fairholm (2004), a fundamental

element of ‘Quantum organisations’ (Kilman, 2001), is the ability to; create a strange

attractor around meaning and identity, develop a fractal organisation through

relationships throughout the system, create a self sustaining environment that can

change within the context of the environment and within this manage themselves

through self-closing feedback loops managed by open ended information flows,

creating bounded instability at the edge of chaos which is the place for creativity and

change leading to innovation within organisations, thus managing uncertainty and

complexity. Organisations need to relinquish the bounds of Newtonian-Cartesian

thinking of command and control and shift their thinking into an Einsteinian-Quantum

paradigm of systems and bounded instability (fractal) thinking (cha-ordic) (Pellissier,

2003) to re-define and re-invent themselves into Quantum organisations.

In Table 2.5., Newtonian-Cartesian organisation modelling categories have been

aligned to Einsteinian-Quantum organisation modelling categories (to show the

juxtaposed positioning of the two organisational designs) and linked to both physical

and meta-physical organisational theories, as adapted from Kilman (2001), linked to the

Wheatley’s (1999) quantum change process, and the Shelton (1999, 2003) quantum

skills model through the same scientific base and organisational model constructs

(Refer to Sections 2.2. and 2.3).

47

In the following Section (2.4) the strange attractor around meaning and identity, to

ensure the fractal patterns (bounded instability) is explored in depth as the value

systems that allow for self-organisational decisions to be made by organisational

participants, thereby ensuring the bounds in which these new fractal organisational

designs can sustainably exist.

48

TABLE 2.5: SUMMARY PARADIGM ASPECT 1&2: CHANGE IMPLICATION OF AN EINSTEINIAN-QUANTUM SCIENTIFIC MODEL ON THE ORGANISATIONAL MODEL

Newtonian - Cartesian

Organisation Design

Einsteinian - Quantum

Organisation Design

Quantum Physics

Models

Shelton Skills

Model

Constructs

Definition of

Quantum skills

Process of

organisational

change (input)

Org. theories -

metaphysical

aspects/models

Organisational

design implication

(output)

Physical (organisational design)

The unconscious

administration of a

rigidly structured linear

organisation

The conscious self-

management of a

flexibly designed

organisation within a

multidimensional

systems view.

Complimentarity,

Uncertainty,

Quantum tunnelling

Quantum

Thinking

Think

paradoxically

Systems view Distributed

Empowerment

Innovation through

360º thinking

The enforced

segregation of passive

jobholders and

organisational entities

and divisions across

supply chains

The empowered

relations among active

participants throughout

the value chain.

Holograms,

Non-seperability,

Bells theorem

Quantum

Knowing

Know intuitively Relationship Decision making

Relationships among

members

Empowerment

through intuitive

decision making

The white space (and)

between passive

jobholders and

organisations in value

chains implicitly

ignored.

Cross-boundary

processes as explicitly

addressed and infused

with information, ‘and’

as important.

Double slit

experiment,

Probability,

Super imposition

Quantum Seeing See intention-ally Information Integrating systems and

processes – ‘and’

Quality through

shared visioning

Meta-physical (continual conscious interaction in running the organisation)

The organisation as

passive jobholders

following official

procedures.

Organisations as

conscious participants

in self-designing

processes.

Chaos theory,

Self-organising

structures,

Strange attractors

Quantum

Trusting

Trusting life’s

processes

Identity of central

meaning

Value adding

Processes: controlled

and improved

Change through

self-organising

The exclusion of

consciousness in the

design of formal

The inclusion of

consciousness in self-

designing systems.

Field theory,

Delayed choice

phenomenon,

Quantum Acting Act responsibly Identity of central

meaning

Formal systems:

Strategy, structure and

reward

Responsibility

through values

49

Source: Adapted from Wheatley (1999), Kilman (2001), Shelton (1999), Shelton et al. (2001, 2003).

Note: See Table 2.1. and 2.2 for scientific categories

systems.

Quantum potential

The external control of

passive jobholders.

Objectives defined by

job role and

designation.

The internal

commitment of active

participants.

Plancks constant,

Bose-Einstein

condensates,

Electro magnetic

Quantum Feeling

Feel vitally alive Identity of central

meaning

Knowledge growth –

personal development

Motivation through

Response-Ability

Organisational Philosophy

The eventual death of

one absolute universe

The external self-

organisation of

relativistic universes

Exclusion principle,

Scattered matrix

diagram,

M Theory of

everything

Quantum being In relationship Systems view Systems view of

organisational internal &

external participants

Partnership through

dialogue

50

2.4. Values

Section 2.3, discussed the need for bounded-instability (fractal patterns), these fractal

patterns are held in place by strange attractors which are referred to as the central tenets

of meaning and identity (Refer to Section 2.3.3), within organisations. Following on from

Section 2.3 where new organisational models were defined, based on a new premise of

Einsteinian-Quantum scientific models as a metaphor (Refer to Section 2.4), following the

paradigm shift model process (as defined in Section 6.4, Chapter 6), reflects the resultant

value systems that need to be in place to ensure that boundaries are placed around the

model to ensure its sustainability, thus suggesting that the central tenets of meaning and

identity (strange attractors) are indeed the value systems of the organisation and of its

people component as they form new self-designing organisational patterns.

Section 2.4., deals with reviewing changes in relevant values in line with a change in

paradigm as modelled in the cultural paradigm shift model (defined in Section 6.4,

Chapter 6). Values are the qualifiable and quantifiable criteria we use to measure success

and inclusion within the defined models as associated with our scientific paradigm. This

section will through review of current literature, (refer to Figure 2.4), relate sets of values

as associated to the classical Newtonian-Cartesian scientific paradigm and organisational

model against the new Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm and its set of values as

associated with the new organisational models (Refer to Section 2.3).

Figure 2.4: Shift in values based on shifts in scientific paradigms (Paradigm shift model Refer

to Section 6.4)


Models

Values

Behaviour






Interrelationship (Organisational

values)



(New value aspects of human

interaction)

51

2.4.1. Paradigm aspect 1: Physical Space

Section 2.4.1, discusses value systems in line with organisational models based on

science in terms of physical space from the perspective of; dimensionality, matter and the

relationship between matter (Inter-relatedness of objects across space and time), from the

perspective of the thesis of a Newtonian-Cartesian and then to test this thesis against an

anti-thesis of ‘new’ science from an Einsteinian-Quantum scientific view.



The basic tenet (value) of modern capitalist business in the twenty first century is still

underpinned by the great economist Adam Smith’s (1776) view of the economic motive for

companies – to make profit (Zohar et al. 2004). ‘..Management practices, all too

frequently, are still reflective of an outdated seventeenth-century worldview - a worldview

that has led to three primary organisational learning disabilities that are pervasive in

contemporary organisations: fragmentation; competition; and reactivity’ (Robbins; 2003, p.

573).

Beyond the basic assumptions of capitalism there are unconscious assumptions that

‘..each agent or corporation is an island unto itself whose actions have no unwanted

consequences, and whose interests are under it’s own self control…without regard to or

concern for wider issues’ (Zohar et al., 2004, p.11). This fragmentation (as per Robbins,

2003), can be related to organisational modelling based on the separation of parts

through a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm (Refer to Section 2.3), leading to an internal

measurement focus within organisations. Gummesson (2006, p.170), argues that this is

internal measurement is ‘..is treated on the conditions of a measurement technique

instead of demanding the technique to treat the phenomenon with respect for its unique

properties.’ Gummesson further suggests examples of how realism is curbed, in

assumptions made that

‘..customers, products and quality are alike, that services and relationships are

inconsequential, and that factors other than those included in the collected data remain

static (ceteris paribus). Furthermore, individual companies and customers are reduced to

masses, described as averages and distributions’ (Gummesson, 2006, p. 170)

52

Gummesson (2006) furthermore states that after all his reduction of information into

deterministic parts, validity and relevance have evaporated and only the academic

reliability criterion remains.

The concern with a deterministic and one dimensional approach to organisational design,

is that the values associated become ‘selfish’ (Zohar et al., 2004) and lead to a continual

search for more and more finite measures within the current system or paradigm leading

to learning inefficiencies, as ‘..problems are addressed and errors are corrected using

only past routines and present policies’ (Robbins, 2003, p. 573). Werman, (2000, p.39)

states that; ‘..all along we had been trying to control the outcomes by forcing artificial

structure and measures upon the discrete aspects of the plan’. Wheatley, translates

Newtonian-Cartesian thinking into deterministic values within an organisation, when she

states;

‘In organisations, we are very good at measuring activity. In fact, that is primarily what we

do. Fractals suggest the futility of searching for even finer measures that concentrate on

separate parts of the system. There is never a satisfying end to this reductionist search,

never an end point where we finally know everything about even that one small part of the

system’ (1999, p. 125).

The researcher suggests a number of the capitalistic value measures associated with a

purely Newtonian-Cartesian view of the world, in which objects and not people are aligned

to deliver on profit motives, driven by shareholder value requirements, where the focus is

internal and not on the system that supports the organisation, does not take into account

the impact the organisation has on the system (Wheatley, 1999; Zohar et al., 2004;

Gummesson, 2006; Fairhaven, 2006). These values are purely profit driven and mainly

take the form of strategy measures that are focused on a goal of financial returns, limited

by financial reporting accounting guidelines, supporting the view that ‘..business today is

killing business because it is locked into a short-term problem-solving, profit-maximising

mentality’ (Zohar, 2004).

These limitations are shown, in Figure 2.5 below, where the values of; shareholder value

add (SVA) is measured in terms of financial reward (driven by private-equity), where time

scales are now measured in yearly cycles by shareholders, company boards and

executive committees (excel.) are setting strategy and realigning this strategy based on

53

complex environmental changes every six months, focused on efficiency and a return on

investment measure (ROI), furthermore management is utilising budgets, objectives and

reactive tactical measures managed in quarterly terms based on return on activity (RO

Act.) and suppliers are now managed through orders and call-offs on a monthly, weekly

and daily basis measured by return on value (RO Val.). All of these methods, suggesting

that efficiency and speed of the supply chain is the answer to pressure being exerted from

the top down, following a Newtonian-Cartesian worldview. Lee (2004), supports this in

saying that;

‘The holy grails of supply chain management are high speed and low cost - or are they?

Though necessary, they aren't sufficient to give companies a sustainable competitive

advantage over rivals. Consider these disturbing statistics: Though U.S. supply chains

became significantly faster and cheaper between 1980 and 2000, product markdowns owing

to excess inventory jumped from 10% to 30% of total units sold - while customer satisfaction

with product availability plummeted.’

Thus shareholders have become the customers, in a system driven by a profit motive.

Figure 2.5: Financial and time line value measures associated with a Newtonian-

Cartesian paradigm

Val

ue m

easu

re

time

shareholder value

vision + values + strategy

budget + objectives

orders / call- offs

1Y � 6M 6M � 1Q 1Q � 1M$ + MS + t 5Y � 1Y

shareholder board / exco. management suppliers

$ - financial � reward (SVA)

fiscal time scales, reporting, short term structural

change � efficiency (ROI)

tactical + reactionary � activity (ROAct.)

cost focus� value (ROVal.)

54

Kilman (2001) supports a view that values associated with measuring the organisation

have lead to an unconscious administration, devoid of new ‘thinking’, of a rigidly

structured organisation measured through the centralisation of power and value measures

that are quantifiable back to shareholder value add and efficiency. The enforced

segregation of passive jobholders in separate organisational entities in the system across

supply chains (Refer to Section 2.3) is formalised through legal relationships, hierarchy

and organisational design and, the value of this, is measured through rigid quantifiable

metrics associated with preset ranges of demand and supply times, quality and quantity

(Refer to Section 2.3). In addition the white space between these separate entities and

structures (Refer to Section 2.3) within organisations are woefully managed with disparate

systems and processes, but measured according to the individual entities ability to

manage the throughput within defined quality regimes, through these systems.

(ii) Findings

Newtonian-Cartesian scientific theories have lead to a set of organisational models

focused on the individual organisation within its own separated environment. The

measurement of which has focused on delivering against a profit motive, associated with

individual players in the supply chain, leading to continual action and reactionary events

that further slow down and unsettle the system. As long as these measures, which are

focused on ever finer measures (Wheatley, 1999; Zohar et al., 2004; Lee, 2004;

Gummesson, 2006; Fairhaven, 2006) remain in place they will continue to support an

incorrect business model leading to the eventual collapse of a system that is not

manageable within the speed of change exerted on it from an increasingly unstable

environment, measured in cycles and shapes in motion (Refer to Section 2.3).



Values associated with measuring organisations from an Einsteinian-Quantum world view

suggests that the world operates within multiple dimensions and not linear ones telling us

that the parts are not independent but dependent on the whole. All participants are

connected therefore and that there is no space between them. Thus, suggesting a

movement towards a holistic view of the organisation, within its environment. In support of

a differing view, gives directional input into a way of managing within this new

55

environment. ‘What we need is not reduction of complexity but condensation: to make

each concept, model and theory progressively denser with knowledge. Within the

strategies for grounded theory (Glaser, 2001, 2003), it means that we search for variables

and concepts that absorb the core of a phenomenon – without disfiguring its nature’

Gummesson (2006, p.170).

Heylighen (1988) stated ten years ago that a complex system cannot be separated into a

set of independent elements, hence a reductionist methodology cannot be applied to the

study of complex systems. This is in stark contrast to the continual reductionist

measurement of the individual elements within organisational value chains today.

Heylighen (1988) further highlights that within complex systems the ability to adapt to

change should be measured by its ability to self-organise, by choosing appropriate action

responses to changes in the environment. These action responses are dependent on the

relationships between the parts of the system and should only distinguish patterns of

change if they have an overall effect on the vulnerability of long term survival. Thus

placing these cognitive decisions in the domain of leadership. Heylighen (1998) further

suggests that the cognitive adaptive capability of an organisation depends on two things:

- The system must have at its disposal a set of adequate responses or actions that can

deal with a large variety of perturbations to the system.

- The system must be able to choose the correct combination of actions within the set

that is appropriate for the given perturbation.

To study perturbations to the system in context requires an understanding of sets or

patterns within complex environments. The study of thermodynamics and fractals

suggests that the concept of attractors (Nicolis & Prigogine, 1986; also Kauffman, 1984;

Mandelbrot, 1982 in Heylighen, 1988, Prigogine, 1998), can in general be seen as a

cyclically closed system of processes (self-organisation). Wheatley (1999), suggest that

scientists of chaos theory study shapes in motion over time as opposed to direct

interactions at a point in time and that organisations should be studied in a similar fashion

(Refer to Section 2.3).

The measures of a complex and dynamic system therefore require the measurement of

the patterns within the system (fractal patterns). These patterns are defined within

56

organisational boundaries, and between, as those that can be identified within the holistic

system as having self-closing loops, and which have a dynamic effect on the long-term

survival of an organisation beyond the requirement for shareholder value. The strange

attractor (central tenet) within organisational systems as stated by (Wheatley, 1982 and

Zohar, 1999), allows for understanding changes in context, and is the central identity of a

goal or meaning for organisations and value chains.

Lee (2004); suggests that supply chains within and between organisations, must operate

as a system and suggests the following values as inherent in these organisational value

chains;

• Agility: Organisations (people-collectives) must respond quickly to sudden changes in

supply or demand. They must be able to handle unexpected external disruptions

smoothly and cost-efficiently (self-designing).

• Adaptability: Organisations (people-collectives) must have the adaptability to evolve

over time as economic progress, political shifts, demographic trends, and

technological advances reshape markets (self-organising).

• Alignment: Organisational (people-collectives) must align the interests of all

participating firms in the supply chain with their own (central tenet of meaning). As

each player maximises its own interests, it optimises the chain's performance as well.

(ii) Findings

Following the metaphysical aspects associated with an Einsteinian-Quantum view (Refer

to Table 2.3), where the shift in focus is to the conscious self-management of a flexibly

designed organisation within a multidimensional environment (Wheatley, 1992, 1999;

Kilman, 2001; Shelton et al., 2003; Zohar et al, 2004; Lee, 2004; Fairholm, 2006), the

move away from a pure shareholder value system to an integrated stakeholder value

system, that is in line with systems thinking and would include the entire value chain of

participants having the same vision, mission, aligned strategies and objectives and

measured by greater set of norms and values. This shift diagrammatically is represented

below (Refer to Figure 2.6 and Table 2.4, p. 44), where the stakeholders in a systems

view are aligned through a central tenet of meaning.

57

Figure 2.6: Movement in value measures from Newtonian-Cartesian to

Einsteinian-Quantum

2.4.1.3. Summary (Paradigm aspect 1)

Despite achievements such as the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics during the

past hundred years, natural scientists continue their search for more inclusive, integrative

and unifying theories. M-theory is the latest theory involving 11 dimensions, the goal of

which is to find an all-embracing and unifying theory and according Greene,

..we envision each new theory taking us closer to the elusive goal of truth, but whether

there is an ultimate theory – a theory that cannot be refined further, because it has finally

revealed the workings of the universe at the deepest possible level – is a question no one

can answer’ (2004, p. 328).

Thus, suggesting that in the natural sciences, continuous grappling with uncertainty and

complexity occurs as part of their search for truth, on the other hand the social sciences

quantitative mainstream including the management disciplines, based in Newtonian-

Cartesian thinking of separation of the parts (reductionism) and an outcomes based

(deterministic) approach, are behind in their thinking and feel uncomfortable with

‘..complexity…(and complexity theory)…characterised by non-linear dynamics and the

phenomenon of emergence’ (Gummesson, 2006, p. 170). Wheatley (1992, p. 140:141)

states that; ‘..we social scientists are trying hard to be conscientious, using the

methodologies and thought patterns of seventeenth century science, while the scientists,

stake-

holder

consumersconsumers

familiesfamilies

communitycommunity

employeesemployees

shareholdersshareholders

customerscustomers

distributorsdistributors

supplierssuppliers

shareholder

58

traveling away from us at the speed of light, are moving into a universe that suggests

entirely new ways of understanding’. Gummesson (2006) further supports Wheatley’s

view in that, as much as complexity is not limited to the natural sciences and that the

methods and techniques are largely universal, the link between management and modern

natural sciences is not a priority in management literature. Gummesson (2006, p. 170)

claims that ‘..complexity theory forms new mathematics, a general vocabulary and

grammar, which is sympathetic to all types of phenomena.’

This lack of integration of quantum, complexity and chaos theorising from the natural

sciences into the social sciences is seen as a gap that needs further investigation, and

understanding, so that one can in essence induce from the natural sciences the impact

that this thinking has on the world of social science, in the way one models organisations,

the value systems one uses to manage discreet patterns within a wider systems view and

how individuals interact (Refer to Section 2.4.2) within these structures to ensure

sustainability within this complex environment.

2.4.2. Paradigm aspect 2: Meta-physical space (conscious interaction with matter

in space)

Section 2.3.2, discusses value systems in terms of meta-physical space from the

perspective of; the conscious interaction with matter, as a debate between the

perspectives of a ‘classical’ thesis of Newtonian-Cartesian science against the ‘new’

science of an Einsteinian-Quantum scientific antithesis.



Hunt as related to Zohar (2004), suggests that devoting one’s life to making even more

money for the shareholders isn’t ultimately inspiring. Business in it’s pursuit of the profit

motive is not what humans are about, “Human beings are essentially spiritual creatures.

We are on a lifelong quest for meaning. So our corporate lives exclude what we really

care about.” (‘Shell executive’ in Zohar, 2004). This is in essence what dualism

(Descartes) and the separation of the relationship between physical and conscious

dimensions has caused in organisational life. The values associated with the pure profit

59

motive have excluded values associated with finding one’s own meaning in life and how

that is associated with creating a better business. Plender (2003) in Zohar (2004) states

that (Capitalism) has been hijacked by the values of a financial community that is so pre-

occupied with trading and deal making that that it has lost sight of the purpose of its own

business. There is a crisis of legitimacy in modern capitalism”. Zohar supports his

statement when she says that;

“Very early capitalism was contained within the moral and spiritual vision of

Christianity…But as ethics and values have eroded generally in society…business has

been exposed as a moral quagmire, filled with cheating, fraud and false accounting”

Enron and WorldCom are recent examples of this decay (Zohar et al., 2004, p. 11).

The separation of spiritual from physical aspects within capitalistic business environments

has focused values (measures) onto objects, people are still measured according to the

outputs they produce to support a financially driven motive, because these value

measures are quantifiable and typically take the form of measurable objectives and are

financially based. In support of this understanding, psychoanalysis as viewed by Freud

was to se the human as a biological machine that operates according to mechanical laws

(Shelton, 1999). He further tried to establish a relation between psychoanalysis and

Newtonian mechanics (Capra, 1983, p. 180 in Shelton, 1999, p. 168).

Based on Skinners view of behaviour as a response to external stimuli, Shelton believes

that this view has “greatly influenced organisations (sic), especially in areas of

performance management (motivation, discipline and compensation)” (Shelton, 1999, p.

168). Typically people are hired according to an objective value measure of intelligence;

Intelligence Quotient (IQ). IQ, is a measure of “certain basic and largely inherited spatial,

numerical, and linguistic abilities, but because it was the only measurable intelligence

indicator available, it was taken as a mark of a persons full intelligence” (Zohar and

Marshall, 2004, p.63). However by the 1960s, IQ tests were being questioned, as they

only measured rational, logical, linear intelligence, “…the kind of intelligence used to solve

certain kinds of logical problems and to do certain kinds of strategic thinking. It is the kind

of intelligence nurtured by Western school systems, and it has dominated Western

business” (Zohar and Marshall, 2004, p. 63). Thus supporting and perpetuating the

Newtonian-Cartesian worldview, within an organisational (people collective) context.

60

The result of this thinking Kilman (2001) believes is, that organisations are filled with

passive jobholders following official procedures measured by their ability to measure the

system that seemingly manages the separate parts of the whole. Consciousness is

excluded in this exercise as passive job holders do not add value beyond what is

expected of them to do, as they are measured on the ability to maintain the ‘status quo’ so

that fluctuations will not disturb the system. These passive jobholders are externally

controlled by the profit motive of shareholders and measured on their ability to deliver on

externally set objectives (linked to financial results), in time and within budget (Refer to

Section 2.4.1.1). This regardless of the impact on the wider system, within the

organisation and externally, including the supply chain, the environment and the impact

on society as a whole (Refer to Section 2.4.1.2).

(ii) Findings

The exclusion of consciousness and physical dimensions within organisations today has

created separations in value systems too. People are measured according to the

quantifiable objectivity measures (IQ) that are focused on delivering on external financial

and time delineated motives based in strategies which are delivered from the ‘top down’ in

static organisational structures within official procedures (Kilman, 2001; Zohar et al.,

2004). These values are further substantiated in an organisation supported by the hiring

of individuals based on IQ scores that are adept at logical, deterministic linear intelligence

states, has filled organisations with administrators of systems that lack the ability to think

in multiple dimensions, to strategise in an environment that requires multi-dimensional,

flexible, agile and adaptable thinking within in an uncertain and sometimes chaotic

environment (Pellissier, 1999; Kilman, 2001; Shelton et al., 2001, 2003; Zohar et al.,

2004).

The value of ‘meaning’ of an organisation to the people, which form the organisation and

the environment and system within which it operates, has been lost (Wheatley, 1999).

There seems to be no room for self-actualisation, personal growth, relations between

organisational participants and the ability to think freely and add value in continually

improving the organisation and how it adds meaning to its environment (Kilman, 2001;

Shelton et al., 2001, 2003; Zohar et al., 2004).

61



Zohar (1990) suggests in line with Jung (1969) that ‘..through a wedding of physics and

psychology we are, fully and meaningfully, part of the scheme of things’ (Zohar, 1990,

p.23). Jung (the most respected psychologist of our time) put it into a clearer context

when he wrote that;

‘..sooner or later, nuclear physics and the psychology of the unconscious will draw closer

together as both of them, independently of one another and from opposite directions, push

forward into transcendental territory….Psyche cannot be totally different from matter, for

how otherwise could it move matter? And matter cannot be alien to psyche, for how else

could matter produce psyche? Psyche and matter exist in the same world, and each

partakes of the other, otherwise any reciprocal action would be impossible. If research could

only advance far enough, therefore, we should arrive at an ultimate agreement between

physical and psychological concepts. Our present attempts may be bold, but I believe they

are on the right lines.’ (Jung, 1969, p.261)

Furthermore, when commenting on the synchronous nature of things outside of pure

empirical psychology, Jung noted when commenting on the development of quantum

theory with regards to its break with causality in that it;

‘..shattered the absolute validity of natural law and made it relative.. The philosophical

principle that underlies our conception of natural law is causality. But if the connection

between cause and effect turns out to be only statistically valid and only relatively true, then

the causal principle is only of relative use for explaining natural processes and therefore

presupposes the existence of one or more other factors which would be necessary for an

explanation. This is as much as to say that the connection of events may in certain

circumstances be other than causal, and requires another principle of explanation.’ (Jung,

1952, p. 421 in Jung, 1977, p. 25)

Fornaciari and Dean (2001), state that there is an emerging stream of research exploring

these aspects in organisations and social scientists have started to give attention to

religion and spirituality in organisations (still not a priority – Refer to Section 2.4.1.3).

Shelton’s (1999) model of values associated with Quantum physics principles built on her

understanding of the organisational design implications suggests a link between both

62

psychological and spiritual aspects linking the conscious dimensions of both psychology

and spirituality into the reality of organisational life. Shelton’s view is that Newtonian-

Cartesian based psychological theories are based on the explicate order (inanimate

objects) and that transpersonal theories recognise the invisible or implicate order (spiritual

or quantum domain). Shelton links Quantum physics to a spiritual or conscious link and

states in support of Jung and Zohar that;

‘We have reached a time of integration. We have discovered the common threads running

through philosophy, psychology and physics. We have not, however, transferred this

…knowledge to the workplace…it takes quantum theory out of the realm of mathematical

formulae (physics) and transpersonal psychology out of the realm of abstraction

(metaphysics)’ (Shelton, 1999, p. 171).

Within this approach to apply multi-dimensional thinking to ones worldview based on

quantum principles, Shelton’s quantum skills model includes value constructs associated

with both psychology and spirituality (Refer to Table 2.6 below):

TABLE 2.6. PSYCHOLOGICAL VALUES AND SPIRITUAL PRACTICE

Principle Definition Psychological

Concept

Spiritual

Practice /

Values

Model

(Org. issue &

impact

Quantum

seeing

See intention-

ally

Perception Affirmation Quality through

shared visioning

Quantum

thinking

Think

paradoxically

and visioning

Creativity Visualisation Innovation through

360º thinking

Quantum

feeling

Feel vitally

alive.

Attribution Detachment Motivation through

Response-Ability

Quantum

knowing

Know

intuitively

Intuition Meditation Empowerment

through intuitive

decision making

Quantum

Acting

Act responsibly Synchronicity Mindfulness Responsibility

through values

63

Source: Researchers adaption form Shelton et al. (2001, 2003), Quantum skills model.

Qualifiable metaphysical value constructs as per Shelton et al. (2001, 2003) are emerging

from social scientists who are bringing this thinking into the mainstream, through the

linking of psychological and spiritual value measures. However from a quantifiable

perspective, one is limited by the absence of a robust and meaningful measurement

system to quantify this phenomenon. The link to scientific base elements as a metaphor

can be seen in Table 2.5.

From a quantitative value measure based perspective IQ, (Refer to Section 2.3.4.1), is

associated with rational, linear, deterministic, Newtonian-Cartesian thinking paradigms.

Thus, based on the above discussion requires further investigation into other forms of

psychological value measures of thinking, that are aligned to a multi-dimensional view,

that requires; irrational, intuitive, abstract systems thinking paradigms including the

spiritual values of meaning and higher levels of human endeavour that are associated

with adding value to a greater systems view of the world, where value beyond oneself or

one’s organisation is relevant.

Goldman introduced Emotional Quotient (EQ) into psychology and the social sciences

arena in an attempt to define intelligence beyond pure rational IQ. Defined as ‘..our ability

to access or recognise the situation we are in, to read other peoples and our own

emotions, and to behave appropriately’ (Goleman in Zohar et al., 2004, p. 64), thus EQ

takes ones ability to understand a situation to a different dimension, beyond oneself and

ones own rationality, to a place of inclusion of others, introducing a conscious interaction

measure. EQ also had a strategic impact within business beyond the ability to understand

and motivate people through the emotional impact responses or pro-active stimuli such

emotions evoked, but also because ‘..it became evident that people pursue emotional

strategies as well as rational ones, or at least that there is often emotional contribution to

strategies we form’ (Goldman in Zohar et al., 2004, p. 64).

Quantum

trusting

Trusting Life’s

processes

Resilience Faith Change through

self-organising

Quantum

being

In Relationship Forgiveness Compassion Partnership through

dialogue

64

Thus, EQ, assist individuals in understanding their emotions, and the cause and effect of

these emotions on cognitive decision making processes (Gardner; Avolio; Luthans; May;

Walumbwa, 2005).

Zohar and Marshall (2004), have further established a new element of intelligence

associated with conscious interaction with matter beyond emotions - Spiritual Intelligence

(SQ). Fry and Matherly (2006, p. 4), suggests that spirituality in the workplace is

comprised of two aspects; a sense of calling to one’s work that gives one the feeling of

meaning, and a need to be connected to others and experience membership in a common

causes. In Campbell (2007) a suggested definition from authors prior to Zohar suggest

that spirituality in the workplace can be defined as; ‘..an intangible animating force

involving a state of intimate relationship with a force beyond oneself, an awareness of

one’s inner self and recognition of a connection with other people’ (Fairholm, 1998;

Strack, Fottler, Wheatley and Sodomka, 2002).

In support of this definition, SQ is more recently described as ‘..the intelligence with which

we access our deepest meanings, values, purposes, and highest motivations’ (Zohar et

al., 2004, p. 3). Furthermore, SQ is the intelligence which makes us ask the questions;

why was I born? What is the meaning of my life? Why am I devoting my life to this

relationship or this job or this cause? ‘..It allows us to see the larger context in which

events take place….It gives our lives an overarching canopy of meaning and value’

(Zohar et al., 2004, p. 64).

As opposed to IQ and EQ, where IQ helps one solve physical problems, and EQ as an

adaptive intelligence helps one behave appropriately and to understand the motivations

that drive our behaviour, SQ;

‘..allows us (one) to play an infinite game…it allows us (one) to play with the boundaries

(of our dimensions). It allows us (one) to change the rules or write new ones. It allows us

(one) to criticise (sic) the what-is from the point of view of what-might-be. It is the

intelligence that allows us (one) to imagine possibilities and situations that do not exist yet.

SQ is transformative intelligence that allows us (one) to break old paradigms and to invent

new ones. From its ability to recontextualize (sic) problems and situations and to see them

from a wider point of view, SQ has the ability to dissolve old patterns and old ways of

65

thinking. It has the force to dissolve old motivations and move us (one) on to higher ones’

(Zohar et al., 2004, p.67).

Further to the point of linking physics to conscious interaction, towards the end of the

1990’s neuro-scientists discovered a mass of tissue inside the brain just behind the

temporal lobes that is dedicated to making us ask fundamental questions about meaning

and existence and to make us search for fundamental questions, they named it the God

spot. The God spot is most active when ‘..we have spiritual experiences – a profound

sense of deep love, a deep sense of peace, a sense of unity with existence, profound

beauty. In religious people, the God Spot is active when they feel they are in contact with

the truths of their religion’ (Zohar et al., 2004, p. 68).

Furthermore the brain’s operations are connected to the heart as the body’s central

oscillator, linking emotional states to the congruent operation of the brain waves of beta,

theta and alpha that create a Bose-Einstein condensate wave function, giving one laser-

like-thinking, which is clear and precise and faster than the speed of light (Shelton, 1999).

Shelton, further suggests that this is what allows people to see visions of the future, in

dimensions beyond the four one is physically bound too.

Singer’s research (as related to in Zohar et al., 2004) further allows us to understand the

workings of the physical brain and the wave functions referred to by Shelton (1999).

Based on the wave (40Hz) oscillations within the brain, the brain searches for the

integration of wider meaning, through this wave function, that moves across the brain and

is then affected by our perceptual, or cognitive experiences. This wave function is also

seen to work to unify IQ (the brains expert systems of numeracy, language and our five

senses), EQ (our relational intelligence) and SQ (the search for a wider meaning).

Zohar et al. (2004), see the discovery of SQ is a basic quality of ones humanity, they see

it as a natural potentiality of ones brain, and lies at the heart of ones ability to make sense

of the world. They go on to suggest that it is for this very reason that organisations need

SQ in them to get a deeper sense of organisational identity, a sense of “what they are

about”. The link between the brains processes of developing patterns of meaning (Refer

to Section 2.3.2.2), as associated with Einsteinian-Quantum science, Chaos theory and

66

CAS theory, Zohar et al. (2004), have similarly linked SQ values to CAS values (see

Table 2.7).

Sour

ce:

Zoha

r and

Mars

hall

(200

4, p.

80)

Further to the CAS link between science and the value systems inherent in SQ, Zohar et

al. (2004) have utilised Maslow’s hierarchy of needs to assist in defining the motivation

scales behind the SQ intelligence state, based on Marshall’s scale of motivations,

published in 1997. Table 2.8, below shows this scale of motivations and the associated

SQ values. These empirical values will be utilised in the development of the priority and

weightings given to the Quantum leadership model constructs in chapter 5.

TABLE 2.8. SCALE OF MOTIVATIONS LINKED TO SQ VALUES

Maslow’s scale Motivations Score SQ Process / Values Score

Enlightenment +8 Grace +8

World soul +7 Grace +7

Maslow: peak

experiences/Self-

transcendence

Higher service +6 Compassion +6

Generativity +5 Ask why? +5 Maslow: self-

actualisation

Mastery +4 Reframing +4

Power-within +3 Field independence +3

Gregariousness and

cooperation

+2 Self-awareness +2

TABLE 2.7. COMMON FEATURES OF COMPLEX ADAPTIVE SYSTEMS AND SPIRITUAL

INTELLIGENCE

Complex Adaptive Systems Spiritual Intelligence

Self-organisation Self-awareness

Bounded instability Spontaneity

Emergent Vision and value led

Holistic Holistic

In dialogue with environment Compassion (feeling-with)

Evolutionary mutations Celebration of diversity

Outside control destructive Field-independent

Exploratory Asking why?

Recontextualise environment Reframe

Order out of chaos Positive use of adversity

Humility

Sense of vocation

67

TABLE 2.8. SCALE OF MOTIVATIONS LINKED TO SQ VALUES

Maslow’s scale Motivations Score SQ Process / Values Score

Exploration +1 Spontaneity +1

Higher needs (+) 0 0

Deficiency needs (-)

0 0

Self-assertion -1 Humility -1 Maslow: Belonging

Anger -2 Holism -2

Craving -3 Vision -3

Fear -4 Positive use of

adversity

-4

Maslow: security

Anguish -5 Celebrate diversity -5

Apathy -6 Sense of vocation -6

Guilt and shame -7 Grace -7

Maslow’s survival

Depersonalisation -8 Grace -8

Source: Adapted from Zohar and Marshall (2004 , p. 39, p. 111)

It is at the point of Maslow’s self-transcendence/peak experiences (enlightenment),

beyond the older highest level of Maslow’s self-actualisation that SQ is seen to begin to

operate, and ‘..is what gives us meaning’ (Zohar et al. 2004, p.111). Michie and Gooty

(2005, p. 443), support this finding in their views on authentic leadership, stating that,

‘..authentic leaders will have both self-enhancement and self-transcendent values, but will

give higher priority to self-transcendent values.’ Thus, suggesting that SQ is fundamental

to leadership development. Further to this understanding of intelligence states, Zohar et

al., have suggested value capital categories within which intelligence states have an

organisational (Refer to Table 2.9).

TABLE: 2.9. THREE INTELLIGENCE STATES LINKED TO VALUE CAPITAL OUTCOMES WITHIN

ORGANISATIONS

Capital Intelligence Function

Material Capital IQ: Rational intelligence What I think

Social Capital EQ: Emotional intelligence What I feel

Spiritual Capital SQ: Spiritual Intelligence What I am

Source: Zohar and Marshall (2004, p. 4)

68

In Table 2.9, the capital dimensions help define the norms and values by which we will

create categories in which behaviours are exhibited. Linear planning (what I think) is

guided by the Newtonian-Cartesian psychological Intelligence Quotient (IQ) measure,

which has ‘Financial capital’ implications. Emotional Intelligence (EQ) is used as a

measure or value of company culture (what I feel) and has ‘Social capital’ implications.

Spiritual Quotient (SQ) is seen as the intelligence measure that gives meaning (what I

am) and links personal and organisational values (Zohar et al., 2004).

Within the context of SQ and it’s implications for conscious interaction within the physical

bounds of the organisation, the connectedness of the SQ values to a set of CAS values,

gives a fundamental link as aligned to the paradigm shift model, between the scientific

base of an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview, the psychological qualitative value

motivational drivers from a Maslow perspective and the quantitative value measurement

associated, and in addition the high level categories of organisational impact.

(ii) Findings

There is a spiritual dimension to the conscious interaction with matter (Jung, 1969). Vision

and strategies of organisations within complex environments require value measures that

are beyond Newtonian-Cartesian linear explicit dimensional thinking (Zohar et al., 2004;

Shelton et al., 2003, Gummesson, 2006). To understand the organisation in multiple

dimensions, within an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview, one needs an understanding of the

implicate order of things in understanding the link between self through an intimate

relationship with a force beyond oneself to relationships with others (Fairholm, 1998;

Strack et al., 2002). This understanding is driven by multiple intelligences, with higher

priority given to self-transcendent values (Michie et al., 2005).

2.4.2.3. Summary (Paradigm aspect 2)

The exclusion of consciousness and physical dimensions within organisations today has

created separations in value systems, as people are measured according to the

quantifiable financial and time delineated motives as suggested by Newtonian-Cartesian

mental models, which are reductionist and deterministic, linear based intelligence states

that exist within static organisational structures (Kilman, 2001; Zohar et al., 2004). The

purveyors of this mental model lack the ability to think in multiple dimensions, to strategise

69

in an environment that requires multi-dimensional, flexible, agile and adaptable thinking

within in an uncertain and sometimes chaotic environment (Pellissier, 1999; Kilman, 2001;

Zohar et al., 2004; Shelton et al., 2003; Lee, 2004; Fairholm, 2006). The values that allow

people to think freely and add value in continually improving the organisation and how it

adds meaning to its environment has been lost (Wheatley, 1992, 1999; Kilman, 2001;

Zohar et al., 2004; Shelton et al., 2004). The growth required for self-actualisation, and

the building of relationships between organisational participants, requires value systems

that are beyond Newtonian-Cartesian linear explicit dimensional thinking (Zohar et al.,

2004; Shelton et al., 2003, Gummesson, 2006). One needs an understanding of the

implicate order of things in understanding the link between self through an intimate

relationship with a force beyond oneself to relationships with others (Fairholm, 1998;

Strack et al., 2002). This growth in people that allows for conscious interaction with matter

(Jung, 1969), is driven by self-transcendent values (Michie et al., 2005) and revealed in

the Einsteinian-Quantum archetypes (examples) of OD (Kilman, 2001).

2.4.3. Summary of values required to sustain models based on scientific discovery

The shift away from a pure Newtonian-Cartesian explicit value measurement system

towards a systems view (Wheatley, 1999; Zohar et al., 2004, Shelton et al., 2003; Senge,

1990, 1994, 2006); of the world and the inclusion of implicit value measures, within an

Einsteinian-Quantum worldview has enormous implications for people-based collectives

(organisations) in society today (Kilman, 2001). The implication beyond modelling new

organisational forms, to the ability to lead and manage complex adaptive people systems,

through the values associated with these models, now imply that organisations will

become bolder in their attempts to develop organisations based on a systems view of the

world including all aspects of Material (Financial), Social (People) and Spiritual

(Conscious link) capital (Zohar et al., 2004), that can deal within complex environments

(Kilman, 2001; Lee, 2004; Fairholm, 2006).

These implications force organisations to take into account IQ, EQ and SQ as a

quantitative value basis to best deal with complexity within the most strategic factors of

production, the people within them. To understand and lead them in ways that allow for

the ability for individuals to utilise their intelligence states fully in the search of greater

meaning within organisations and the linking of personal values with organisational value

70

systems to add greater value to the world around them (Wheatley, 1999; Zohar et al.,

2004, Shelton et al., 2003, Michie et al., 2005). These aligned value systems will elicit a

personal behavioural response in line with determining dynamic strategies in line with a

continually changing environment (Kilman, 2001).

Table 2.10 below, represents the summary of the implication of Einsteinian-Quantum

scientific models on the organisational value systems as discussed in Section 2.4, through

the mental models this science invokes as per Section 2.3. The Table lists these values in

line with the author’s (Wheatley, 1992, 1999; Kilman, 2001; Shelton et al., 2003, Zohar et

al. 2004) value models and aligns them to the physical organisation design aspects, the

meta-physical conscious interaction of people within the process of running the

organisation and then overall in terms of an organisational philosophy (Kilman, 2001).

The value systems (Refer to Section 2.4), are extremely important as these are the

elements that define the behavioural responses that this thesis serves to define, model

and create a leadership model and measurement instrument for. These behavioural

responses will be dealt with in chapter 4, with a specific focus on leadership and the

measurement of the behaviour associated with a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm versus

an Einsteinian-Quantum leadership behavioural paradigm.

71

TABLE 2.10: SUMMARY PARADIGM ASPECT 1&2- CHANGE IMPLICATION OF AN EINSTEINIAN-QUANTUM SCIENTIFIC MODEL ON ORGANISATIONAL VALUE SYSTEMS

Organisational design Science Organisational Modelling Values

Newtonian - Cartesian

Organisation Design

Einsteinian –

Quantum

Organisational

Design

Quantum Physics

principles

Shelton

Skills

Model

constructs

Shelton

Quantum

skills

Process of

org.

modelling

(inputs)

Org. theories -

metaphysical

aspects/models

Organisatio

nal design

implication

(outputs)

Psyche Spiritual

practice

Spiritual

Quotient

Physical (organisational design)

The unconscious

administration of a rigidly

structured linear

organisation

The conscious self-

management of a

flexibly designed


multidimensional

systems view.

Complimentarity,

Uncertainty,

Quantum tunnelling

Quantum

Thinking

Think

paradoxically

Systems view Distributed

Empowerment

Innovation

through 360º

thinking

Creativity Visualisation Vision &

Value lead &

Holistic

The enforced segregation of

passive jobholders and

organisational entities and

divisions across supply

chains

The empowered

relations among

active participants

throughout the value

chain.

Holograms,

Non-seperability,

Bells theorem

Quantum

Knowing

Know

intuitively

Relationship Decision making

Relationships

among members

Empowerment

through intuitive

decision making

Intuition Meditation Humility

The white space (and)

between passive jobholders

and organisations in value

chains implicitly ignored.

Cross-boundary

processes as

explicitly addressed

and infused with

information, ‘and’ as

important.

Double slit

experiment,

Probability,

Super imposition

Quantum

Seeing

See intention-

ally

Information Integrating

systems and

processes –

‘and’

Quality through

shared visioning

Perception Affirmation Asking why?

Reframing

Meta-physical (continual conscious interaction in running the organisation)

The organisation as passive

jobholders following official

procedures.

Organisations as

conscious participants

in self-designing

processes.

Chaos theory,

Self-organising

structures,

Strange attractors

Quantum

Trusting

Trusting life’s

processes

Identity of

central

meaning

Value adding

Processes:

controlled and

improved

Change through

self-organising

Resilience Faith Self-

awareness,

Spontaneity,

Positive use

of diversity

The exclusion of The inclusion of Field theory, Quantum Act Identity of Formal systems: Responsibility Synchronicity Mindfulness Field

72

Source: Adapted from Wheatley (1999), Kilman (2001), Shelton (1999), Shelton et al. (2001, 2003)

Note: See Table 2.1. and 2.2 for scientific categories

consciousness in the design

of formal systems.


designing systems.

Delayed choice

phenomenon,

Quantum potential

Acting responsibly central

meaning

Strategy,

structure and

reward

through values independent

The external control of

passive jobholders.

Objectives defined by job

role and designation.

The internal


participants.

Plancks constant,

Bose-Einstein

condensates,

Electro magnetic

Quantum

Feeling

Feel vitally

alive

Identity of

central

meaning

Knowledge

growth –

personal

development

Motivation

through

Response-Ability

Attribution Detachment Bounded

instability

Organisational philosophy

The eventual death of one

absolute universe

The external self-

organisation of


Exclusion principle,

Scattered matrix

diagram,

M Theory of

everything

Quantum

being

In relationship Systems view Systems view of

organisational

participants and

external

Partnership

through dialogue

Forgiveness Compassion Compassion

(feeling-with)

73

2.5. Gap analysis

From the literature review on Newtonian physics and the ‘new’ science of Quantum

physics, two definitive paradigms exist with guiding principles in direct opposition to

each other. The gaps between these paradigms, as reviewed in current literature, form

the initial categories for basing assumptions on, for a change in a paradigm for

leadership. These gaps are defined below in line with the previous discussion utilising

the paradigm shift model (Refer to Section 6.4), in terms of science, models and values.

2.5.1. Science

From a scientific base (Refer to Section 2.2) it is clear that we have two duelling

paradigms. The Newtonian-Cartesian science of four dimensions, the universe filled

with stationary inert molar object and space as flat and empty. As a result of this linear

and logical understanding of the universe, the theory of absolute space and time

became the basis for a very rational, reduction based and deterministic approach to

science. This view of the world, in western society, has remained virtually unchanged

for the past two and a half thousand years and has had a profound influence on the

social sciences (Wheatley, 1992; Shelton et al., 2001, 2003; Kilman, 2001; Fairholm,

2004).

In opposition, an Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm of up to eleven dimensions, the

universe as a motion of continually moving and vibrating self-motion monads (Kilman,

2001) and space as filled with matter and energy between these monads elicits, a clear

response of a paradigm shift in the implicit basic assumptions that make up the

constitutive mechanisms of the world around us and how we interpret these

assumptions in the construction of our world (Refer to Table 2.1) including the social

constructions.

Beyond the fundamental physical science of space, objects and time, the separation of

consciousness from matter from a meta-physical perspective, has material impact on

the way that we as human beings with consciousness, interact with physical matter.

In a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm, the dualistic separation of consciousness from

matter is profound in its basic premise. The Newtonian-Cartesian premise that; each

74

object in space and time always has deterministic certainty in terms of outcomes, molar

objects are fundamentally separated by the emptiness of space, and that there is a

separation of conscious interaction with matter, has been challenged by they

Einsteinian-Quantum scientific discoveries which through scientific investigation and

experimentation in the Quantum and Cosmological environments show a differing

premise. The realisation that there is a monastic unification between consciousness and

matter, that there is uncertainty in terms of outcomes with self-motion monads and that

there are eternal connections between self-motion monads (Kilman, 2001), has

enormous implications for the world around us, especially for the interaction of people

within people-collectives (organisations), that up to now have been seen as inert molar

objects, externally controlled, and reactionary (Refer to Table 2.2). Thus, the new

science of Quantum physics and associated elements of thermodynamics, chaos

theory, complex adaptive systems and non-linear dynamics opens ups a new worldview

that one can use as a metaphor for modelling our mental worldview as well as the

physical manifestation of this worldview in organisational design and modelling

(Wheatley, 1992; Shelton et al., 2001, 2003; Kilman, 2001; Fairholm, 2004).

2.5.2. Models

From a modelling perspective (Refer to Section 2.3), built on our understanding of

science it is clear that we have a fundamental shift within organisations and specifically

how people fit within this model as active conscious participants

The Newtonian-Cartesian world view has structured organisational modelling based on

the separation of parts. Within his fundamental science it is reflected in an unconscious

administration of a rigidly structured organisation, forcing the segregation of

organisational participants into divisions and separate structures within organisational

boundaries and across extended supply chains. The space between these internal

participants and between the external organisations is implicitly ignored and only seen

as relevant once a reaction to an external stimulus is required (Shelton et al., 2001,

2003; Kilman, 2001; Fairholm, 2004).

In opposition to this philosophy is the Einsteinian-Quantum worldview. Based in its

scientific premise as a metaphor to understand organisations, this worldview sees

75

organisations as stakeholder driven, multi-dimensional, 360º systems, integrated

through the empowered relations among active participants (people) up and down the

value chain (Wheatley, 1992, 1999; Kilman, 2001; Shelton et al., 2001, 2003; Lee 2004,

Gummeson, 2006). Where a shared vision and value system, infused with shared

information, forms boundaries and guides intuitive cross-functional decision making,

capable of enabling self-designing cross-boundary processes (Kilman, 2001) that

ensure dynamic changes can occur in the system when external environmental factors

affect the bounded instability (fractals) created (Refer to Figure 2.3 and Table 2.3). This

paradigm relies on the internal active participation of people (Kilman, 2001; Darling et

al., 2001, 2004) to make this environment work, to guide these participants a central

tenet of meaning (Wheatley, 1992, 1999) or values is required and is the next step in

our cultural paradigm shift model.

2.5.3. Values

From a values determination perspective (Refer to Section 2.4), the shift away from a

pure Newtonian-Cartesian explicit value measurement system towards an Einsteinian-

Quantum view of the world and the inclusion of implicit value measures has measurable

implications for people-based collectives (organisations) in society today.

The Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm where; the associated quantitative measures of

inert molar objects (physical elements) and reactions between these internal

organisational objects are driven by shareholder value requirements, as the

fundamental components of OD, has shifted with the introduction of an Einsteinian-

Quantum world view. Within the Newtonian-Cartesian value context, organisational

participants value-add is measured purely on their ability to deliver on deterministic,

quantitative and rational (IQ) objectives (Wheatley, 1992; Shelton et al., 2001, 2003;

Kilman, 2001; Zohar et al., 2001, 2004) as set from a shareholders perspective based

on bottom line financial motives, through their job role in terms of; adherence to

organisational policy, procedures, within the organisational boundaries.

From an Einsteinian-Quantum perspective, pure shareholder value motives are

replaced by a wider systems view of stakeholder value motivations (Zohar et al., 2001,

2004). Value chains are measured from a holistic perspective where, shared values

76

drive empowered relations and interactions between self-motion monads (conscious

people) and knowledge and information sharing are highly valued (Wheatley, 1999,

Kilman, 2001). This is a systems view (Senge, 1989, 1990, 1994, 2006), taking into

account the social context of their actions (EQ), their ability to perceive future

possibilities and opportunities grounded in shared organisational meaning, through

shared visioning and strategy (SQ) adding continual value to the organisational

stakeholders (see Table 2.10) (Zohar et al., 2001, 2004). The responses to this value

system, is presented in the behaviour of its participants, to be dealt with in detail in

chapter 3.

The implication beyond modelling new organisational forms, to the ability to lead and

manage complex adaptive people systems, through the values associated within an

Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm now imply that organisations will become bolder in their

attempts to develop organisations based on a systems view of the world (Senge, 1989,

1990, 1994, 2006) including all stakeholder aspects of; financial, social and value

capital. This will impact the social fabric of organisations as hiring practises change

towards employing people within organisations that have the ability to relate to others,

think for themselves and are bold in dynamically re-designing the organisation in-step

with the environment.

2.6. Conclusion

From the information gleaned through the literature review from Einstein (1920), Gribbin

(1984), Stapp (1975), Herbert (1987), Penrose (1989), Jaworski (1996), Wheatley

(1992, 1999), Zohar (1999), Shelton (1999), Fornaciari et al. (2001), Kilman (2001),

Strack et al., (2002), Strack (2002), Pellissier (1999, 2003), Zohar et al. (2004), Shelton

et al. (2001, 2003), Lee (2004), Hocking (2005); Calder (2005), Gardner et al. (2005),

Michie (2005); Beuche (2005), Fairholm (1998, 2006), Gummesson (2006), Campbell

(2007) and Serway et al. (2008) a fundamental element of an Einsteinian-Quantum

paradigm shift in organisations, is the ability to create a strange attractor around

meaning and identity, develop a fractal organisation through relationships within this

system, and through relationship, gain the ability to create a self-organising system that

can dynamically change within the context of the environment and in this way manage

uncertainty.

77

To continually innovate organisational forms, requires the organisations to be at the

edge of chaos (bounded instability), which is the place for creativity and change. This

takes fundamental trust in the thinking ability of self-motion monads, which within an

organisational context; is the people. These implications require organisations to take

into account IQ, EQ and SQ as a basis to best deal with complexity within the most

strategic factors of production, the people within them. To understand and lead them in

ways that allow for the ability for individuals to utilise their intelligence states fully in the

search of greater meaning within organisations and the linking of personal values with

organisational value systems to add greater value to the world around them. These

aligned value systems will elicit a personal behavioural response in line with

determining dynamic innovative strategies in line with a continually changing

environment.

In conclusion therefore, by utilising the paradigm shift model to determine the gap

between a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm and an Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm in the

areas of modelling and value measures and the associated effects on organisational

models and values to this point, has helped to define a sufficient gap that should elicit a

very different set of behaviours in response. Leadership behaviour as a dependent

variable, to values, as a response is the purpose of this thesis. These specific

responses will be the focus of chapter 3, where the researcher will attempt to

understand leadership, as a specific organisational role in context of historical

leadership approaches and contemporary leadership theory to determine a gap through

secondary literature review of qualifiable and quantifiable studies, which should in the

context of this study match the gaps shown up to this point in the literature review,

between the duelling paradigms of Newtonian-Cartesian and Einsteinian-Quantum

paradigms. The focus of chapter 4 will then be to derive a new model, including the

constructs of quantum leadership; behaviours, values, mental models, and the base

worldview. Further to this leadership model, physical examples of the impact of this new

model on OD will be derived and a measurement instrument developed in Chapter 5.

78

LITERATURE REVIEW (PART II)

CHAPTER 3: LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOUR

3.1. Introduction

The focus of this chapter is on leadership behaviour as a response to values as

discussed in chapter 2.

In this chapter the researcher follows a descriptive theory approach, within the research

process as per Figure 5.6. In this chapter the researcher uses descriptive theory (Refer

to Chapter 5, Section 5.2.3) again, in observing, classifying and defining relationships

between variables, through a qualitative inductive category development process,

contained within content analysis methodology (Refer to Chapter 5, Section 5.4.3.2). In

this chapter the researcher gathers information to answer gaps as defined in through

categories developed in chapter 2, through secondary literature research.

To place this descriptive theory build through the inductive literature review process of

leadership behaviour in context following chapter 2, it is important to note that; the

inductive manner of investigating the two duelling scientific paradigms of Newtonian-

Cartesian science and Einsteinian-Quantum science has elicited a set of gaps based on

the science and the implicative response by organisations in the form of organisational

designs (Refer to Section 2.3), utilising the underlying structure of scientific modelling

(Refer to Section 2.2) as the base upon which to construct these organisational views,

and the value systems (Refer to Section 2.4) required to control the boundaries within

which these models operate. In response to these value systems as motivational

factors, as per the paradigm shift model, a behavioural response is required, which is

the focus of this chapter.

Behaviour as the final element of the paradigm shift model (Refer to Section 6.4) and as

per the Dubrin leadership framework (Refer to Figure 3.3), is the quintessential element

of leadership, as it is behaviour that is readily observable and measurable in an

organisational context, (Bass and Avolio, 1985, 1999; Alban-Metcalfe & Alimo-Metcalfe,

79

2000), therefore dedicating a chapter to the investigation of this particular element is

appropriate.

Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe (2001), note that the emergence of a new

behavioural leadership approach (Bryman, 1992) in the 1980s represented a paradigm

shift from transactional methods such as the situational contingency methods of Fiedler

(1967), Vroom and Yetton (1973), and Yukl (1989), to the visionary (Sashkin, 1988),

charismatic (Conger and Kanungo, 1988; House, 1977), and further to the

transformational (Bass, 1985, 1998; Bass and Avolio, 1994), have to a great degree

contributed to the received wisdom of leadership behavioural models and theory.

However, cultural diversity through globalisation and the impact this has had on

leadership has resurrected some of the thinking around contingency theories within the

work of Drath and Palus (1994) in their study on cultural leadership.

Beyond these theories though, exists the reality of a changing complex environment

and the enquiries into new forms of organisations and leadership, affected through the

influence of external factors such as multinational organisations, virtual companies and

the exponential increase in knowledge through the connected economy (Maravelias,

2003; Torpman, 2004; Pellissier, 2007). These complex environmental factors have

generated studies into leadership thinking and models in line with CAS, chaos and

quantum physics as a means to understand complexity and the impact this will have on

organisational design and therefore associated leadership behaviours (Kilman, 2001;

Shelton et al., 2003; Zohar et al. 2004, Campbell, 2007).

The focus of chapter 3 will be to understand leadership behavioural theories as

modelled within the Transformational leadership model of Bass and Avolio (1999), and

the more recently proposed Authentic leadership theory of Avolio (2004), suggested as

a more holistic and positive theory of leadership in the context of it’s base being the

positive attributes of Transformational leadership (Luthens and Avolio, 2004). These two

theories will be reviewed in detail via a secondary qualitative literature review into the

model and theory underpinning them, and a secondary quantitative literature review into

the measurement instrument (Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire - MLQ) of the

Transformational leadership model. No measurement instrument exists for the authentic

leadership theory to date, as no definitive model supported by measurable constructs

80

have been posited and tested as yet. These reviews are used to determine current gaps

in these models, based on the findings from the literature review in chapter 2, to be filled

or replaced by a new model theory of leadership, based on a holistic approach of theory

building, by utilising the paradigm shift framework (Refer to Figure 5.7, Chapter 5)

3.2. Transformational leadership

Transformational leadership will now be investigated from an understanding of it’s

origins, its constructs and the measures used to understand this set of leadership

behaviours within an organisational setting (Refer to Section 3.1).

3.2.1. Introduction

This thesis will now examine the contemporary leadership approach of transformational

leadership in more detail. As behavioural theories have become an important way of

measuring leadership traits, transformational leadership, in recent (2000-2005) studies

on leadership, is the most widely studied leadership model (Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-

Metcalfe, 2000; Kent, Cotts and Azziz, 2001; Humphreys and Einstein, 2003; De

Charon, 2003; Visser, 2003; Luthens and Avolio, 2004). It is therefore important that this

model is researched in more detail. The following line of enquiry will, together with a

deeper understanding of transformational leadership, also help to give perspective into

the findings of recent studies that question the transformational leadership constructs

and seek to introduce new constructs and methods of leadership quantification.

The process (Refer to Figure 3.1) follows a logical, secondary data, enquiry; firstly into

the origins of transformational leadership, through leadership research of the scientific

and behavioural theory approaches to leadership behaviour over the years, culminating

in the transformational leadership approach, secondly a qualitative review process is

then utilised to review the behavioural and psychological elements of the

transformational leadership theory and thirdly from a quantitative perspective the model

is reviewed, utilising secondary data from researchers which have debated the

constructs of the transformational leadership model, to determine gaps in this approach,

in light of the literature review findings (Refer to Chapter 2)

81

Figure 3.1: Process of enquiry into transformational leadership

3.2.2. Origins of transformational leadership

The following discussion is based on a peer-reviewed journal paper by Humphreys’ and

Einstein (2003). It is used to form an understanding and frame of reference for

transformational leadership within the continuum of the development of this leadership

model and theory, from the beginnings of the scientific management era through to the

behavioural sciences era. Humphreys and Einstein (2003) suggest, that patterns of

transformational leadership in the form of leader and follower relationship were

beginning to emerge in writings some 5000 years ago (Bass, 1981 in Humphreys et al.,

2003). They state that Plato spoke at length about ‘effective leadership’ and ‘charisma’

in which he asserted that if leaders desired to be charismatic, they must learn to

express important ideas by using symbols and metaphors in their managerial efforts

(Takala, 1988). This historical under-pinning, is a central tenet to bring relevance to the

facts that transformational (charismatic) leadership is not a new idea.

3.2.2.1. Scientific management era

Fayol, in 1949, suggested that ‘..a leader who is a good administrator but technically

mediocre is generally much more useful than if he were a brilliant technician’ (From

Wren, 1994, p. 181). This insight started the debate into the separation of leadership

from technical management.

3.2.2. Origins of transformational leadership The scientific management era and the behavioural science era

3.2.3. Qualitative secondary data study Literature review focusing on the behaviour and psychological constructs of

the transformational leadership model

3.2.4. Quantitative secondary data study Literature review focusing on the transformational leadership constructs as

tested through recent research

82

Humphreys et al. (2003), suggest that glimpses of transformational leadership were

beginning to surface in modern management writers such as Taylor (1911) (Refer to

2.3.2.1) in the ‘scientific management’ era, where Taylor (in Drucker, 1976) wrote that;

“It becomes the duty of those on the management side to deliberately study the

character, the nature, and the performance of each workman, with a view to finding out

his limitations, on the one hand, but even more important, his possibilities for

development, on the other hand; and then, as deliberately and systematically as

possible, to train and help teach the workman, giving him wherever it is possible, those

opportunities for advancement which will finally enable him to do the highest and most

interesting and most profitable class of work …development is not a single act; it goes

on from year to year and is the subject of continual study on the part of management.”

(in Humphreys et al., 2003)

Humphreys et al. (2003) further state that, Taylor was of the opinion that, true scientific

management was about a mental revolution and not necessarily the efficiency effect of

management that embodied his time. Wren (1994) writes that Taylor believed that

‘..leaders and followers working together toward common goals, with mutual

responsibility, could perform beyond expectations of both parties’. The emphasis of

employee as individual was further expanded by Gilbreth (1921) when she stated that

‘..the object of scientific management was to develop each person to the fullest potential

by strengthening personal traits, special abilities, and skills’. The follower’s ability to

produce efficiently therefore, depended on the leader’s ability to guide attitude,

opportunity and to provide a positive physical environment (Wren, 1994).

It is not impossible to see the constructs of ‘individual consideration’ and ‘intellectual

stimulation’, within Bass and Avolio’s model of transformational leadership emerging

from the above discussion (Humphreys et al., 2003).

3.2.2.2. Behavioural science era

(i) Charismatic authority (1920)

Conger and Kanungo (1988) in Humphreys et al. (2003), state that Weber (1920)

believed that charismatic authority derived its legitimate power from faith in the personal

character of the leader, not from rules or traditions. Charismatic authority in his opinion

83

was based upon ‘..devotion to specific and exceptional sanctity, heroism or exemplary

character of an individual person’ (Weber in Henderson and Parsons, 1947) further

suggested that the charismatic leader was obeyed ‘..by virtue of the follower’s personal

trust and belief in the leader’s powers or revelations’ (Wren, 1994, p.95). Bass (1990, p.

21) describes the charismatic aspect of transformational leaders is all important, when

he states that;

“Attaining charisma in the eyes of one’s employees is central to succeeding as a

transformational leader. Charismatic leaders have great power and influence.

Employees want to identify with them, and they have a high degree of trust and

confidence in them. Charismatic leaders inspire and excite their employees with

the idea (that) they may be able to accomplish great things.”

This researcher agrees that charismatic leaders have great influence over their

followers and that this influence is due to the legitimacy of faith in the leader’s personal

character and sanctity in the leader’s powers or revelations. This argument does not

stand however in light of the dark side of charismatic leadership, where personal

character and sanctity do not prevail in the follower’s minds. Bass and Steidlmeier

(1999) suggested that there are two kinds of charismatic/transformational leaders;

‘authentic’ and ‘pseudo’, this is an important distinction as the consideration of integrity

is of critical importance in the leadership debate (Posner and Schmidt, 1984; Parry,

1998; Morgan, 1993 in Humphreys et al., 2003) especially when authentic leadership as

a leadership behavioural construct or theory is discussed in Section 3.3 of this thesis.

Weber (1920) made the observation that, people are more likely to follow a charismatic

leader during times of distress or turmoil. This is supported by; Bass (1985, 1990),

Howell and Avolio (1993), Humphreys and Parise (2000) and Humphreys et al. (2003),

in their statements that it is indicative that transformational leadership behaviour is most

valuable during periods of turbulence and instability, thus linking this behaviour element

to leaders positioned at national and spiritual leadership levels (Weber in Humphreys et

al., 2003). Shils (1965) in Humphreys et al. (2003) argues against the notion of Weber

(1920), that charisma is too idealistic. He suggested that charisma could be found in

ordinary people within ordinary organisations. Bass (1985) supports this view in his

research too and states that transformational leader behaviours are often present at

various levels of the organisation. Thus, bringing the debate of transformational

84

leadership into the organisational domain at all levels, and opens up this leadership

theory to questions around the construct of charisma within transformational leadership

as the highest weighted element, suggesting that arguments against the Multifactor

Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) of Bass and Avolio, are well founded (Refer to Section

3.2.4).

(ii) Relational leadership - a relationship systems approach (1933)

Humphreys and Einstein (2003), erroneously continue with an exposition of Follett’s ,

1933 thinking (Follet, 1933, 2003) in an attempt to link her into a continuum of thinking

towards a transformational leadership theory. They state that Follet lead the change

from the scientific management era to a behavioural sciences era, as thinking was

beginning to transform from man-as-machine to a more humanistic approach.

Humphreys et al. (2003), state; Follet argued that intellectual reasoning could stimulate

workers, because a mixture of reasoning, feelings and character governed both

management and workers (Graham, 1996), and agreed to by Senge (1994, 2001, 2007)

when he suggested that the integration of intellect and reason is the most important

element for systems thinking. Parker Follet further offered a leadership approach of,

’power with’, instead of, ’power over’, describing this as, ‘..jointly developed power, a

coactive power, not (a) coercive power’ (Graham 1996, p.103). Follet (2003) believed

that legitimate power is the power brokered between two groups and not the strong

hierarchical view of positional power, in opposition to the charismatic stance.

Follett (1933, 2003) in 1933, was of the opinion that ‘power with’ is built up through

influence, between co-workers and upward from a worker to a manager. Follett further

divided leadership into three areas; leadership of position (positional leadership),

leadership of function (functional leadership), leadership of personality (behaviour),

suggesting that leadership as a concept, as agreed by Dubrin (1965), is beyond pure

behaviour and that depending on the position and function, behaviours would differ,

suggesting a contingency type approach to leadership. However, she did qualify this

view in stating that; positional power was authority and not real power. Power in her

opinion, was a self-developing capacity within a person, and a leader’s responsibility

was to develop the workers own power through creating opportunities to expand their

own abilities and grow in personal confidence. She also believed that personal traits

played a part, but they were not the most important aspect of leadership. Of the three

85

areas of leadership she described, Follett saw ‘leadership of function’ as the most

important aspect and summed it up in the following statement;

“The leader then is the one who can organize (sic) the experience of the group…and

thus get the full power of the group. The leader makes the team. This is pre-

eminently the leadership quality – the ability to organize (sic) all the forces there are

in an enterprise and make them serve a common purpose. Men with this ability

create a group power rather than express a personal power…the leader must

understand the situation, must see it as a whole, must see the interrelation of all

parts…He must see the evolving equation, the developing situation. His wisdom, his

judgement, is used not on a situation that is stationary, but one that is changing all

the time.” (Follett, 1933, p. 51)

In summary, Follet (1933, 2003) suggested that a holistic approach to the function of

leadership is the most important element of leadership, as it is understanding the

changing environment within which the organisation exists and how to align all of these

elements in concert, which is the essence of true power (as per Follet, 1933, 2006) and

the secret to leadership, as suggested in the literature review in chapter 2 of the

Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm. This researcher believes that Follett’s body of work was

ahead of it’s time and the essence was lost, through the writings of subsequent

management theorists, such as Humphreys et al. (2003) who use her work to establish

a continuum between Taylor (1911), Gilbreth (1921), Barnard (1938), Burns (1978) and

Bass (1984), into transformational leadership, however her explanations of where power

comes from and how it is used, does not correlate to modern theories of

transformational leadership. Of particular interest is Bass’s stance on charisma or

idealised influence, which is quite paradoxical to Follett’s understanding of sharing of

power and personal relationship between leader and follower.

This research will re-examine Follett’s work again, when it associates her thinking and

theories with the leadership of a changing, dynamic environment, in line with

understanding these environment through the lens of the ‘new’ science of quantum

physics, complexity and chaos theory.

86

(iii) Motivational leadership (1938)

Humphreys and Einstein (2003), suggest that Barnard (1938), similar to Follett (1933,

2003) saw that organisational goals could be achieved and extended, if people worked

together collectively and systematically. However, he fundamentally differed in

approach and understanding of the motivational aspects around the dynamic of creating

shared power. Barnard (1938) saw people as external to the organisation. He believed

that motivations influenced the individual based on their own free will to extract what

they needed from the organisation to meet their purposes, desires and impulses. In as

much as it is their motivations that draw them to an organisation it is through these

motivations, Barnard argued, that one can influence them. Barnard explained the

behaviour of individuals in organisations as resulting from ‘..the modification of the

action of the individual through control of or influence upon of these categories of

choice’ (Barnard, 1938, p. 17). Thus Barnard defined leadership as ‘influencing

followers’.

Barnard’s definition of a formal organisation was ‘..a system of consciously coordinated

activities of two or more persons’ (Barnard, 1938, p. 73). He believed that within these

activities, authority was not seen as a manager’s right to lead, but that authority was

based on consent from subordinates. Humphreys et al. (2003), uses Barnard as a

reference and suggests that modern writers call this ‘personal power’, which is

interesting; in that, Follett eluded to this back in 1933. From this researcher’s

perspective, ‘personal power’ and ‘accepted authority’ are the same, as they are guided

by the acceptance of the individual to be influenced by the leader. Positional authority

however, if governed by organisational policy, still exists as a static element.

However, Barnard (1938), furthermore suggested that a subordinate can and will accept

a communication order when four conditions exist simultaneously; the communication is

understood, the communication is consistent with the purpose of the organisation at the

time of the decision, the communication is consistent with his/her personal interest as a

whole, the subordinate has the mental and physical ability to comply.

The above discussion does not show the relational elements that Follett referred to as a

requirement for increased organisational power and motivation. This is clearly seen in

the aspects used to describe communication, Follett speaks of ‘reasoning’ in

87

communication and Barnard speaks of communication ‘orders’. Follett refers to

requesting in a ‘questioning style’, opening the door for the subordinate to interact and

influence the leader in a relational style, whereas Barnard refers to ‘communication

orders’, and ‘coercion’ through managing motivations, even if this is in the context of

certain criteria of obedience. This researcher believes that Humphreys et al. (2003),

cannot use Barnard as a link in the continuum between Follett and Burns and as such

Follett’s work should be set aside as a stand-alone theory and that Barnard’s theories

on motivational leadership should be defined, through its command and control

variables as more of a management theory than a leadership one, in line with a

Newtonian-Cartesian cause-and-effect paradigm.

Humphreys et al. (2003) suggests, that congruence of thought did take place between

Follett and Barnard, in the area of morality. Wren (1994) states that both Follett and

Barnard concluded that moral leadership would enhance the effectiveness of

organisations and the well being of people. Humphreys et al. (2003), further utilise this

thought to tie these writers into Burns and Bass’s later work in transformational

leadership. Morality as a value statement, this researcher argues is a basic requirement

for leadership and will form part of all leadership theory, and therefore does not in any

way tie the theories of Barnard to Follett and therefore excludes Follett from later works

of Burns and Bass.

(iv) Charismatic leadership and followership (1968)

Tucker (1968) first described the charismatic leader/follower relationship in 1965 and is

often credited with the first formal theory of charismatic leadership (Kessler, 1993 in

Humphreys et al., 2003). Tucker (1968) through research into the Russian revolution

realised that radical change was best achieved when one could gain the esteem of

followers. Tucker (1968) also argued that charismatic leaders were not endowed with

any special characteristics or traits that made them charismatic and further dismantled

charismatic leadership into two types or styles which he labelled; Prophet and Activist.

Prophets are, in his opinion, able to excel in communicating a vision and Activists are

able to excel in practical leadership skills to implement this vision. Bass (1985) picked

this relationship up in his model and suggests that charismatic leaders have the ability

to do both; communicate a vision and assist followers in solving problems.

88

House (1977), disagrees with Tucker (1968), on the characteristics of charismatic

leaders and suggested that charismatic leaders do possess distinguishing personality

characteristics beyond seeing charismatic leadership as a ploy or political position to

influence followers. He suggests that these are; high self-confidence, dominance, a

strong belief in the moral correctness of their vision, and the need to influence other

people. House believes these characteristics motivate them to lead in a charismatic

style. House, further suggests that it is these unique abilities that lead followers to

greater heights of performance and morality, it gives the charismatic leader the ability to

‘..inspire their followers to give unquestioned obedience, loyalty, commitment, devotion

to the leader and to the cause the leader represents’ (House, 1977, p. 191). This can

allow the leader to exhibit tendencies to manipulate and enslave followers, which is the

two edged sword of this kind of leadership style, for example; Hitler, Idi-Amin, Stalin, Pol

Pot (Conger et al., 1990; Howell and Avolio, 1992; Sankowsky, 1995 in Humphreys et

al., 2003).

This integrity question on charismatic leadership has been discussed at length in

academic journals on the subject and Bass and Steidlmeier (1999) have suggested a

separation between ‘authentic’ and ‘pseudo’ transformational (charismatic) leaders, who

represent the ‘dark side’ of this style of leadership and therefore are not authentic (Refer

to Section 3.3). They suggest that if a leader is authentic, they would ‘transcend’ beyond

their individual interest and acquiesce to the good of the group. Thus, suggesting in the

researcher’s opinion the ability to go beyond self-actualisation in Maslow’s terminology

to a point of peak experiences, which has a spiritual context and points to the suggested

constructs of a new leadership theory (Refer to Section 2.4.2.3) as per Zohar and

Marshall (2004).

(v) Situational leadership’s effect on charismatic leadership (1988):

Conger and Kanungo (1988) explain ‘charisma’ as an ‘attributional occurrence’. They

suggest that charisma is an attribute followers attach to leaders that they perceive as

effective. The Conger and Kanungo (1988) model suggests that certain conditions must

be present for a leader to be perceived as transformational (charismatic), these are; the

leader must be see the opportunity and develop a vision to address it, the vision must

be communicated to followers and those followers must be persuaded that change must

89

occur, the leader’s personal success, sacrifice, and risk taking must convince followers

to trust his/her abilities and vision, and the leader must convince the followers that the

vision is both realistic and attainable. Conger and Kanungo (1988, p. 83), therefore

suggest that; ‘..what distinguishes charismatic from non-charismatic (sic) leaders is the

charismatic leader’s ability to recognise deficiencies in the present system’.

This insight from Conger and Kanungo is a valuable asset to the direction of this study.

Firstly, the suggestion that the charismatic leader must convince followers of a vision, is

out of step with contemporary thinking on shared visioning and secondly their

suggestion that charismatic leaders think of whole systems, in their understanding that,

charismatic leaders have the ability to see deficiencies in systems, highlights

organisational structure thinking in line with systems thinking and an Einsteinian-

Quantum worldview for the management of complex environments, where the

understanding of the relationships between the parts to form the system is important

and not the workings of the parts on their own, as per the Newtonian-Cartesian

principles of structure, and not congruent with the issue raised that leaders need to

convince followers. If working within a systems design, where all parts are connected to

a central vision and value system, a central tenet of meaning, then no convincing would

be necessary as these organisational participants would have been included in

organisational visioning and value system design and as such would have already

developed the synergy of understanding. In the researchers view, Conger and Kunango

contradict themselves in their argument.

(vi) Transformational leadership (1978)

Burns (1978) was the first leadership commentator to establish a model of

transformational leadership, in which he proposed that transactional leadership was at

one end of a scale and transformational leadership was at the other end. Burns further

suggested that transformational leaders, appeal to their followers sense of moral

obligation and values such as liberty, justice and equality (as per Follet, 1933, 2006;

Barnard, 1938, House 1977). This understanding of transformational leadership, with

charisma as a central tenet, suggests that Burns in his understanding of liberty, justice

and equality, was focused on the ‘authentic’ side of transformational leadership (Refer

to Section 3.2.2.2 and Section 3.3). The transformational (charismatic) leadership style

of Hitler, Stalin and Idi-Amin, certainly did not have the basis of liberty, justice and

90

equality for any of the millions that succumbed to their brand of leadership. However,

this researcher believes that those words imbedded in the U.S.A. constitution and as so

eloquently stated by John Hancock, should be a fundamental part of the value system

of any organisation and should be part of the personal value system of the people in an

organisation, and as such leaders should “hold these truths to be self-evident” (John

Hancock, 1776).

Bass (1985) suggested that there were more constructs to the transformational

leadership style and the transactional leadership style. He did this by investigating a

broader range of behaviours that separated transactional from transformational leaders.

His model challenged Burns’ model in that Bass (1985) suggested that transformational

leaders and transactional leaders were not at opposite ends of a scale. In Bass’ (1985)

construct, transformational leadership is not a substitute for transactional leadership, but

a compliment to it (Dubinsky, Yammarino, Jolson and Spangler, 1995). Humphreys et

al. (2003), suggest that research has supported this view of transformational leadership

as augmenting transactional leadership behaviour (Hater and Bass, 1988; Howell and

Avolio, 1993; Waldman, Bass and Yammarino, 1990, Humphreys et al. 2003).

Thus suggesting that as a compliment, transactional leadership skills should form part

of transformational leadership as a construct, thereby denying a unique position for

leadership as a function on it’s own but as an extension of management (Refer to

Section 3.2.3.2)

(vii) Beyond transformational leadership - Authentic leadership (2004):

Authentic leadership is an emerging model which acknowledges the positive side of

transformational leadership (as opposed to the dark side) focusing on the importance of;

life experiences - where I came from (family and work experiences), the organisational

environment or context - how I am supported (the physical and financial resources), a

strength-based organisational culture, and positive psychological capital - who I am (the

levels of confidence, hope, optimism, and resiliency) (Luthans and Youssef, 2004;

Luthans and Avolio, 2004). Avolio and Luthans (2004) define Authentic leadership as:

“A process that draws from both positive psychological capacities and a highly

developed organisational (sic) context, which results in both greater self-awareness

91

and self-regulated positive behaviour on the part of leaders and employees, fostering

positive self-development. The authentic leader is confident, hopeful, optimistic,

resilient, transparent, moral/ethical, future-oriented, and gives priority to developing

employees to be leaders” (Luthans and Avolio, 2003, p. 243)

Authentic leadership is presented as a broad construct incorporating other positive

leadership approaches, including transformational, charismatic, servant and spiritual

leadership (Avolio and Gardner, 2005). This researcher argues that authentic

leadership, if to be recognised by this definition, is a copy of the functional leadership

position adopted by Parker’s theories of functional leadership (Refer to Section 3.2.2.2).

Authentic leadership as an emerging theory and as such will be explored in further

depth in Section 3.3 within this thesis.

3.2.2.3. Findings

As has been discussed, transformational leadership has a rich heritage. Bass and

Avolio (1994), suggest that their model of transformational leadership is not only a new

paradigm, but also the most complete picture of the ‘full range’ of leadership. However,

some see transformational leadership theory as a return to trait theory of leadership,

combined with situational factors (Wiehrich and Koontz, 1993). The mere mention of

transformational leadership being linked to Taylorism shows the underlying scientific

worldview of a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm (Refer to Section 3.2.2.1 and 2.3.2.1).

Humphreys and Einstein (2003) suggest that the constructs within the transformational

leadership model are nothing new and have ‘..existed since the dawning of time’.

These arguments have been augmented by Avolio and Luthans (2004) more recent

attempt at delivering on another iterative proposal for leadership, the ‘authentic

leadership’ model, yet to become a theory. However, it is suggestive of a return to

Follet’s (1933) research on relational leadership, which does not correspond to the

formation of transformational leadership, yet is aligned to the newer theory of authentic

leadership as posited by Avolio and Luthans (2004).

Thus, suggesting that understanding leadership is not necessarily developed through

the iterative academic process (gap of 71 years between Follet, 1933 and Avolio and

92

Luthens, 2004), but in understanding the basis for leadership, as this thesis will show in

it’s suggested leadership approach, based on quantum and CAS scientific modelling,

which has since the dawning of time been the same, yet is still to be incorporated into

the social sciences sphere of academic thinking. It is suggested by this researcher that

until there is a robust basis for leadership constructs in the context of the organisation,

as in this thesis, leadership theory will remain elusive.

3.2.3. Qualitative secondary literature enquiry into the transformational

leadership model

This Section utilises a secondary literature review process to study direct debates on

the specific constructs of the transformational leadership model to understand the gaps

as seen by other academic enquiries into this theory from a behavioural and

psychological perspective.

3.2.3.1. Behavioural constructs

(i) Idealised influence style (charisma)

Bass and Avolio (1990), maintain that attaining charisma in the eyes of followers is a

critical step in becoming a transformational leader. This is because charismatic leaders

exert an enormous amount of influence on followers (Conger and Kanungo, 1988;

Howell and Frost, 1989) and therefore followers place an inordinate amount of trust in

the leader (Howell and Avolio, 1992). To achieve this charismatic status,

transformational leaders provide a vision, and sense of mission, instilling pride and in so

doing gain respect and trust. Followers see these leaders as role models and want to

emulate their behaviours (Humphreys and Einstein, 2003).

The researcher argues and is of the opinion that charisma causes a continual

separation between leader and follower. Charisma is required to maintain the ‘idol’

status in the minds of the follower. This is in contrast to the need for relationship and

authenticity in a leader that through the inherent relationship, authenticity and trust that

are built in the process of relationship, form congruence with the value systems of the

follower and in this way influences the follower’s behaviour. The separation due to a

charismatic leadership style, is shown in extreme cases where a charismatic leader’s

93

self-interest may undermine and even erode the ethical base of their organisation (Kelly,

1987 in Humphreys et al., 2003) and suggests that this self interest precludes these

leaders from transcending to a point of peak experiences. Idealised influence from the

researcher’s perspective therefore hinders organisational growth by creating a

separation between leader and follower and dilutes trust between layers of

organisational hierarchy, leading to organisational decay (Refer to Section 3.2.2.2. on

charisma)

Bass and Steidlmeier (1999), have suggested a separation between ‘authentic’ and

‘pseudo’ transformational / charismatic leaders, who represent the ‘dark side’ of this

style of leadership and therefore are not authentic. For if they were authentic, they

would transcend beyond their individual interest and consider the needs of others over

their personal needs and share risk with followers and reflect this in decision making

and can be counted on to do the right thing, thus demonstrating high standards of

ethical and moral conduct (Bass and Avolio, 1990; Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe,

2000). Parry and Proctor-Thomson (2003) support an ethical or authentic stance in their

findings that there was a positive relationship between transformational leadership and

perceived integrity in studies they conducted.

The researcher does not support this view, as ‘perceived’ integrity, is a subjective

measure and that true integrity can only be measured through evidence of behaviour.

Perceived integrity is therefore influenced by how the follower views the leader and this

researcher therefore feels that these studies are therefore not conclusive, as ‘perceived’

integrity could also be viewed as ‘pseudo’, if the leader has alternative intentions. For

example, Hitler was perceived by his followers to be doing the right thing, he therefore

had a measure of perceived integrity, but which in behaviour was seen to be ‘pseudo’

(Refer to Section 3.2.2.2 Section and Section 3.3).

(ii) Inspirational motivation

Inspirational motivation is seen as a companion of charisma as inspiration is seen to

influence followers to achieve beyond expectations (Bass, 1990). Transformational

leaders that use inspirational motivation as a style, behave in ways that motivate and

inspire those around them by providing meaning and challenge to their follower’s work

94

(Visser, 2003), this is communicated using symbols and simple methods to express

purpose (Humphreys and Einstein, 2003).

Followers in response show increased enthusiasm and optimism (Visser, 2003). These

types of leaders also involve followers in envisioning attractive future states through

clearly communicated expectations that followers want to meet in order to achieve these

future states (Bass, 1990). Commitment to these goals is demonstrated by these

leaders through their personal commitment to these goals. Gibson (1997) agrees with

Bass and Avolio’s explanation of inspirational motivation, and further argues that

leaders will therefore make major changes to the firm or unit’s mission, way of doing

business, and human resources management to achieve this vision. The leader will

strive to overhaul the entire philosophy, system, and culture of the organisation.

Yammarino, Dionne, Chun (2002), have further shown that cohesion does occur in

teams when idealised influence combined with inspirational motivation is used as a

leadership behaviour, and can lead to ‘intermediate’ improvement within shared

visioning and team commitment leading towards a cohesive team process, thus

facilitating overall team performance.

From the researcher’s perspective inspirational motivation is focused on how the leader

communicates a vision through his/her oral ability and personal dedication in his/her

own work ethic toward accomplishing the vision he/she has set, but if fused with

idealised influence, may still alienate the workforce over time, dependent on the ego-

centricity and individual interest, which may lead to an inspired work force or team,

motivated to move in the wrong direction, in line with possible pseudo charismatic

leadership intentions. As transformational leadership has a high weighting towards

charisma as measured in the MLQ, then transformational leaders as measured by the

MLQ, could most certainly influence followers towards pseudo goals, that will have a

negative impact on organisational stakeholders.

(iii) Intellectual stimulation

Transformational leaders that behave in this way, attempt to engender followers to be

creative and innovative by questioning assumptions, reframing organisational problems

and approaching old situations in new ways (Bass et al, 1988; Bryant, 2003, Crawford,

95

2005). Public criticism does not take place for mistakes made by followers (Bass et al,

1988) and errors become an iterative learning process, to further enhance the learning

within an organisational context, leading to continuous improvement. New ideas and

creative problem solving solutions are continuously solicited from followers, who are

actively involved in the process of addressing problems and finding sensible solutions

(Humphreys and Einstein, 2003; Visser, 2003).

From the researcher’s perspective, this followership in creative problem solving is

bounded by the original vision for the organisation, as set by the leader (if lead through

a state of idealised influence). The follower in this context is asked to find new and

better solutions to solving problems in line with a ‘shared’ vision that has been brought

about through inspirational motivation and influence by a charismatic leader that is

idealised by followers. This assumption, does not take into account cognitive

dissonance of followers, who have not been asked to influence the vision from their own

perspective and as such do not deliver more than what is required to achieve material

bonuses in line with incentive motivations. Dionne et al’s (2003) study shows limited

influence of transformational leadership in the intellectual stimulation element and

further suggests that it has little influence on creativity. They show that only the team

functional conflict factor is influenced. This does not point to individual or shared group

creativity and innovation. Bryant (2003), differs in his view and suggests that

transformational leaders allow for individual and group creativity in knowledge creation,

integration and shared mental models and supported by Crawford (2005).

Thinking from the perspective of Zohar (2001), is the beginning of all creativity,

innovation and changes to structures, the researcher therefore argues that if the

intellectual stimulation of followers follows the lead from the intellectual stimulation of

the leader then transformational leadership will re-define follower’s parameters of

thought. However, if the leader’s thinking is still in line with a Newtonian–Cartesian

paradigm, where deterministic, linear processes are the building blocks, then creativity

and innovation, will be extremely difficult to stimulate, as the follower’s within the

organisation will be limited in freedom of thinking ability, thus supporting Dionne et al’s

(2003) study as stated in this paragraph.

96

(iv) Individualised consideration

Bass (1999) suggests that individualised consideration is used to effect motivation

through transformational leaders paying special attention to each individual’s needs for

achievement and growth by acting as a mentor. Followers and colleagues are

developed to achieve successfully higher levels of potential. Individualised

consideration is practiced as follows; new learning opportunities are created along with

a supportive climate and individual differences in terms of needs and desires are

recognised and accepted. A bi-directional exchange of communication is encouraged

and ‘management by walking around’ is practiced. Leaders in this fashion, personalise

interactions and listen effectively. The transformational leader delegates tasks as a

means of developing people and then monitors these tasks to see if followers need

additional direction or support, and to assess followers’ progress; ideally, followers do

not feel that they are checked on.

From the researcher’s perspective individualised consideration, is seen as an extension

of command and control management. This researcher argues that individual

consideration should take into account the follower’s ability to think for himself/herself

and influence the leader in his/her decision-making. It should be the leader trusting the

follower as the knowledge worker at their level to know more about their environment

and influences, and to receive this wisdom from the follower. The theory also considers

that leaders are more attune to what is happening at a micro level, than it is possible to

do in reality, requiring more of a micro-management approach. The theory also

assumes that the leader has a higher level of knowledge than the follower, which in the

current environment of knowledge workers and a younger generation of technologically

astute followers, is not necessarily the case.

3.2.3.2. Psychological value states, measures and behaviour constructs

In this Section the researcher links psychological behaviour (personality) types and

intelligence measures to the transformational leadership constructs.

(i) Jungian psychological types and transformational leadership constructs

Bass (1988) identified the constructs of transformational leadership that ultimately, if

practiced through a leader’s behaviour, will ‘..lead to employee empowerment, improved

97

satisfaction and retention, and a more successful organisation’ (De Charon, 2003, p. 9).

De Charon states that a way of inculcating these four constructs into leaders is through

the use of identifying personal intrinsic preferences, thereby leveraging existing areas of

strength and addressing areas of weakness.

De Charon (2003), further suggests in support of this statement, that the use of Jung’s

psychological attitude and functional dichotomies, in which he defined psychological

types, as intrinsic personality attributes, to which the transformational constructs can be

linked to the constructs of transformational leadership.

In Jung’s attitude dichotomy, he designates individuals as either introverted or

extroverted and within his functional dichotomy; he designates individuals as either

irrational or rational. Irrational types include sensation and intuitive behaviours, which

are used in experiencing and the perception of information. Jung’s rational types include

thinking and feeling behaviours, which are used in decision-making process.

Within the irrational individual; sensing types rely primarily on pragmatic and conscious

experiences, while intuitive types; base actions and behaviours primarily on

unconscious experiences and perceptions (De Charon, 2003). Furthermore in contrast

within the irrational individual; thinking types rely primarily on data evaluation and logic,

while the feeling types; use beliefs and values as the principal criteria (sic) for decision

making (De Charon, 2003). Therefore the rational individual tends to think more with

their head than their heart, De Charon summarises by saying that;

‘..each person therefore has an innate strength, either toward sensing, the ability to

apply actual, pragmatic information, or toward intuition, the ability to comprehend

and translate abstractions. As well, each person has innate strength towards either

thinking, the ability to analyse experiential data, or toward feeling, the ability to

connect with and relate to others’ (De Charon, 2003, p. 10)

De Charon (2003), has matched Jung’s irrational and rational psychological types to

Bass’s transformational leadership behaviour traits / constructs / characteristics, in the

following way:

• irrational intuitive linked to idealised influence/charisma – strategic

• irrational sensing linked to inspirational motivation - tactical

98

• rational thinking linked to intellectual stimulation – analytical/logical decision making

• rational feeling linked to individualised consideration – relational/logical decision

making

Based on the above alignment, and the primary disposition rule of Jung,

transformational leaders are only primarily predisposed based on their psychological

types. Thus, they are either; primarily idealised influencers and inspirational motivators

(irrational intuitive and sensing) or intellectually stimulating with individualised

consideration (rational thinking and feeling).

According to Jung, development of personality is a life-long process (Jung 1959). He

maintained that attaining balance within the psyche established wholeness within the

individual. Jung (1959, p.181 in De Charon, 2003, p, 10), states that, ‘..individuation

means becoming a single, homogeneous (sic) being.’ Thus integrating these two areas

is critical in leadership development.

De Charon (2003) observes that through studying leadership development participation

in leadership training, she observed that 80% of the individuals tested, preferred to use

the rational thinking and feeling dichotomy above sensing and intuition. De Charon,

states that;

‘..both thinking and feeling styles use logic as the basis for decisions…thinkers prefer to

make decisions based on analysis and objectivity, feelers prefer to decide based on the

impact on others and a need for harmony. Potential weaknesses associated with

thinkers include avoidance of interpersonal issues, ignoring the feelings of others,

suppressing their own feelings and focusing on persuasion during conflict rather than

seeking compromise…feelers may potentially interpret more from verbal and physical

messages than are actually intended, may display inappropriate emotional responses,

may avoid conflict, and may allow personal choices to prevail over analytical reasoning’

(De Charon, 2003, p. 14).

This is concerning, in light of Senge (1980, p.168) where he states that, ‘..re-integrating

reason and intuition may prove to be one of the primary contributions of systems

thinking’ as supported by Shapiro and Spence (1997, p. 68), ‘..while sensing is sufficient

for uncomplicated management decisions, the best forecast in more complex

99

environments is one that harnesses the power of intuition’. They concluded by saying

that ‘..when combining intuitive and analytically based judgements, as underlying

relationships become more complex, greater weight should be attached to the intuitive

judgement relative to the analytical judgement’ (Shapiro and Spence, 1997, p. 69; De

Charon, 2003, p.11). De Charon, further discusses the importance of both sensing and

intuition for both tactical and strategic leadership, in that ‘..intuition is imperative to

distinguish the changing environmental needs, sensing is required to engage followers

in the implementation of the changes’ (De Charon, 2003, p. 14). Oakley and Krug

(1991) and Badaracco (1998), further suggest that the development of intuitive skills is

decisive to growth from a manager to a leader. Agor (1989, p.20), through research into

leadership development programs suggest that, ‘..those that score as highly intuitive on

such test instruments as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicators (MBTI) tend to be the most

innovative in strategic planning and decision making’. De Charon states that these

attributes allow leaders to perceive the relationships between internal and external

environments, from a systems view, and can interpret and integrate these ideas into an

organisational vision.

These findings provide support for certain of the transformational leadership constructs,

where idealised influence and inspirational motivation are positioned in priority above

the areas of intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration and suggests that

the transformational leadership model does support a leadership versus management

perspective from an intuitive positioning stance by supporting charisma as a weighted

element as linked to intuition by De Charon (2003) and provide a rationale for leaders

who inherently prefer sensing type Jungian attributes, to develop their intuitive skills. De

Charon (2003) suggests that, intuitive skills can be developed by leaders, through

practicing visualisation, creativity, innovation and integration of ideas as supported by

(Shelton et al., 2003). These findings also have an impact on distributed leadership

within systems thinking (Senge, 1990, 2001, 2006), in that there is a requirement for

leaders to possess intuitive skills to be able to operate in complex environments.

This has a fundamental influence on future organisational types, operating in

discontinuous complex environments, as they will need leaders at all levels to make

decisions, and therefore need to integrate rational and irrational behaviours, supported

by Jung who stated that; ‘..individuation means becoming a single, homogeneous being’

100

(1991, p.181). Thus, maintaining balance within the psyche establishes wholeness

within the individual. This requires a fundamental shift in organisational thinking. Lank

and Lank (1995, p.23) in De Charon (2003, p.11), maintain that;

“as organisations continue to face discontinuous change, intuition based decisions are

becoming increasingly imperative for defining the future… (and organisations) will need

to redefine their approach to management development and identify how best to develop

visionary leaders of the future”.

This subject will be expanded upon further in this thesis, in the enquiry into quantum

leadership skills, where the idea of a quantum being, relating to wholeness of the

psyche is explored.

In summary, it is this researcher’s conclusion, that intuition is an important attribute of

leaders, at all levels, and a differentiator between management and leadership

dichotomies and needs further research and enquiry into the intuition type as an

important factor of a new generation of leaders. It is clear from the arguments above

that intuition as aligned to idealised influence support the findings of Bass and Avolio’s

transformational model in line with their placement of heavy weighting on the idealised

influence construct. This researcher argues that in line with the requirement to distribute

leadership through out the organisation at all levels it is however impossible to maintain

the charismatic attributes associated with the idealised influence construct of the model.

This suggests that idealised influence at a level of individual consideration cannot exist,

as the characteristics of charisma, is such that a distance between leader and follower

needs to be maintained. This leaves a gap in the transformational leadership model in

future organisations.

(ii) Linking intelligence value measure to Jung types (MBTI) and to transformational

leadership constructs

The thinking and feeling paradigm that is related to decision making associated with

short-term goals is equated by Burke (2001) to the Intelligence Quotient, which is linear

and associated with verbal-linguistic and logical-mathematical skills as per the western

educational systems approach to learning over the past century. Zohar and Marshall

(2004), state that the rational IQ layer is used too often, in technology-driven western

cultures, to interact efficiently with the public world of written (linguistic) texts, timetables

101

and linear, goal-oriented planning, where as at home, away from the competitive

management environment, one relaxes in a mixed rational-associative mode of IQ-EQ

and allows emotions and dreams to be more associative. Davies (2001), suggested that

rational intelligence and cognitive abilities are associated with management (IQ). From

the discussion on Jungian psychological types one can then conclude that the rational

thinking and feeling psychological types as associated with Bass and Avolio’s

constructs of intellectual stimulation and individualised consideration respectively are

also associated with logical determinism and IQ.

Davies (2001) further suggested that irrational intelligence and emotional intelligence

are associated with leadership (EQ). Similarly as to IQ, one can then associate, based

on the findings of De Charon (Refer to Section 3.2.3.2), that the irrational sensing and

intuition Jungian psychological types as associated with the transformational leadership

constructs of inspirational motivation and idealised influence and are linked to EQ

(Davies, Sivanathan and Fekken, 2002; Mandell and Pherwani, 2003).

As stated above the summary of the links between intelligence value states, Jung type

behaviours and transformational leadership constructs are shown below.

• I.Q. (Intelligence Quotient) is ones rational or intellectual intelligence, which one

uses to solve logical and short-term strategic problems. What I/we think. It has

material capital implications (Zohar and Marshall, 2004). As linked to rational

thinking and feeling dichotomies of the MBTI and to intellectual stimulation and

individualised consideration of the transformational leadership model.

• EQ (Emotional Quotient) is ones emotional intelligence and gives one an awareness

of ones own and other people feelings, it allows one to make appropriate use of I.Q.

(Goleman, 1995). What I/we feel. It has social capital implications (Zohar and

Marshall, 2004). Linked to the irrational intuition and sensing dichotomies of the

MBTI and to idealised influence and inspirational motivation of the transformational

leadership model.

However, beyond the state of IQ and SQ, Zohar and Marshall (2004) believe that at the

centre of oneself, surface phenomena get put into a wider context and integrated with

one another. This process has been then associated with spiritual intelligence (SQ).

102

This analysis is in agreement with Jung’s understanding of wholeness requiring an

integration of psyche (Refer to Section 3.2.3.2). Zohar et al., have therefore introduced

SQ as an additional intelligence that quite unlike IQ, that computers possess, and EQ

that exists in all higher mammals, SQ is the sole domain of humans. SQ is linked to the

need for meaning, visioning, value and purpose. SQ underlies the things one believes

in and the role ones beliefs and values play in the actions that one takes and the shape

one gives to one’s life (Burke, 2001). Follett’s statements (1933, in Humphreys and

Einstein 2003), are also aligned with this thinking. She stated that, positional power was

authority and not real power. Power in her opinion, was a self-developing capacity

within a person, and a leader’s responsibility was to develop the workers own power

through creating opportunities to expand their own abilities and grow in personal

confidence (Refer to Section 3.2.2.2).

The value of meaning and higher levels of human endeavour that are associated with

adding value to a greater systems view of the world, beyond oneself or one’s

organisation is a paradigm associated with quantum physics and interconnectedness.

This uses SQ as linked to solving shared problems of meaning, value and purpose

(Zohar and Marshall, 2004). This is a paradigm of linking a collective consciousness to

strategic thinking and associative organisational forms of extended organisations

operating in a discontinuous environment. The link between the relationships of people

collectives, across organisational and spiritual boundaries is where SQ is positioned.

Zohar et al., utilise the scientific positioning of CAS, through the interconnectedness of

conscious and physical matter, to support their positioning of SQ as a legitimate

intelligence, thus following a process of integrating physical scientific modelling into the

social sciences.

SQ is ones spiritual intelligence and is used to solve shared problems of meaning and

value and purpose. What I/we, am/are. It has spiritual capital and relational implications.

(Zohar and Marshall, 2004). No link to MBTI or transformational leadership constructs

has been made, but authentic leadership does pose questions around spirituality within

the formation of this theory (Avolio and Luthans, 2004).

Thus suggesting that transformational leadership as a model and theory is not complete

and is missing a primary element required to integrate intuition and reason (Senge,

103

1984, 2001, 2006) and to understand the value of meaning and higher levels of human

endeavour that are associated with adding value to a greater systems view of the world,

beyond oneself or one’s organisation is a paradigm associated with quantum physics

and interconnectedness.

(iii) Linking intelligence state values to Maslow needs state values to behaviours

through Jung behaviour types (MBTI) to understand the gaps in transformational

leadership

The introduction of SQ in Section (ii) above, allows one to link discontinuous thinking

and quantum physics to values and resultant behaviours required in future leaders

operating in a discontinuous environment. This is due to another construct in the

formation of SQ, where Zohar and Marshall’s (2004) research is guided by Maslow’s

hierarchy of needs and associated motivation scales, suggesting that SQ values are

associated with these need and influencing motivational states. However within

leadership, especially behaviour and personality types, Schott (1992) suggests that the

link between Jung and Maslow is clear but that certain persons, as defined by Jung’s

personality types as captured in the MBTI, are more receptive to the process of

Maslow’s self-actualisation (Jung’s individuation) than others (Schott, 1992) supporting

Maslow’s premise, as commenting on Likert’s research (1961) that psychologically

healthier people make better managers (Maslow, 1965 in Schott, 1992).

Thus understanding Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, to define psychologically healthier

individuals, linked to MBTI will assist in defining the behaviour components that require

higher weighting when determining leadership attributes.

From a transformational leadership perspective, Bass (1985, p. 104) defined

transformational leadership as ‘..transforming follower’s needs, elevating them to higher

levels of Maslow’s hierarchy’. Schott (1992), takes this idea a step further in the linking

of Maslow needs motivators to behavioural concepts when he refers to Maslow’s own

works where he (Maslow) acknowledged his idea formation in part to Jung’s works in

his writings (1954, p.116; 1959, p. 125; 1961, s. vi). Jung (1971, p. 61) discussed

personality types as intrinsic stating that, ‘..the instincts are not vague and indefinite by

nature, but are specifically formed motive forces which, long before there is any

104

consciousness, and in spite of any degree of consciousness later on, pursue their

inherent goals.’ For Jung, the path to change, improvement and development (the road

to ‘individuation’) is ‘..in the integration of unconscious content into consciousness’

(Jung, 1980 in Donlevy, 1996).

Thus the integration of spiritual issues into consciousness, interconnected to physical

extensions (Refer to Section 3.2.3.2), which is an Einsteinian-Quantum concept in

linking consciousness to physical reality through the principle of interconnectedness.

Literature is sparse in linking Jung to Maslow, yet in one journal article, Schott (1992),

suggests that for one to grow to a point beyond self-actualisation as per Maslow or

individuation as per Jung (used interchangeably), and beyond to a point of self-

transcendence, beyond self-actualisation in Maslow’s hierarchy, as detailed by Jung as

being, is linked to personality types in that certain personalities are more predisposed

towards individuation than others.

In Schott's review of Jung (as per MBTI) and Maslow’s congruency, extroverted vs.

introverted personality types are more focused on others and the external world, which

prevents them from directing psychic attention to inward contemplation and self-

experience leading to self-actualisation.

On the sensing-intuition continuum, sensors focus on the discrete and factual, and may

be less able to enter into the holistic appreciation of moods, patterns and experiences

that the individuation process seems to require.

Along the thinking-feeling continuum, those leaders who are more in touch with their

affective side and their emotions may find it easier to transition to a point of self-

actualisation, beyond their ‘mid-life’ emotional period, which is an important period for

leaders.

The judging-perceiving continuum highlights that those who are more pre-disposed to

perceiving, with the ability to deal with fluidity, change and developmental detours are

more associated with the individuation process.

105

Schott (1992) states that beyond personality types ‘personal intelligences’ may be

particularly relevant to the path of self-actualisation. Zohar et al. (2004) have developed

SQ on the basis of individuals developing beyond self-actualisation towards Maslow’s

self-transcendence. This then suggests that SQ is linked to the introverted, feeling,

intuition and the perceiving side of ones personality, as per the discussion above. Zohar

et al. (2004) states, that SQ is used to solve shared problems of meaning, value and

purpose. It is what I/we, am/are, and has spiritual capital implications, which is a direct

link to peak experiences that takes into account a path through self-actualisation to a

point of the need for meaning, visioning, value and purpose (Zohar et al., 2004) as

aligned to Jung’s being. SQ underlies the things one believes in, and the role ones

beliefs and values play in the actions that one takes, and the shape one gives to one’s

life (Burke, 2001).

The implication for transformational leadership in this context is that the links made

within this section show a clear integration between transformational leadership

constructs, Jung type dichotomies and Maslow needs value states. Yet, the above

discussion has introduced introversion and perception as additional elements not

catered for in the transformational leadership model, but a primary element needed by

leadership enabling leaders to self-transcend, by integrating the elements of self-

actualisation through SQ by allowing leadership to enable the interconnectivity of

spiritual consciousness to the physical reality in an organisational setting.

(iv) Implication for leadership behaviour

In a complex world where relationships between the parts are important, the integration

of intelligence types to manage and lead is required. Senge (1980, p.168), as previously

stated suggests that the reintegration of reason and intuition is primarily important for

systems thinking, thus linking the two Jung dispositions of irrational intuition and rational

thinking together. Follett (1933, in Humphreys and Einstein 2003), seventy one years

ago stated that the power of a leaders was a self-developing capacity within a person,

and that it was a leader’s responsibility to develop this capacity within his workers

(followers), through creating opportunities for them to experience this leadership ability

within themselves, thus integrating conscious state with physical manifestation.

106

However, quite the opposite purveys in organisational thinking today. Horney (1937, pp.

125:126 in Schott, 1992, p. 115), suggested that,

“the person who seeks for power is the one who is just exactly the one who shouldn’t

have it, because he neurotically and compulsively needs power…The safest person to

give power to, is the one who doesn’t enjoy power. If one struggles for leadership…this

should make us question his ability.”

Schott (1992) sees this as an important irony in that, individuals who are psychologically

healthy, self-actualising, and democratic in their management styles often do not make

their way into leadership positions.

“Persons of more autocratic tendencies, who have not yet satisfied lower-level security

and safety needs, may pursue executive positions as a way of reducing anxiety and

compensating for deficiencies. Their attraction to management is often the desire to

exercise power per se” (Schott, 1992, p. 114)

Maslow argued that “self-actualised individuals make the best organisation leaders and

managers” (Maslow in Schott, 1992, p. 118). Thus Parker Follet (1933, 2006), Horney

(1937), and Senge (1980) are following in this same theory.

In a recent landmark five year study by Collins, (Refer to the book ‘Good to great’), the

leadership style that emerged from ‘great companies’, in support of the views from

Maslow, Jung, Follett, Horny, Kilman, Shelton and Zohar, shocked the system;

“We were surprised, shocked really, to discover the type of leadership required for turning

a good company into a great one. Compared to high-profile leaders with big personalities

who make headlines and become celebrities, the good-to-great leaders seem to have

come from Mars. Self-effacing, quiet, reserved, even shy – these leaders are a

paradoxical blend of personal humility and professional will. They are more like Lincoln

and Socrates than Patton or Caesar” (Collins, 2001 p. 12)

Collins’ study supports the premise of great leaders being ‘self-actualised’ or

‘individualised’ persons who have ‘transcended’ and have a notion of ‘being’.

107

The findings support the premise that transformational leadership does not support the

additional behavioural constructs required for leadership in a holistic sense as required

for systems thinking in organisations.

(v) Findings

The following Figure (Figure 3.2) is a representation of the discussion in this section

(linking transformational leadership behavioural constructs to the psychological

constructs of Jung via the MBTI tool and to the intelligence states of IQ, EQ and SQ via

Maslow as per Zohar and Marshall (2004) and Schott (1992). Figure 3.2 exhibits the

gaps that exist in the transformational leadership constructs that do not fulfil the need

for becoming a holistic individual required for a holistic leadership. The researcher

suggests that the value state as measured by SQ is the transition point as linked to the

value need driver of Maslow’s peak experiences, that allows one to transcend and

respond in a behaviour set that equates to a point of ‘being’ as per Jung. It is at this

point that a leader, once they know themselves and integrate their psyche through self-

actualisation, can lead others and true leadership emerges.

Figure 3.2: Linking transformational leadership constructs, Jung behavioural type dichotomies

(MBTI), Maslow need state values and intelligence quotients values.

This finding, is in support of the ‘Level 5’ leadership finding from the ‘Good to Great’

Feeling(affective &emotions)

Thinking(logical)

Perceiving(change &

Development)

Sensing(discrete &

factual)

Judging(dictating)

Intuition(moods,

patterns &experiences

Introverted(internal)

Extroverted(external)

MBTI

Jung Type

Dicho-

tomies

Analytical

Relational

Ta

cti

ca

l

Dire

ctin

g

Visio

nary

Str

ate

gic

self-actualisation

se

lf-a

ctu

ali

sa

tio

n

self-actualisation

self-

actu

alisatio

n

Feeling(affective &emotions)

Thinking(logical)

Perceiving(change &

Development)

Sensing(discrete &

factual)

Judging(dictating)

Intuition(moods,

patterns &experiences

Introverted(internal)

Extroverted(external)

MBTI

Jung Type

Dicho-

tomies

Analytical

Relational

Ta

cti

ca

l

Dire

ctin

g

Visio

nary

Str

ate

gic

self-actualisation

se

lf-a

ctu

ali

sa

tio

n

self-actualisation

self-

actu

alisatio

n

IQ

EQ EQ

JungIndividuation /

Maslow’s Peak Experiences /

Belonging

SQ

SQ

IQ

EQ

rational thinking linked to intellectual stimulation –analytical / logical decision making

rational feelinglinked to

individualised consideration –

relational / logical decision making

irrational intuitivelinked to

idealised influence / charisma –

strategic

irrational sensing linked to inspirational motivation -tactical

self-esteem

su

rviv

al&

& s

ecu

rity

survival & security

Struc

ture

surv

ival

& &

sec

urity

108

study by Collins (2001, pp. 36:37). In which he states that;

”..The great irony is that the animus that drives people to positions of power stand at odds

with the humility required for Level 5 leadership…those who have the potential to evolve

to Level 5…under the right circumstances – self-reflection, conscious personal

development, a mentor, a great teacher, loving parents, a significant life experience, a

Level 5 boss, or any number of these factors – they begin to develop.”

“..of the 1435 companies that appeared on the Fortune 500 in our initial candidate list,

only eleven made the very tough cut into our study. In those eleven, all of them had Level

5 leadership in key positions, including the CEO, at the pivotal time of transition” (Collins,

2006, p. 35)

Collins defines level 5 leaders in stating that this type of leadership does not flow with

conventional wisdom, ‘..especially the belief that we need larger-than-life saviours with

big personalities to transform companies, it is important to note that Level 5 is an

empirical finding and not an ideological one…Level 5 leaders are a study in duality:

modesty and wilful, humble and fearless” (Collins, 2001, p. 22)

This empirical finding supports a view beyond transformational leadership behavioural

constructs as the findings in this literature review would suggest.

3.2.3.3. Summary of findings

Through linkages to the Jung type dichotomies and the expected behaviours

associated, it is found that the transformational leadership model construct of idealised

influence (that carries the highest weighting in the transformational leadership model) is

associated with intuitive strategic ability, EQ and self-actualisation, which is highly

valued in a leadership context. But as this construct is aligned with charismatic

leadership in the transformational leadership model, it questions the ability to distribute

this leadership approach to lower levels of management, although it has been argued

that charisma does exist at all levels of management, this researcher maintains the

position that charisma as linked to idealised influence requires the necessary separation

of leadership from management to maintain the charismatic status required to lead

within this construct. This is especially important when charisma is the most valued

construct in the model, thereby elevating leadership beyond the realms of self-

109

leadership to an organisational hierarchy structural model, as aligned to a Newtonian-

Cartesian paradigm.

Beyond the transformational leadership construct links to Jung type behaviours through

the MBTI and value drivers through Maslow need states, the linking of the value

measures of intelligence states; EQ and IQ to the transformational leadership model

has also established a gap in terms of SQ as associated with wholeness of the

individual and associated maturity as associated with Jung’s ‘being’ and Maslow’s ‘self-

transcendence’ (Refer to 3.2.3.2). SQ, is seen to be the element that interconnects all

areas of psyche and allows one as a leader to holistically integrate all areas of psyche,

which has a fundamental impact on behavioural responses. This has implications when

dealing with distributed organisations, where self-leadership and relationship between

functions within an interconnected environment is a fundamental requirement (Refer to

Section 3.2.4) as per an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview, thus suggesting that the

transformational leadership model does not sufficiently satisfy this requirement.

The findings of the enquiry into the transformational leadership constructs as debated

through secondary literature review enquiry, suggest that there are shortcomings in the

transformational leadership model, that need to be addressed to fulfil the need for a

holistic leadership model. These areas fundamentally lie in the ability to integrate all

areas of psyche, which are not covered by the transformational leadership constructs,

and are shown in the behavioural Jung type dichotomies of perception and judging, and

extroversion and introversion. Perception and introversion being key concepts as these

are associated with SQ, and are fundamental to satisfy the total ambit of self-

actualisation, required for self-transcendence as per Maslow or being as per Jung,

which allows for full integration of psyche and a holistic approach to leadership.

3.2.4. Quantitative literature enquiry into the transformational leadership model

and the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)

3.2.4.1. Introduction to the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ)

The MLQ was developed by Bass and Avolio in 1985, by interviewing 70 senior

executives in a qualitative study. Its quantitative elements were developed iteratively,

through successive studies, creating subsequent versions of the MLQ (Alban-Metcalfe

110

& Alimo-Metcalfe, 2000; Northouse, 2004). The 1999 version of MLQ, uses a continuum

of seven behavioural factors to determine the level of a leader’s ability. These are:

(i) Transformational leadership (factors arranged in order of weighting)

• Idealised influence (Charisma)

• Inspirational motivation

• Intellectual stimulation

• Individualised consideration

(ii) Transactional leadership

• Contingent reward

• Management by exception

(iii) Laissez-faire behaviour

• Non-transactional leadership

3.2.4.2. Arguments for and against the MLQ

In this section, the researcher has selected the major findings in relation to the issues

surrounding the MLQ, from a secondary literature review of quantitative studies done by

various authors.

(i) Leaders and followers

Northouse (2004, p.198), noted that the MLQ “emphasises the importance of followers

in the leadership process and goes beyond the traditional transactional leadership

models and broadens leadership to include the growth of followers”. This was previously

argued against by a recent study by Alban-Metcalfe & Alimo-Metcalfe (2000), where

they noted that in their quantitative study, ‘..there was no such notion of transformational

leadership in the UK data. The emphasis (in the UK study) …is in what the leader does

(specifically) for the individual’, they further suggest that ‘..the U.S. (United States)

model has a strong sense of ‘followership’, almost entirely absent from the [UK (United

Kingdom) data] TLQ-LGV. In addition there is an element of humility and vulnerability in

the UK data (not present in US studies).” Thus suggesting that idealised influence

(charisma) as a strong influencing factor within the MLQ, as based on grounded theory

findings within the elements that make up the constructs of the transformational

111

leadership model, when plotted against other grounded research, from a quantitative

base is found to be not as important as previously expected. This may be due to the fact

that the Alban-Metcalfe et al. data are influenced by cultural influences, but this

researcher notes that the transformational leadership model and supporting MLQ are

global in approach and is purveyed as a general theory of leadership.

(ii) Morals and Values

Krishnan (2001) utilised MLQ as a base to separate out transformational leaders from

non-transformational leaders, against this separated population, he correlated value

system responses and found that high value systems are correlated to the group of

transformational leadership qualities found within the MLQ constructs. Northouse (2004,

p. 198) agrees in his statement that the MLQ “places a strong emphasis on morals and

values”.

(iii) Questions into trait like qualities

Northouse (2004, p. 198) states from a negative perspective that “the approach lacks

clarity” and implies that transformational leadership has a trait like quality. This shows

opposition to the requirements of leadership, where traits are qualities that can be

taught and can be faked, whereas behaviours in the sense of authentic or holistic

leadership, that integrates all areas of psyche can only be engendered through

experience and a deep understanding of oneself, via self-actualisation integration and

self-transcendence to a higher level of being (Refer to findings in Section 3.2.3.3).

(iv) Validity of constructs

Bass and Avolio in 1993, acknowledged the difficulty in establishing discriminant validity

of the four factors of transformational leadership, even so Hinkin and Tracey (1999),

suggest that there are several reasons for this;

The way in which the MLQ was created;

Hinkin and Tracey (1999) state that the measure was developed inductively and not

based on theoretical foundations leading to heavy post hoc factor analysis techniques to

determine scale construction. Also, they argue that simply because factors correlate

does not mean that they assess the same construct. They further quote Nunnally

112

(1978), in that without a strong theoretical foundation, there is little assurance that

results will demonstrate adequate construct validity.

Previous studies have focused on the MLQ have focused on the relationships between

the dimensions of the MLQ and various independent and dependent variables;

Hinkin and Tracey (1999), suggest that little attention has been given to psychometric

qualities of the transformational leadership measures (Boycio et al., 1995 in Hinkin and

Tracey, 1999). They further suggest that the MLQ has not been subjected to any

rigorous form of factor analysis to support the proposed theoretical structure or any

attempt to establish discriminant or convergent validity. This argument is supported by

Alimo-Metcalfe and Alban-Metcalfe (2001), who did do a discriminant and convergent

study in the United Kingdom and discovered many inconsistencies with the MLQ (see

TLQ-LGV analysis later in this Section).

There appear to be problems with the theoretical content of some of the items included

in the MLQ;

“The content adequacy analysis showed that 16 of the MLQ items had questionable

properties…however a great deal of clarity was revealed once these items were

removed” (Hinkin and Tracey, 1999, p. 6).

The expectation that charismatic leaders are required in typical business organisations

may be unrealistic;

Tichy and Devanna (1986), support this view in that it may take a crisis for a charismatic

leader to emerge. They further suggest that charisma as an attributional process as per

Conger and Kanungo (1987), and that the extent to which idealised influence/charisma

can be operationalised in terms of specific behaviours may be quite limited. Results

from a studies by Yukl (1994), Bennis and Nanus (1985) and, Alimo-Metcalfe and

Alban-Metcalfe (2001), de-emphasising charisma and is therefore consistent with the

findings of Hinkin and Tracey and support the gap as defined within the qualitative

analysis (Refer to Section 4.3.3, Chapter 4).

In summary, Hinkin and Tracey (1999, p. 6) state that; “The results from the current and

previous research suggests that perhaps Bass and his colleagues have developed a

113

good theory of transformational leadership, but they have not designed a measure that

assesses it very well. Alternatively, perhaps their theory is flawed”.

(v) Idealised influence (Charisma) questioned as a primary behaviour

Hinkin and Tracey (1999), in their empirical analysis of the MLQ (5X), question the

relevance of charisma for transformational leadership. Their study further reveals many

aspects that question the validity of the MLQ itself. They conducted two studies; the first

study investigated the content, via a content adequacy assessment and the second

study conducted tests for including a series of factor analyses, internal consistency

estimates and correlations to a revised set of transformational leadership items.

The first study revealed through content adequacy analysis that 23 of 39 items were

classified correctly and that there was therefore some support for the content supporting

the four constructs of transformational leadership. The most striking issue revealed was

that there was lack of support for ‘Idealised influence’. Only three of nine charismatic

items survived the content adequacy test.

The second set of studies through factor analysis showed that charisma (idealised

influence), lacked empirical support, leading Hinkin and Tracey to report that it was

difficult for respondents to differentiate idealised influence as a separate construct. This

analysis supports the findings evidenced in the qualitative secondary literature review

study conducted (Refer to findings in Section 3.2.3.3).

Doubts in the MLQ, due to the value placed on charisma or idealised influence, was

further explored and expanded on, in a study conducted in the United Kingdom (U.K.)

by Alban-Metcalfe & Alimo-Metcalfe, 2000 – the Transformational Leadership Quotient

for Local Government (TLQ-LGV). In this study a new set of behavioural constructs

based on a grounded theory approach, were tested in line with an intensive qualitative

and quantitative study.

In the TLQ-LGV analysis (Alban-Metcalfe & Alimo-Metcalfe, 2000), nine separate

factors were revealed, all with a strong internal reliability, for transformational

leadership. This shows opposition to the MLQ where emphasis was put on

‘individualised consideration’ and ‘motivation factors’ as most indicative of strong

114

transformational leadership (Northouse, 2004). The nine constructs in the TLQ-LGV,

ranked from highest predictor variable to lowest are:

1. Genuine concern for others

2. Political sensitivity and skills

3. Decisiveness, determination, self-confidence

4. Integrity, trustworthiness, honesty and openness

5. Empowering, delegates, develops potential

6. Inspirational networker and promoter

7. Accessibility, approachability

8. Clarifies boundaries, keeps others informed, involves others in decisions

9. Encourages critical and strategic thinking

In their study Metcalfe & Metcalfe (2000), correlated these factors to criterion variables

of:

• Individual’s achievement (Enables over achievement)

• Job satisfaction (Behaves in ways that increase job satisfaction)

• Motivation (Increases motivation to achieve)

• Satisfaction with leadership style (Leads in a way that is satisfying)

• Stress (Leads in a way that reduces job related stress)

In the Alban-Metcalfe & Alimo-Metcalfe study (2000) study, both correlation and multiple

regression data provided evidence that ‘genuine concern for others’ or ‘individual

consideration’ as per the transformational leadership models definition, had the highest

correlations with the criterion variables and had the highest predictive variance shown in

each of the multiple regression equations. This factor was shown to be the most

consistent predictor of each of the five criterion variables. Further evidence of the

reliability of the TLQ-LGV data were the size of the sample, which included 32

Board/CEOs, 149 Directorate/Directors, 461 Senior/Assistant Directors and 811

Middle/Section-unit heads. This suggests a correlation between the studies of Alban-

Metcalfe & Alimo-Metcalfe and Kent, Crotts and Azziz (2001), where individual

consideration and not idealised influence (charisma) shows up as the most important

factor of leadership.

115

Table 3.1 shows the predictability of the criterion variables in order of most predictability

by the factors of the TLQ-LGV:

TABLE 3.1. PREDICTABILITY OF FACTORS ON CRITERION VARIABLES

Factor scale Factor Predictive criterion variable

1 • Genuine concern for others • Individual achievement

• Job satisfaction

• Motivation

• Satisfaction with leadership style

• Stress

2 • Political sensitivity and skills • None

3 • Decisiveness

• Determination

• Self-confidence

• Individual achievement


• Motivation


• Stress

4 • Integrity

• Trustworthiness

• Honesty and openness



• Stress

5 • Empowering

• Delegates

• Develops potential


• Motivation

6 • Inspirational networker

• Promoter


7 • Accessibility

• Approachability


• Motivation


• Stress

8 • Clarifies boundaries

• Involves others in decisions



116

TABLE 3.1. PREDICTABILITY OF FACTORS ON CRITERION VARIABLES

Factor scale Factor Predictive criterion variable

• Motivation


• Stress

9 • Encourages critical and

strategic thinking



• Motivation

• Satisfaction

Source: Adapted from Alban-Metcalfe & Alimo-Metcalfe (2000)

The continuum between the MLQ and the TLQ-LGV, suggest a less leader vs. follower

approach and is more relational in its intent with the factor of ‘genuine concern for

others’ being the factor with the highest correlations and the most meaningful predictor

variable for the criterion variables. This shows a more relational-centred approach in

favour of a systems view, than the leader-follower transformational model and MLQ

measurement instrument of Bass and Avolio (1999).

Further to these findings, a study on the four factors of transformational leadership by

Kent, Crotts and Azziz (2001), points to ‘individual consideration’ as the primary factor

for change and not idealised influence or the linked construct of inspirational motivation,

as per Bass and Avolio (1999). This study takes into account the factors of the MLQ and

plots them against a number of author’s views on behaviours engaged in by leaders.

These included Bennis & Nanus (1985), Conger (1989), Kotter (1990), Kouzes and

Posner (1995) and Kent et al. (1996) as per Kent, Crotts and Azziz (2001). The

variables from each of these authors were then tested with a questionnaire. A

Chronbach Alpha of 0.9919 suggested very high internal consistency, however only four

factors tested using the MLQ, had high enough variance to be used for factor analysis.

These four factors are (in order of highest loading to lowest loading) (Kent, Crotts,

Azziz, 2001):

1. Individual consideration: Deployment of self, encouraging commitment in followers,

aligning people, enabling others to act, enlisting and developing stakeholders.

“These factors include a category of behaviours that are related to: a sense of unit,

117

team and we-ness…in such a way as to engender commitment, stake-ownership

and empowerment. The behaviours seem intent on forming a sense of identity with a

larger whole…and installing a personal feeling of value in the larger

whole…empowers others to act, builds team spirit, fosters collaboration”.

2. Attention through vision; sensing opportunity and formulating a vision, establishing

direction, inspiring a shared vision and visioning. These items suggest behaviour of

“continuously discussing the vision, using graphical concepts, images and word

pictures to describe his or her ideas…expresses enthusiasm for his/her vision”

3. Trust through positioning; building trust through personal commitment, modelling the

way, building spirit and wilfulness, managing oneself. Behaviours relate to the

leaders state of being and emotional consistency.

4. Communication style; ability to relate ideas, taking time to relate the underlying

meaning and importance, “able to discuss the ideas at a deeper level such

as…values, beliefs and principles.”

3.2.4.3. Findings

The findings from Kent, Crotts and Azziz (2001) are in support the findings of the Alban-

Metcalfe & Alimo-Metcalfe study (2000) and further supports the views as per the

findings (Refer to Section 3.2.2.3 and 3.2.3.3), in the approach towards a holistic view of

leadership, beyond the leader-follower approach of transformational leadership

encouraged by the strong emphasis on idealised influence (charisma) as a construct.

Based on the above insight, this researcher argues that the constructs of the

transformational Leadership model, as tested in different cultural settings, should be

positioned differently, when the MLQ is used to measure leadership. This is especially

important, in light of this section’s findings in the move away from the charismatic

construct of idealised influence towards a construct of individual consideration, even to

a point of where the model seems to be more robust once the construct of idealised

influence is removed. This supports the Good-to-Great study (Collins, 2001), of the 11

most successful ‘Fortune 500’ companies in the U.S.A. over 35 years, where the

leaders of these companies were seen to be ‘..self-effacing, quiet, reserved, even shy’,

Collins further suggested that they were a ‘..paradoxical blend of personal humility and

professional will’ (Collins, 2001, p. 12). Thus, suggesting that transformational

leadership lacks in credibility when subjected to grounded research, which indicates

118

that the fundamental construct of idealised influence within the model is flawed and

therefore requires a review.

3.3. Authentic leadership

3.3.1. Introduction

Authentic leadership as a new leadership construct, has been growing in interest within

social sciences academia. Avolio, the leader of the change, together with a large

number of supporters, contend that ‘..the decrease in ethical leadership (e.g.,

Worldcom, Enron, Martha Stewart) coupled with an increase in societal challenges

(e.g., September 11 terrorism, fluctuating stock values, a downturn in the U.S.

economy) necessitates the need for positive leadership more so than in any other time’

(Cooper; Scandura; Schriesheim, 2005). This is an important change in direction for

leadership research as it supports the findings in this section on the questions into

transformational leadership (Refer to Section 3.2.3 and 3.2.4), and even more important

in that Avolio is at the forefront of the change, suggesting that as the joint architect of

transformational leadership with Bass, the pressure of a changing worldview has forced

a change in understanding of leadership. Cooper et al. (2005), further suggest that a

number of authors (Luthans & Avolio, 2003; Avolio, Gardner, Walumbwa, Luthans, &

May, 2004; Avolio, Luthans, & Walumbwa, 2004; Gardner, Avolio, Luthans, May, &

Walumbwa, 2005; Avolio & Gardner, 2005), ‘..argue that existing frameworks are not

sufficient for developing leaders of the future’. Thus further enhancing the findings made

by this researcher against the transformational leadership construct in this section and

the MLQ.

Michie and Gooty (2005), in support of Cooper et al’s (2005) position on a change in

leadership modelling towards a more positive leadership style, suggest that research

into leadership in the past ‘..has focused to a great extent on inspirational styles of

leadership, including visionary (Waldman, Bass and Yammarino, 1990; House, 1994;

Podsakoff, MacKenzie, Bommer, 1996; Sashkin, 1988), charismatic, (Conger &

Kanungo, 1987; Gardner & Avolio, 1998; House, 1977; House and Shamir, 1993; Klein

& House, 1995) and transformational (Avolio & Bass, 1995; Bass, 1997; Burns, 1978;

Carey, 1992; Jung, How & Wu, 2003; Lowe, Kroeck and Sivasubramaniam, 1996) and

argue that ‘..inspirational leadership is unethical because its rhetoric appeals to

119

emotions rather than to reason; it lacks the checks and balances of democratic process

and power distribution; and it exploits followers into foregoing their own best interests

(Bass & Steidlmeier, 1999; Beyer, 1999; Price, 2003; in Michie and Gooty, 2005).’

Furthermore, researchers are beginning to differentiate, ‘..between authentic and

inauthentic leaders’, supported by the statement that ongoing research by a number of

academic scholars suggests that ‘..authentic leaders are guided by a set of values that

are oriented toward doing what’s right and fair for all stakeholders (Bass & Steidlmeier,

1999; Luthans & Avolio, 2003; May, Chan, Hodges, & Avolio, 2003).’

The above insights support the findings (Refer to Sections 3.2.3 and 3.2.4) as to the

inappropriateness of transformational leadership as a holistic leadership model, where

the weightings are in support of idealised influence and inspirational motivation

(irrational intuitive and sensing) as their primary disposition, as per Jung’s

psychological typology (De Charon, 2003 in Section 3.2.3.2 of this thesis) and further

supporting the insights drawn from the literature review enquiry (Refer to Section 2.3,

Chapter 2) into organisational design that includes all stakeholders within an

Einsteinian-Quantum worldview versus a Newtonian-Cartesian one, wherein a set of

holistic values (Refer to Section 2.4, Chapter 2), guide the behavioural decision making

responses (to be deduced in Chapter 4).

3.3.2. Suggested elements of authentic leadership

Michie and Gooty (2005) have suggested the following propositions for authentic

leadership values, mental models towards organising and behaviours;

3.3.2.1. Proposition 1: Authentic leaders will have both self-enhancement and self-

transcendent values, but will give higher priority to self-transcendent values. Gardner,

Avolio, Luthans, May, Walumbwa (2005) support Michie et al.(2005) in alignment of

values as core to this leadership construct proposing that authentic leadership;

• Will ensure that leaders possess higher levels of self-awareness, including self-

clarity and self-certainty, than other leaders.

• Will ensure that leaders are more aware of, and committed to, their core end values.

120

3.3.2.2. Proposition 2: Authentic leaders will frequently experience positive other-

directed emotions toward inside and outside stakeholders. This other-directed

behaviour is once again supported by Gardner et al (2005), in their proposition that

authentic leadership;

• Possesses higher levels of emotional intelligence (EQ)

• Possesses trustworthiness, integrity, credibility, respect for others, fairness, and

accountability as core personal identity images within leaders

• Will create leaders that are positive models for others

• Exemplifies the following attributes; trustworthiness, honesty, integrity, credibility,

respect for others, fairness, and accountability

3.3.2.3. Proposition 3: Frequent experiences of positive-other directed emotions will

moderate the relationship between a leader’s values and actions, such that authentic

leaders will exhibit high consistency between their self-transcendent values and

behaviours. This proposition is once again supported by Gardner et al. (2005), in that

they propose too, that behaviour is in support of and a response to self-transcendent

values. They propose that authentic leadership;

• Is motivated by self-verification and self-improvement goals, as opposed to ego

defence motives to pursue self enhancement and self-protection objectives

• Achieve greater congruence between their actual and ideal selves, resulting in more

positive emotions and well-being

• Increases a leaders ability to gain self-knowledge and awareness, so that decisions

and actions become increasingly self-determined and congruent with their

internalised values and goals

• Ensures that leaders engage in more balanced processing of self relevant and other

information to arrive at more accurate perceptions of themselves and others

• Behaviour is consistent with felt, and espoused, end values, identities and beliefs

• Self-awareness and balanced processing are positively related to behavioural

authenticity

• Increases a leaders self-awareness and self-acceptance, they become more

transparent in communicating their values, identity, emotions, goals and motives to

others.

121

• Creates organisational climates that are more inclusive, caring, engaged, and more

oriented towards developing strengths.

3.3.3. Questions into authentic leadership

Cooper, Scandura and Schriesheim (2005, p. 493) contend that; ‘..scholars in this area

(still) need to give careful consideration to four critical issues: (1) defining and

measuring the construct, (2) determining the discriminant validity of the construct, (3)

identifying relevant construct outcomes (i.e., testing the construct’s Nomo logical

network), and (4) ascertaining whether authentic leadership can be taught.’ two of the

only published writings on authentic leadership have more or less brushed past these

issues to focus on authentic leadership development (Luthans & Avolio, 2003; May et

al., 2003)’ and that ‘..only after the authentic leadership concept is clearly defined, may

scholars then move onto measurement creation’ (Cooper et al., 2005, p. 493).

3.3.4. Findings

The above discussion suggests that as much as authentic leadership has been

proposed as a new construct or in some cases the ‘root’ construct for leadership (Avolio

and Gardner, 2005, p. 315), it is seen as the next extension of transformational

leadership as it’s approach, as seen by the authors (Refer to Section 3.3.1), is a view on

the authentic side of transformational leadership versus the inauthentic or pseudo side

of transformational. As such, much research is still required before this suggested

construct, can be viewed as a construct and measured as such (Refer to Section 3.3.3).

3.4. Conclusion

Collins and Porras (1994), predicted that companies will begin to organise themselves

to be less dependent on charismatic leaders (as per the transformational leadership

theory), and that companies do not need visionary leaders. They state that visionary

leadership is a myth and that, ‘..a charismatic visionary leader is absolutely not required

and in fact, can be detrimental to a company’s long-term prospects’ (Collins and Porras,

1994, p. 64). Collins and Porras (1994), further suggest that future organisations would

seek to become visionary companies by building flexibility and responsiveness into their

organisational systems. Various authors agree and add that this will take place through

122

team-based structures and through process re-engineering. (Emery and Purser, 1996;

Weisbord, 1992; Landrum, Howell and Paris, 2000).

These scholars further believe that this organisational structure will take care of natural

succession, as knowledge can be transferred and retained in a team-based

environment, which is not the case with charismatic leadership, where charisma has

trait type qualities. Furthermore, the value of this new type of organisational structure is

that teams are also superior to individuals in their judgement and problem-solving

abilities (Bass and Stodgill, 1990; Koehler and Pankowski, 1996; Lawler, 1986; Pfeffer,

1999) and share a greater source of knowledge (Lawler, 1986). Landrum et al.(2000)

suggest that this strategic change through team-based organisational re-design and

process re-engineering, will be longer lasting and more responsive to future changes

than change initiated by a charismatic leader. This together with the findings (Refer to

Section 3.2.3.3 and 3.2.4.3), suggest that transformational leadership does not define

through its constructs, as tested within grounded theory, a holistic approach to model

and measure leadership.

Further to the debate on transformational leadership constructs, empowerment of the

organisation to flatter structures and team-based approaches within complex

environments, suggest decision making at much lower levels of the organisation and

suggests a self-leadership direction, driven by intrinsic assumptions, values and

behaviours at every level of the organisation – a paradigm shift in culture aligned to new

organisational models, as supported by Follet where ‘..the leader must understand the

situation, must see it as a whole, must see the interrelation of all parts…He must see

the evolving equation, the developing situation…his wisdom, his judgement, is used not

on a situation that is stationary, but one that is changing all the time’ (Follett, 1933, in

Humphreys et al., 2003, p. 51).

Authentic leadership speaks to this need beyond transformational leadership, where the

process of creating this proposed new leadership theory ‘..draws from both positive

psychological capacities and a highly developed organisational context, which results in

both greater self-awareness and self-regulated positive behaviour on the part of leaders

and employees, fostering positive self-development. The authentic leader is confident,

123

hopeful, optimistic, resilient, transparent, moral/ethical, future-oriented, and gives

priority to developing employees to be leaders’ (Luthans and Avolio, 2003, p.243).

However authentic leadership, as suggested in this section is a linear extension of

transformational leadership and is a response to questions raised of the

transformational leadership theory and the MLQ as a measurement instrument, and is

still to be authenticated as a leadership construct as suggested in the findings in chapter

3 (Section 3.3.4)

This researcher argues that a true unified and holistic theory of leadership will only be

achieved when the base of understanding organisations fundamentally shifts in line with

the science, models and values that this behaviour is a response too. This further

suggests that a deeper enquiry is needed into a new paradigm of leadership as

supported by the findings of Follett (1933, 2003), Alban-Metcalfe et al (2000), Kent et

al.(2001), and Zohar et al. (2004), aligned to Jung and Maslow’s understanding of

psyche in terms of a higher level leadership, beyond self-actualisation towards self-

transcendence / peak experiences (Maslow), in line with being (Jung) and SQ, which is

the balance between self and a purpose driven service towards a greater systems or

community based view of the world. This derivation must be based in the paradigm shift

aligned to a scientific paradigm shift and the models and values it pre-supposes. This is

in support of the new debate around authentic leadership (Michie et al,. 2005, and

Gardner et al, 2005) and supports this thesis in the fundamental debate around holistic

leadership models, which include the dimensions associated with conscious interaction

as per the findings in chapter 2.

Dubrin (2006) developed a framework for understanding leadership effectiveness

through the evaluation of leadership theories within the context of the models they are

built on. The Dubrin leadership framework is defined within a set of variables and can

be expressed in a formula notation: L=f(l,gm,s); where Leadership is a function of the

following key variables; the leader’s characteristics and traits (l), behaviour and style (l),

group member’s characteristics (gm) and situational variables of the internal and

external environment (s), as referred to (Figure 4.1) below, for a diagrammatic

explanation of the framework.

124

Figure 3.3: A framework for understanding leadership

Source: Dubrin, A.J., Leadership research findings, practice and skills, 2006

Firstly in Table 3.2, gaps in transformational leadership are viewed from the structure as

provided by the Dubrin framework, from the perspective of conscious interaction within

leadership models as suggested by the literature review enquiry findings in Section 2.6

on conscious interaction with matter and authentic leadership construct suggestions in

Section 3.3. to align chapter 3 to chapter 2 findings. In table 3.3, a holistic approach is

taken to the literature review in chapter 3 on transformational leadership from both a

qualitative and quantitative perspective and gaps shown in terms of the findings in

chapter 3 (Refer to Section 3.2.3.3 and 3.2.4.3)

The following set of tables (Refer to Table 3.2. and 3.3) are positioned to simplify the

insights gained from the literature review study into transformational leadership

constructs and through these the determinable gaps exposed by taking into account;

leadership in holistic terms using the Dubrin (1965) leadership framework.

Leader characteristics

and traits (l)

Internal and external

environment (s)

Leader behaviour and

style (l)

Group member characteristics

(gm)

Leadership effectiveness

125

TABLE 3.2

DETERMINABLE GAPS OF CONSCIOUS INTERACTION THROUGH PRIMARY AND SECONDARY LITERATURE REVIEW ENQUIRY INTO TRANSFORMATIONAL

LEADERSHIP (DUBRIN FRAMEWORK)

Dubrin framework for

understanding leadership

holistically

Exclusion of conscious interaction in leadership models Inclusion of consciousness in leadership models


environment (s):

Charismatic leadership as the dominant construct within transformational

(leader-follower) leadership is not positioned to lead within organically

formed organisations.

Transformational leadership is not structured to lead within

organically styled organisations that require self-leadership

Leadership behaviour (l): The 'charismatic' nature of transformational leadership, which separates

leaders from followers cannot in essence, drive relationships between

leaders and followers from a basis of self-esteem, self-efficacy and values

position, which are psyche and intellect based drivers and dependent on

trust within relationships. These trust relationships are in support of an

Einsteinian-Quantum worldview and excluded within a Newtonian-Cartesian

worldview, where separation of parts is a fundamental supporting principle

and is in support of a charismatic leadership proposition.

The gap in behaviour as related to Transformational leadership is in

the requirement to drive a response from a follower, instead of

conscious individuals who are trusted and empowered to make

decisions, which is a relational approach and not a leader-follower

approach to leadership. Thus suggesting that leader and follower

style of leadership requires reactionary, cause and effect influences

as per a Newtonian-Cartesian scientific paradigm

Group member

characteristics (gm):

This researcher contends that contingency theories of leadership fall into the

trap of a Newtonian-Cartesian worldview, in that they suggest that external

factors influence leadership behaviour from a pure cause and effect

positioning without taking into account the individual's freedom for a

behavioural response based on psychological and spiritual factors inherent

in the person and not the situational conflict at the time. These factors are

defined in characteristics, traits and value systems and if aligned to

organisational values, then external influences, are an input too, but should

not be the basis upon which leadership behaviour and responses are

based. Contingency theory from a group member perspective would

suggest that leadership behaviour is a response or knee-jerk reaction to

situational influences and not based on mature psyche and spiritual value

Leadership in a contingency theory approach has gaps in that it does

not take into account value and spirit based decision making at an

individual level and suggests that leadership is a pure cause and

effect reaction to situational influences and therefore based on a

Newtonian-Cartesian scientific paradigm

126

systems. Thus, it is the researcher's opinion that contingency theory relies

on a force and reaction based worldview, which is built on a Newtonian-

Cartesian paradigm.

Leadership characteristics

and traits (l):

Current leadership characteristics show a behavioural response based on

situational influences or as a driver to influence a followers to respond.

There is a view that Transformational leadership is a return to Traits. This

leadership approach focuses on the physical aspects of leadership (Psyche

and Intellect) and ignores the Conscious and Spiritual Value drivers.

Leadership characteristics as reviewed in current leadership theory

suggest that; Leadership is a response to only physical aspects

measured by psyche and intellect, and ignores the Spiritual and

interconnectedness of conscious participation and that leadership is

dependent on traits therefore responses are aligned to 'birthright'.

Leaders are born not made. Thus, supporting a pure IQ, EQ link to

leadership in line with a Newtonian-Cartesian scientific paradigm.

127

TABLE 3.3: DETERMINABLE GAPS THROUGH PRIMARY AND SECONDARY LITERATURE REVIEW ENQUIRY INTO TRANSFORMATIONAL LEADERSHIP

Dubrin framework for

understanding leadership

holistically

Insight from enquiry into

origins of

Transformational

leadership

Secondary qualitative

enquiry into

Transformational

leadership

Secondary quantitative enquiry into Transformational leadership


environment (s):

Transformational leadership

is found to be lacking by

those who proposed it as

the complete leadership

theory (Bass and Avolio,

1994). Authentic leadership

is presented as a broad

construct incorporating

other positive leadership

approaches, including

transformational,

charismatic, servant and

spiritual leadership (Avolio

and Gardner, 2005).

IQ and EQ are linked to

transformational leadership

constructs; Davies (2001)

suggested that non-rational

intelligence and emotional

intelligence are associated

with leadership (EQ).

Similarly as to IQ, one can

then associate, based on

the findings of De Charon,

that the irrational sensing

and intuition Jungian

psychological types as

associated with Bass and

Individual consideration and not Charisma/idealised influence is the

most influencing leadership construct within Transformational

leadership. (Kent, Cotts and Aziz, 2001), which is aligned to the

Quantum values of interconnectivity and relationships between

individuals through a shared central tenet of meaning. This suggests that

interconnectivity between organisational participants and not separation

as per the leader follower-model in quantitative analysis, supports the

outcomes that Transformational leadership is based on a Newtonian-

Cartesian premise and that an Einsteinian-Quantum based model needs

to be considered where interconnectivity and relationship are the core

values through a link to a central tenet of meaning within the context of

bounded instability.

128

Leadership behaviour (l): Suggestions that

Transformational leadership

is a return to trait theory

combined with situational

factors (contingency theory)

(Weihrich and Koontz,

1993, in Humphreys and

Einstein, 2003), shows a

link to causality in the

leadership behavioural

constructs. i.e. Leadership

behaviour is a response to

situational factors and is

directionally trait based.

Thus suggesting a cause-

effect relationship and a

connection to a Newtonian-

Cartesian scientific

paradigm

Avolio's constructs of

inspirational motivation and

idealised influence are

linked to emotional linkages

of transformational

leadership and self-

actualisation of individuals

and EQ (Davies,

Sivanathan and Fekken,

2002; Mandell and

Pherwani, 2003). Thus a

gap for SQ exists in the


model - the quest for

individual meaning within

an organisational context.

Thus, further suggesting

the base for


is within a Newtonian-

Cartesian paradigm and

influenced by organisational

design and situational

factors.

MLQ - Bass, Avolio

(1994)

Transformational

leadership

1.Idealised influence

(charisma)

2. Inspirational Motivation

3. Intellectual Stimulation

4. Individualised

consideration

Transactional leadership

5. Contingency Reward

6. Management by

exception

Laissez-faire leadership

7. Non-transactional

TLQ/LGV

Metcalfe &

Metcalfe (2000)

1. Genuine

concern for

others

2.

Decisiveness,

determination &

self-confidence

3. Clarifies

boundaries,

involves others

4. Encourages

critical strategic

thinking

MLQ: 4Factors Kent,

Crotts, Azziz (2001)

1. Individual

consideration

2. Attention through

vision

3. Trust through

positioning & Managing

oneself

4. Communication style

129

From the insights gained, in table 3.2. and 3.3. above it is proposed that

transformational leadership has a causality relationship to external influences in line

with situational factors within contingency leadership theory, to which the leadership

behavioural response follows trait like qualities (Humphreys et al, 2003, Northouse,

2004), which is then used to influence followers into a specific response. This cause

and effect relationship combined with the strong charismatic trait of idealised influence

to bring about this response, which causes a separation between leader and follower

(Alban-Metcalfe et al., 2000; Kent et al., 2003), is in direct opposition to an integrated

relationship of interconnected participants, where; decision making is pro-active and not

reactive, is made possible through empowered relationships in which conscious

participants make decisions based on an understanding of their environment through

conscious participation, guided by a central tenet of meaning (Wheatley, 1999; Zohar et

al., 2004). There are no followers in this environment, suggesting thus, that

transformational leadership is based on a scientific premise of Newtonian-Cartesian

cause and effect physics, where the models that it elicits suggest that external

influences determine responses in line with contingency theory and within a conscious

participatory realm where a leader-follower separated relationship is maintained

between organisational participants.

Furthermore, the leadership behaviour in response to this paradigm is through ones

charisma / idealised (to think of or represent somebody or something as being perfect,

ignoring any imperfections that exist or may exist in reality, Encarta, 2008) influence to

elicit a favourable response from followers. This suggests an un-authentic approach to

leadership and within the context of this review not in line with the paradigm shift in

science based on Einsteinian-Quantum theory, this line of thinking is supported by the

new iterative enquiry into authentic leadership, where the positive side of transformation

leadership is explored (Avolio et al, 2005) and is driven by values as previously

indicated has a strong correlation to transformational leadership constructs (Krishnan,

2001; Northouse, 2004) and supports this study methodology of values having a

motivational effect on leadership behaviour as a response to values systems.

Furthermore, within quantitative studies of the MLQ, serious questions have been raised

by Hinkin (1999), Alban-Metcalfe et al. (2000) and Kent et al. (2003) as to the construct

validity of the MLQ.

130

This researcher further argues in favour of the findings of Collins (2001, p. 36); in which

he suggests that leadership should possess the following characteristics;

Professional will:

• Creates superb results, a clear catalyst in the transition from good to great

• Demonstrates an unwavering resolve to do whatever must be done to produce the

best long term results, no matter how difficult.

• Sets the standard of building an enduring great company; will settle for nothing less.

• Looks in the mirror, not out the window, to apportion responsibility for poor results,

never blaming other people, external factors, or bad luck.

Personal humility:

• Demonstrates a compelling modesty, shunning public adulation; never boastful

• Acts with quiet, calm determination; relies principally on inspiring standards, not

inspiring charisma, to motivate.

• Channels ambition into the company, not the self; sets up successors for even

greater success in the next generation.

• Looks out the window, not in the mirror, to apportion credit for the success on the

company – to other people, external forces, and good luck.

Collins (2001, pp.36:37) hypothesis is that there are two kinds of people;

“The first category consists of people who could never in a million years bring

themselves to subjugate their egoistic needs to the greater ambition of building

something larger and more lasting than themselves. For these people, work will

always be first and foremost about what they get – fame, fortune, adulation, power,

whatever – not what they build, create and contribute. The second category of

people – and I suspect the larger group – consist of those who have the potential to

evolve to Level 5…under the right circumstances – self-reflection, conscious

personal development, a mentor, a great teacher, loving parents, a significant life

experience, a Level 5 boss, or any number of these factors – they begin to develop.”

In summary, many other scholars (Refer to Chapter 2 and Chapter 3) suggest that a

new model of leadership is required. It is determined that a gap exists in current

leadership theory and it is therefore posited that this gap can only be filled by a

131

leadership theory that requires behaviours to be a response aligned to values as

determined by interconnected models of physics and conscious participation as pointed

to by Einsteinian-Quantum scientific principles. In chapter 4 a new leadership model,

based on an Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm, is derived to answer the gaps as defined

in the literature review in chapter 2 and 3.

132

CHAPTER 4: DERIVATION OF A QUANTUM LEADERSHIP MODEL

4.1. Introduction

This chapter follows a deductive approach within the descriptive theory section of the

research methodology (Refer to Figure 5.1, Chapter 5). Observations and

classifications, in chapter 2 are taken further to define relationships or correlations

between variables through the process of derivation of a Quantum Leadership Model

(QLM). In the context of existing theory, these phenomena and the circumstances in

which they find themselves are presented through deduction into typologies and

frameworks utilising a deductive category application process, contained within content

analysis methodology. Though this process, the researcher discovers anomalies that

are present within this categorisation. Furthermore, these statements of correlation from

this stage are aligned to the research hypothesis, which forms the basis for new

models, testing and subsequent theory.

The chapter 2 literature review summaries on science (Refer to Section 2.2.3), models

(Refer to Section 2.3.3), and values (Refer to Section 2.4.3) and the enquiry in chapter

3, into the current leadership theories (Refer to Section 3.2.2.3 and 3.3.4), models

(Refer to Section 3.2.3.3) and measurement instruments (Refer to Section 3.2.4.3) has

provided a set of gaps associated with our current paradigm of thinking that leadership

is based on (Chapter 2) and the subsequent gap in current leadership models (Chapter

3), suggesting that the gap aligns itself to the chasm between Newtonian-Cartesian and

Einsteinian-Quantum worldviews, which these gaps elude too. This identified gap has

opened up a new vein of enquiry into leadership that does not try to build on previous

leadership theory or find a link between the two worldviews based on science, but

instead bases its proposed theory squarely on the basis of the new science of quantum

physics and associated sciences, as a stand alone theory.

The new quantum worldview base introduces metaphoric models for organisational

design, the value sets associated and the behaviour response that it exerts and requires

from leaders wanting to grow organisations in a multi-dimensional and often chaotic

environment. This environment, in which absolute knowledge is unavailable and ‘ceteris

133

paribus’ (all conditions remaining the same) conditions can not be applied to real world

problems, has been a trend of economic theory for years, but has been modelled

according to Newtonian-Cartesian linear based theories and have forced many

economic theories to depend on multiple assumptions and base outcomes in a vacuum

(ceteris paribus). However, the world does not operate in these perfectly constructed

conditions. Insights from quantum physics, thermodynamics and complex adaptive

systems (CAS), give us an opportunity to view organisations in a multiple dimensional

way and a set of scientific models to base our organisational modelling on, within a set

of parameters (bounded instability) or values, allowing this environment to become

manageable. It is this value set then that elicits a particular leadership behavioural

response that ensures sustainability of this new system. This insight thus allows one to

begin to postulate a new theory - a quantum organisational leadership theory.

To move towards postulating a theory, a model must be derived that can be utilised as a

base to test this theory. To begin one must consider the literature as reviewed, on

quantum thinking and its applicability as a metaphor for leadership, from the various

researchers, in light of their own specific insights to ‘parts’ of a complete theory. Many of

these theories, although published in scientific, psychological and management

journals, carry only specific aspects of the total leadership theory and as such no

holistic leadership theory exists (Campbell, 2007). The purpose of this section is to link

these ideas, as discussed in the literature review, in a coherent manner, via a content

analysis process as these insights pertain to science, models, values and behaviour.

This common framework will then be utilised as a pro-forma model, to be tested and a

general theory as related to this new paradigm of scientific thought – a quantum

organisational leadership theory, will be postulated (Refer to research methodology,

Chapter 5).

To understand the phenomena as presented in chapter 2 and 3, these observations and

classifications are taken further to define relationships or correlations between variables

through the process of derivation of a Quantum Leadership Model (QLM), in the context

of existing theory these phenomena and the circumstances in which they find

themselves are presented through deduction into typologies and frameworks utilising a

deductive category application process, contained within content analysis methodology.

Though this process, the researcher discovers anomalies that are present within this

134

categorisation. Furthermore, these statements of correlation from stage are aligned to

the research hypothesis, which forms the basis for new models, testing and subsequent

theory.

The approach used to derive the quantum leadership model, is the same paradigm shift

model, (Refer to Section 5.4 of Chapter 5). Thus coherency and consistency of

approach is followed, as this same model was used to understand the gaps between

the scientific base, models, values and leadership behaviours in the literature review

The paradigm shift model will be used to understand and to assist in clearly defining the

new mental models required for organisational design within this paradigm, i.e. the

physical models postulated by the metaphoric scientific models in quantum science and

CAS, the associated values and then the derived leadership behaviour sets elicited by

these values. In aligning these tables a methodology known as content analysis is used

to determine the links between the authors to align the common elements. The following

diagram (Refer to Figure 4.1.) shows the framework approach taken in deriving the new

quantum leadership behavioural model in line with the above points. The process of

deriving the quantum leadership model will be dealt with in detail in Section 4.2.

135

Figure 4.1: Framework approach for deriving and analysing the proposed quantum leadership

model

In overview, the process of deriving the model encompasses six phases.

4.1.1. Phase 1 (Ph 1): Scientific paradigm and modeling synthesis

To synthesise the research on quantum and CAS theory models as a metaphor for

organisational design, the research method utilised is deductive in context and takes the

form of a content analysis combining a common scientific paradigm (Quantum, CAS

and Thermodynamics) to find common linkages between various authors, as per the

literature review (Refer to Chapter 3), who utilise this same scientific paradigm to

determine organisational design elements.

• Step 1: The process applied is one of developing a common scientific theory

‘paradigm alignment’ table, through alignment of scientific theory.

• Step 2: This table is then utilised in driving an overall table of organisational design

elements, as linked to the scientific theory as a metaphor.

Jung

Maslow

Der

ive

beha

viou

r,m

otiv

atio

ns a

nd v

alue

s ta

ble

Schott(1992)

Burke(2001)

Davies(2001)

Charon(2003)

Bass &Avolio(1999)S

ingl

e co

mm

on a

lignm

ent t

able

: Sci

ence

, Mod

els,

Val

ues,

Beh

avio

urs

QuantumLeadershipBehaviour

QuantumValues

QuantumOrg. designParadigm

Qua

ntita

tive

anal

ysis

to d

eter

min

e th

e im

pact

of t

he

Qua

ntum

Lea

ders

hip

shift

Inte

llige

nce

Val

ue m

odel

s

Lead

ersh

ip b

ehav

iour

cons

truc

tsD

eter

min

e ga

ps

Alig

n so

lutio

ns a

nd r

econ

text

ualis

e

Ph.3 Ph.4

CASModels

QuantumPrinciples/

models

Der

ive

com

mon

sci

entif

ic th

eory

alig

nmen

t tab

le

Kilman(2001)

Shelton & Darling

(2004)

Wheately(1999)

Zohar &Marshall(2003)

Org

anis

atio

nald

esig

n m

odel

tabl

eB

ehav

iour

and

mot

ivat

iona

l sc

ales

tabl

e

Ph.1

Ph.2

Ph.2

Initial quantitativeanalysis todetermine

weightings &dependent &

independent variables

Der

ive

Qua

ntum

lead

ersh

ip m

odel

& c

onst

ruct

s

Ph.1

Ph.2

Ph.5

Ph.6

Ph.2

136

4.1.2. Phase 2 (Ph 2): Value states and behaviour synthesis

To synthesise the research on values (Maslow) and Behaviour (Jung), the research

method used is again a deductive one, making use of correlation analysis, where the

researcher seeks to determine the linkages between personality behaviour sets (MBTI),

motivations and values, including intelligence state values, through the common

psychological foundational links found through the literature review research stage

(Refer to Chapter 4). The outcome will be a combined table of values and associated

behaviours.

4.1.3. Phase 3 (Ph 3): Linking content analysis to form a common integration

table

The method used to create a table that links a scientific paradigm to organisational

design, to values and behaviours, as a base to derive a quantum leadership model from

is again a deductive one, utililising the content analysis tables from Phase 1 and 2. The

alignment of physical modeling dimensions through science to conscious psychological

dimensions are made via the links between the value needs states of Maslow’s

hierarchy of needs and CAS as per the literature review research conducted (Refer to

Chapter 3). The outcome is thus a general table of all dimensions (dichotomies) to be

utilised, in deriving a quantum leadership model.

4.1.4. Phase 4 (Ph 4): Analyse, contextualise, restructure and derive

• Step 1: Analyse and contextualise the table as formulated in Phase 3 (Refer to

Section 4.2.3), through understanding groupings of like elements, and anomalies,

allows one to translate/contextualise the data elements into information, from which

one can then begin to formulate initial insights.

• Step 2: Restructuring of the table in step 1, in line with the paradigm shift model.

This must be done to ensure consistency of approach to the paradigm shift model as

the behavioural and value elements were initially aligned through content analysis.

The restructuring of the table will change the table to have four specific areas of; (1)

science models (paradigm as a base), (2) organisational design (OD) (scientific

model implications as a metaphor), (3) value systems including continual conscious

137

interaction in running the organisation (People), and (4) behaviour as a response to

paradigm modeled in OD and associated value systems.

• Step 3, is then to derive the quantum leadership organisational model and

constructs.

4.1.5. Phase 5 (Ph 5): Determine behavioural construct directional influence and

construct weightings

To determine construct weightings and dependent and independent variables, the

Maslow needs and motivational value driver scores as per Zohar et al (2004) are

utilised as a base to determine the weightings of individual behavioural constructs.

4.1.6. Phase 6 (Ph 6): Determine quantum leadership shift effect

To determine the impact of the quantum leadership, shift effect, on organisational

behaviours, the weightings as per Ph 1, are applied and measured against an

organisational shift that would be evident, if taking into account the full integration of

self-actualisation scores, without the shift to peak experiences (Maslow), against a shift

taking this additional element of scoring into account which is possible through SQ

(Zohar et al., 2004), once self-actualisation is aligned. Once peak experiences (Maslow)

are achieved, a state of being or individuation (Jung) is obtained. The move through

peak experiences contributes a quantum leap to the individual positive behavioural

scores (based on Maslow’s need state scores), and therefore suggests a shift in

behavioural impact, which this researcher refers to as the quantum leadership shift

effect.

4.1.7. Phase 7: Expected organisational outcomes

Expected outcomes of quantum leadership on the organisation are seen in examples as

suggested by the authors (Wheatley, 1992, 1999; Shelton (1999), Shelton et al., 2001,

2003, 2004; Kilman, 2001; Zohar et al., 2004) as aligned in Ph 3 in this chapter and in

the sections on organisational modeling in Chapter 2 (Refer to Section 2.3.3).

138

4.2. Approach used for content analysis

The methodology process used to align similar ideas together in this chapter is defined

within the method of content analysis (Refer to Chapter 5). The concept of linking of

common themes, constructs and elements together requires base elements (common

denominators) that can be used between individual concepts, so as to align these

various ideas together, in context. In this thesis, and in particular within this chapter

where the quantum model will be derived, the elements consist of the scientific models,

organisational design models, values and behaviours.

4.3. Deriving the quantum leadership model

4.3.1. Ph 1: Scientific paradigm and modeling synthesis

The process in phase 1, to determine the scientific paradigm and associated

organisational design implications utilising the quantum scientific paradigm as a

metaphor, following the paradigm shift model process of, organisational modeling

follows the scientific paradigm model. The first step is to determine a common key table

(common scientific theory ‘paradigm alignment’ table), to connect constructs together.

The second step involves utilising this table to link the organisational modeling

concepts, via the ‘common scientific theory ‘paradigm alignment’ table into one single

table. Within this single table will be the general physical design elements, as pre-

supposed by the Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm as a metaphor. Further through these

models is the ability to link these physical design elements to the conscious interactions,

through a value driver set of needs and motivations to a set of values and behaviours,

that is phase 2 (Refer to Section 4.2.2) and phase 3 (Refer to Section 4.2.3).

4.3.1.1. Step 1: Develop a common scientific theory paradigm alignment table

Based on the literature review analysis (Refer to Chapter 2), one is able through

commonality of scientific theory, using a content analysis process; to derive a table that

links quantum based OD theory together. Once established, this table can be used (as

a set of common keys) to link author’s (Refer to Literature review in Chapter 2) insights

on OD, through deductive analysis, as based on the scientific principles and associated

scientific model of quantum physics, CAS and thermodynamics (Refer to Section

4.2.1.2). The base structure utilised to link theory together is Kilman’s structure (2001)

139

of physical science, conscious interaction and overall paradigm. Below in table 4.1 one

can see the linking of Kilman’s understanding of Quantum theory and CAS in creating a

new paradigm(2001), Shelton et al. (2001), Wheatley’s (1992 & 1999) contribution as

well as a link to CAS theory via Wheatley (1999), Shelton et al.(2001 and 2003) and

Zohar and Marshall (2003) are added. The detail behind the theoretical discussion is

found in Section 2.2 (Chapter 2).

TABLE 4.1

COMMON SCIENTIFIC THEORY ALIGNMENT TABLE

Kilman scientific Model

(2001)

Quantum Scientific

theory

experimentation &

CAS in literature

review (Kilman, 2001)

Quantum Scientific

theory

experimentation &

CAS in literature

review (Kilman,

2001; Shelton et al.,

2001 & 2001,

Wheatley, 1992 &

1999)

Complex

Adaptive

systems view

(Wheatley,

1999, Shelton

et al. 2001 &

2003, Zohar &

Marshall, 2003)

Einsteinian - Quantum paradigm (physical)

1. The existence of many

relativistic universes - up to

11 dimensions (Einstein,

1905, M-Theory)

Theory of relativity,

Quantum tunneling, M

Theory, Space time

continuum, Speed of

light

Complimentarity,

Uncertainty,

Quantum tunneling

Emergent

2. Universes as a motion

wave energy potential

continually moving and

vibration materialised by

conscious participation (Von

Neumann, Goswami, 1993;

Herbert, 1987; Penrose,

1989; Zohar, 1990)

Super String theory,

Wave particle duality,

double slit experiment

Holograms, Non-

seperability, Bells

theorem

Exploratory

3. Space-time as curved and

filled with matter and energy

(Einstein, 1905; Hawking,

1996)

Double slit experiment,


Super string theory,

Space time continuum,

Double slit

experiment,

probability, super-

imposition

Recontextualise

environment

140

TABLE 4.1



(2001)

Quantum Scientific

theory

experimentation &

CAS in literature


Quantum Scientific

theory

experimentation &

CAS in literature

review (Kilman,


2001 & 2001,

Wheatley, 1992 &

1999)

Complex

Adaptive

systems view

(Wheatley,

1999, Shelton

et al. 2001 &

2003, Zohar &

Marshall, 2003)

Holograms, quantum

tunneling, CAS

Einsteinian - Quantum paradigm (conscious interaction)

4. The monastic unification

of consciousness with

matter (Heisenberg, 1971;

Young, 1976)

Non-seperability, Bells

theorem, chaos theory

Chaos theory, self-

organising structures,

strange attractors

Self-organising /

Order out of

chaos

5. The eternal connections

between self-motion

monads (Bohr, 1958; Bell,

1964; Aspect, 1972)

First Law of

thermodynamic, Bells

theorem, non-

seperability, string

theory, wave-particle

duality

Planks constant,

Bose-Einstein

condensates, Electro

magnetism

Field

independence /

Bounded

instability

6. The probabilistic

uncertainty among self-

motion monads

(Heisenberg, 1971)

Heisenberg's

uncertainty principle,

Self-motion monads,

External forces (curved

geometry and string

compression of space

time)

Field theory, delayed

choice phenomenon,

quantum potential

Beyond

equilibrium /

Outside control

destructive

Einsteinian – Quantum paradigm / Philosophy

7. The eternal self-

organisation of relativistic

All Exclusion principle,

scattered matrix

In dialogue with

environment

141

TABLE 4.1



(2001)

Quantum Scientific

theory

experimentation &

CAS in literature


Quantum Scientific

theory

experimentation &

CAS in literature

review (Kilman,


2001 & 2001,

Wheatley, 1992 &

1999)

Complex

Adaptive

systems view

(Wheatley,

1999, Shelton

et al. 2001 &

2003, Zohar &

Marshall, 2003)

universes diagram, M-Theory of

everything

4.3.1.2. Step 2: Linking the common scientific theory paradigm alignment table

to organisational design (OD)

The common scientific theory ‘paradigm alignment’ table now allows us through a

deductive approach to link the extended implication of this new quantum paradigm to

organisational design. In Table 4.2., Kilman’s (2001) structure is used as the base, the

reference numbers allocated as per the column ‘Organisational design (Kilman, 2001)’

directly correspond to the column entitled ‘Kilman scientific Model (2001)’ in table 4.1

similarly, the various authors (Refer to Table 4.2) have similar OD linkages to scientific

models as in table 4.1. Quantum science links to OD by Shelton et al. (2001, 2003) and

CAS linkages to OD through Lewin and Regine (2001), and Pascale, Millemann & Goija

(2000) as well as Wheatley’s (1992 and 1999) inputs, based on her links to quantum

physics and CAS have been linked through using the common scientific theory

‘paradigm alignment’ table (Refer to Table 4.1). These links are also seen in the

literature review (Refer to Section 2.3, Chapter 2).

142

TABLE 4.2

ORGANISATION DESIGN IMPLICATIONS UTILISING QUANTUM PHYSICS, CAS AND THERMODYNAMIC

MODELS AS METAPHORS

Organisational

design (Kilman,

2001)

Org. theories -

metaphysical

aspects/models

(Kilman, 2001)

Org Design

values

(Shelton &

Darling,

2001, 2003)

CAS implications for

organisational design

(Lewin and Regine,

2001; Pascale,

Millemann & Goija,

2000)

Organis-

ational

design

(Wheatley,

1992,

1999))

Einsteinian-Quantum science as a metaphor for physical OD

Emergence is certain,

but there is no certainty

as to what it will be

1. The conscious self-

management of a

flexibly designed


multidimensional

systems view.

Distributed

Empowerment

Innovation

(through

360º

thinking) The greater the

diversity of agents in

the system the greater

the emergence will be

Systems

view

2. The empowered

relations among

active participants


chain.

Decision making

Relationships

among members

Empowerm

ent (through

intuitive

decision

making)

Where agents interact

with each other in a

system, this is the

source of emergence

Relationship

3. Cross-boundary

processes as


and infused with

information, ‘and’ as

important.

Integrating

systems and


Quality

(through

shared

visioning)

Agents 'behaviours' are

governed by a few

simple rules

Information

Einsteinian-Quantum science as a metaphor for Psychological OD (conscious interaction)

4. Organisations as

conscious

participants in self-

designing processes.

Value adding

Processes:

controlled and

improved

Change

(through

self-

organising)


governed by a few

simple rules

Central

identity of

meaning

143

TABLE 4.2


MODELS AS METAPHORS

Organisational

design (Kilman,

2001)

Org. theories -

metaphysical

aspects/models

(Kilman, 2001)

Org Design

values

(Shelton &

Darling,

2001, 2003)



(Lewin and Regine,

2001; Pascale,

Millemann & Goija,

2000)

Organis-

ational

design

(Wheatley,

1992,

1999))

The greater the

diversity of agents in

the system the greater

the emergence will be

5. The internal


participants.

Knowledge

growth – personal

development

Motivation

(through

Response-

Ability)


governed by a few

simple rules

Central

identity of

meaning

Small changes can

lead to large effects

6. The inclusion of


designing systems.

Formal systems:

Strategy,

structure and

reward

Responsibil-

ity (through

values

audits) Emergence is certain,

but there is no certainty

as to what it will be

Central

identity of

meaning

Einsteinian-Quantum science as a metaphor for OD as a combination of physical and

psyche elements across ‘value’ chains

7. The eternal

evolution of new

organisational forms

Systems view of

organisational

participants and

external

Partnership

(through

dialogue)

In the face of threat or

when galvanized by a

compelling opportunity,

living things move

towards the edge of

chaos. This condition

evokes higher levels of

mutation and

experimentation, and

fresh solutions are

more likely to be found.

Systems

view

144

TABLE 4.2


MODELS AS METAPHORS

Organisational

design (Kilman,

2001)

Org. theories -

metaphysical

aspects/models

(Kilman, 2001)

Org Design

values

(Shelton &

Darling,

2001, 2003)



(Lewin and Regine,

2001; Pascale,

Millemann & Goija,

2000)

Organis-

ational

design

(Wheatley,

1992,

1999))

When this excitement

takes place, the

components of living

systems self-organise,

and new forms and

repertoires emerge

from turmoil.

4.3.2. Ph 2: Values and behaviour content analysis

In this phase the requirement is to derive the values and behaviours and be able to link

these to the theoretical organisational model, built on the Einsteinian-Quantum scientific

paradigm that is used as a metaphor. A content analysis methodology is utilised from

behaviours, back through values and then the link between values and the

organisational design model is formed (Phase 3). The personality behavioural

preferences via the MBTI tool, which is based on Jung’s psyche dichotomies, is used for

this purpose and is used as a central base to link values too.

• Step 1, involves linking Maslow’s hierarchy of needs to the MBTI dichotomies (Refer

to Table 4.3.), via Schott’s (1992) research as detailed in Chapter 3 (Refer to

Section 3.2.3.2). This is done to establish the link between Zohar and Marshall’s

intelligence state values of SQ to behaviours, as based in Maslow’s hierarchy of

needs and motivational values, as discussed in detail in the literature review in

Chapter 3 (Refer to Section 3.2.3.2).

• Step 2, involves establishing a link between the MBTI and the other intelligence

states of IQ and EQ. This link is established in two ways; initially a link is established

145

between the MBTI and Bass and Avolio’s (1999) transformational leadership

constructs (De Charon, 2003). This link allows us two establish the gap between the

behavioural preferences of the MBTI and the Transformational leadership

constructs, but also gives us a valuable link to intelligence values, through Davies

(2001) and Burke’s (2001) research where they have established links between IQ,

EQ and the transformational leadership constructs, thus giving one a gap once again

in terms of intelligence values that this researcher is proposing, should be filled by

the SQ intelligence values (Refer to Table 4.4). This then allows one to link the full

intelligence values system to MBTI and through the MBTI link as a base, one is able

to then establish a link between IQ, EQ and SQ to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and

motivations (Refer to Table 4.5).

Further to this derived link, the link to Zohar and Marshall establishes a connection

between conscious interaction (behaviour and values) and the physical

organisational design elements (science and models), as Zohar and Marshall have

established SQ on the basis of their research into Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and

motivations and their link to CAS. This CAS link gives one the opportunity to link the

physical elements of organisational design to the psyche elements of conscious

interaction with the physical environment to establish a new paradigm in designing

and leading organisations. Thus establishing a behavioural model, that has physical

organisational manifestations.

4.3.2.1. Step 1: Linking Maslow hierarchy of needs to MBTI via Schott (1992)

Utilising Schott’s (1992) research, a link is established between the personality

behavioural preference dichotomies of the MBTI and Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and

motivations, in table 4.3. Individuation is separated as an overall higher level as driven

by the need state of peak experiences or self-transcendence by Maslow. Self-

actualisation (Maslow in Schott, 1992 and Zohar et al., 2004) and the associated

behaviour types of introversion, feeling, intuition and perceiving (Jung in Schott, 1992)

or the process of individuation (Jung, 1969 in Schott, 1992) are seen as the building

blocks to peak experiences/ transcendence (Maslow) and the behavioural response of

individuation – the individual (as a whole person) (Jung, 1969). It is therefore these

behavioural elements; perceiving, introversion, intuition and feeling through to

individuation/being as seen by Jung which is taken as the behaviours associated with

146

true leadership (Maslow in Schott, 1992, p. 115). Thus leaders are called to higher

services, in areas beyond defined, physical organisational boundaries.

Security needs are associated with thinking as per Schott (1992), in his comments on

men in ‘midlife crisis’, where security is important, and is associated with greater

turbulence in which craving, fear and anguish are motivational factors. Belonging, via a

similar premise is linked via content analysis similarity to the behavioural response of

thinking, through Myers and Briggs descriptors for thinking that uses the following;

questioning (precise, challenging, want discussion) and tough (firm, tough-minded,

ends-oriented), which are linked to self-assertion and anger motivational value states of

belonging and as such linked to the thinking behaviour type. Survival is linked to

sensing and judging via a similar premise, in Schott (1992), where sensing and judging

types are predisposed towards conservation and survival of the current order (Kiersey

and Bates, 1984 in Schott, 1992) and linked to sensing through the Myers and Briggs

descriptors through content analysis similarities, where descriptors for sensing are;

traditional (conventional, customary, tried and true) and to judging via the same

process, whereby descriptors of judging are seen to be; systematic (orderly, structured,

dislike diversions) and scheduled (want routine, make lists, procedures help) and are

thus found to be similar in pre-disposition and linked accordingly, in the table below.

TABLE 4.3

BEHAVIOUR AND NEEDS MOTIVATION

MBTI (behavioural

preferences)

Linking Maslow to MBTI

(Schott, 1992)

Maslow’s Motivations

Extroverted Self-Esteem (+6) Power-within (+3)

Gregariousness and

cooperation (+2)

Exploration (+1)

Introverted Self-Actualisation (+9) Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)

Thinking Security (-12) Craving (-3)

Fear (-4)

Anguish (-5)

Feeling Self-Actualisation (+9) Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)

147

Sensing Survival (-21) Apathy (-6)

Guilt and Shame (-7)

Depersonalisation (-8)

Intuition Self-Actualisation (+9) Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)

Judging Survival (-21) Apathy (-6)



Perceiving Self-Actualisation (+9) Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)

Thinking Belonging (-3) Self assertion(-1)

Anger (-2)

Individuation (being) Maslow: peak experiences /

(self-transcendence) (+21)

Enlightenment (+8)

World soul (+7)

Higher service (+6)

4.3.2.2. Step 2: Determining leadership behavioural preferences

Linking MBTI to Transformational leadership through De Charon (2003) and linking

intelligence values (a) - Linking IQ and EQ values (Burke, 2001, Davies, 2001; Tischler,

Biberman and McKeage, 2001) to transformational leadership constructs (Bass and

Avolio, 1999).

In Table 4.4 below, gaps are evident for intelligence state links for the MBTI constructs

of extroverted, introverted, judging, perceiving and for the higher-level state of complete

individuation (Refer to Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3.2).

148

TABLE 4.4

DETERMINING LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOURAL PREFERENCES

MBTI behavioural

preferences

Linking Transformational

leadership behaviour to MBTI

(De Charon, 2003)

Linking Intelligence states to

MBTI via Transformational

leadership constructs

(Davies, 2001; Burke, 2001)

Extroverted Unknown

Introverted Unknown

Thinking Rational intellectual stimulation – analytical

/ logical decision making

IQ

Feeling Rational individualized consideration –

relational / logical decision making

IQ

Sensing Irrational inspirational motivation - tactical /

practical

EQ

Intuition Irrational idealized influence/charisma –

strategic / intuitive

EQ

Judging Unknown

Perceiving Unknown

Individuation

(being)

Unknown

4.3.2.3. Step 3: Determining leadership intelligence values.

Step three involves a process of linking IQ, EQ and SQ to MBTI through Burke (2001),

Davies (2001), Schott (1992) and Zohar et al. (2004).

In Table 4.5 below, when linking Maslow back to MBTI, including the intelligence states,

it becomes apparent from the discussion in step 2 above and table 4.4., that the self-

149

actualisation elements of Maslow that form the basis for the journey to peak

experiences, has gaps in intelligence value states. From a self-actualisation

perspective, IQ as a value links to the MBTI construct of rational thinking (Burke, 2001;

Davies, 2001) and transformational leadership construct of intellectual stimulation (De

Charon, 2003; Bass and Avolio, 1999) (Refer to Table 4.4).

EQ as an intelligence value links to self-actualisation and the MBTI construct of

irrational intuition, which are linked to idealised influence / charisma (Bass and Avolio,

1999), (Refer to Table 4.4). Further, the areas of self-actualisation that link to the MBTI

constructs of introversion and perception, do not have a correlation from an intelligence

value perspective, as determined by Davies (2001) and Burke (2001) and no link to the

transformational leadership model of Bass and Avolio (1999). Similarly, individuation

(being) as a behavioural response has a motivational driver of peak experiences (self-

transcendence), that is not catered for by the transformational leadership model, yet is

required as a central concept of the development of true leadership by both Jung and

Maslow (Schott, 1992). This research points to the paradigm that leadership models

have been developed upon, a paradigm that excludes conscious and spiritual

interaction within physical organisational models, as pre-supposed by the metaphor of

Newtonian-Cartesian science.

From the table below it is apparent that Zohar and Marshall (2004), through their

research, have opened up an important link between conscious interaction and physical

space, in line with the findings in Chapter 2 (Refer to Section 2.2.2.2). This researcher

therefore contends that the areas of self-actualisation, where they correspond to the

MBTI behavioural constructs of introversion and perception are elements of SQ. This

researcher further purports that to reach a point of individuation, a requirement for true

leadership (Jung and Maslow in Schott, 1992) as per literature review analysis (Refer to

Chapter 3, Section 3.2.3.2), is the inclusion of SQ as a value measure alongside IQ and

EQ, as a link to understand behavioural responses that are required to lead effectively,

within a continually changing environment. Furthermore, as SQ is also a requirement for

the behavioural constructs of feeling and intuition, it is derived that SQ forms the basis

to link all elements of IQ and EQ together to ensure ‘individuation (being)’, the basis for

quantum leadership.

150

Thus, the formation of a general quantum leadership model must in this researcher’s

view, take into account all quantum, CAS and thermodynamic scientific modeling

aspects that determine the metaphor for organisational models in a CAS environment,

as evidenced through the links established between conscious interaction and physics

realms. Thus, due to the conscious interaction between self-motion monads (people’s

thinking ability) (Refer to Chapter 2, Section 2.2.2.2) and the physical elements of the

organisation (design, processes, structures, policy, etc.) (Refer to Chapter 2, Section

2.3.1.2), leadership must now be based on the combined constructs of self-

actualisation, leading to a shift in behaviour, which combines the behavioural elements

of introversion (internal oneness), feeling (rational relationships), intuition (irrational

experience) and perception (inclusive explorative) (Jung / MBTI).

Once combined to reach a point of peak experiences (self-transcendence) as a value

state driver for individuation (being), has an impact on the opposing behaviours of

extroversion (Interactive in a group context), thinking (rational analysis), sensing

(irrational implementation) and judging (exclusively static), and which are seen to be the

elements of management as opposed to leadership (Refer to findings in Chapter 3,

Section 3.2.3.3, 3.2.4.3 and 3.3.4).

TABLE 4.5

DETERMINING LEADERSHIP VALUE STATES

MBTI

behavioural

preference

scales

Linking

Intelligence

states to MBTI

via Transformat-

ional leadership

(Davies, 2001;

Burke, 2001)

Linking

Maslow

hierarchy of

needs to MBTI

(Schott, 1992)

Maslow’s

Motivation scales

SQ (personal

values) (Zohar

and Marshall,

2001 & 2004)

Power-within (+3) Field independence

Gregariousness and

cooperation (+2)

Self-awareness

Extroverted Self-Esteem (+6)

Exploration (+1) Spontaneity

Generativity (+5) Ask Why? Introverted SQ Self-Actualisation

(+9) Mastery (+4) Reframing

151

TABLE 4.5

DETERMINING LEADERSHIP VALUE STATES

Craving (-3) Vision & Value led Thinking IQ Security (-12)

Fear (-4)

Anguish (-5)

Positive use of

adversity

Generativity (+5) Ask Why? Feeling IQ Self-Actualisation


Apathy (-6) Sense of vocation

Guilt and Shame (-7) Grace

Sensing EQ Survival (-21)

Depersonalisation (-8) Grace

Generativity (+5) Ask Why? Intuition EQ Self-Actualisation


Apathy (-6) Sense of vocation

Guilt and Shame (-7) Grace

Judging SQ Survival (-21)

Depersonalisation (-8) Grace

Generativity (+5) Ask Why? Perceiving SQ Self-Actualisation


Self assertion(-1) Humility Thinking IQ Belonging (-3)

Anger (-2) Holism

Enlightenment (+8) Grace

World soul (+7) Grace

Individuation

(being)

SQ Maslow: peak

experiences

(transcendence)

(+21)

Higher service (+6) Compassion

4.3.3. Ph 3: Linking content analysis to form a common integration table

The aim of phase 3 is to derive a single common table that links the scientific paradigm

(as a metaphor) to organisational design, to values and behaviour – as a base to derive

a quantum leadership model from. Through the connection that Zohar and Marshall

(2004) have established with the intelligence state value of SQ, the links to Maslow’s

hierarchy of needs and motivations scales and the link of this thinking to the scientific

152

paradigm of CAS, it is now possible to through content analysis similarities to link the

tables in Ph 1 (scientific paradigm and modeling synthesis) and Ph 2 (value states and

behaviour synthesis) together. This new integrated table (table 4.6 A and B) establishes

the understanding of causality links between the scientific paradigm, the proposed

organisational models this new paradigm evokes as a metaphor, the values that are

utilised to create the bounded instability in which these models operate and the

behaviours that are elicited as a response to these value sets.

These behaviours when directed within an organisational setting, will deliver continual

updates to organisational models as the system consciously responds to macro

influences, ensuring that a continual self-designing dynamic or emergent evolutionary

process is maintained in managing within the complexity of a changing environment. In

tables 4.6 (A & B) below only the elements as applicable to self-actualisation as per

Maslow are shown, as these are the elements that are required in total to move to self-

transcendence (peak experiences) (Maslow), which integrate the psyche for

individuated behaviour (being) (Jung). Note of explanation to read table 4.6A & 4.6B:

Table 4.6B is an extension of table 4.6(A). All three column headers in table 4.6A have

been combined into the first column of table 4.6B to ensure lateral consistency in the

table across pages. Furthermore number references in the first column of table 4.6A

correlate to the number references in the first column of table 4.6B.

153

TABLE 4.6A

LINKING CONTENT ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOUR, TO VALUES TO ORGANISATIONAL DESIGN TO THE SCIENTIFIC BASE

Conscious interaction in organisational design

Leadership behaviour Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

and motivation scale

Values as linked to Common scientific theory alignment table

Behavioural preferences

Behaviour

descriptors

(MBTI)

Behaviour

descript-

ors (MBTI)

Behavioural

preferences

Linking

Intelligence

states to MBTI

via

Transformation

al leadership

(Davies, 2001;

Burke, 2001)

Quantum

behaviours

(Shelton &

Darling,

2001, 2003)

Linking

Maslow to

MBTI via

(Schott,

1992)

Maslow’s

Motivations

SQ personal

values / CAS

theory (Zohar &

Marshall, 2004)

Psyche

value

(Shelton,

1999;

Shelton et

al, 2001,

2003)

Spiritual

value

(Shelton,

1999;

Shelton et

al, 2001,

2003)

Skill value

(Shelton, 1999;

Shelton et al,

2001, 2003)

Focused Generativity

(+5)

Ask Why? /

exploratory

Perception Affirmation See intentionally 1. Introverted SQ

Confident

Self-

Actualisation

(+9) Mastery (+4) Reframing /

recontextualise

environment

Intuition Meditation Know intuitively


(+5)

Ask Why? /

exploratory

Perception

Affirmation See intentionally 2. Feeling Rational Individualized

consideration –

relational /

logical decision

making

IQ

Confident

Self-

Actualisation


recontextualise

environment



(+5)

Ask Why? /

exploratory

Perception

Affirmation See intentionally 3, Intuition Irrational Idealized

influence/

charisma –

strategic

EQ

Confident

Self-

Actualisation


recontextualise

environment


4. Perceiving SQ Focused Self- Generativity Ask Why? / Perception Affirmation See intentionally

154

(+5) exploratory

Confident

Actualisation


recontextualise

environment


Enlightenment

(+8)

Grace / in

dialogue with

environment

World soul

(+7)

Grace / in

dialogue with

environment

5.

Individuation

(Being)

SQ Compassion-

ate

Maslow: peak

experiences

(self-transcen-

dence) (+21)

Higher service

(+6)

Compassion

Forgive-

ness

Compass-

ion

Being in

relationship

155

TABLE 4.6B

LINKING CONTENT ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIOUR, TO VALUES TO ORGANISATIONAL DESIGN TO THE SCIENTIFIC BASE

Conscious

interaction in

org. design

Physical science and organisational design implications

Leadership

behaviour

Organisational design implications utilising Quantum physics, CAS and Thermodynamic

models as metaphors

Common scientific theory alignment table

MBTI

behavioural

preferences /

Intelligence

values /

Maslow’s

hierarchy of

needs

Organisational

design (Kilman,

2001)

Org. theories -

metaphysical

aspects/models

(Kilman, 2001)

Org. Design

values

(Shelton, 1999;

Shelton et al,

2001, 2003)

CAS implications

for organisational

design (Lewin &

Regine, 2001;

Pascale, Millemann &

Goija, 2000)

Org. design

(Wheatley,

1992, 1999)

Kilman scientific

Model (Von Neuman,

Goswami, 1993;

Herbert, 1987;

Penrose, 1989;

Zohar, 1990,

Einstein, 1905;

Hawking, 1996)

Quantum Scientific

theory experiment-

ation & CAS in

literature review

(Kilman, 2001)

Quantum

Scientific

theory

experiment-

ation & CAS in

literature

review (Kilman,

2001, (Shelton,

1999; Shelton

et al, 2001,

2003; Wheatley,

1999)

Complex

Adaptive

systems

(Zohar &

Marshall,

1999,

2001/4)

Complex

Adaptive

systems

view

(Wheatley

(1999),

Shelton

(1999),

Zohar &

Marshall,

2001/4)

The empowered

relations among

active participants

throughout the

value chain.

Decision making

Relationships

among members

Empowerment

(through intuitive

decision

making)

Where agents

interact with each

other in a system, this

is the source of

emergence

Relationship Universes as a

motion wave energy

potential continually

moving and vibration

materialised by

conscious

participation




Holograms,

Non-

seperability,

Bells theorem

Exploratory Exploratory 1. Introverted /

SQ / Self-

actualisation

(+9)

Cross-boundary

processes as

explicitly

addressed and

Integrating

systems and


Quality (through

shared

visioning)

Agents 'behaviours'

are governed by a

few simple rules

Information Spacetime as curved

and filled with matter

and energy

Double slit

experiment, Wave

particle duality, Super

string theory, Space

Double slit

experiment,

probability,

super-imposition

Recontex-

tualise

environ-

ment

Recontext-

ualise

environ-

ment

156

infused with

information, ‘and’

as important.

time continuum,

Holograms, quantum

tunneling, CAS

The empowered

relations among

active participants

throughout the

value chain.

Decision making

Relationships

among members

Empowerment

(through intuitive

decision

making)

Where agents

interact with each


is the source of

emergence


motion wave energy



materialised by

conscious

participation




Holograms,

Non-

seperability,

Bells theorem

Exploratory Exploratory 2. Feeling / IQ

/ Self-

actualisation

(+9)

Cross-boundary

processes as

explicitly

addressed and

infused with


as important.

Integrating

systems and


Quality (through

shared

visioning)

Agents 'behaviours'

are governed by a

few simple rules



and energy

Double slit

experiment, Wave



time continuum,

Holograms, quantum

tunneling, CAS

Double slit

experiment,

probability,

super-imposition

Recontext-

ualise

environ-

ment

Recontext-

ualise

environ-

ment

157

Leadership

behaviour

Organisational design implications utilising Quantum physics, CAS and Thermodynamic

models as metaphors

Common scientific theory alignment table

The empowered

relations among

active participants

throughout the

value chain.

Decision making

Relationships

among members

Empowerment

(through intuitive

decision

making)

Where agents

interact with each


is the source of

emergence


motion wave energy



materialised by

conscious

participation




Holograms,

Non-

seperability,

Bells theorem

Exploratory Exploratory 3. Intuition /

EQ / Self-

actualisation

(+9)

Cross-boundary

processes as

explicitly

addressed and

infused with


as important.

Integrating

systems and


Quality (through

shared

visioning)

Agents 'behaviours'

are governed by a

few simple rules



and energy

Double slit

experiment, Wave



time continuum,

Holograms, quantum

tunneling, CAS

Double slit

experiment,

probability,

super-imposition

Recontext-

ualise

environ-

ment

Recontext-

ualise

environ-

ment

The empowered

relations among

active participants

throughout the

value chain.

Decision making

Relationships

among members

Empowerment

(through intuitive

decision

making)

Where agents

interact with each


is the source of

emergence


motion wave energy



materialised by

conscious

participation (Von

Neumann, Goswami,

1993; Herbert, 1987;

Penrose, 1989;

Zohar, 1990)




Holograms,

Non-

seperability,

Bells theorem

Exploratory Exploratory 4. Perceiving /

SQ / Self-

Actualisation

(+9)

Cross-boundary

processes,

explicitly

Integrating

systems and


Quality (through

shared

visioning)

Agents 'behaviours'

are governed by a

few simple rules



and energy

Double slit

experiment, Wave


Double slit

experiment,

probability,

Recontext-

ualise

environ-

Recontext-

ualise

environ-

158

addressed and

infused with


as important.


time continuum,

Holograms, quantum

tunneling, CAS

super-imposition ment ment

5.

Individuation

(being) (SQ)

(+21)

The eternal

evolution of new

organisational

forms

Systems view of

organisational

participants

Partnership

(through

dialogue)

Due to threat or major

opportunity, living

things move towards

the edge of chaos,

excitement increases

& system

components self-

organise evoking

higher levels of

mutation & experi-

mentation & new

solutions emerge

Systems view The eternal self-

organisation of


All Exclusion

principle,

scattered matrix

diagram, M-

Theory of

everything

In dialogue

with

environ-

ment

In dialogue

with

environ-

ment /

Evolution-

ary

mutations

159

4.3.4. Ph 4: Analyse, contextualise, restructure and derive

The aim of Ph. 4 is the process of analysis, contextualising, restructuring of the data as

per tables defined in Ph. 3 and the derivation of the quantum leadership model and

constructs.

4.3.4.1. Step 1: Analyse and contextualise initial insights from table 4.6. (A and B):

Firstly, it is evident in table 4.6.A, that the highest motivations as per Maslow’s hierarchy

of needs scales, is self-transcendence or peak experiences, as aligned to individuation in

Jung’s terminology, scoring +21 (Zohar and Marshall, 2004). This area as discussed

before, is in hierarchal placement as the pinnacle of humanistic psyche development, yet

needs to be pulled together through spiritual enlightenment (SQ).

Secondly, an important link is between the area of overall development of individuation

(being) (Jung) as linked to self-transcendence (peak experiences), and the skills value as

determined by Shelton (1999). Shelton (1999) sees this area as ‘quantum being’ and

defines being as ‘being in relationship’. This relationship takes on new meaning, beyond

the relationship between psyche states, but also to physical states, when we engage the

scientific and business modeling aspects as per table 4.6B. In table 4.6B, in each of the

areas that relate to self-actualisation, there is a direct link to a relationship context in the

organisation. Thus corroborating earlier insights from the literature review of a systems

view of the world (Senge, 1999), where conscious participation, across organisational

boundaries and in between organisational participants or value chains, is the central tenet

of meaning (Wheatley, 1999) that pulls the system together into a system of bounded

instability.

From the holistic psyche state of ‘being’, the formation of the holistic manifestation of

‘being’ as an ‘organisation of conscious participants’, is formed through the central tenet

of relationship. Thus, the complete organisational design, if focused on the paradigm of

quantum science, will lead to holistic leadership that has the behavioural ability to

transcend organisational boundaries through the relationships they create between

organisational participants. These new quantum leaders will understand the Einsteinian-

Quantum paradigm, they will be able to harness the combined power of IQ, EQ and SQ

values, motivated by the needs of self-actualisation, motivated by the value drivers of

160

generativity and mastery and responding with a Jung type personality behavioural profile

of introversion, feeling, intuition and perceiving. They will base their behavioural

responses on asking why?, exploring multiple dimensions, reframing contexts, re-

contextualising, understanding the holistic nature of their environment, having compassion

for the system elements and working together in relationship to create new outcomes.

Their motivation will be to create generative organisations that master the art of

excellence and to leave a legacy. The outcome, will be a dynamic organisation, guided by

empowered intuitive decision making relationships between all members at all levels,

ensuring that emergent solutions to problems are constantly found, supported by cross-

boundary integrated processes, infused with shared information, to deliver on a combined

vision that takes into account all organisational dimensions and is governed by a few

simple rules, thus allowing continual organisational mutations and evolutions to take

place.

However, there is another side to human nature. When one reviews the areas of

behavioural preference that do not align to Maslow’s hierarchy in terms of self-

actualisation to self-enlightenment (peak experiences) and consequent behavioural

response of ‘individuation (being)’, as per Jung. This paradigm, as suggested by the

researcher, is one employed by many organisations today, that of a pure Newtonian-

Cartesian one, which excludes a multidimensional worldview, conscious interaction within

the organisational context and interconnectivity between organisational participants. In

this context value systems include only IQ and EQ states, which invoke self-esteem,

security and survival needs motivated by power-within, craving, fear, anguish, de-

personalisation, guilt, shame, apathy, self-assertion and anger, evoking an extroverted,

thinking, sensing and judging behavioural response to external influences.

Thus, if this paradigm is solely employed, organisational outcomes will be internally

focused and myopic in approach. In line with the determinable gap findings in the

literature review (Refer to Chapter 2, Section 2.5 and Chapter 3, Section 3.4) of the

literature review, as per a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm. There is however, something

unique about a quantum holistic (or systems approach), in that the full model takes these

dimensions into account. Through enabling the conscious interaction of people between

the physical elements of the organisational design, the behavioural response is different

to the atypical response, without an integrated balance of psyche through individuation.

The ability to change these elements is due to the constructs of Jungian psychology,

161

where even though Maslow shows that a path is required to self-enlightenment, Jung

realised the paradox of the human mind, and linked his dichotomies in juxtaposing

positions as seen in the MBTI. Thus, the personality behaviour preference of extroversion

in terms of Jung’s dichotomies and the MBTI scale is juxtaposed to introversion and if one

becomes more introverted it has a direct opposite effect on the extroversion scale.

Similarly, thinking is juxtaposed to feeling, sensing is juxtaposed to intuition and judging is

juxtaposed to perceiving.

Thus, when conscious participation is allowed; extroverted behaviour is repositioned from

power-within to change and motivation, where it has an impact on cross-boundary value

adding, knowledge building processes; thinking moves from pure analytical to a multi-

dimensional 360º view that allows distributed empowerment of thinking across

organisational boundaries; sensing moves from focused time-line, straight line

implementation to being holistic in approach, in terms of flexibility and sensitivity to

changes affecting implementation approaches across organisational boundaries,

changing implementation paths and judging moves from 4 dimensional exclusion to an

acceptance of diversity and a partnership through dialogue approach, in understanding

that diversity brings strength.

These elements are all necessary in managing a business, if one is to execute against

any plan, yet if lead in the wrong ways without conscious participation from a quantum

leadership approach, it will ensure an eventual death of an internally focused enterprise

(Kilman, 1999), which cannot recreate itself as the environment changes. The juxtaposed

elements of personality behaviour types will be explored, when the quantum leadership

model is derived in step 3, of this section. It is however important to note, that due to the

effect that fully individuated leadership has on the juxtaposed elements of behaviour, the

focus of this study moving forward, will be on understanding the elements that are

weighted in favour of creating such leadership i.e. the elements of combined self-

actualisation that have the ability to form one into an individuated being, as the

implementation of such a paradigm shift has a direct opposite effect on a Newtonian-

Cartesian paradigm.

162

4.3.4.2. Step 2: Restructure table 4.6 (A & B) in line with the paradigm shift model

In this step, table 4.6(A & B) are restructured to align to the paradigm shift model this

ensures consistency of approach through the thesis and alignment to the research

methodology. Table 4.7(A & B) shows the data in step 1 (Refer to Section 4.2.4.1) as

arranged into logical groupings, in line with the paradigm shift model, of science and its

modeling implications (as a metaphor) for physical organisational design (OD) (table

4.7A), and the continual conscious interaction in running the organisation (Psyche) i.e.

values and behaviour (table 4.7B). Reference numbers in the first columns align the two

tables.

163

TABLE 4.7A

QUANTUM LEADERSHIP – PARADIGM SHIFT MODEL ALIGNMENT TABLE 1 (SCIENCE AND MODELLING)

line # align

to table 5.7.

(b)

Common scientific theory alignment table Organisational design implications utilising Quantum physics,

CAS and Thermodynamic models as metaphors

0

Kilman scientific

Model (Von

Neuman,

Goswami, 1993;

Herbert, 1987;

Penrose, 1989;

Zohar, 1990,

Einstein, 1905;

Hawking, 1996)

Quantum

Scientific

theory

experiment-

ation & CAS

in literature

review

(Kilman, 2001)

Quantum

Scientific

theory

experiment-

ation & CAS in

literature

review

(Kilman, 2001,

Shelton &

Darling, 2001;

Wheatley, 1999)

Complex

Adaptive

systems

(Zohar and

Marshall,

2001, 2003)

Complex

Adaptive

systems view

(Wheatley

(1999),

Shelton

(1999), Zohar

and Marshall,

2001/3)

Organisation-

al design

(Kilman, 2001)

Org. theories

–

metaphysical

aspects/

models

(Kilman, 2001)

Org.

Design

values

(Shelton

, 1999;

Shelton

et al,

2001,

2003)



(Lewin and Regine,

2001; Pascale,

Millemann and Goija,

2000)

Org.

design

(Wheatley,

1992,

1999)

1

Universes as a

motion wave

energy potential

continually moving

and vibrating,

materialised by

conscious

participation

Super String

theory, Wave

particle

duality, double

slit experiment

Holograms, Non-

seperability,

Bells theorem,

0th law of

thermodynamics

Exploratory Exploratory The

empowered

relations

among active

participants

throughout the

value chain.

Decision

making

Relationships

among

members

Quality

(through

shared

visioning)

Where agents interact

with each other in a

system, this is the

source of emergence

Relation-

ship

2

Space-time as

curved and filled

with matter and

energy

Double slit

experiment,

Wave particle

duality, Super

string theory,

Space time

continuum,

Holograms,

Double slit

experiment,

probability,

super-imposition

Recontext-

ualise environ-

ment

Recontext-

ualise

environment

Cross-

boundary

processes as

explicitly

addressed

and infused

with

information,

Integrating

systems and

processes –

‘and’

Empower

-ment

(through

intuitive

decision

making)


governed by a few

simple rules

Informat-

ion

164

quantum

tunneling,

CAS

‘and’ as

important.

3

The eternal self-

organisation of

relativistic

universes

All Exclusion

principle,

scattered matrix

diagram, M-

Theory of

everything

In dialogue

with environ-

ment

In dialogue

with environ-

ment /

Evolutionary

mutations

The eternal

evolution of

new

organisational

forms

Systems view

of

organisational

participants

and external

Partner-

ship

(through

dialogue)

Due to threat or major

opportunity, living things

move towards the edge

of chaos, excitement

increases & system

components (self-motion

monads) self-organise,

this process evokes

higher levels of mutation

& experi-mentation,

where new solutions

emerge

Systems

view

165

TABLE 4.7B

QUANTUM LEADERSHIP – PARADIGM SHIFT MODEL ALIGNMENT TABLE 1 (CONSCIOUS INTERACTION)

line # align to

table 5.7. (a)

Values as linked to Common scientific theory alignment table Leadership behaviour

Behavioural preferences

0

Skill value

(Shelton,

1999; Shelton

et al, 2001,

2003)

Psyche

value

(Shelton,

1999;

Shelton et

al, 2001,

2003)

Spiritual

value

(Shelton,

1999;

Shelton et

al, 2001,

2003)

SQ personal

values / CAS

theory (Zohar

and Marshall,

2004)

Maslow’s

Motivations

Linking

Maslow to

MBTI via

(Schott,

1992)

Behaviour

descript-

ors (MBTI)

Psyche:

Conscious

or Uncon-

scious

Linking

Transformat-

ional

leadership

behaviour to

MBTI (De

Charon,

2003)

Linking

Intelligence

states to

MBTI via

Transform-

ational

leadership

(Davies,

2001; Burke,

2001)

Quantum

behaviours

(Shelton,

1999; Shelton

et al, 2001,

2003)

Introverted SQ

Feeling Rational individualised

consideration

– relational /

logical

decision

making

IQ

Intuition Irrational idealised

influence/

charisma –

strategic

EQ

1

See

intentionally

Perception Affirmation Ask Why? /

exploratory

Generativity

(+5)

Self-

Actualisation

(+5)

Perceiving SQ

Focused

Introverted SQ 2 Know

intuitively

Intuition

(should be

Intro-

spection)

Meditation Reframing /

recontext-

ualise

environment

Mastery (+4) Self-

Actualisation

(+4)

Feeling Rational individualised

consideration

– relational /

logical

IQ

Confident

166

decision

making

Intuition Irrational idealised

influence/

charisma –

strategic

EQ

Perceiving SQ

Grace / in

dialogue with

environment

Enlightenment

(+8)

World soul

(+7) 3

Being in

relationship

Forgive-

ness

Compass-

ion

Compassion Higher service

(+6)

Maslow: peak

experiences(s

elf-

transcendenc

e)(+21)

Individuat-

ion (being)

SQ Compassion-

ate

167

(i) Analysis of Table 4.7 (A & B)

Firstly, it is apparent when re-contextualising the information into table 4.7 (A & B) that

Shelton et al. (2001, 2003) have a differing view on where intuition as a value or

behaviour is linked to the underlying scientific modelling of the organisation. This can be

seen between tables 4.6B and 4.7B, where in table 4.6B the focus is on introversion from

a scientific and SQ value perspective as aligned to behaviour, when re-contextualised into

the process showing the alignment to scientific principles, Shelton et al. (2001, 2003)

linkages, in table 4.7B, seem to be misaligned. Zohar et al. (2004) via their linking of CAS

to Maslow, which is a central premise to this thesis, pointing to the integration of scientific

modelling to behaviour, shows that the scientific models of re-contextualisation and

reframing of the environment, as filled with matter and energy, is linked to the ability to

meditate and see the environment from a focused introverted perspective, which has a

direct link to introversion as a behaviour type. Thus Shelton et al. (2001, 2003) linkage of

this scientific model to intuition as a value and subsequent behavioural preference is in

this researcher’s opinion incorrect and thus cannot be utilised within the context of

determining values and subsequent behaviours sets for the quantum leadership model,

for intuition. However, the remaining values and behaviour sets as suggested by Shelton

et al. (2001, 2003), do have direct links to the quantum scientific base as researched. This

insight has been confirmed via an e-mail discussion with Dr. C.K. Shelton, where she did

confirm that, ‘..there was no formal scientific investigation conducted to link the quantum

skills values and behaviours in her model to the Jung behavioural constructs’ as shown

within the MBTI personality preference model, it has further been confirmed that The

Quantum Skill labels in Shelton’s model were indeed influenced by Buddhism (Right

Thinking, Right Acting) not by the MBTI. Therefore even though the naming conventions

are similar, the misalignment is confirmed.

From a quantum organisational leadership perspective, tables 4.7(A & B) show that

through a systems view of a dynamically instable environment, relationships between

people who are partnering up and down the value chain, through continuous dialogue,

create new emergent solutions to manage the complexity. These relationships are built on

forgiveness and compassion and will extend grace in deliberations where the environment

creates elements of instability. Through this value system, the leaders in this context will

through individuation of the person, with a ‘holistic’ view of the organisation, and therefore

understanding of the entire system, behave with compassion to organisational

168

participants. Within this context two elements are clarified and require specific weighting

within the overall environment. Firstly, due to the relational context of the environment,

shared explorative visioning is possible, this is a ‘focused’ visioning within this

organisational context and requires whole brain thinking, in terms of value measures there

is a requirement for IQ, EQ and SQ. In this way the environment is perceived in a holistic-

multidimensional way, yet new emerging ‘focused’ visions and solutions are generated. In

execution of these visions and solutions, is the dynamic of empowered people, who have

access to information across value chains, who are able to make intuitive decision,

through viewing the system holistically at the point of change, which become increasingly

better decisions as mastery of the system improves. Once again whole brain thinking is

required through group conscious interaction and decisions are made in context between

the relationships developed by the participants in the value chain, via dialogue in a

compassionate way. Quantum leadership, has the unique opportunity, through the ability

to perceive and explore multiple dimensions, and through introverted behaviour to reframe

and re-contextualise (focus) both analytical and conceptual information and understand

the implications in context of the entire value chain, and then through the understanding of

how to relate to organisational participants, form consensus of opinion and garner

support, from which the organisation can make confident intuitive decisions on solutions

to steer it through a dynamically unstable environment.

Further to this insight in table 4.7(A & B), which shows the alignment of the constructs in

this table to Kilman’s (2001) logical packaging of the quantum elements into

organisational design, as a leadership function, the management function which is

focused on the continuous conscious interaction with the operations of the organisation,

were excluded from table 4.7(A & B), yet the role of leadership is to influence

management of the organisation through strategy to deliver on the vision and mission of

the organisation. This element of leadership, although not directly relevant to building a

leadership model, has an impact. It would therefore be inappropriate when discussing

holism of approach, to not also understand this area of quantum leadership, and it is

therefore reflected in the quantum leadership – paradigm shift alignment table 2 (tables

4.8(A & B). Again, as per tables 4.7(A & B) the reference numbers in the first columns

align the two tables.

169

TABLE 4.8A

QUANTUM LEADERSHIP – PARADIGM SHIFT MODEL ALIGNMENT TABLE 2 (SCIENCE AND MODELLING)

Line # aligns

table 4.8. (B) Common scientific theory alignment table

Organisational design implications utilising Quantum physics, CAS and

Thermodynamic models as metaphors

0

Kilman

scientific Model

(Von Neuman,

Goswami, 1993;

Herbert, 1987;

Penrose, 1989;

Zohar, 1990,

Einstein, 1905;

Hawking, 1996)

Quantum Scientific

theory experiment-

ation & CAS in

literature review

(Kilman, 2001)

Quantum

Scientific

theory

experiment-

ation & CAS in

literature

review

(Kilman, 2001,

Shelton &

Darling, 2001;

Wheatley, 1999)

Complex

Adaptive

systems

(Zohar and

Marshall,

2001, 2003)

Complex

Adaptive

systems

view

(Wheatley

(1999),

Shelton

(1999),

Zohar and

Marshall,

2001/3)

Organisational

design

(Kilman, 2001)

Org. theories

-

metaphysical

aspects /

models

(Kilman, 2001)

Org.

Design

values

(Shelton

and Darling,

2001, 2003)

CAS implications

for organisational

design

(Lewin and Regine,

2001; Pascale,

Millemann and

Goija, 2000)

Org.

design

(Wheatley,

1992, 1999)

Emergence is

certain, but there is

no certainty as to

what it will be

1

The existence of

many relativistic

universes - up

to 11 dimensions

(Einstein, 1905,

M-Theory)

Theory of relativity,

Quantum tunneling, M

Theory, Space time

continuum, Speed of

light

Compliment-

arity,

Uncertainty,

Quantum

tunneling

Emergent Emergent The conscious

self-

management of

a flexibly

designed

organisation

within a

multidimensional

systems view.

Distributed

Empowerment

Innovation

(through

360º

thinking)

The greater the

diversity of agents

in the system the

greater the

emergence will be

Systems

view

Small changes can

lead to large effects

2

The probabilistic

uncertainty

among self-

motion monads

(Heisenberg,

1971)

Heisenberg's

uncertainty principle,

Self-motion monads,

External forces

(curved geometry and

string compression of

space time)

Field theory,

delayed choice

phenomenon,

quantum

potential

Outside

control

destructive

beyond

equilibrium /

Outside

control

destructive

The inclusion of

consciousness in

self-designing

systems.

Formal

systems:

Strategy,

structure and

reward

Respons-

ibility

(through

values)

Emergence is

certain, but there is

no certainty as to

what it will be

Central

identity of

meaning

170

3

The monastic

unification of

consciousness

with matter

(Heisenberg,

1971; Young,

1976)

Non-separability,

Bells theorem, chaos

theory

Chaos theory,

self-organising

structures,

strange

attractors

Self organ-

isation

Self

organising /

Order out of

chaos

Organisations as

conscious

participants in

self-designing

processes.

Value adding

Processes:

controlled and

improved

Change

(through

self

organising)

Agents 'behaviours'

are governed by a

few simple rules

The greater the

diversity of agents

in the system the

greater the

emergence will be 4

The eternal

connections

between self-

motion monads

(Bohr, 1958;

Bell, 1964;

Aspect, 1972)

First Law of

thermodynamic, Bells

theorem, non-

seperability, string

theory, wave-particle

duality

Planks constant,

Bose-Einstein

condensates,

Electro

magnetism

Bounded

instability

Field

independen

ce /

Bounded

instability

The internal

commitment of

active

participants.

Knowledge

growth –

personal

development

Motivation

(through

Response-

Ability)

Agents 'behaviours'

are governed by a

few simple rules

171

TABLE 4.8B

QUANTUM LEADERSHIP – PARADIGM SHIFT MODEL ALIGNMENT TABLE 2 (CONSCIOUS INTERACTION)

Line # align to

table 4.8 (A)


0 Skill

value

(Shelton

, 1999;

Shelton

et al,

2001,

2003)

Psyche value

(Shelton,

1999; Shelton

et al, 2001,

2003)

Spiritual

value

(Shelton

, 1999;

Shelton

et al,

2001,

2003)

SQ personal

values / CAS

theory

(Zohar and

Marshall, 2004)

Maslow’s

Motivations

Linking

Maslow

to MBTI

via

(Schott,

1992)

MBTI behavioural

preferences & Psyche

context (MBTI)

Linking

Transform-

ational

leadership

behaviour to

MBTI

(De Charon,

2003)

Linking

Intelligence states

to MBTI via

Transformational

leadership

(Davies, 2001;

Burke, 2001)

Quantum

behaviour(

Shelton

and

Darling,

1999,

2001)

Vision & Value

led

Craving (-3)

Positive use of

adversity

Fear (-4)

Celebrate

diversity

Anguish (-5)

1 Think

para-

doxically

Creativity Visualis-

ation

Humility

Holism

Self assertion (-1)

Anger (-2)

Security

(-12)

Belonging

(-3)

Thinking Rational intellectual

stimulation –

analytical /

logical decision

making

IQ Creative

Field

independence

Power-within (+3)

Self-awareness Gregariousness and

cooperation (+2)

2 Act

respons-

ibly

Synchronicity Mindful-

ness

Spontaneity Exploration (+1)

Self-

Esteem

(+6)

Extroverted SQ Ethical

Sense of

vocation

Apathy (-6) 3 Trust

life's

process-

Resilience

Faith

Grace Guilt and Shame (-7)

Survival

(-21)

Sensing

Judging

Irrational

inspirational

motivation -

tactical

EQ

SQ

Flexible

172

Line # align to

table 4.8 (A)


0 Skill

value

(Shelton

, 1999;

Shelton

et al,

2001,

2003)

Psyche value

(Shelton,

1999; Shelton

et al, 2001,

2003)

Spiritual

value

(Shelton

, 1999;

Shelton

et al,

2001,

2003)

SQ personal

values / CAS

theory

(Zohar and

Marshall, 2004)

Maslow’s

Motivations

Linking

Maslow

to MBTI

via

(Schott,

1992)

MBTI behavioural

preferences & Psyche

context (MBTI)

Linking

Transform-

ational

leadership

behaviour to

MBTI

(De Charon,

2003)

Linking

Intelligence states

to MBTI via

Transformational

leadership

(Davies, 2001;

Burke, 2001)

Quantum

behaviour(

Shelton

and

Darling,

1999,

2001)

es Grace De-personalisation (-

8)

4 Feel

vitally

alive

Attribution Detachm

ent

Field

independent /

self aware /

spontaneous /

bounded

instability /

outside control

destructive

Power-within (+3)

Gregariousness and

cooperation (+2)

Exploration (+1)

Self-

Esteem

(+6)

Extroverted SQ Spirited

173

(ii) Analysis of Table 4.8 (A & B)

The existence of many relativistic universes as a scientific paradigm, required for

perceptive thinking into uncertainty within a multi-dimensional organisational design, has

linked, via the scientific CAS base elements, the survival and craving elements of Maslow

to the thinking, sensing and judging behavioural constructs of Jung through the use of the

MBTI tool. This highlights an interesting insight, in that although table 4.7(A & B) is

focused on the elements relating to ‘individuation’ of the person and ‘holism’ of

organisations in the context of leadership, one must take into account that these elements

are a focus area to bring about change as it is through ‘individuation’ or ‘being’ via the

path of self-actualisation that these changes are wrought, but that individuation also

requires the full ambit of behaviour, value drivers and the modelling of this environment to

be understood and taken into account, to effect change in a ‘holistic’ organisational

context. In table 4.8(A & B) that one is able to view the additional behavioural constructs

that are opposing forces to self-actualisation (see Figure.4.8) as a leadership behavioural

driver and therefore are seen as a management behavioural set of drivers. These will now

be discussed in context of Table 4.7(A & B) as influencing factors that may help or hinder

the impact of leaderships change efforts.

Through utilisation of the behavioural constructs to understand quantum leadership in

context, the MBTI links the constructs of behavioural preferences as opposing forces (see

table 4.9) as per Jung’s dichotomies, and as such if one increases ones behavioural

preference for example within the construct of perception, as a leadership behaviour, this

has an effect on the opposite (in the context of quantum leadership -negative) behaviour

of judging, seen as a management behaviour. Negative in context when viewed via the

link to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs as per Zohar and Marshall (2004) in which perception

as a behaviour type is linked to self-actualisation with a (positive) score of +9, and judging

is linked to survival with a (negative) score of -21. The ability to perceive multiple

dimensions allows one to also understand the universe in a holistic way and judgement in

this context, should not be exclusive, but brought about to be inclusive and as such

becomes objective, in context, taking into account the holistic nature of the environment. If

this is done correctly via leadership coaching then judging becomes a positive attribute

and not negative. The discussion in Section 4.2.4.1 on this specific subject refers.

174

TABLE 4.9

ALIGNING OPPOSING BEHAVIOUR PREFERENCE TYPES (MBTI) AND MASLOW HIERARCHY OF NEEDS

SCORING ELEMENTS

Maslow’s

hierarchy of

needs

associated

scoring

(Zohar et al.,

2004) as per

table 5.5

Maslow’s

Hierarchy of

needs as

matched to

behavioural

types in

tables 5.7. (a

& b)

Behaviour preference

types (MBTI), as

opposed to each other

Maslow’s

Hierarchy of

needs as

matched to

behavioural

types in tables

5.8 (a & b) and

5.9 (a &b)

Maslow’s

hierarchy of

needs

associated

scoring

(Zohar et al.,

2004) as per

table 5.5.

+9 Self-

Actualisation

Introverted Extroverted Self-esteem +6

+9 Self-

Actualisation

Perceiving Judging Survival -21

+9 Self-

Actualisation

Intuitive Sensing Survival -21

+9 Self-

Actualisation

Feeling Thinking Security &

Belonging

-15

+21 Self-

Transcendence

(peak

experiences)

Individuation

(being)

4.3.4.3. Step 3: Derivation of the initial Quantum leadership model and associated

constructs

Quantum physics, thermodynamic and CAS scientific models used as a metaphor for

organisational modeling, values and behaviours through the tables in step 2 allows one,

from insights derived from these tables, to further derive a quantum leadership model and

it’s associated constructs.

175

The outcome of this research is to derive a quantum leadership model and questionnaire

(Chapter 5). Leadership in context of the literature review in Chapter 2, has a focus on

behaviour, as it is the most observable element of leadership’s conscious interaction with

the environment, and can be measured, as such it is the outcome for the derivation of the

quantum leadership constructs. Chapter 5 will focus on the methodology used in this

thesis and as part of this methodology, rigorous testing of the quantum leadership

constructs is required, and to this end a multidimensional questionnaire will be established

to test individual leadership behaviour, and the additional multidimensional constructs of

organisational models and values.

As quantum leadership is based on the premise of individuation within a holistic

organisational systems view of the world. The premise of ‘being / ‘individuation’ (Jung) or

‘peak experiences / self-transcendence’ (Maslow), the derivation of the quantum

leadership model must thus be focused on the leadership behaviours that these levels of

maturation of the psyche are based on. This aligns to the insights drawn from the

literature review in that rational thinking and irrational sensing are management

behaviours as per De Charon (2001) and furthermore includes judging and extroversion

and per Schott (1999) as linked to self-esteem, security and survival needs, through

Zohar and Marshall (2004). From this deductive premise, constructs related to leadership

are the scientific paradigms, organisational models and value systems that are aligned to

‘individuation / being’ (Refer to Figure 4.1).

176

Table 4.10: Paradigm shift model constructs aligned to form the basis for the quantum

leadership model

Models: Einsteinian-

Quantum-Relativistic

Universe

Models:

Organisational

Design

Organisational Participant Values Organisational Participants

Leadership Behaviours

Organisational Quantum Paradigm

The eternal self-

organisation of

relativistic universes,

continually in dialogue

with environment,

evolutionary mutations

as an emerging

consequence

An integrated

systems view of the

world and

organisational

participants, where a

sense of true

partnership through

dialogue leads to a

process of self-

organising,

mutation,

experimentation and

the continual

evolution of new

organisational forms

will emerge to take on

the challenges of a

dynamic environment.

Being in relationship, where

compassion for organisational

participants allows for a collaborative, non-

critical environment, where grace is

extended in view of the larger context in

which one is seeking to bring about

change. The overriding value is one of the

importance of stakeholders beyond

oneself, through an understanding of how

the environment operates as a system

(enlightenment), having a passion for a

better life for all (world soul) and

protection of the system in which we live,

and a calling to a higher service beyond

the profit motive within an organisation. It

is the value of being, which is the ability to

contextualise all values into an

understanding of how they operate

together within a single system, and to

make decisions on the organisational

model design and strategies, from a place

of complete understanding of the

interactions between the varied

organisational participants and expected

outcomes.

Being / Individuation

Compassionate

Individuation (SQ) – A point of

focus for the Quantum

leadership mode and constructs

Receiving

Contained

Intimate

Reflective

Quiet

Empathetic

Compassionate

Accommodating

Accepting

Tender

Abstract

Imaginative

Conceptual

Theoretical

Original

Casual

Open ended

Pressure-prompted

Spontaneous

Emergent



Universe

Models:

Organisational

Design



The quantum

universes as a motion

wave energy potential

continually moving

and vibrating,

materialised by

conscious

participation and

continuously

exploratory

Empowered,

decision making

relationships,


chain to ensure

quality of emerging

ideas and solutions,

through a shared

vision

Intentionally perceiving and exploring

multiple dimensions (cross-boundary) to

understand the context within a complete

holistic systems view, showing mastery

over the environment in being able to

generate a future perfect vision and the

navigable direction to get there.

Focused on the issue and

outcome

Confident in oneself

Introverted (SQ) – A point of


leadership model and

constructs – descriptors from

MBTI:

Receiving (reserved, low-key,

introduced)

Contained (controlled, harder

177



Universe

Models:

Organisational

Design



Space-time as curved


and energy,

continually re-

contextualising the

environment

Cross-boundary

processes as


and infused with

integrated systems,

processes and

information, where

collaborative

information is greater

than a single entity

and decision making

behaviour through

knowledge sharing,

governed by a few

simple rules,

allowing for intuitive

real-time decisions

to be made between

extended

organisational

participants

The value of being able to, empty ones

mind and focus intently on the problem,

allowing one to reframe and

recontextualise the issue at hand, in light

of the volume of information and

dimensions at play, showing mastery over

the environment in being able to generate

(give birth too) innovative solutions to

solve organisational issues.

to get to know, private)

Intimate (seek intimacy, one-

on-one, finds individuals)

Reflective (onlooker, prefer

space, read and write)

Quiet (calm, enjoy solitude,

seek background)

Feeling (IQ) - rational feeling

linked to individualised

consideration – relational /

logical decision making (Bass

and Avolio, 1999) – Descriptors

from MBTI:

Empathetic (personal, seek

understanding, central values)

Compassionate (tactful,

sympathetic, loyal)

Accommodating (approving,

agreeable, want harmony)

Accepting (tolerant, trusting,

give praise)

Tender (gentle, tender-hearted,

means-oriented)

Intuition (EQ) - irrational

intuitive linked to

idealised influence / charisma –

strategic (Bass and Avolio,

1999) – Descriptors from MBTI

Abstract (Figurative, symbolic,

intangible)

Imaginative (resourceful,

inventive, seek novelty)

Conceptual (scholarly, idea-

oriented, intellectual)

Theoretical (seek patterns,

hypothetical, trust theories)

Original (unconventional,

different, new and unusual)

Perceiving (SQ) – A point of


leadership model and

constructs – Descriptors

from MBTI

Casual (relaxed, easygoing,

welcome diversions)

Open ended (present-focused,

go with the flow, make flexible

178



Universe

Models:

Organisational

Design



plans)

Pressure-prompted (motivated

by pressure, bursts and spurts,

early start un-stimulating)

Spontaneous (want variety,

enjoy the unexpected,

procedures hinder)

Emergent (plunge in, let

strategies emerge, adaptable)

In Figure 4.2 below, the constructs of the Quantum leadership model are brought together

to form a diagrammatic view. The constructs below are as per headings in Tables (Refer

to Tables 4.1 to 4.8) and as per the Quantum Paradigm Shift Model (Refer to Figure 4.4):

1. Scientific paradigm: Based on Quantum physics, CAS, Thermodynamics

2. Models: A holistic systems view of organisational design (OD) using scientific

theory as a metaphor

3. Values:

• SQ intelligence state, and paradigm shift values of compassion and grace

• Motivational value states: Maslow’s motivations of enlightenment, higher

service and world soul

• Need value state: Maslow’s need of peak experience (self-transcendence)

4. Quantum leadership behaviour: quantum leadership = individuation (Jung)

179

Figure 4.2: Diagrammatic view of the essence of Quantum leadership

Individuation (Being)

‘Quantum

entanglement’

1. Science paradigm: Quantum physics, CAS, Thermodynamics

2. Models: Organisational design (OD) models using scientific theory as a metaphor

3. Values: 1. SQ values2. Behaviour motivations: Maslows

motivations3. Behaviour needs: Maslows needs

4. Quantum Behaviour: Quantum leadership = Individuation (Jung)

1234

180

Figure 4.3 below shows the detail in each construct. The model as per the discussion in

this Chapter indicates the constructs required to enable quantum leadership. The essence

of which is individuation (being), and in this thesis in line with quantum leadership and the

integration of physics and consciousness (psyche), the term quantum entanglement has

been introduced at the centre of the model (Refer to Figure 4.2).

Quantum entanglement is achieved through linking the need state value of self-

actualisation and the motivational state values of generativity and mastery (as drivers for

the needs state), this associated with the now integrated intelligence state values of SQ of

IQ and EQ, combining to form the integrated formation of psyche (consciousness) and

physics into quantum entangled individuation (this term is chosen to represent the

combination of physics and psyche). The resultant behavioural response to formation of a

higher level of psyche is in the combined exhibited behaviours of perception (SQ),

introversion (SQ), irrational intuition (IQ) and rational feeling (EQ) (as per the MBTI). As

the behaviours of intuition and feeling are linked via De Charon (2003) to individualised

consideration and idealised influence (Bass and Avolio, 1999) respectively, the

differentiator in this model to the transformational leadership model, is the inclusion of

perception and intuition (MBTI) as behavioural factors linked to SQ, through CAS

integration (Zohar et al., 2004). These constructs drive a conscious relational integration

of psyche and physics through individuation. It is this paradigm, the Quantum-Einsteinian

(holistic systems) view of the world, which allows the integration of leadership behaviour

to organisational design outcomes and an entangled or interconnected view of

performance across all dimensions of the extended organisation.

Inclusion of perception behaviour and introverted behaviour in the constructs of a

leadership model, allows for; focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation

(introversion) for focused solution-finding (innovation) within a multi-dimensional

organisational, within this context collaborative (inclusive) explorative perceptive

(perception) is possible as the organisation is empowered to create combined visions

across organisational boundaries, leading to empowered intuitive decision making

(intuition) in line with the re-contextualisation of a vision, which enables rational strategic

181

objectives to be set, and for the structural alignment of people to accomplish this strategy

through conscious participative relativity (feeling) (as a behavioural response to need

state drivers of self-actualisation). These combined behaviours as integrated through

quantum entangled individuation (as a response to self-transcendence / peak experiences

built on top of the integration of self-actualisation) focuses a multidimensional scanning of

the environment into strategic outcomes to achieve a ‘future perfect’ vision.

The organisational design outcomes, generated as a result of this thinking, as guided by

the motivational values of; generativity of focused future outcomes (motivated by asking

why? and exploring the answers) and mastery of the complete environment (motivated by

the ability to reframe and contextualise answers to generative questions within

organisational boundaries and constraints) is for generativity; empowered decision

making relationships, and for mastery; cross-boundary processes infused with

information.

Thus, the first step in alignment of quantum leadership is achieved, in aligning all aspects

of self-actualisation allowing for self-transcendence, with the appropriate behavioural

response of quantum entangled individuation. Through this entanglement, a focus on

relationships across organisational boundaries that are empowered to make strategic

decisions is achieved. Furthermore, the people who practice this style of leadership as

‘self-motion monads’ are connected to cross boundary processes and information to

enable intuitive strategic, people based collaborative and structural decision making in line

with the focused and directed multi-dimensional vision of the organisation.

The Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm invokes a change in behavioural descriptors to

include these modeling aspects, using the Jung (MBTI) behavioural constructs as a base:

(i) Perception, is now seen as: Collaborative (inclusive) explorative perceptive

(conscious visionary)

(ii) Introverted, is now seen as: Focused multi-dimensional introverted re-

contextualisation (conscious solution finding)

(iii) Intuition, is now seen as: Empowered intuitive decision-making (conscious

strategic)

(iv) Feeling, is now seen as: Conscious participative relativity (conscious structural)

182

Constructs as associated with quantum leadership behaviour:

(i) Collaborative (inclusive) explorative perceptive

• Quantum behaviour trait descriptor: conscious visionary

• Intelligence state value: SQ

(ii) Focused multi-dimensional Introverted re-contextualisation

• Quantum behaviour trait descriptor: conscious solution finding


(iii) Empowered intuitive decision-making

• Quantum behaviour trait descriptor: conscious strategic

• Intelligence state value: EQ

(iv) Conscious participative relativity

• Quantum behaviour trait descriptor: conscious structural

• Intelligence state value: IQ

The above behaviours, as integrated by the value need state driver of self-actualisation

have the following common constructs:

• Quantum organisational model (examples):

• Empowered decision-making relationships

• Cross-boundary processes infused with information

• Values:

• Needs value: Self-actualisation

• Motivational value: Generativity and mastery

• Quantum mental model (positive value state driver)

• Ask why? / explore, reframe/re-contextualise the environment

• Scientific model paradigm:

• Universe materialised by conscious participation / exploratory

• Space-time curved and filled with energy

• Re-contextualise the environment

183

Figure 4.3: Diagrammatic view of the essence of the Quantum leadership constructs

1. Scientific paradigm: Quantum –Einsteinian Paradigm

2. Model: Quantum Organisational Design

3. Values: Quantum entanglement & SQ 4. Values: Motivators and Needs5. Behaviour: Quantum Leadership

4 3 12

5. Quantum

‘entangled’Individuation

5

184

The second step, in forming a holistic model as aligned to quantum entangled

individuation is to look at the entire ambit of behaviours, including those, as per Table

4.9., that are juxtaposed to the four quantum leadership behaviours as discussed in

relation to Figure 4.3 and to understand how these particular behaviours, which make up

the full psyche are affected by the combined entanglement that needs to occur to enable

the correct use of these behaviours, within a quantum paradigm.

From a Maslow hierarchy of needs perspective, except for the unique linking of self-

esteem to the Jung (MBTI) behavioural descriptor of extroversion, the combined needs of

security and survival are aligned to the Jung (MBTI) behaviours of; thinking, sensing and

judging (see Figure 4.4).

From a behavioural perspective, the Einsteinian-Quantum paradigm invokes a change in

behavioural descriptors to include these modeling aspects, using the Jung (MBTI)

behavioural descriptors as a base:

(i) Extroversion, is now seen as: Extroverted bounded instability (conscious cross-

boundary organisational design)

(ii) Thinking, is now seen as: Emergent creative thinking (conscious multi-

dimensional analysis)

(iii) Judging, is now seen as: Diversified (Inclusive) compassionate judging

(conscious organisational change evolution)

(iv) Sensing, is now seen as: Flexible, partnered sensing (conscious collaborative

implementation)

A detailed view of the behaviours, including value drivers, organisational modeling

implications and the scientific modeling paradigm that these are metaphorically pre-

supposed on is detailed below:

(i) Extroverted bounded instability:

• Quantum behaviour trait descriptor: conscious cross-boundary organisational

design


• Conscious design of systems (strategy, structure, reward)

• Conscious participant in self-designing processes

185

• Internal commitment and knowledge growth

• mindfulness/synchronicity

• Values:


• Needs value: Self-esteem

• Motivational value: power within, gregariousness, exploration

• Quantum mental model (positive value state):

• Detachment/attribution

• resilience/faith


• Probabilistic uncertainty/outside control is destructive

• Non-seperability of consciousness and matter / self-organisation

• Eternal connections in the universe/bounded instability

(ii) Emergent creative thinking:

• Quantum behaviour trait descriptor: conscious multi-dimensional analysis


• Consciously empowered multi-dimensional flexible systems

• Conscious participant in self-designing processes

• Values:

• Intelligence state value: IQ

• Need state value (negative): Security and Belonging needs

• Motivation state value (negative value state): Craving, fear, anguish, self-

assertion, anger

• Quantum mental model (positive value state drivers) through quantum entangled

individuation:

• Vision and value lead creative visualisation

• positive use of adversity

• resilience/faith

• celebrate diversity as aligned to security needs and,

• humility, holism and compassion – as aligned to belonging needs


• Multi-dimensional emerging universe

• Non-seperability of consciousness and matter/self-organisation

186

• Evolutionary mutations of a relativistic universe

For the following behaviours of; flexible, partnered sensing and diversified, compassionate

judging, excluding intelligence states, share the same set of; values, organisational model

and scientific model paradigm - as detailed below:

(iii) Diversified, compassionate judging

• Quantum behaviour trait descriptor: conscious organisational change evolution

• Quantum organisational model (examples): Eternal evolution of organisational forms

• Values


• Need state value (negative): Survival

• Motivation state value (negative): Apathy, guilt and shame, de-

personalisation

• Quantum mental model (positive value state drivers) through ‘Quantum, entangled

individuation’:

• Sense of vocation

• celebration of diversity

• grace

• forgiveness

• compassion

• partnership through dialogue – as aligned to survival needs


• The eternal self-organisation of relativistic universes

• In dialogue with environment

• Evolutionary mutations

(iv) Flexible, partnered sensing

• Quantum behaviour trait descriptor: conscious collaborative implementation

• Quantum Organisational model (examples): Eternal evolution of organisational forms

• Values

• Intelligence state value: EQ

• Need state value (negative): Survival

187

• Motivation state value (negative): Apathy, guilt and shame, de-

personalisation

• Quantum mental models (positive value state drivers) through quantum entangled

individuation:

• Sense of vocation

• celebration of diversity

• grace

• forgiveness

• compassion

• partnership through dialogue – as aligned to survival needs


• The eternal self-organisation of relativistic universes

• In dialogue with environment

• Evolutionary mutations

188

Figure 4.4: Quantum leadership model including impact on opposing behavioural dimensions and the dual construct for emergent

creative thinking behaviour.

1. Scientific paradigm: Quantum –Einsteinian Paradigm

2. Model: Quantum Organisational Design

3. Values: Quantum entanglement & SQ 4. Values: Motivators and Needs5. Behaviour: Quantum Leadership

A

A

B

B

4

3

1

2

5. Quantum

‘entangled’Individuation

5

189

Note in Figure 4.4 above, a separate section is shown for emergent creative thinking, to

cater for the overlapping need state value of belonging and the motivational value drivers

of self-assertion and anger, the balance of the remaining construct detail remains the

same.

From the above diagram one can determine the initial sequence of integration of psyche

when viewing the thesis thus far in terms of integration of psyche, through the process of

alignment of self-actualisation need state drivers (Maslow) (process of individuation –

Jung) to get to the point of self-transcendence (peak experiences) (Maslow), where the

person becomes a whole being, the point of individuation driven by SQ, the ability to

transcend. Thus from the model as presented above the flow in understanding SQ,

suggests that points ‘A’ is the point of behavioural departure and then points represented

by ‘B’. Point ‘A’ being a focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation through

the psyche requiring an inward journey and integrating, through SQ, a collaborative

explorative perceptive, behaviour allowing the individual to operate in a wider

multidimensional frame of reference, having a direct positive effect on the opposing

behaviours in the model. Section 4.2.5 through analysis of the need state value driver

measures, the researcher will confirm this understanding.

4.3.5. Phase 5: Analysis to determine construct weightings and dependent and

independent variables

Beyond the Quantum leadership constructs as presented above, by utilising an inductive

methodology, in utilising the scoring associated with Maslow’s need states as per Zohar

and Marshall (2004), one is able to determine the value of the dependent and

independent variables, the weighting of such variables, a preliminary scoring based on the

weightings and therefore a resultant behaviour measure. These indicators will be utilised

to construct the scoring mechanism for the quantum leadership questionnaire, as part of

this research (Chapter 5) and as a method to analytically test the preliminary findings of

the quantum leadership model and theory in practice. Figure 4.5 below, reveals the flow of

influence between variables to the point of self-actualisation, allowing for the transition

into peak experiences/self-transcendence (Maslow) and the resultant behaviour of

individuation/being (Jung), now including the quantum worldview - quantum entangled

individuation).

190

Higher service

(+6)

Elightenment (+8)

World soul (+7)

Peak experiences

(self-

transcendence)

(SQ) (+21)

Quantum

entangled

individuation

(Being) (+21)

Focused multi-

dimensional

introverted re-

contextualisation

(SQ)(+30)

Collaborative

explorative perception

(SQ) (+30)

Empowered

intuitive decision-

making (EQ) (+30)

Conscious

participative

relational

(IQ) (+30)

Diversified

compassionate

judging (SQ) (-21)

Flexible partnered

sensing (EQ) (-21)

Extroverted

bounded instability

(SQ) (+6)

Survival (-21) Survival (-21)

Belonging (-3)

Self –

actualisation (+9)

Self –

actualisation (+9)

Self –

actualisation (+9)

Self –

actualisation (+9)

Self-esteem (+6)

6

6 8

7

5.25.1

5.25.1

Exploration (+1)Power within (+3)Gregariousness &

Cooperation (+2)Self assertion (-1)Anger (-2)Craving (-3)

Apathy (-6)

De-personalisation

(-8)

Guilt & Shame (-7)

Anguish (-5) Fear (-4)

-6

-8

-7

Diversified

emergent creative

thinking (IQ) (-15)

Security (-12)

2

2

Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)

1

1

4 5

3

3

1

Scientific paradigm:The eternal self-organisationand evolution of relativistic universes that are in continual dialogue with one another

OD Outcome:

Relational systems view of the organisation

leading to an eternal evolution of organisational

forms

Negative

Motivational Value

Positive

Motivational Value

Negative Needs

Value

Positive Needs

Value

Quantum

Leadership

Behavior

Correlated Values

Causality flow

Legend

Figure 4.5: Maslow’s motivational and needs state value measures to determine; causality, preliminary scoring, weightings, and directional

indicators of dependent and independent variables

191

4.3.5.1. Stage 1: Self-actualisation as a dependent and independent variable:

In Figure 4.5, the link between the value motivators of: generativity and mastery of the

environment, lead to the higher value need states of self-actualisation (process of

individuation) (Refer to Figure 4.5 and to Figure 4.6 for variable alignment).

4.3.5.2. Stage 2: Behavioural response to self-actualisation as a dependent

variable:

In Figure 4.5 and 4.6 the motivational value states that drive self-actualisation initially

impact on the response behaviours of focused multi-dimensional introverted re-

contextualisation and collaborative explorative perceptive. This assumption is made due

to the nature of the intelligence value of SQ associated with these two behaviours that are

a necessary requirement for peak experiences (self-transcendence) (Refer to Figure 4.6

for variable alignment).

4.3.5.3. Stage 3: Peak experience (self-transcendence) motivational value set as a

dependent and independent variable:

In Figure 4.5, the combined behavioural response to self-actualisation via SQ (stage 2),

drive a motivational set of value drivers; enlightenment (+8), world soul (+7) and higher

service (+6) required for the need state of peak-experiences (self-transcendence) (+21)

(Refer to Figure 4.6 for variable alignment).

4.3.5.4. Stage 4: Enablement of peak-experiences as a dependent variable and

independent variable:

In Figure 4.5, peak experience (self-transcendence) is enabled through the motivational

value drivers as per stage 3 above. Thus a symbiotic relationship is formed in reaching

the level of peak experiences, as measured through SQ, via stages 1, 2 and 3 (Refer to

Figure 4.6 for variable alignment).

4.3.5.5. Stage 5: Quantum entangled individuation (individuation/being (Jung)) as

a dependent variable:

192

In Figure 4.5: A state of quantum entangled individuation (+21) (individuation/being

(Jung)) begins to emerge, as the behaviour sets of focused multi-dimensional introverted

re-contextualisation and collaborative explorative perception are entangled through SQ

(see sub-stage 5.1), as a response to the need state drivers of self-actualisation (+9). In

so doing, this entanglement through SQ, also entangles the behaviours of empowered

intuitive decision-making (EQ) and conscious participative relativity (IQ) (sub-stage 5.2),

as a response to the shared need state value driver of self-actualisation (Refer to Figure

4.6 for variable alignment). The next stage (stage 6) is associated with sub stage 5.1, due

to the directional leading of SQ for these behaviours as primary variables.

4.3.5.6. Stage 6: Impact of Quantum entangled individuation:

In Figure 4.5, the positive influence of peak experiences (self-transcendence) adds a

multiplier effect to positive value need state drivers and adds (+21) to the numerical value

of these behaviours, which shifts them up from a position of +9 (based on the need state

numerical values) to +30, this has a positive impact on the juxtaposed behaviours which

this researcher has given a scoring profile, based on the numerical values of their

perspective need state values. Further, additional positive motivational value sets from an

Einsteinian-quantum worldview are present. This research does not apply numerical

values to these value drivers, it is assumed that these positive values are encompassed in

the multiplier effect brought about by the quantum entangled individuation aspect where a

positive (+21) numerical value as associated with the need state value driver of peak

experiences (self-transcendence) has been introduced. The impact of this quantum shift is

detailed below through the linked juxtaposed behaviours (Refer to Figure 4.4 and Figure

4.5). (Refer to Figure 4.6 for variable alignment).

• Focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation (+30) has an influence on

extroverted bounded instability (+6) (through the juxtaposed positioning of behavioural

types (MBTI, Jung)), through SQ. Extroverted bounded instability (SQ) is a behavioural

response to and a dependent variable associated with the needs state driver of self-

esteem (+6), yet is also a dependent variable of: power-within (+3), gregariousness &

cooperation (+2) and exploration (+1). Further, additional positive motivational value

sets from an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview: detachment, attribution, resilience and

faith, mindfulness / synchronicity have an influencing effect on the positive motivational

value set of self-esteem.

193

• Collaborative explorative perception (+30) has an influence on diversified

compassionate judging (-21) (through the juxtaposed positioning of behavioural types

(MBTI, Jung) through SQ. Diversified compassionate judging (SQ) is a behavioural

response to and a dependent variable of the survival (-21) need state value, which is a

dependent variable of the motivational value state drivers of de-personalisation (-8),

guilt & shame (-7), apathy (-6). Further, additional positive motivational value sets from

an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview: sense of vocation, celebrate diversity, grace,

forgiveness, compassion, and partnership through dialogue have an influence on the

negative motivational value set for the survival need value state.

4.3.5.7. Stage 7: Impact of Quantum entangled individuation - associated with

sub-stage 5.1:

In Figure 4.5, empowered intuitive decision-making (+30) influences flexible partnered

sensing (-21) (through the juxtaposed positioning of behavioural types (MBTI, Jung).

Flexible partnered sensing (EQ) is a behavioural response to the same survival state

value driver as diversified compassionate judging - survival, and therefore carries the

same dependent variable status and is associated with the same negative motivational

state drivers and positive quantum value sets. Due to the connected nature of the

motivational and need state drivers this impact in behaviour is seen as the next logical

step in integrating behavioural constructs, through quantum entangled individuation.

(Refer to Figure 4.6 for variable alignment)

4.3.5.8. Stage 8: Impact of quantum entangled individuation - associated with sub-

stage 5.1:

In Figure 4.5, conscious participative relativity (+30) influences emergent creative thinking

(-15) (through the juxtaposed position of behavioural types (MBTI, Jung)). Emergent

creative thinking (IQ) as a behavioural response to and a dependent variable of security

and belonging needs value set of: anguish (-5), fear (-4), craving (-3) and anger (-2), self-

assertion (-1) respectively. Through quantum entangled individuation, further additional

positive motivational value sets from an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview of vision and

value lead creative visualisation, positive use of adversity (resilience and faith) and a

celebration of diversity (compassion) have an influence over the negative motivational

value set for the needs value state of security. (Refer to Figure 4.6 for variable alignment).

194

Figure 4.7: Independent and Dependent variable flow of the Quantum leadership model

Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)

World Soul (+7)

Enlightenment (+8)

Higher Service (+6)

Power within (+3)

Gregariousness & Cooperation (+2)

Exploration (+1)

Anguish (-5)

Fear (-4)

Craving (-3)

De-personalisation (-8)


Apathy (-6)

Self-actualisation(+9) Self-actualisation(+9)

Peak experiences (+21)Peak experiences (+21)

Self esteem (+6)Self esteem (+6)

Security (-12)Security (-12)

Survival (-21)Survival (-21)

Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation (SQ) (9+21=30)Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation (SQ) (9+21=30)

Collaborative Explorative Perception (SQ) (9+21=30)Collaborative Explorative Perception (SQ) (9+21=30)

Empowered Intuitive Decision Making (EQ) (9+21=30)Empowered Intuitive Decision Making (EQ) (9+21=30)

Conscious Participative Relativity (IQ) (9+21=30)Conscious Participative Relativity (IQ) (9+21=30)

Quantum entangled individuation (SQ, EQ, IQ) (+21)Quantum entangled individuation (SQ, EQ, IQ) (+21)

Extroverted bounded instability (SQ) (+6)Extroverted bounded instability (SQ) (+6)

Diversified Compassionate Judging (SQ) (-21)Diversified Compassionate Judging (SQ) (-21)

Flexible Partnered Sensing (EQ) (-21)Flexible Partnered Sensing (EQ) (-21)

Diversified Emergent Creative Thinking (IQ) (-15)Diversified Emergent Creative Thinking (IQ) (-15)

Independent variables Dependant variables Independent variables

Stage2

Stage1

Stage3

Stage4

Stage5

Stage7

Stage6

Stage8

Anger (-2)

Self Assertion (-1)

Belonging (-3)Belonging (-3)

Stage5

195

4.3.6. Phase 6: Initial quantitative analysis to determine the Quantum

leadership shift effect

4.3.6.1. Numerical value base

From Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6 above and the explanation in the previous

paragraphs, the establishment of dependent and independent variables has been

shown. These variables carry weightings based on the scoring of Maslow’s need

state values as per Zohar and Marshall (2004) and will be used in Chapter 5 to

develop the weighted scoring for the quantum leadership questionnaire. One will

notice that the positive influence of the Einsteinian-Quantum motivational value sets

has not been included from a scoring perspective, even though they are positioned

against the negative motivational value sets from Maslow as an influencing factor,

there is no research base for scoring in terms of how much influence these positive

motivational value factors have and in this research is assumed to be present in the

multiplier effect of peak-experiences (self-transcendence) as a need state driver for

quantum entangled individuation.

Table 4.11 below shows the numerical value scores associated with the need state

values and the inference for measuring behaviours within this research. The score of

+21 associated with quantum entangled individuation is added to the individual

scores of the behaviours associated with self-actualisation as a needs state value

driver and acts as a multiplier due to integration of behaviours (via integration of self-

actualisation) through SQ.

TABLE: 4.11: QUANTUM LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOURS - NUMERICAL VALUE SCORING BASE

MOTIVATIONAL STATE

VALUES (MASLOW) NEED STATE VALUES

(MASLOW) QUANTUM LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOURS

Enlightenment (+8), World soul (+7)

Higher service (+6)

Peak experiences (self-transcendence) (+8+7+6=+21)

Quantum entangled individuation (+21)

Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)

Self-actualisation (+5+4=+9)

Focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation (+9 +21=+30)

Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)


Collaborative explorative perceptive (+9+21=+30)

196

TABLE: 4.11: QUANTUM LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOURS - NUMERICAL VALUE SCORING BASE

MOTIVATIONAL STATE

VALUES (MASLOW) NEED STATE VALUES

(MASLOW) QUANTUM LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOURS

Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)


Empowered intuitive decision-making (+9+21=+30)

Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)


Conscious participative relational (+9+21=+30)

Power within (+3)

Gregariousness and co-operation (+2) Exploration (+1)

Self-esteem (+3+2+1=+6)

Extroverted bounded instability (+6)

Apathy (-6)

Guilt (-7) Shame (-8)

Survival (-6-7-8=-21) Diversified compassionate judging (-21)

Apathy (-6)

Guilt (-7) Shame (-8)

Survival (-6-7-8=-21) Flexible partnered sensing (-21)

Craving (-3) Fear (-4) Anguish (-5) Self-assertion (-1) Anger (-2)

Security (-3-4-5=-12)

Belonging (-1-2=-3)

Emergent creative thinking (-12-3=-15)

4.3.6.2. Quantum leadership shift impact

Table 4.12 (Refer to Figure 4.8, 4.9 and 4.11) is a tabular and graphic illustration of

the influence of this weighting and shows the multiplier effect impact of quantum

individuation through quantum individuation (peak experiences), on the negative

motivational and need state drivers. This confirms the influence of an Einsteinian-

Quantum paradigm in which a holistic, multidimensional, systems view of the world

enables evolutionary changes in a state at the edge of chaos that are positive and

not negative.

197

Table 4.12: Quantum leadership shift effect (after quantum individuation leading to Quantum individuated being)

Quantum entanglement behavioural constructs

Juxtaposed behavioural constructs

Maslow motivational values applied

Quantum values applied after Quantum entanglement

Quantum individuation multiplier

Quantum leadership shift effect

Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation &

Extroverted bounded instability 15.0 36.0 21.0 140.00%

Collaborative Explorative Perception &

Diversified Compassionate Judging -12.0 9.0 21.0 -175.00%

Empowered Intuitive Decision Making &

Flexible Partnered Sensing -12.0 9.0 21.0 -175.00%

Conscious Participative Relativity &

Diversified emergent creative thinking (incl. Belonging) -6.0 15.0 21.0 -350.00%Total -15.0 69.0 84.0 -560.00%Average -3.8 17.3 21.0 -560.00%

Total difference 84.0Quantum leadership shift effect (Total diff) -560.00%

Average difference 21.0Quantum leadership shift effect (Ave. diff) -560.00%

Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership Questionnaire (QLQ) © - Behavioural

Constructs

Quantum leadership shift effect(after quantum individuation leading to Quantum individuated being)

In Figure 4.8, the influence of scoring based on the pure weighting scale of Maslow’s

need state values is shown. The use of MBTI descriptors in the Figure is to show the

state of behaviour before the introduction of a new paradigm of Einsteinian-Quantum

leadership and the impact of quantum entangled individuation. In this Figure one can

view the negative motivational influence on judging, sensing and thinking, that has

an overall average negative effect of -3.75 on the holistic behavioural response of

the person.

-30 0 +30

-30 +30

-30 0 +30

-30 0 +30

-30 0 +30

PerceptionJudging

Sensing Intuition

ThinkingFeeling

Extroverted Introversion

Overall average score

-21

0

0

+9

+9

-15 +9

+9-3.75

+9+6

-12.75

Average negative motivational and

need state values

Average positive Motivational and need state values

-12

0-21 -12

-6

+12

Figure 4.8: Organisational motivational value scoring excluding Quantum

Leadership Behaviour (Jung MBTI descriptors utilised – indicating exclusion of

Quantum entanglement)

198

In Figure 4.9, the new quantum leadership behavioural descriptors are presented, to

include the impact of Einsteinian-Quantum thinking on the behavioural responses

when the paradigm is shifted to allow for Quantum entangled individuation. In this

diagram one can see the multiplier effect of the inclusion of peak experiences as a

needs state value, which adds an additional +21 weighting points to the individual

behaviours of focused multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation,

collaborative explorative perception, empowered intuitive decision-making, and

conscious participative relativity. This in context moves the average behavioural

response from a negative (-3.75) to a positive (+17.25).

-30

-30

-300

CollaborativeExplorativePerception

DiverseCompassionate

Judging

FlexiblePartnered

Sensing

EmpoweredIntuitiveDecision-making

DiverseEmergentThinking

ConsciousParticipativeRelational

ExtrovertedBoundedInstability

FocusedMultidimensionalIntrovertedRe-contextualisation

Overall average score

+30

-30 +30

-30 +30

+30+6

Average motivational and

need state values

Average positive motivational and need state values as aligned to Quantum entangled individuation

0

0

-21

0

+9

-21

+30-12.75 +17.25

00-15 +24

+36

0 +9

Figure 4.9: Organisational motivational value scoring including Quantum

Leadership Behaviour through Quantum entangled Individuation (Quantum

leadership behaviour descriptors utilised – showing inclusion of Quantum

entanglement)

In Figure 4.10, a Comparison of average motivational and need value state

weightings, before and after the shift to quantum leadership behaviour, through

quantum entangled individuation, shows the multiplier effect of quantum leadership

on the mean difference (d) of the motivational and needs value scores or the

cumulative average ‘quantum leadership shift’ effect of 560%.

199

Figure 4.10: Cumulative average ‘Quantum leadership shift’ effect

4.3.7. Phase 7: Impact of the Quantum leadership model on organisational

outcomes (examples)

The behaviour nomenclatures and descriptors used in the quantum leadership model

bare testimony to the impact that quantum entangled individuation has on the

quantum shift of negative behaviour to positive and the impact this behaviour has on

organisational outcomes. The behaviours have been linked below with their

juxtaposed behaviour types as per the base of the Jung model as per the MBTI

(Refer to Section 4.2.4.3).

(i) Vision (SQ)

Collaborative explorative perceptive behaviour combined with diversified

compassionate judging behaviour allows for conscious visioning that is acceptable in

light of an organisation that is conscious of the organisational change evolution that

needs to occur to remain competitive in a complex environment, taking into account

all stakeholders.

(ii) Strategy (SQ)

Focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation behaviour combined with

extroverted bounded instability behaviour allows for conscious solution finding within

Overall average score, excluding Quantum leadership behaviour through quantum entangled individuation

Quantum shift

Cumulative average ‘Quantum leadership shift’ effect (+560%)

Overall average score, including Quantum leadership behaviour through quantum entangled individuation

-30 0 +30+9

-3.75

-12.75

Average negative motivational and

need state values

Average positive Motivational and need state values

Average motivational and

need state values

Average positive motivational and need state values as aligned to Quantum entangled individuation

+17.25

-30 0 +30-12.75

200

a conscious cross-boundary organisational design leading to innovation throughout

the integrated organisation between all stakeholders.

(iii) Structural planning and design (IQ)

Conscious participative relativity behaviour combined with emergent creative thinking

behaviour allows for the design of conscious structural impacts on the holistic

organisation and all of its stakeholders to achieve organisation outcomes through

conscious multi-dimensional analysis.

(iv) Execution (EQ)

Empowered intuitive decision-making behaviour combined with flexible, partnered

sensing behaviour allows for conscious strategy implemented through conscious

collaboration with all organisational stakeholders.

4.4. Conclusion

In Chapter 4, through deductive analysis from the literature review and gap analysis

in Chapter 2 and 3, a comprehensive quantum leadership model has emerged.

Through the derivation of this model, its constructs and initial quantitative analysis, it

has become evident that a paradigm shift in behaviour has occurred alongside the

paradigm shift in science supporting a holistic view of the world, leading to a positive

impact on business and society.

The dramatic impact of peak experiences (self-transcendence) as a need value state

to enable quantum entangled individuation has immense implications for leadership

in all spheres of society, this shown from the behavioural response indicative of this

shift as shown in this research, from both a qualitative and quantitative position.

The behaviour nomenclatures and descriptors used in the quantum leadership model

bare testimony to the impact that quantum entangled individuation has on the

quantum shift of negative to positive behavioural responses, especially in an

organisational setting, where these behaviours impact specifically on the

organisational outcomes of visioning, strategy formulation, structural planning and

design, and execution.

201

In Chapter 5, the constructs deduced in Chapter 4, will be used to develop a

quantum leadership questionnaire, as part of the research methodology, to test the

shift in behaviour as suggested in the findings in Chapter 2, 3 and 4.

202

CHAPTER 5: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

5.1. Introduction

This chapter seeks to develop a research methodology that is relevant to validating

the research hypothesis posed and primary and secondary objectives in this thesis.

The approach taken in this chapter is from the perspective of defining research, the

characteristics and process involved and within this to analyse the correct approach

as is relevant.

5.2. Investigation into research methodology

5.2.1. Definition and characteristics of good research in developing a

methodology (the thesis)

Hussey and Hussey (1997), suggest that there does not seem to be consensus on a

definition of research. This is supported by Cooper and Schindler (2001). However

Cooper et al (2001) and Leedy and Ormond (2005) do support the view that

research;

• Is a process of rigorous enquiry and investigation

• Is systematic and logical using appropriate methods to collect and analyse data,

and

• Increases knowledge through addressing a specific research problem.

Business research within this domain is defined as a ‘..systematic inquiry that

provides information to guide business decisions’. Furthermore (Hussey et al., 1997,

Cooper et al., 2001, Leedy et al., 2005), detail a set of characteristics of good

research, typical of research projects across varying complexity and duration. This

researcher has combined these sets of characteristics into the following list,

suggesting that good research:

1. Originates with a question or problem

2. Defines a clear purpose, guided by the specific research problem, statement,

question or hypothesis to:

• Investigate an existing situation or problem

• Provide solutions to a problem

203

• Construct or create a new process or system

• Explain a new phenomenon

• Generate new knowledge

3. Details a thoroughly planned research process

• Cyclical or, more exactly, helical (cycles vertically upward)

• Divides the principal problem into more manageable problems

• Reviews and synthesises existing knowledge

• Frankly reveals limitations and critical assumptions

• Includes adequate analysis for decision maker needs to provide solutions to

problems (Internal and external validity, leading to reliability)

• Unambiguously presents findings

• Justifies conclusions

4. Applies high ethical standards to research

5. Ensures that researchers experience is reflected

The researcher intends to utilise these characteristics as an input into forming a

robust research methodology that is consistent with the objectives and purposes of

this research.

5.2.2. Alternative interpretations of good research methodology (the

antithesis)

This thesis (from a human sciences perspective) suggests that human conscious

interaction supports an approach that is beyond a pure positivist empirical approach,

yet is also not purely intrinsic or extrinsic, but a combination of both. This statement

is aligned to Fornaciari and Dean (2001, p.338), who state that ‘..humans are

complex, non-rational and emotional creatures that often defy the neat, behavioral

descriptions offered by the accepted positivist model.’ In support, Pellissier states

that although research is systematic it is also ‘..the human, communal study of both

natural and cultural phenomena that is paradigm-and theory-dependent’ (Pellissier,

2007, p. 6). Thus, suggesting that not all research can be rigorously completed in

line within the scientific method. The scientific method, works ‘..best where you can

isolate the phenomenon of interest and can repeatedly test the system under study

204

after making limited controlled changes to it…there are situations where this is not

possible…for example, social interactions between people’ (Pellissier, 2007, p. 6). In

these instances, there is critique to the scientific method, notably Feyerabend’s

(1975), suggestion that no specific method guaranteeing success in research exists.

Rather Feyerabend suggests that when explaining the process, scientists following

the scientific method, change the process to fit the solution. Thus, they subsequently

understand a small part of the total logic. Feyerabend (1975) subsequently

suggested that ‘..it is possible that (researchers using the scientific method) do not

solve problems; they rather develop new laws for society’.’ This proposition is

justified through the following statements (Feyerabend, 1975):

‘..the idea that science can and should be run according to fixed, universal rules is

unrealistic and pernicious. It provides too simple a view of the talents of man and of

the circumstances which encourage, or cause, their development. In addition, it is

detrimental to science for it ignores complex physical and historical conditions which

influence change. As a consequence, science becomes less adaptable and more

dogmatic. Underlying assumptions are taken for granted, for example empiricism

takes for granted that the sense of experience represents the world better than

analytical thought….we realise that even the simplest demands are not satisfied in

scientific practice, and could not be satisfied, because of the complexity of the

material. Combining this observation with the insight that science has no special

method, we arrive at the result that the separation of science and non-science is not

only artificial but also detrimental to the advancement of knowledge.’ (Feyerabend,

1975, pp. 3 - 11)

Feyerabend, further questioned the superiority and excellence of modern science

over other forms of reasoning such as mythology or rationality. Pellissier agrees and

contends that:

‘..scientists let facts, logic and methodology decide. A good theory explains more

than its rivals, since it predicts new things. But it restricts itself to the facts alone and

these facts cannot make us accept or reject scientific theories. There is a gap in the

ever-changing human domain, where facts alone are not sufficient. The human role

is vital in making the final decision to change ideas and build new constructs.’

(Pellissier, 2007, p.7)

205

In support of Feyerabend and Pellissier, and specifically from research into

leadership as an aspect of social science, Campbell, states that:

‘..these (leadership) theories have traditionally been grounded in rational empiricism,

wherein only phenomena amenable to knowledge through direct experience were

considered to be within the proper purview of scientific enquiry…(however), the

scientific method does not lend itself to the study of phenomena such as Being

(sic)….(whereas) the primary focus of leadership research has been on the doing of

leadership, with little attention given to Being (sic)’ (Campbell, 2007, p. 138).

As this thesis is focused on research into leadership and the notion of being

(individuation), as per Jung - as the central unifying factor for holistic leadership

behaviour, it is important to recognise the limitations of the traditional approach to

scientific investigation techniques, in that rational empiricism cannot give a holistic

range of answers to answer the research hypothesis posed in this thesis. This is

highlighted in he various areas that this research covers and the scholars who

suggest that in this area of research that the traditional empirical methods are not

sufficient.

As the basis for this study is in the Einsteinian-quantum and complexity theory realm

of science, it is important to mention that:

‘..Quantum mechanics has taught us that we can know parts of the system, but

knowing only a part is incomplete and often misleading…impossibility (of

measurement) does not deter physics scholars from their conceptual leaps.

Conversely, modern social science research continues down the path of logical

positivism and determinism, (even though) many physical systems are a lot less

complex than most social systems. The experience of quantum mechanics forces us,

as social scientific researchers, to question what we are actually measuring’

(Fornaciari et al., 2001, p.338).

In the area of value systems and specifically spirituality in this research that has

inputs into the development of a leadership model taking into account spiritual

quotients (Zohar et al., 2001), Fornaciari and Dean (2001) further suggest that:

206

‘..Despite growing interest in the topic, this realm of inquiry represents major shifts in

research methodology paradigms that have yet to be adequately addressed. First,

we must confront the inadequacy of our traditional social science research tools to

address this issue; we challenge the current dominance of the quantitative, positivist

research methods paradigm. Our traditional tools are not up to the task and we

simply cannot let the old tools drive the research for the sake of convenience. If we

do not adopt new paradigmatic approaches to measurement and conceptualization

(sic) of spirituality and religion, the research suffers the high probability that the

results produced will be trivial.’ (Fornaciari and Dean, 2001, p. 336)

In addition, this research as it is focused on outcomes of understanding leadership

behaviour within an organisational context, does not lend itself to traditional

structured organisational research (Dehler and Welsh, 1994; Mitroff and Denton,

1999). Fornaciari et al. (2001) suggest that human beings, ‘..defy the neat,

behavioral (sic) descriptions offered by the accepted positivist model’. However,

Fornaciari et al. (2001) do temper this approach by being inclusive and state that;

‘..this (method of) research does not replace, but rather augments empirical,

Tayloresque notions of organisational behavior (sic)’. Thus a holistic approach must

be adopted in the approach to researching social systems.

5.2.3. Synthesis of approaches to research in support of this thesis

In support of this holistic approach to methodology building, this researcher relies on

Feyerabend’s approach to scientific method, in which he ultimately aligned himself

with a type of social constructionism, wherein which he emphasised that the world is

not singular but plural. This is supported in the findings of this thesis’ theory building

methodology and points towards the understanding of a worldview founded in

quantum physics and not Newtonian physics. Feyerabend’s and his insight into

research methodology suggests that, if there is no single method for doing science

for all problems at all times in all spaces (generalisable method), then each research

project must find its own method.

In support of Feyerabend’s approach, Harman and Clark (1994, pp. 379 - 389)

indicate the need in bringing together researchers from many disciplines to explore,

207

share, and oftentimes provoke the social sciences domain into considering a new

science of wholeness which builds upon:

• An ontological assumption of oneness, unity, interconnectedness of everything,

and

• An epistemological assumption that there are two available windows onto reality:

the objective, through the physical senses, and the subjective, through the

intuitive and aesthetic faculties.

This thesis however challenges the Harman and Clarke assumption of separation

between objective and subjective domains, as it brings both objective physical and

subjective intuitive and aesthetic faculties together into a holistic context, through the

research methodology employed.

In an attempt to formulate a solution to the research problem and not purely

formulate new concepts, in line with a holistic approach, the researcher uses a

theory building research process, which suggests that the research method ‘..is not a

clear-cut sequence of procedures following a neat pattern, but a messy interaction

between the conceptual and empirical world, deduction and induction occurring at

the same time’ (Beckhofer, 1974, as related by Shaw, 2000), and as supported by

Carlisle and Christenson (2005) in their process of theory building as a research

methodology. Carlisle et al. utilise both descriptive and normative theory building

steps in their postulation of a holistic research methodology, using a process of

induction from point (i), through point (ii), to point (iii) and then deduction from point

(iii) to point (i), scaling up and down between these two elements for both causality

and normative theory building within this research methodology as seen below:

Building descriptive theory:

(i) Observation (observe, describe and measure phenomena)

(ii) Classification (categorisation by the attributes of the phenomena) and

(iii) Defining relationships (statements of correlation)

Building normative theory:

(i) Observation (observe describe and measure the phenomena)

208

(ii) Classification (categorisation of the circumstances or situations in which

phenomena take place) and

(iii) Defining causality (statements of causality)

The difference between descriptive and normative theory, is the leap from correlation

of relationships to causation of relationships (Carlisle et al., 2005).

Carlisle et al. (2005) further suggest a link between Kuhn’s (1962 and1970) work on

paradigm shift models as a transition framework from descriptive to normative

theory. It is from this base that this researcher has chosen to resolve confusing

descriptive theory relationships (Carlisle, 2005), by abstracting up from the detail to

define a few categories that satisfy the circumstances in question. The researcher

uses the Kuhn paradigm shift model as logical framework in which to build

descriptive theory that has a jump over point to normative theory through shifting the

classification of phenomena, ensuring a shift from correlative relationships found in

the literature review and modelling stage through using content analysis techniques

to causal relationships found in the testing of the QLM through the use of a

questionnaire (QLQ), within a ex-post facto case study design in seeking to form

causality.

5.3. Research methodology (application of theory)

In Section 5.2 of this chapter, the theory of understanding and developing a research

methodology was discussed in light of defining a relevant method and process for

establishing a robust thesis at the doctoral level. This section takes these insights

into account and develops a robust methodology to answer the research hypothesis.

5.3.1. Researcher’s position on research

5.3.1.1. Researcher’s paradigm

The research paradigm of the researcher is one of a mix between the

phenomenological, in line with Hursel’s (1946) statement that the world and reality

are not objective but are socially constructed and given meaning by people, and the

209

positivist paradigms, in that knowledge is only significant if it is based on observation

of external reality (Shaw, Thomas & Brown, 2000).

5.3.1.2. Ontology

The researcher’s basic beliefs or ontology assumes oneness, unity, and

interconnectedness (Harman et al., 1994). This belief is further enhanced by an

understanding that the world is socially constructed and subjective and that science

is driven by human interest as per the phenomenological paradigm. However for this

study in terms of the position of the observer, the observer is independent as per the

positivist tradition and not part of what is observed. A scientific approach of causality

is followed, thus allowing for predictability of phenomena and therefore the study is

to an extent empirically measurable (Hussey et al., 1997).

5.3.1.3. Epistemology

The researcher’s epistemological assumption is that there are two available windows

into reality: the objective, through the physical senses, and the subjective, through

the intuitive and aesthetic faculties. In this assumption the researcher believes that

research should focus on meanings and facts, but only after trying to understand

through modelling, the totality of each situation (holism) through an inductive lens in

the interpretivist sociological tradition, and then when understanding the correlations

of phenomena, using a deductive lens to understand causality and inference, in

context of circumstantial evidence. By using this approach, the researcher attempts

to find solutions and not just present new concepts or theories. Thus, the researcher

follows a descriptive theory building approach to correlative links between

phenomena, then shifts focus to understanding the context of the situation in which

these correlations occur to derive causality within categorisation of elements in a

normative manner (Carlisle and Christensen, 2005), subjected to a quantitative

measurement criteria.

210

5.3.2. Research hypothesis and objectives

5.3.2.1. Research hypothesis

The gap that exists between the worldviews established through Quantum physics

and Newtonian physics as a base, suggests that a paradigm shift impact should

occur within organisations, if a quantum physics worldview is used as a metaphor for

organisational design. This paradigm shift should impact the organisational model

(mental and physical), the values that support this model, and the leadership

behaviours as a response to these values, in such a way that, a paradigm shift

should be evidenced in physical examples (outcomes) and be measurable as per the

Dubrin (1965) paradigm shift model. Thus leadership behaviour, as inferred through

this model, has an impact on organisational outcomes and as such, to deduce and

define a quantum leadership behavioural model and measurement instrument will

add unique value to science.

The research hypothesis is thus:

To use a quantum physics based worldview to: define, deduce and validate a

quantum leadership model and measurement instrument.

From this research hypothesis, the primary and secondary research objectives are

articulated below.

5.3.2.2. Primary and secondary research objectives

The primary research objectives are articulated in such a way so as to simplify and

focus the process to answer the research hypothesis.

The research seeks to achieve the following primary research objectives:

(i) Define and deduce a Quantum Leadership Model (QLM)

• Define the QLM:

o Understand the paradigms of Newtonian and Quantum physics and their

defining features within a paradigm shift framework.

211

o Review current leadership models and their constructs in relation to this

broad approach.

• Deduce the QLM.

(ii) Define and derive a measurement instrument – the Quantum Leadership

Questionnaire (QLQ).

• Define the QLQ requirements;

• Derive the QLQ.

(iii) Validate the QLQ and QLM.

• Validate the QLQ;

• Validate the QLM.

5.3.3. Research process

5.3.3.1. Overview:

The overview covers the cyclical division of the research hypothesis into

manageable elements.

The research process (see Figure 5.1), is multidimensional in approach, as aligned

to the nature of the research topic, and takes into account a research methodology,

process and a framework within which to research the multi-dimensional approach

taken to understanding leadership, from a theoretical scientific base. The

methodology adopted is one of utilising descriptive theory and normative theory at

different phases of the research process, within which an inductive and deductive

methodology approach is adopted. The inductive method provides a more truly

causal, as well as more theory-connected, understanding for research, whereas the

deductive model explicitly contains not only the causal factors but also the causal

mechanisms (Overmars, Wouter and Huigen, 2007). Figure 5.1 below details the

methodology approach taken in the thesis and aggregates the elements into a

simple model for interpretation.

212










Chapter 6Analysis

Chapter 7Findings

















Chapter 6Analysis

Chapter 7Findings








Figure 5.1 Research process in this thesis.

(i) Phase 1: Descriptive process

The researcher follows a descriptive theory approach in Phase 1 of the research

process as per Figure 5.6. In stage 1 and 2 of this phase, the researcher uses

descriptive theory (see paragraph 5.2.3), in observing, classifying and defining

relationships between variables, this is done through a qualitative inductive category

development process, contained within content analysis methodology. Through this

process in stage 1, the researcher observes science, asks questions and forms

categories for general application. In stage 2, the researcher gathers information in

line with categories developed, through secondary literature research. In stage 3, to

understand the phenomena as presented in stage 1 and 2, these observations and

classifications are taken further to define relationships or correlations between

variables through the process of derivation of a Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) in

Chapter 4, in the context of existing theory these phenomena and the circumstances

213

in which they find themselves are presented through deduction into typologies and

frameworks utilising a deductive category application process, contained within

content analysis methodology. Though this process, the researcher discovers

anomalies that are present within this categorisation. Furthermore, these statements

of correlation from this stage are aligned to the research hypothesis, which forms the

basis for new models, testing and subsequent theory.

(ii) Phase 2: Normative process

In phase 2 (see Figure 5.1), the researcher follows a normative theory approach in

an attempt to predict the circumstances under which these phenomena and

anomalies present themselves and in so doing find solutions to them. In this stage

(stage 4, Chapter 5) the researcher develops test instruments to test the model

created in stage 3 (Chapter 4), in terms of its ability to predict causality and to

provide information to form solutions to any anomalies, thus the inductive process is

one of moving from generalisations to particular solutions. Furthermore in this stage

the researcher also chooses a test group to test the control instrument, and a

population and sample group in which to conduct the primary research. In stage 5

(Chapter 6), the researcher analyses the quantitative data and formulates theoretical

opinions of causality based on these findings. This process is however seen to be

limiting as cause-and-effect research, in light of the quantum field as discussed in

this thesis, suggests that we cannot account for all circumstances within the defined

dimensions one measures within. As much as the findings may point to a specific

direction, they can never be precise enough to define a general theory. This anomaly

is approached from a triangulation of quantitative and qualitative data from interviews

in an attempt to answer the research hypothesis. In stage 7 (Chapter 8), conclusions

are drawn and future study direction is intimated.

5.3.3.2. Review of existing theory

Content analysis in this thesis is the method and process in which the manual coding

of documentation is undertaken. Berelson (1952) suggested various reasons for

using content analysis vary, below are those related to this thesis:

• To describe the relative focus of attention for a set of topics;

214

• To compare group differences in content;

• To compare individual differences in content and

• To trace conceptual development in intellectual history.

On the use of content analysis in leadership research, Meindl (1990) notes that

‘..researcher’s attention needs to move away from the analysis of leaders and move

toward the analysis of leaders and followers embedded in a field of contextual

variables.’ Insch, Moore and Murphy (1997), explain this contextual aspect in that

‘..the use of content analysis can help to extend leadership research in many ways.

Foremost, the use of this methodology can encourage contextually rich research

designs and provide a means to triangulate the self-report data that are so heavily

utilized (sic) in leadership research.’

Thus in light of contextualising information into logical constructs, content analysis as

a methodology fits the requirement of this research, in that it contextualises complex

variables into constructs that can be triangulated through self-report data analysis

back to the construct context. In essence, content analysis provides a means of

integrating qualitative aspects of research into constructs that allow for quantitative

analysis methods to be applied in investigating new theory.

Within the methodology of qualitative content analysis, Mayring (2000), has

developed a specific process that contains aspects of quantitative analysis, and has

been applied to inductive category development and deductive category application,

in descriptive theory building, suggesting a congruence to the methodology

employed in this research (Mayring, 2000; Overmars, De Groot, and Huigen 2007)

(Refer to Figure 5.2). Mayring as supported by Krippendorf (2004), suggests that

four quantitative techniques be included in the methodology in the form of: fitting the

material into a model of communication, ensuring that rules of analysis be applied

(accepted procedures, structured into content analytical units), that categories form

the centre of analysis (interpretation in line with research hypothesis, are carefully

founded within the process of analysis), that the process applied includes criteria for

215

reliability and validity.

The adapted process model for inductive category development follows a process to

formulate a criterion of definition, derived from theoretical background and research

hypothesis, which determines the aspects of the textual material taken into account.

Following this criterion the literature (in this thesis) is analysed step-by-step and

categories are induced. Within a feedback loop those categories are revised,

eventually reduced to main categories and checked in respect to their reliability.

Figure 5.2: Adapted step model of inductive category development.

Source: Mayring (2000); Overmars, De Groot, and Huigen (2007)

Once the inductive phase of category formation is checked for reliability against

initial research hypothesis and to validate whether they are still contextually correct

within he formation of categories, Mayring (2000) further suggests a model for

deductive content analysis. Starting with the theoretical based definitions of

Research question / objective

Determination of category definition (criterion of selection) and levels of abstraction for inductive categories

Step by step formulation of inductive categories out of the material, aligned to category definition and levels of abstraction. Leads to acceptance of old categories or formulation of new categories

Continual revision of categories

Final text revision

Interpretation of results using quantitative steps of analysis

Formative reliability check

Summative reliability check

216

categories again and deducing from these new definitions, examples and categories.

The deductive category application process of content analysis, works with prior

formulated, theoretically derived aspects of analysis (as per the inductive formation

of categories). The objective in deductive category application is to give explicit

definitions, examples and coding rules for each deductive category. These category

definitions, rules and examples for distinguishing different categories must be

formulated in respect to theory and material, and completed step by step, and

revised through the process of analysis.

Figure 5.3: Adapted step model of deductive category application.

Source: Mayring (2000); Overmars, De Groot, and Huigen (2007)

Within qualitative content analysis the aim is to describe procedures of systematic

text analysis, (theory reference, step models, model of communication,

categorisation, criteria of validity and reliability) to develop qualitative procedures

(inductive category development, summarizing, context analysis, deductive category

application) which are methodologically controlled. These procedures allow a

Research question / objective

Theoretical based definition of aspects of analysis, main categories, sub-categories

Theoretical based formulation of definitions, examples and coding rules for categories. Developing a coding agenda.

Continual revision of categories and coding agenda

Final text revision

Interpretation of results using quantitative steps of analysis

Formative reliability check

Summative reliability check

217

connection to the quantitative steps of analysis (Mayring, 2000; Overmars, De Groot,

and Huigen 2007)

Following, this introduction to content analysis and the processes involved, a

framework for paradigm shifts, from Kuhn (1962), suggests a process of inducing

categories from science (theory) and deducing definitions and examples, encoded by

specific rules within each category ensuring contextualisation bask to the original text

and theory is maintained, as per Mayring (2005) and furthermore is mentioned by

Carlisle et al. (2005) as a method for linking descriptive and normative theory

together. In addition the Kuhn paradigm shift model includes metaphysical aspects,

values and ideal examples, which all help to shape the context in which this shift

occurs. However the Kuhn (1962) model excludes behavioural aspects as a

response to behaviour. Thus an adapted paradigm shift model is deduced below,

and is utilised as the framework, within which the inductive and deductive process of

descriptive model forming is achieved, through the lens of qualitative content

analysis methodology. Furthermore the same framework is used within which

normative theory is linked to this descriptive theory formation process by

quantitatively testing the categorisation deduced, through triangulation of self-test

results (questionnaire completion) against the qualitatively deduced model.

5.3.3.3. Synthesis and application of existing theory into a research

framework

(i) Inducing a scientifically acceptable research framework

The requirement in this stage is to inductively observe empirical reality through

science. In doing this one must ask questions and form categories, as per the

adapted step model of inductive category development (Mayring, 2000; Overmars,

De Groot, and Huigen 2007) (Refer to Figure. 5.2), to move from specific science to

generalisation. As this thesis is focused on the paradigm shift, required by

leadership, to research this paradigm shift in detail requires a scientifically

acceptable model, a paradigm shift model, that can be used to understand the

various aspects and specifically the causality of a paradigm shift in leadership

218

behaviour, in line with the formation of categories to move from empirical reality to

generalisation. Zohar (1997, p. 25) states that;

‘If we want to transform the structure and leadership of our organisations, we have to

address change at the fundamental pragmatic level. We have to change the thinking

behind our thinking. Leaders who want to initiate real change processes must

become aware that they have been acting out of a paradigm. They must see the

origin and nature of this existing paradigm and its effect on their management. And

(sic) they must get to a point where they can feel the reality of an alternative

paradigm – or the creative excitement of standing at the edge between paradigms.’

To move forward, one must understand paradigms. A paradigm is a coherent,

internally consistent approach for making sense of the universe and coping with life:

essentially how one sees, thinks, and behaves (Kilman, 1999). Similar terms that are

often used interchangeably with paradigm include archetype, gestalt, worldview,

template, schema, mind-set, mental model and conceptual/theoretical framework. In

its basic form, a paradigm is a fairly rigid set of categories that are organically

infused within a human mind/brain: If a person does not have a category for seeing

something, for all practical purposes it does not exist. ‘Paradigms are deeply

entrenched in unstated, untested, and unquestioned assumptions about the

fundamental makeup of reality: light, space, time, energy, mass – and, particularly,

the nature of life, and human beings’ (Kuhn, 1962). Kuhn (1962), further stated that

major changes in scientific theories take place only occasionally, with what he calls:

shifts of paradigm. These paradigm shifts occur where the existing assumptions on

which researchers depend become so unsuitable that they collapse and have to be

replaced by a new set of assumptions. This according to Kuhn cannot simply be

reduced to a given set of data, but rather also a change in gestalt (position). This

new gestalt, is made up of four constructs that flow in causality, namely:

• Symbolic generalisations – typical scientific expressions that are not questioned,

• Metaphysical aspects - suitable or acceptable models that offer suitable

analogies and metaphors,

• Values - quantitative aspects for judging research results, topics or theories, and

219

• Ideal examples - specific solutions to a problem that are found in scientific

journals

Furthermore, one needs to understand the models through which one can identify

and categorise the elements of the world around us, to show a shift in paradigm.

Kuhn’s model of paradigm shift falls short of behavioural implications, which are

included in models of cultural change, such as Trompenaars (1985) and Bjerke

(1999). The similarities between the components of a paradigm shift to the

measurement and interpretation of culture ‘..are obvious’ (Bjerke, 1999, p. 16). It is

therefore important to understand Trompenaars (Figure 5.4) and Bjerke’s models to

form a holistic cultural paradigm shift model that has categories to move from

science to generalisation in a descriptive inductive mode. Trompenaars (1995),

provides a cultural change model of layers. This model places implicit basic

assumptions at the core or inner circle of the human non-consciousness state and

artefacts and products at the other end or outer circle of the scale at consciousness.

In the middle circle, are the values and norms that frame one’s reference.

In this model, a move towards conscious interactions involving artefacts and

products is based in a non-conscious understanding of basic assumptions through a

norms and values state. The Bjerke adaptation model (Figure 5.5); is made up of

Figure 5.4: Culture as layers of explicit – implicit. Source: Bjerke (1999, p.14) and Trompenaars (1995, p.23)

Artefacts and Products

Norms and Values

Implicit basicassumptions

220

three areas of interaction that, collectively, make up the consciousness-

nonconsciousness continuum (adapted from Kilman, 1986 by Bjerke, 1999).

Constitutive mechanisms make up shared understandings. These are those

phenomenologically rooted processes of subjectification and objectification, which

people operate existentially to create the social reality of any group and without

which the other two levels of values and assumptions cannot function (Berger and

Luckman, 1986 in Bjerke, 1999). Values and assumptions, lie at a deeper level than

behaviours. These are hidden values and assumptions; the fundamental drivers of

beliefs behind all decisions and actions. Behavioural norms are the most overt parts

of culture. They are just below the surface of experience. They are the unwritten

rules of behaviour. Norms, by definition, are not written but transmitted from senior to

junior, from old to young, from one generation to the next (Bjerke, 1999).

Culture in this model is a shared understanding based on a conscious-non-

consciousness continuum, the same as the cultural shift model of Trompenaars, but

the examples and artefacts in this model are behavioural norms. Norms and values

are replaced with values and assumptions. The major shift here is therefore seeing

examples and artefacts as extensions of behaviour. Kilman (2001), further suggests

a third understanding or model for understanding cultural paradigms. Kilman has

adapted his model from Kuhn’s (1962) paradigm model and added a cultural

understanding to it. Kilman (2001) suggests a paradigm shift model (Figure 5.6) that

includes behaviour, derived from Kuhn (1962) yet in this researcher’s opinion lacks

the depth of Trompenaar and Bjerke’s cultural change models as an interim step

between linking Kuhn’s paradigm shift model through to a behavioural change;

Behavioural norms

Values and assumptions

Constitutive mechanisms

Conscious

Non-conscious

Figure 5.5: Culture in a conscious – non-conscious continuum.

Source: Kilman (1986)

221

In this model Kilman (2001), synthesises the paradigm shift model (1962), within a

cultural understanding. Behaviour remains in place of ideal examples (Kuhn, 1962),

or products and artefacts (Trompenaars, 1995) in line with Bjerke, 1999. Thinking

encompasses models (metaphysical aspects) and values. The base of Kilman’s

model is seeing which replaces symbolic generalisations (Kuhn, 1962), or implicit

basic assumptions (Trompenaars, 1995) and constitutive mechanisms (Bjerke,

1999). In essence Kilman has synthesised the Bjerke (1999) and Kuhn (1962)

models to create a cultural shift model, which he uses for paradigm shift purposes

and for cultural change in organisations (Kilman, 2001). Although, in Kilman (2001),

the model has been derived directly from Kuhn, and other elements have been

added intuitively. The researcher has hereby shown, that his intuitive position is

aligned to the cultural model of Bjerke. From this researcher’s perspective, Kilman

(2001) has left out an important aspect of Kuhn’s paradigm shift model. These being

the metaphysical aspects, described as the mental models one creates based on our

symbolic generalisations or implicit basic assumptions (the science we base our

theory on) (Kuhn, 1962). Furthermore this researcher argues that the inclusion of

artefacts and products (examples) within behaviour, limits the model. As much as

behaviour is a response to values and a product of values, there are also physical

examples that are created by this behaviour as extensions of the organisation into:

financial, social and spiritual areas (Zohar and Marshall, 2004).

(ii) Deducing a scientifically acceptable research framework

The quest for a scientifically robust framework for this thesis has led the researcher

to synthesise the elements of these four models for inductive and deductive research

purposes. As per the adapted step model of deductive category application

(Mayering, 2000, Overmars, De Groot, and Huigen 2007) (Refer to Figure 5.3), the

Behaving

Thinking

Seeing

Conscious

Non-conscious

Figure 5.6: Cultural paradigm model. Source: Kilman (2001)

222

researcher chooses to follow the inductive method for the move from science to

generalisation from a correlative relational perspective, and the deductive method to

define causality within circumstances in an attempt to identify examples of this shift.

This model (Refer to Figure 5.7) will be used in the literature review process in line

with an inductive descriptive approach (Refer to Chapter 2 and 3) and a deductive

descriptive approach (Refer to Chapter 4) to theory building as a research

methodology, and in Chapters 5 and 6 a more normative approach causal approach

is adopted in building the questionnaire to test causality of constructs, as a research

methodology. The researcher’s model takes into account both cultural models and

the components of paradigm shift from Kuhn (1962) and combines them into a

framework for reframing ones worldview or paradigm, through a cultural lens.

The researcher’s adaption of the models as discussed in this section for the

purposes of this research is extremely important. In context, the move from science

(implicit basic assumptions), through to implicative models (correlative physical and

metaphysical aspects), value systems (causal needs, motivations, intelligences and

measures) that these models operate within, the behaviours (rational and non-

rational responses) as a response to value systems and the physical and meta-

Figure 5.7: Model of paradigm shift. Source: Adapted from Kuhn (1962), Trompenaars (1995), Bjerke (1999), Kilman (2001).

EXAMPLES Products and artifacts

(Quantifiable, causal circumstantial deliverables: Material, Social, Spiritual)

VALUES Values and assumptions/Norms and values (Quantifiable causal/predictive

directional states: Needs, motivations, intelligence)

SCIENCE Scientific generalisations / Constitutive mechanisms / Implicit basic

assumptions (Quantitative and symbolic scientific generalisations: Newtonian-Cartesian

science vs. Einsteinian - Quantum science)

Conscious

MODELS Metaphysical aspects / Models / Theories

(Qualifiable correlations: Implications of Science on inert molar objects and self-motion monads: Objects vs. People)

BEHAVIOUR Responses to value systems

(Quantifiable types: Rational and non-rational leadership)

Non-conscious

223

physical examples (financial, social and spiritual) of this paradigm are taken into

account in both the descriptive and normative phases of this thesis.

5.3.3.4. Limitations and critical assumptions

(i) Limitations

Firstly, taking into account the aforementioned critique of the pure empirical scientific

method (Refer to Section 6.2), it is important to note that due to the nature of the

paradigm shift from a Newtonian-Cartesian worldview, which encourages an

ontology of separateness of parts and causality and certainty, to the inclusion of an

Einsteinian-Quantum worldview, where wholeness, interrelatedness and the principle

of uncertainty preside, the use of empirical scientific method, as much as it is

required to form causal and predictive inferences for future states, based on factual

known knowledge, the Einsteinian-Quantum worldview suggests that not all

variables are known and that outcomes are unpredictable, suggesting that the

outcomes of this study, by taking into account the inclusion of a new scientific

worldview, will not be conclusive and will vary depending on the circumstances in

which they are viewed. Thus, suggesting that any theory from this research is not

general across all instances and this research does not does not purport to develop

such a theory.

Secondly, the limitation in terms of size of population (not sample), that is used to

tests the QLQ and implication of the QLM, even though the filtering mechanism for

this population is robust and correct, suggests that the findings will not be

conclusive.

Thirdly, the analysis conducted is on a South African, global mining company and in

context is culturally western in intent. Although the QLM suggests that as the base

upon which this model is derived is holistic, it is very possible that in circumstances

where this model is tested in a cultural setting other than a westernised culture that

the same shift is not observable.

224

(ii) Assumptions

Firstly, assumptions are made that science as based in philosophical beginnings

leads to paradigm models (mental and physical) that have values associated from

which behaviours and examples of such behaviour are a result as per the paradigm

shift model deduced in this chapter (Refer to Section 6.3.4.2).

Secondly, it is assumed that science (Quantum and Newtonian) in it’s understanding

of the world around us, both in a non-physical and a physical state has

fundamentally been well defined, studied and tested to be true. Furthermore it is

assumed that in line with this thinking that psychological concepts, from the same

premise are well researched, in the form of documented case studies, and as such

are accepted as correct and can be utilised as stated in this thesis.

Thirdly, based on the assumption in made above and that quantum physics and its

related theories are only within the last ten years beginning, through academia, to

find a presence in influencing the social and management sciences, it is assumed

that organisations that are at least twenty years old, have executives that are trained

up in a Newtonian-Cartesian paradigm and have organisations that have been built

on this paradigm.

Fourthly, it is assumed that people are able to change their mental models towards a

new paradigm and as such will, through changes in behaviour, have an impact on

examples within organisations in spiritual, material and social capital.

5.3.3.5. Validity and reliability methodology

Validity and reliability in essence is a method employed by researchers to ensure

that development of models and instruments for testing, based on theory building

methodologies, are robust and that the outcomes can be replicated in similar

environments consistently, respectively.

225

(i) Validity

Validity is split into two aspects, namely internal and external validity. In the end

validity implies reliability (accuracy), but although reliability is dependent on validity,

reliability on its own does not infer validity.

Internal validity

Internal validity is the extent to which a theory’s conclusions are unambiguously

drawn from its premise (Carlisle et al., 2005). Carlisle et al., further suggest that the

best way of ensuring internal validity, is to ‘..examine the phenomena… through the

lenses and tools of other academic disciplines’ (2005, p.15).

Internal validity is deemed to be high, due to the research methodology and design

employed being consistent throughout this thesis from literature review, model

building, and questionnaire design through to sampling and analysis. However,

internal validity based on content analysis, in this thesis is subject to an internal

validity check. This is achieved through the correlation analysis of secondary

variables and primary variables in Chapter 6.

External validity

External validity of a theory is the extent to which a relationship that was observed

between phenomena and outcomes in one context can be trusted to apply in

different contexts as well (Hussey et al., 1997, Carlisle et al., 2005, Pellissier, 2007).

However, one can never test a theory against every data set and in practice data

sets are historical therefore rendering them ineffectual in terms of application of a

model in the future.

External validity is limited due to the population size. However, due to the nature of

external validity sought, in terms of aligning the shift towards quantum leadership to

quantum performance in organisations, it is suggested that if the same research

design and methodology is employed, due to the nature of the purposive sample,

external validity between similar studies should be high.

226

(ii) Reliability

Reliability is the degree to which an assessment or instrument consistently measures

an attribute (Pellissier, 2007, p.12)

Reliability is difficult to prove as the population size is low and a single entity as part

of an ex-post facto case study methodology within a single organisation. A separate

study was not conducted with a control group (control organisation) to determine the

reliability of difference between leadership in one organisation versus the other or to

determine the similarity of outcomes with a similar organisation, as the determination

of population size in South Africa over 30 years of stock exchange history, only

determined one organisation that could be studied.

5.3.3.6. Application of theory

Application of theory within the thesis, as per 5.3.4.5, is detailed below. Internal

validity is managed within the research design and development of the data

gathering tool. External validity and reliability limitations are managed through

purposive sampling.

(i) Management of internal validity through research design

Construct development within the QLM, has been formed through examination of

phenomena ‘…through the lenses and tools of other academic disciplines’ (Carlisle

et al., 2005, p.15), which as per Carlisle et al., is the best way of ensuring internal

validity. Furthermore, development of the QLM and QLQ has concentrated on

reviewing literature from a descriptive inductive perspective and deducing the model

and constructs from a deductive premise (Refer to Section 5.3.4.4), in line with the

paradigm shift model (as described in Section 5.3.4.2). Furthermore the correlation

of attributes followed a path of content analysis, aligned to the descriptors within the

paradigm shift model to ensure consistency of attribute groupings within correlated

constructs, as far as these related to each other from science, models, value

systems, behaviours and examples. The QLM was then developed into a QLQ,

utilising a normative approach using once again inductive and deductive methods, as

aligned to the paradigm shift model in determining the causality of variables,

227

categorised within circumstances, as associated with psychological causality models

of motivation and needs to behaviours. The QLQ was subjected to an internal validity

test through an experimental study group to determine whether the new model’s

principles, constructs (dependent variables) and factors (independent variables).

This test included the QLQ questions as well as areas for comments, to capture;

interpretations, misunderstandings of questions, suggestions, and any other

feedback deemed necessary, within the test environment.

From a quality perspective, the test group used is made up of senior and middle

management personnel that had been taken through instruction on quantum

principles and the understanding of how this worldview impacts the organisation.

Furthermore the principles to engineer this change through individual behaviour, was

also discussed. As such these people were deemed to be the best informed test

group within which to test the questionnaire. This feedback was used to make

changes necessary within the questionnaire to ensure that it was simple to

understand and as user-friendly as possible.

(ii) Management of internal validity through structured development of data gathering

method and tool

Measurement as defined by Furlong, Lovelace, E. & Lovelace, K. (2000 p. 62) is

‘..the use of rules (or standardised procedures) to assign values to the properties or

characteristics of individuals, objects or events.’ In line with this thinking/definition,

the methodology followed throughout this research from content analysis (inductive

and deductive) in the descriptive phase through the normative phase of model

building, the constructs and definitions has through the standardised processes

adopted ensured that internal validity of criteria used is high. This base can then be

utilised to develop a test instrument with sufficient internal validity to gather

information that tests the Quantum model’s principles, constructs (dependent

variables) and factors (independent variables). The suggested methodology adopted

from a quantitative perspective is the development of a questionnaire. The Quantum

Leadership Questionnaire (QLQ), will need to gather data in such a way and format,

so that the information released qualifies the Quantum leadership model as a stand

alone leadership model and the supporting data measurement tool as a support

228

instrument to this effect. Furthermore the principles of the QLQ, will be supported by

a qualitative directed interview process, with the sample group, so as to triangulate

findings between sample group, the QLQ and QLM from a holistic perspective.

Questionnaire as a measurement tool

Furlong et al. (2000, p. 59) mentions that the self-report technique is very useful in

studying behaviours that are difficult to observe directly because they are either

subjective in nature or too personal or private. These include attitudes, beliefs, and

feelings. Furlong, also writes that self-reports may be used for face-to-face

interviews, such as the first part of this study, which will involve interviews to set up a

base line for the wider population questionnaire.

The instrument of choice by the researcher is therefore a questionnaire, for Furlong’s

reasons above and for the reasons listed below;

• The location of the data being spread internationally makes it difficult to do

structured interviews.

• Bass and Avolio’s MLQ and Metcalfe and Metcalfe’s TLQ-LGV, as per Chapter 2,

are both questionnaire based research tools and as such it makes sense for the

methodology to be a questionnaire, so that the base methodologies of testing are

the same as current modes of investigation.

• The questionnaire allows for has internal validity of structure and content and

uniformity of data so that empirical analysis can be performed.

Care is taken to ensure that questions are succinct and easily understood in their

context, so as to limit ambiguity and ensure quality data. It is also important to

ensure that questions are free of any cultural bias, so as to ensure utility in other

cultures. Furlong et al. (2000) support this view, mentioning that a major problem

with self-test questionnaires is that responses may be inaccurate if the person

misinterprets the question. Another problem as per Furlong et al. is the slippage

between actual behaviour and what is reported in the questionnaire. This however

cannot be controlled for and the questionnaire is not to be used as an individual

instrument of measure, but as an aggregate measure to form causality and direction

in the research.

229

Questionnaire distribution and control

The final instrument to be used on the sample group will be an electronic document,

for ease of completion and transmission/distribution via e-mail to the specific people

within the sample group. This will ensure that data security and trustworthiness, is

ensured as the questionnaire will only be sent directly to the participants for

completion. The final electronically completed document will be sent directly back to

the researcher, so that the security of information is sufficiently controlled.

Development of the questionnaire

The questionnaire was constructed in such a way that the constructs associated with

individual Quantum behaviours, which have their own causality and/or directional

predictiveness of: paradigm/worldview to mental models to values to behaviour for

each behaviour were separated into sections which accommodate all questions

associated with paradigms, mental models and values. Thus ensuring that

participants found it difficult to find the connection between the directional

predictiveness, the researcher was testing for.

Scoring of questions was done using a Likert scale;

• Totally disagree = 1

• Disagree = 2

• Agree = 3

• Totally agree = 4 (in which the participants were forced to give an answer)

Weightings for each of the quantum behavioural constructs, including variables

within constructs were weighted in line with the motivational value scale as

associated with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (Zohar and Marshall, 2004), (Refer to

Table 4.9, Chapter 4).

To test for before and after paradigm shift behaviour (as a dependent variable) due

to the causality and/or directional predictiveness of paradigms, mental and

organisational models and values (independent and dependent predictor variables),

the questionnaire was constructed with two sets of answer areas for each question,

one for an answer associated with a before-transition phase answer and the other

associated with an after-transition answer.

230

In addition the questionnaire included automatic radio buttons for each answer,

which managed the respondent by way of only allowing one answer per question. In

some instances where respondents were not technically proficient in completing the

questionnaire within Microsoft Word, they printed a hard copy out and then

completed it manually.

Full instructions on how to complete the questionnaire and definitions of concepts

were included in the introduction page as attached to each questionnaire. In addition

each separate section of the questionnaire carried a description of the section to be

completed.

The data from the questionnaire was manually inputted into a spreadsheet designed

for the purpose. The spreadsheet was an exact replica of the questionnaire, to

facilitate the process. The researcher completed the translation himself and was

checked by a research assistant to ensure the validity of data transfer was correct.

The spreadsheet was constructed in such a way that scoring and weightings were

applied to the answers received, furthermore it recontextualised the scores back into

the correct behavioural constructs, so that constructs could be scored independently

of one another, by respondent.

In addition the spreadsheet was constructed, so as to integrate the various

respondents into a single table for comparison of scores between variables between

constructs. This table was then used as the basis for quantitative analysis.

Statistical analysis/treatment of the data

The questionnaire being developed directly from the model building phase and

determination of questions by category through this phase, ensures internal

consistency and reliability. It was however important for the researcher to test the

categories and the relationships between categories as variables. Thus a correlation

analysis was conducted on the pilot sample and correlations measured in terms of

the model aspects and whether these modelling aspects were indeed reflected in the

answers as received from the test group as related to the use of the questionnaire as

231

a measurement instrument. Thus determining the fit-for-purpose usability of the

questionnaire.

These results from the correlation analysis, taking into account the weighted results,

suggested that the questions within categories were correlated sufficiently to derive

empirical direction in answering questions related to predictive directional influence

as per the proposed quantum leadership model. Furthermore qualitative written

feedback from the test group was used to change ambiguous wording, sentence

structures, definitions and section layouts. The final Quantum Leadership

Questionnaire (QLQ) is annexed in Annexure 1.

Queries have been raised about utilising statistical (Newtonian) techniques, in testing

the factors in the questionnaire for predicting constructs, especially when the study is

focused on a new paradigm of quantum physics where systems and CAS thinking, is

used in which emergence is a major theme. The author suggests that there are no

ethical dilemmas here. In terms of systems thinking and the quantum model, the use

of interviews and questionnaires allow for free thinking within the paradigm of self-

motion monads and the link to consciousness and brain activity. This is why it is very

important that participants are not coerced into the study by management. However,

once this data is captured, this data is fixed and becomes an inert molar object, only

changed in implication by the conscious interaction of the researcher, through

analysis techniques. This must therefore be controlled for. As inert molar objects,

however the use of Newtonian principles to test for internal reliability and the

predictive nature of factors in constructs are acceptable, and allows for a holistic

approach to understanding the nature of the problem.

(iii) Further management of internal validity within the purposive sample

An in depth interview process, structured in line with the research design was

conducted to ensure a holistic approach is taken in terms of ensuring that qualitative

elements which are not presented in the analysis of the questionnaire can be used to

answer any anomalies that may present themselves in the data analysis of the

questionnaire information. The process entails interviews with all of the senior

management who were present during the turnaround of Impala Platinum. These

232

interviews are conducted on the basis of one-on-one interviews with the researcher.

The interviews are exploratory and non-directive (Pellissier, 2007), yet based on a

structure of interview process as aligned to the understanding changes in different

capital flows in the organisation i.e. material capital, social capital and spiritual

capital. The interviews are recorded and transcribed. The transcribed information

received is then contextualised into the categories as per the research methodology

through content analysis techniques, specifically focusing on the organisational

examples of quantum leadership.

Similarly the analysis of published financial statements is done to understand in

context any additional insights that may be gained in terms of a holistic approach to

data acquisition so that any anomalies presented by the purely analytical data

analysis can be supported. This insight is as per the interview information also

contextualised into categories as per the research methodology through content

analysis techniques, specifically focusing on the organisational examples of quantum

leadership.

(iv) Employment of purposive sampling to manage external validity and reliability

constraints

Background and method employed for purposive sampling

Through the study, it is suggested that leading an organisation towards defined

outcomes, within a complex environment takes a quantum paradigm shift within a

leader, and therefore the study into the characteristic behaviours of quantum

leadership is the central theme of this research. It is from this premise that as part of

this research, South African organisations must be stratified to find organisations

showing outcomes consistent with a quantum shift. Looking for correlations within

these organisations post-facto, will show whether in deed these quantum shifts have

predictable causality to the behaviour characteristics of their leadership. From these

results one can then draw conclusions and suggested inferences which can be used

to create a leadership behavioural theory in an attempt to increase the ability for

organisations to effectively predict performance within complex changing

environments, through engaging certain leadership behavioural principles.

233

In search of U.S. organisations that outperformed industry and market averages by

significant amounts over extended periods of time, Collins (2001) found that the

executives who ran these companies were exceptional in leadership ability, although

he could not define these leadership behaviours in terms of a structured behavioural

model, he did find that they had a set of similar characteristics. These characteristics

in the researchers opinion reflect the quantum leadership behavioural constructs

which are tested in this research, as the outcome of quantum leadership is

organisational performance, the process by which Collins, filtered his research to

determine the outstanding companies in which these leaders were exceptional, has

been chosen as a mechanism for determining population and sampling to test the

quantum leadership model. Collin’s definition of a ‘great’ organisation were those

organisations that performed in line with industry participants, within the same

industry and therefore common set of constraints and environmental factors, and

then at an inflection/transition point on their histogram of ‘stock/share price‘ results

began to outperform the others consistently, over a 15 year period. For the U.S.

study the following selection criteria were applied;

Selection criteria and outcomes for research companies (Collins, 2001, p. 220)

• Cut 1: 1,435 companies – selected from fortune 500, 1965 – 1995 (30 years)

• Cut 2: 126 companies – selected based on published rates of return to investors

that showed a significant pattern of above-average returns preceded by a pattern

of average or below-average returns, over the average rate of return.

• Cut 31: 19 companies – selected based on cumulative stock/share returns for

each candidate company versus the general market2. (Terminology and

elimination criteria for Cut 3 can be seen in Annexure 2)

• Cut 4: 11 companies – selected based on the same comparative analysis as per

cut 3, but within the specific industry and against an industry index, rather than

against the market average.

Selection criteria for comparison companies (Collins, 2001; Refer to appendix 1b):

At the time of transition, the comparison company had/was;

234

• Business fit: similar products and services

• Size fit: the same basic size

• Age fit: founded in the same era

• Stock/share chart fit: cumulative stock returns that track in line until the transition

point, at which the candidate company is significantly outperformed by the

selected company

• Conservative test: more successful than the selected company – larger and more

profitable, with a stronger market position and better reputation.

• Face validity: in a similar line of business at the time of the study and that the

comparison company was less successful at the time of the study.

Employment of purposive sampling method in South Africa

As per this set of criteria a similar study was conducted in South Africa (SA) to

determine the population (companies) and the sample (leadership team) of the

companies that has dramatic transitions (as per share price indicators), that were

sustainable for an extended period, above market and industry averages. (Data and

graphics can be seen in appendix 3). Selection criteria and outcomes for the SA

research - adopted from Collins (2001) were as follows:

• Cut 1: 1,292 companies – selected from JSE Main board, 1975 – 2005 (30 years)

• Cut 2: 18 companies – selected based share price quarterly average, over the

period delivering a minimum return of 15% above the share index (All share

index, Industrial index for industrial shares and Financial index for financial

shares)

235

Figure 5.8: JSE listed companies above all share average (Dec 1974 – Dec 2005)

• Cut 3 & 4 combined: one company (Impala Platinum Ltd) – selected based on

cumulative stock/share returns for each candidate company versus the all share

index, industry index, industry and sub-industry average. Thus the population for

this study in SA is one organisation and the sample size is the executive directors

present at the time of transition.

Figure 5.9: Mining companies above all share index and mining sector sub industry average

(Dec 1974 - Dec 2005)

JSE listed companies above All share average (%)

(Dec 1974 - Dec 2005)

0.00%

500.00%

1000.00%

1500.00%

2000.00%

2500.00%

3000.00%

Dec-74Dec-75Dec-76Dec-77Dec-78Dec-79Dec-80Dec-81Dec-82Dec-83Dec-84Dec-85Dec-86Dec-87Dec-88Dec-89Dec-90Dec-91Dec-92Dec-93Dec-94Dec-95Dec-96Dec-97Dec-98Dec-99Dec-00Dec-01Dec-02Dec-03Dec-04Dec-05

Tracked by quarter - shown in Annual terms

% Shares vs All share average

SAPPI L IMITED (SAP)

PALABORA MINING COMPANY LIMITED (PAM)

ANGLO AMERICAN PLC (AGL)

ASSORE LIMITED (ASR)

BHP BILLITON PLC (BIL) ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI L IMITED (ANG) HARMONY GOLD MINING COMPANY LIMITED (HAR) ANGLO PLATINUM (AMS)

IMPALA PLATINUM HOLDINGS LIMITED (IMP) LONMIN PLC (LON) AECI LIMITED (AFE) METAIR INVESTMENTS LIMITED (MTA) SABMILLER PLC (SAB)

TIGER BRANDS LIMITED (TBS) TONGAAT-HULETT GROUP LIMITED (TNT) NASPERS LIMITED -N (NPN) ELLERINE HOLDINGS LIMITED (ELH) ITALTILE LIMITED (ITE) JD GROUP LIMITED (JDG) SUN INTERNATIONAL LIMITED (SUI) ABSA GROUP LIMITED (ASA)

NEDCOR GROUP LIMITED (NED) STANDARD BANK GROUP LTD (SBK)

INVESTEC LIMITED (INL) INVESTEC PLC (INP) SANTAM LIMITED (SNT) SOUTH AFRICAN EAGLE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED (SAE)

15 %

Implats

Angloplats

Mining companies above All share Index, Mining sector average and Sub-Industry Average

(%) (Dec 1974 - Dec 2005)

0.00%

100.00%

200.00%

300.00%

400.00%

500.00%

600.00%

700.00%

800.00%

900.00%

1000.00%

1100.00%

1200.00%

Dec-74 Dec-75 Dec-76 Dec-77 Dec-78 Dec-79 Dec-80 Dec-81 Dec-82 Dec-83 Dec-84 Dec-85 Dec-86 Dec-87 Dec-88 Dec-89 Dec-90 Dec-91 Dec-92 Dec-93 Dec-94 Dec-95 Dec-96 Dec-97 Dec-98 Dec-99 Dec-00 Dec-01 Dec-02 Dec-03 Dec-04 Dec-05


Share % vs Mining sector average



BHP BILLITON PLC (BIL)

ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI LIMITED (ANG)

HARMONY GOLD MINING COMPANY LIMITED (HAR)

ANGLO PLATINUM (AMS)

IMPALA PLATINUM HOLDINGS LIMITED (IMP)

LONMIN PLC (LON)

`

Implats

Angloplats

236

The elimination criteria for the SA study remained identical except for the X and Y-

period periods. This change was necessary due to the time period within which

Impala Platinum Ltd, made the transition and the data available to measure the

period of sustainable returns. Elimination criteria changes for South African study:

• X-period of at least 5 years

• Require a Y-period of at least 5 years

• Company demonstrates breakthrough performance, but it is not sustained

through the period of the study (at least 5 years)

Selection of comparison companies (as per Collins, 2001).

Anglo Platinum Ltd was selected as the comparison company as they, at the time of

Impala Platinum’s transition, fulfilled the following criteria:

• Business fit: similar products and services – platinum mine.

• Size fit: the same basic size - larger

• Age fit: founded in the same era – prior, but operational for same period within

period of study

• Stock/share chart fit: cumulative stock returns that track in line until the transition

point, at which the candidate company is significantly outperformed by the

selected company. Impala Platinum Ltd tracked far behind Anglo Platinum Ltd

prior to the transition point.

• Conservative test: more successful than the selected company – larger and more

profitable, with a stronger market position and better reputation. Anglo Platinum is

the larger, prior to the transition point – more profitable and in stronger market

and brand position due to it’s inclusion in the Anglo American group stable of

companies.

• Face validity: in a similar line of business at the time of the study and that the

comparison company was less successful at the time of the study. This has been

discussed under ‘stock/share chart fit’.

Participants and location of data

Thus, as per Section 5.3.4.6, the selected company in South Africa in which the QLQ

is to be tested is Impala Platinum Ltd and is therefore by method of the filter applied

(Refer to Section 5.3.4.6), the whole population that meets the criteria as a quantum

237

company. Within this population and the fact that it is a population of 1, the sample

size is required to be as close to 100% of the executive directors that were present

at the time of transition. Many of these executives are scattered about the world

leading new companies at the time of this research, and has therefore added a

complicating factor to the generation of data.

Interviews were conducted with three senior executives and the chairman of the

board who was present during the transition years at Impala Platinum and they

together selected a team, who they felt were responsible as leaders for the

turnaround of the organisation, during the period of 1990 - 2001. These executives

were contacted via telephone and were all enrolled into the study. An overview of the

study was sent to each of the required participants via e-mail, with return receipts

enabled. On confirmation of receipt and acceptance of the terms of the study, the

QLQ was sent to each individual via e-mail, with instructions to send completed

questionnaires straight back to the researcher for management and confidentiality.

In addition, post the questionnaire stage, one-on-one interviews were conducted with

each individual involved in the study. These interviews were open ended so as not to

guide or coach the interviewee into answers consistent with expected outcomes. The

interviewees were asked to relate their own personal experiences of the changes at

Implats, specifically those that they viewed were critical, to enable the organisational

shift they experienced.

5.3.3.7. Applies high ethical standards

(i) Ethical issues

Shaw et al. (2000), suggest that ethical concerns must be high on the researcher’s

agenda as management research is about people and their behaviour. These ethics

extend to research design, data generation and analysis but also in terms of framing

research hypothesis ethically. Ethical issues are extremely important in the study,

not only for the protection of the participants but also in terms of the study itself, the

questions asked and the analysis of such questions. This ethical dilemma id

managed in two ways; within the context of research ethics, the researcher

238

subjected the thesis to an independent test for plagiarism (results in Annexure 3) and

the process of model building and questionnaire design inherently applies ethical

validity through the process and through the use of statistical analysis techniques to

test the questionnaire’s ability to reflect the QLM in subject responses. Furthermore

the triangulation of data between primary (Questionnaire and Interviews) and

secondary (Annual reports) data to interpret findings is an important element towards

the ethical approach to findings.

(ii) Participants and confidentiality

In terms of the participants, confidentiality is extremely important and confidentiality

agreements will be signed between the researcher and the university and the

companies involved in the research to ensure that private information pertaining to

that specific company will only be made available to them for their internal purposes.

This also covers the detail behind aggregation of data, that no one individual will be

displayed as being part of the study so as to ensure that comparison of individuals

does not take place. This confidentiality agreement will be combined with a consent

form that will need to be signed by the tri-partite alliance. The research objective will

be made known to the executive management within the company utilised for

purposes of testing this study.

5.3.3.7.1. Unambiguously presents findings

Findings are as far as possible unambiguously stated, taking into account the writing

style of the researcher. The ethical approaches utilised in analysis, findings and

presentation of data from various sources (primary and secondary) through

quantitative and qualitative methods, are important pointers as to the unambiguous

approach to solving the research hypothesis.

5.3.3.8. Justifies conclusions

Conclusions through the thesis, are justified through the process of the

implementation of a robust research process, the research methodologies used (i.e.

triangulation between quantitative and qualitative methods) to analyse the data, and

the ethical manner in which this data and findings are sourced and presented.

239

5.3.4. Researcher’s experience reflected

Throughout the research from the understanding of the research hypothesis through,

literature review, model building, analysis, findings and conclusions, the researchers

20 years experience in commerce is reflected in the approach to the subject and

search for the truth.

5.4. Conclusion

This chapter discussed the triangulated approach used in the research design. Both

inductive and deductive reasoning were used, within a descriptive and a normative

process, in order to address the complex nature of the leadership characteristics

under investigation. The next chapter discusses the analyses of the data.

240

CHAPTER 6: ANALYSIS

6.1. Introduction

This chapter on analysis seeks to analyse, within the context of the normative theory

phase (Refer to Section 5.3.4.1) of the research methodology applied. The analysis

is inductive in intent and is used to predict the circumstances under which the

phenomena and anomalies present themselves, as described and contextualised

within the normative theory building phase of the researchers applied methodology.

In doing so the researcher attempts to find solutions, within the data and information,

to the primary research hypothesis as defined within the Quantum Leadership Model

(QLM) (Refer to derivation in Chapter 4, Section 4.2.4.3).

This chapter therefore attempts to answer the research hypothesis by analysis as

related to the primary research objectives, where previously in this thesis the QLM

was defined and derived (Refer to Chapter 4) and the QLQ was defined and derived

as a measurement instrument to validate the QLM (Refer to Chapter 5). In this

chapter the QLQ and QLM require validation through analysis of pilot and sample

study data respectively.

Thus the purpose of chapter 6 is therefore to validate the QLQ and QLM, by way of:

• Validate the QLQ: Quantitative data analysis, through a pilot study.

• Validate the QLM: Quantitative and qualitative data analysis, through a sample

study. This sample must exhibit expected quantum leap organisational outcomes

for triangulation against the thesis purpose, research hypothesis and objectives.

Furthermore qualitative data analysis through on-on-one interviews is

triangulated to ensure quantitative analysis is consistent within a holistic context.

The analysis is therefore both quantitative and qualitative, in respect of answering

different areas of the primary research hypothesis.

Quantitative analysis is done utilising the Quantum Leadership Questionnaire (Refer

to Annexure 1) results. Firstly internal validation to ensure consistency and reliability

241

of the QLQ is sought through analysis of a pilot test groups results as aligned to the

required outcomes as suggested in the premise of the QLM (Refer to Chapter 4,

Section 4.2.5). Secondly, the QLQ responses from the executive management of

Impala Platinum Ltd, in line with the purposive sampling techniques applied (Refer to

Chapter 5, Section 5.3.4.6) are analysed with specific reference to the period of their

turnaround between 1990 and 2001 to determine the validation of the QLM. Thirdly,

this analysis is applied to validate and determine the quantum leadership shift effect

on the executive management at Implats (Refer to Chapter 4, Section 4.2.6.2).

Qualitative analysis through annual report content analysis and structured one-on-

one interviews with the executives at Implats is used to qualify the outcomes of

quantum leadership in examples of organisational success. This is achieved through

triangulation of returns in material, social and spiritual capital as associated with

quantum leadership behavioural constructs, and thus linked back to the analysis of

the QLQ results and validation of the QLM.

6.2. Quantitative QLQ validity analysis

6.2.1. Pilot study analysis

Internal validity analysis of the QLQ to test for consistency and reliability is done

using a pilot study group. The pilot study group has been chosen from individuals

known to the researcher who are academically qualified and hold senior positions in

industry, thus simulating the sample data set.

Pilot case study set was made up of:

Case 1: Research and Development (PhD) – in manufacturing

Case 2: Financial Director (CA) – in Information Technology

Case 3: Research Director (PhD) – in knowledge management

Case 4: Company Director (MBA) – in financial services

Analysis is done to test for consistency and reliability of individual constructs within

QLM, as proposed through the content analysis, by looking for relationships between

secondary variables as suggested within the QLM constructs (Refer to Chapter 4,

242

Section 4.6), and the subsequent questions to test for these construct relationships,

once again as per the content analysis, within the QLQ.

The secondary variables are then aggregated by primary variable and correlations

are also then sought between these primary variables.

Furthermore, primary and secondary internal validation measures are used to

determine whether content analysis within the model building phase can be carried

through to the QLQ validation phase. i.e. do the quantum questions that are aligned

to the Maslow psyche questions give similar behavioural outcomes, as measured by

the QLQ and subsequent correlation data analysis. Thus, validating the premise of

the QLM of using Einsteinian-Quantum values to ensure the same outcomes as

measured through the data delivered through the use of the QLQ.

6.2.2. Limitations

Limitations of data are related to data volumes across the pilot study and sample

size alike. This limit restricts any form of external validity analysis as well as

directional causality required to show construct causality as per the QLM derivation.

This limits directional analysis between constructs to directional predictive analysis

through scatter plot diagrams.

6.2.3. Relationships between variables

An understanding is required of relationships between variables within constructs to

determine the validity of variables, in terms of which variables satisfy the outcomes

as proposed within the QLM, prior to using the QLQ (as premised on the QLM) for

the sample study group.

Relationship between variables is tested using correlation analysis. Within

correlation tables: Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm is represented as

scientific paradigm, Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model is represented as

organisational model, Einsteinian-Quantum value is represented as quantum value,

Maslow motivational value is represented as motivational value and Maslow needs

value is represented as needs value.

243

Determination of correlations between quantum scientific paradigm, quantum

organisational mental models and quantum values are sought within and between

constructs. Furthermore, determination of correlations between Einsteinian-Quantum

values and Maslow’s motivational values are sought. It is assumed that Maslow’s

motivational values and needs values will correlate and as such if correlations are

found between Einsteinian-Quantum values and Maslow’s needs values then

positive correlations between Einsteinian-Quantum values behaviour is assumed, as

behaviour is reflected through the research analysis and methodology, as a

directional response to value sets. These correlations between variables will all be

tested for in the analysis that follows to validate the assumptions. If found to be

correct it will be determined for purposes of further analysis that the Quantum

predictor variables of quantum scientific paradigm, quantum organisational mental

models and Einsteinian-Quantum values can be used to determine the quantum

behavioural response, which is seen to then be a new measure, that has an impact

as measured through organisational outcomes/examples.

In addition to test for quantum entanglement (Maslow’s self-actualisation), the four

construct behaviours associated with quantum individuation (Maslow’s peak

experiences leading to Being (Jung)) will be tested using correlation analysis to

determine correlations between all variables. Furthermore descriptive statistics are

used to determine shifts between values associated with individual constructs.

Variables that show high degrees of correlation and prediction will then be utilised for

further analysis within the sample group to determine validity of the QLM as a total

model.

6.2.3.1. Construct 1: Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-

contextualisation

Correlation analysis is required to answer whether relationships exist between the

following variables:

(i) Secondary variable correlation analysis:

• Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm 1 (Universe materialised by conscious

participation/Exploratory) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model

244

1 (Empowered decision making relationships) = 1. A perfect positive linear

correlation exists between variables and vverifies expected outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm 2 (Space-time curved and filled with

energy/recontextualise the environment) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum

organisational model 2 (Cross-boundary processes infused with information) = 1.

A perfect positive linear correlation exists between variables and vverifies

expected outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 1 (Empowered decision making

relationships) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum value 1 (Ask why / Exploratory)

= 1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists between variables and verifies

expected outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 2 (Cross-boundary processes infused

with information) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum value 2

(Reframe/Recontextualise environment) = 1. A perfect positive linear correlation

exists between variables and verifies expected outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 1 (Ask why / Exploratory) correlated to Maslow

motivational value 1 (Generativity) = -1. This is an anomaly and does not verify

expectations. Expectation was for a positive correlation.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 2 (Reframe/Recontextualise environment) correlated

to Maslow motivational value 2 (Mastery) = 0.33. A positive correlation exists.

TABLE 6.1(A): CONSTRUCT 1 – FOCUSED MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INTROVERTED RE-CONTEXTUALISATION BY

SECONDARY VARIABLES Focused

multidimensional

introverted

recontextualisation Need value

Motivation value

1

Motivation value

2

Quantum value

1

Quantum

value 2

Organisation

al model 1

Organisational

model 2

Scientific

paradigm 1

Scientific

paradigm 2

Focused multidimensional introverted recontextualisation 1.00Need value 1.00 1.00Motivation value 1 -0.58 -0.58 1.00Motivation value 2 -0.58 -0.58 -0.33 1.00

Quantum value 1 0.58 0.58 -1.00 0.33 1.00Quantum value 2 0.58 0.58 -1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00Organisational model 1 0.58 0.58 -1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00Organisational model 2 0.58 0.58 -1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 1 0.58 0.58 -1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 2 0.58 0.58 -1.00 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

(ii) Primary variable correlation analysis:

• Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum

organisational model = 1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists between

variables and verifies expected outcomes.

245

• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum

value = 1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists between variables and

verifies expected outcomes.

• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = -.099. An

unexpected outcome. Expected a positive linear correlation.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow motivational value = -.70. This is

an anomaly and does not verify expectations. Expectation was for a positive

correlation.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow needs value (Self-actualisation)

= 0.58. A large positive linear correlation exists.

TABLE 6.1(B): CONSTRUCT 1 – FOCUSED MULTI-DIMENSIONAL INTROVERTED RE-CONTEXTUALISATION BY

PRIMARY VARIABLES

Focused multidimensional

introverted recontextualisation Maslow need value

Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum

value Organisational model

Scientific

paradigm

Focused multidimensional introverted recontextualisation 1.00Maslow need value 1.00 1.00Maslow motivational value -0.99 -0.99 1.00Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.58 0.58 -0.70 1.00

Organisational model 0.58 0.58 -0.70 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 0.58 0.58 -0.70 1.00 1.00 1.00

6.2.3.2. Construct 2: Collaborative Explorative Perception







correlation exists between variables and verifies expected outcomes.




A perfect positive linear correlation exists between variables and verifies

expected outcomes.

246




expected outcomes.






motivational value 1 (Generativity) = 1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists

between variables and verifies expected outcomes.


to Maslow motivational value 2 (Mastery) = -0.17. This result shows that close to

zero correlation exists between these variables.

TABLE 6.2(A): CONSTRUCT 2 – COLLABORATIVE EXPLORATIVE PERCEPTION BY SECONDARY VARIABLES

Collaborative explorative

perceptive Need value

Motivation value

1

Motivation value

2

Quantum value

1

Quantum

value 2

Organisation

al model 1

Organisational

model 2

Scientific

paradigm 1

Scientific

paradigm 2

Collaborative explorative perceptive 1.00Need value 1.00 1.00Motivation value 1 1.00 1.00 1.00Motivation value 2 -0.17 -0.17 -0.17 1.00Quantum value 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 -0.17 1.00Quantum value 2 1.00 1.00 1.00 -0.17 1.00 1.00Organisational model 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 -0.17 1.00 1.00 1.00Organisational model 2 1.00 1.00 1.00 -0.17 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 -0.17 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 2 1.00 1.00 1.00 -0.17 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00






value = 1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists and verifies expected

correlations between variables.

• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = 0.44. A positive

linear correlation exists and verifies expected outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value to Maslow motivational value = 0.44. A positive linear

correlation exists and verifies expected outcomes.

247

• Einsteinian-Quantum value to Maslow needs value (Self-actualisation) = 1. A

perfect positive linear correlation exists between variables and verifies expected

outcomes.

TABLE 6.2(B): CONSTRUCT 2 – COLLABORATIVE EXPLORATIVE PERCEPTION BY PRIMARY VARIABLES

Collaborative Explorative

Perception Maslow need value

Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum


Scientific

paradigm

Collaborative Explorative Perception 1.00Maslow need value 1.00 1.00Maslow motivational value 0.44 0.44 1.00Einsteinian-Quantum value 1.00 1.00 0.44 1.00Organisational model 1.00 1.00 0.44 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 1.00 1.00 0.44 1.00 1.00 1.00

6.2.3.3. Construct 3: Empowered Intuitive Decision Making




• Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm 1(Universe materialised by conscious








expected outcomes.




expected outcomes.





248


motivational value 1 (Generativity) = 0.58. A positive linear correlation exists

between variables.


to Maslow motivational value 2 (Mastery) = 0.33. A positive linear correlation

exists between variables.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 1 correlated to Maslow need value = 1. A perfect

positive linear correlation exists between variables and verifies expected

outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 2 correlated to Maslow need value = 1. A perfect


outcomes.

TABLE 6.3(A): CONSTRUCT 3 – EMPOWERED INTUITIVE DECISION MAKING BY SECONDARY VARIABLES

Empowered intuitive

decision making Need value

Motivation value

1

Motivation value

2

Quantum value

1

Quantum

value 2

Organisation

al model 1

Organisational

model 2

Scientific

paradigm 1

Scientific

paradigm 2

Empowered intuitive decision making 1.00Need value 1.00 1.00Motivation value 1 0.58 0.58 1.00Motivation value 2 0.33 0.33 0.58 1.00Quantum value 1 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.33 1.00Quantum value 2 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.33 1.00 1.00Organisational model 1 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00Organisational model 2 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 1 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 2 1.00 1.00 0.58 0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


• Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm correlates to Einsteinian-Quantum



• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model correlates to Einsteinian-Quantum



• Maslow motivational value correlates to Maslow needs value = 0.44. A positive

linear correlation between variables exists.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlates to Maslow motivational value = 0.44. A

positive linear correlation between variables exists.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlates to Maslow needs value (Self-actualisation)


expected outcomes.

249

TABLE 6.3(B): CONSTRUCT 3 – EMPOWERED INTUITIVE DECISION MAKING BY PRIMARY VARIABLES

Empowered intuitive decision

making Maslow need value

Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum


Scientific

paradigm

Empowered intuitive decision making 1.00Maslow need value 1.00 1.00Maslow motivational value 0.44 0.44 1.00Einsteinian-Quantum value 1.00 1.00 0.44 1.00Organisational model 1.00 1.00 0.44 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 1.00 1.00 0.44 1.00 1.00 1.00

6.2.3.4. Construct 4: Conscious Participative Relativity












expected outcomes.




expected outcomes.






motivational value 1 (Generativity) = 0.33. A positive linear correlation exists

between variables.


to Maslow motivational value 2 (Mastery) = 0.87. A large positive linear


250

• Einstein-Quantum value 1 correlated to Maslow need value = 1. A perfect positive

linear correlation exists between variables and verifies expected outcomes.

TABLE 6.4(A): CONSTRUCT 4 – CONSCIOUS PARTICIPATIVE RELATIVITY BY SECONDARY VARIABLES

Conscious participative

relativity Need value

Motivation value

1

Motivation value

2

Quantum value

1

Quantum

value 2

Organisation

al model 1

Organisational

model 2

Scientific

paradigm 1

Scientific

paradigm 2

Conscious participative relativity 1.00Need value 1.00 1.00Motivation value 1 0.33 0.33 1.00Motivation value 2 0.87 0.87 0.52 1.00Quantum value 1 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.87 1.00Quantum value 2 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.87 1.00 1.00Organisational model 1 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00Organisational model 2 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 1 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 2 1.00 1.00 0.33 0.87 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00








• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = 0.75. A large


outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow motivational value = 0.75. A

large positive linear correlation exists between variables and verifies expected

outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow needs value (Self-actualisation)


expected outcomes.

TABLE 6.4(B): CONSTRUCT 4 – CONSCIOUS PARTICIPATIVE RELATIVITY BY PRIMARY VARIABLES

Conscious participative relativity Maslow need value

Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum


Scientific

paradigm

Conscious participative relativity 1.00Maslow need value 1.00 1.00Maslow motivational value 0.75 0.75 1.00Einsteinian-Quantum value 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00Organisational model 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 1.00 1.00 0.75 1.00 1.00 1.00

251

6.2.3.5. Construct 5: Extroverted bounded instability




• Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm 1 (Probabilistic uncertainty / outside

control destructive) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 1

[Conscious design of systems (strategy, structure, reward)] = 1. A perfect positive


• Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm 2 (Non-seperability of consciousness

and matter / self-organisation) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum organisational

model 2 (Conscious participant in self-designing processes) = 1. A perfect


outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm 3 (Eternal connections in the universe /

bounded instability) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 3

(Internal commitment to knowledge and growth) = 1. A perfect positive linear


• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 1 [Conscious design of systems

(strategy, structure, reward)] correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum value 1

(Detachment / Attribution) = 0.71. A large positive linear correlation exists. This is

anomaly and not an expected outcome.

• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 2 (Conscious participant in self-

designing processes) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum value 2 (Resilience /

Faith) =1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists between variables and


• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 3 (Internal commitment to knowledge

and growth) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum value 3 (Mindfulness /

Synchronicity) = 0. No correlation exists between variables.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 1 (Detachment / Attribution) correlates to Maslow

motivational value 1 (Power within) = -0.33. Low negative correlation exists.

252

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 2 (Resilience / Faith) correlates to Maslow

motivational value 2 (Gregariousness & Cooperation) = 0.58. A positive

correlation exists

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 3 (Mindfulness / Synchronicity) correlates to Maslow

motivational value 3 (Exploration) = 0. No correlation exists between variables.

TABLE 6.5(A): CONSTRUCT 5 – EXTROVERTED BOUNDED INSTABILITY BY SECONDARY VARIABLES

Extroverted

bounded

instability

Need

value

Motivation

value 1

Motivation

value 2

Motivation

value 3

Quantum

value 1

Quantum

value 2

Quantum

value 3

Organisational

model 1

Organisational

model 2

Organisational

model 3

Scientific

paradigm 1

Scientific

paradigm 2

Scientific

paradigm 3

Extroverted bounded instability 1.00Need value 1.00 1.00Motivation value 1 0.58 0.58 1.00Motivation value 2 0.00 0.00 0.58 1.00Motivation value 3 0.58 0.58 -0.33 -0.58 1.00

Quantum value 1 0.58 0.58 -0.33 -0.58 1.00 1.00Quantum value 2 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.58 -0.33 -0.33 1.00Quantum value 3 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.58 -0.33 -0.33 1.00 1.00Organisational model 1 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.58 -0.33 -0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00Organisational model 2 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.58 -0.33 -0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Organisational model 3 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.58 -0.33 -0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Scientific paradigm 1 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.58 -0.33 -0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 2 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.58 -0.33 -0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 3 0.58 0.58 1.00 0.58 -0.33 -0.33 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00






value = 0.71. A high positive linear correlation exists between variables and


• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = 0.75. A high


outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow motivational value = 0.58. A


outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow needs value (Self-esteem) = 0.

No correlation exists between variables.

TABLE 6.5(B): CONSTRUCT 5 – EXTROVERTED BOUNDED INSTABILITY BY PRIMARY VARIABLES

Extroverted bounded instability Maslow need value

Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum


Scientific

paradigm

Extroverted bounded instability 1.00Maslow need value 1.00 1.00Maslow motivational value 0.78 0.78 1.00Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.58 0.58 0.19 1.00Organisational model 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.71 1.00Scientific paradigm 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.71 1.00 1.00

253

6.2.3.6. Construct 6.1: Conscious Belonging

Conscious belonging as a construct is individually measured to test for relationships

between variables, yet is linked to construct 8, Diversified Emergent Creative

Thinking and as such has an aggregated impact when seen in context when testing

the sample set. This aggregation is seen to be only impactful when tested as part of

the sample data set.



(i) Secondary variable analysis:

• Einsteinian-Quantum motivational value 1 (Humility) correlated to Maslow

motivational value 1 (Self assertion) = -0.58. Verifies expected negative

correlation between variables, however the correlation was expected to be

higher. Directionally it is correct.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 2 (Holism) correlated to Maslow motivational value 2

(Anger) = 0.58. A positive linear correlation between variables exists. This is an

anomaly, as a negative correlation was expected between variables.

TABLE 6.6(A): CONSTRUCT 6.1 – CONSCIOUS BELONGING BY SECONDARY VARIABLES

Conscious belonging Need value

Motivation value

1

Motivation value

2

Quantum value

1

Quantum

value 2

Organisation

al model Scientific paradigm

Conscious belonging 1.00Need value -1.00 1.00Motivation value 1 0.00 0.00 1.00Motivation value 2 0.58 -0.58 -0.58 1.00Quantum value 1 0.58 -0.58 -0.58 1.00 1.00Quantum value 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.58 1.00Organisational model 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.58 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 0.58 1.00 1.00 1.00


• Quantum scientific paradigm correlated to Quantum organisational model = 1. A


outcomes.

• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = -0.71. This is an

anomaly and an unexpected outcome. Need to verify question validity.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value to Maslow motivational value = 0.85. A large positive


254

• Einsteinian-Quantum value to Maslow needs value (Belonging) = -0.30. A small

negative correlation exists.

TABLE 6.6(B): CONSTRUCT 6.1 – CONSCIOUS BELONGING BY PRIMARY VARIABLES

Conscious belonging Maslow need value

Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum


Scientific

paradigm

Conscious belonging 1.00Maslow need value -1.00 1.00Maslow motivational value 0.71 -0.71 1.00Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.30 -0.30 0.85 1.00Organisational model 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.90 1.00Scientific paradigm 0.00 0.00 0.71 0.90 1.00 1.00

6.2.3.7. Construct 6.2: Diversified Emergent Creative Thinking




• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 1 (Eternal evolution of organisational

forms)] correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum value 1 (Celebrate diversity /

Compassion) = 1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists between variables

and verifies expected outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 2 (Conscious participant in self-

designing processes) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum value 2 (Positive use of

adversity / Resilience / Faith) = 1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists


• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 3 (Multi-dimensional emerging

universe) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum value 3 (Vision and value lead

creative visualisation) = 1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists between


• Einsteinian-Quantum value 1 (Celebrate diversity / Compassion) correlates to

Maslow motivational value 1 (Anguish) = 0.70. A large positive linear correlation

exists between variables and verifies outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 2 (Positive use of adversity / Resilience / Faith)

correlated to Maslow motivational value 2 (Fear) = -1. A perfect negative linear


255

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 3 (Vision and value lead creative visualisation)

correlated to Maslow motivational value 3 (Craving) = -1. A perfect negative linear


TABLE 6.7(A): CONSTRUCT 6.2 – DIVERGENT EMERGENT CREATIVE THINKING BY SECONDARY VARIABLES

Diversified emergent

creative thinking Need value

Motivation value

1

Motivation value

2

Motivation

value 3

Quantum

value 1

Quantum

value 2 Quantum value 3

Organisational

model 1

Organisational

model 2

Organisational

model 3

Scientific

paradigm

Diversified emergent creative thinking 1.0Need value -1.0 1.0Motivation value 1 0.7 -0.7 1.0Motivation value 2 0.0 0.0 -0.7 1.0Motivation value 3 0.0 0.0 -0.7 1.0 1.0Quantum value 1 0.0 0.0 0.7 -1.0 -1.0 1.0Quantum value 2 0.0 0.0 0.7 -1.0 -1.0 1.0 1.0Quantum value 3 0.0 0.0 0.7 -1.0 -1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0

Organisational model 1 0.0 0.0 0.7 -1.0 -1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Organisational model 2 0.0 0.0 0.7 -1.0 -1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Organisational model 3 0.0 0.0 0.7 -1.0 -1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Scientific paradigm 0.0 0.0 0.6 -0.8 -0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 1.0



organisational model = 0.82. A large positive linear correlation exists between


• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model correlated to Einsteinian -Quantum

value =1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists between variables and


• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = -0.26. No

correlation exists between variables..

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow motivational value = -0.96. A

large negative linear correlation exists between variables and verifies expected

outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow needs value (Security) = 0. No

correlation exists between variables.

TABLE 6.7(B): CONSTRUCT 6.2 – DIVERGENT EMERGENT CREATIVE THINKING BY PRIMARY VARIABLES

Diversified emergent creative

thinking Maslow need value

Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum


Scientific

paradigm

Diversified emergent creative thinking 1.00Maslow need value -1.00 1.00Maslow motivational value 0.26 -0.26 1.00Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.00 0.00 -0.96 1.00Organisational model 0.00 0.00 -0.96 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 0.00 0.00 -0.79 0.82 0.82 1.00

256

6.2.3.8. Construct 6.1 and 6.2 aggregated: Belonging and Diversified

Emergent Creative Thinking

(iii) Primary variable correlation analysis:





value = 1. A large positive linear correlation exists between variables and verifies

expected outcomes.

• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = -.042. A negative

linear correlation between variables exists and verifies expected outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow motivational value = -0.78. A

large negative linear correlation exists between variables and verifies expected

outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow needs value (Security) = -0.23.

A small negative linear correlation exists between variables.

TABLE 6.7(C): CONSTRUCT 6.1 AND 6.2 - BELONGING AND DIVERGENT EMERGENT CREATIVE THINKING BY

PRIMARY VARIABLES

Belonging and Diversified

emergent creative thinking Maslow need value

Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum


Scientific

paradigm

Belonging and Diversified emergent creative thinking 1.00Maslow need value -1.00 1.00Maslow motivational value 0.42 -0.42 1.00Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.23 -0.23 -0.78 1.00

Organisational model 0.15 -0.15 -0.83 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm -0.06 0.06 -0.83 0.77 0.82 1.00

6.2.3.9. Construct 7: Diversified Compassionate Judging



(i)Secondary variable correlation analysis:

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 1 (Celebrate diversity / Grace / Forgiveness /

Compassion / Partnership through dialogue) correlated to Maslow motivational

value 1 (Depersonalisation) = -1. A perfect negative linear correlation exists


257

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 2 (Sense of vocation) correlated to Maslow

motivational value 2 (Guilt and Shame) and Maslow motivational value 3 (Apathy)

-1. A perfect negative linear correlation exists between variables and verifies

expected outcomes.

TABLE 6.8(A): CONSTRUCT 7 – DIVERSIFIED COMPASSIONATE JUDGING BY SECONDARY VARIABLES

Diversified

compassionate judging Need value

Motivation value

1

Motivation value

2

Motivation

value 3

Quantum

value 1

Quantum

value 2

Organisational

model

Scientific

paradigmDiversified compassionate judging 1.00Need value -1.00 1.00Motivation value 1 -1.00 1.00 1.00Motivation value 2 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Motivation value 3 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Quantum value 1 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00

Quantum value 2 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00Organisational model 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 0.82 -0.82 -0.82 -0.82 -0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 1.00








• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = 1. A perfect

negative linear correlation exists between variables and verifies expected

outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow motivational value = -1. A

perfect negative linear correlation exists between variables and verifies expected

outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow needs value (Survival) = -1. A

perfect negative linear correlation exists between variables and verifies expected

outcomes.

TABLE 6.8(B): CONSTRUCT 7 – DIVERSIFIED COMPASSIONATE JUDGING BY PRIMARY VARIABLES

Diversified compassionate

judging Maslow need value

Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum


Scientific

paradigm

Diversified compassionate judging 1.00Maslow need value -1.00 1.00Maslow motivational value -1.00 1.00 1.00Einsteinian-Quantum value 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00Organisational model 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 0.82 -0.82 -0.82 0.82 0.82 1.00

258

6.2.3.10. Construct 8: Flexible Partnered Sensing




• Einsteinian-Quantum value 1 (Celebrate diversity / Grace / Forgiveness /

Compassion / Partnership through dialogue) correlated to Maslow motivational

value 1 (Depersonalisation) = -1. A perfect negative linear correlation exists


• Einsteinian-Quantum value 2 (Sense of vocation) correlated to Maslow

motivational value 2 (Guilt and Shame) and Maslow motivational value 3 (Apathy)

= -1. A perfect negative linear correlation exists between variables and verifies

expected outcomes.

TABLE 6.9(A): CONSTRUCT 8 – FLEXIBLE PARTNERED SENSING BY SECONDARY VARIABLES

Flexible partnered

sensing Need value

Motivation value

1

Motivation value

2

Motivation

value 3

Quantum

value 1

Quantum

value 2

Organisational

model

Scientific

paradigmFlexible partnered sensing 1.00Need value -1.00 1.00Motivation value 1 -1.00 1.00 1.00Motivation value 2 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Motivation value 3 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Quantum value 1 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00Quantum value 2 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00Organisational model 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00


• Einsteinian-Quantum scientific paradigm to Einsteinian-Quantum organisational

model = 1. A perfect positive linear correlation exists between variables and


• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model to Einsteinian-Quantum value = 1. A


outcomes.

• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = 1. A perfect


outcomes.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value to Maslow motivational value = -1. A perfect negative


259

• Einsteinian-Quantum value to Maslow needs value (Survival) = -1. A perfect

negative linear correlation exists between variables and verifies expected

outcomes.

TABLE 6.9(B): CONSTRUCT 8 – FLEXIBLE PARTNERED SENSING BY PRIMARY VARIABLES

Flexible partnered sensing Maslow need value

Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum


Scientific

paradigm

Flexible partnered sensing 1.00Maslow need value -1.00 1.00Maslow motivational value -1.00 1.00 1.00Einsteinian-Quantum value 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00Organisational model 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00Scientific paradigm 1.00 -1.00 -1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

6.2.4. Anomalies found in correlations between variables and treatment

applied

6.2.4.1. Conscious belonging (IQ)

(i) Secondary variables:

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 2 (Holism) correlated to Maslow motivational value 2

(Anger) = 0.58. A large positive linear correlation exists between variables. This is

an anomaly, as a negative correlation was expected between variables. This

variable needs to be reviewed in light of its link to diversified emergent creative

thinking. However, when aggregated, the Einsteinian-Quantum quantum values

as a set, has a positive 0.85 linear correlation. Thus, no changes will be made to

the QLQ in this construct section.

(ii) Primary variables:

• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = -0.71. This is an

anomaly and an unexpected outcome. Need to verify question validity. In light of

this review it is also noted that Maslow motivational value does indeed have a low

linear correlation to the construct of conscious belonging on questions related to

the construct as a pre behavioural response. Thus, the Maslow needs state

response is in question here and not the motivational value. As it has been

assumed through the research that Maslow’s needs and Maslow’s motivational

values are correlated, the QLQ needs to consider leaving out questions relating

to Maslow needs values as correlations exist between quantum values and

Maslow’s motivational values, thereby through association and assumption

260

determining that Maslow’s needs values will also be satisfied. Furthermore this

research is not to determine validity of Maslow’s needs values and as such is left

for further research at a later stage.

6.2.4.2. Focused Multi dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation (SQ)

(i) Secondary variables:


motivational value 1 (Generativity) = -1. This is an anomaly and does not verify

expectations. Expectation was for a positive correlation. No reason can be found

to support this anomaly; overall aggregated correlation within primary variables

shows a positive 0.86 correlation between variables. No changes will therefore be

made to QLQ.

(ii) Primary variables:

• Maslow motivational value correlated to Maslow needs value = -0.99. An

unexpected outcome. Expected a positive linear correlation. A positive linear

correlation does however exist between the control variable of the behavioural

sub-construct and Maslow needs value. Thus the link between Maslow values is

inconsistent.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value correlated to Maslow motivational value = -0.7.

Shows a negative correlation. This is unexpected and may need to be controlled

for in the sample test. Maslow motivational value question may be ambiguous in

QLQ (Refer to annexure 1). No reason can be found to support this anomaly. No

change made to QLQ.

6.2.4.3. Collaborative Explorative Perception (SQ)

Secondary variables:


to Maslow motivational value 2 (Mastery) = -0.17. This result shows that close to

zero correlation exists between these variables. However, both Einsteinian-

Quantum values have a positive +1 linear correlation with Maslow need value

261

and with the control behavioural sub-construct. Thus, no changes to QLQ will be

made.

6.2.4.4. Extroverted bounded instability (SQ)

Secondary variables:

• Einsteinian-Quantum organisational model 3 (Internal commitment to knowledge

and growth) correlated to Einsteinian-Quantum value 3 (Mindfulness /

Synchronicity) = 0. No correlation. However both the Einsteinian-Quantum

organisational model variables (1 and 2) have a +1 perfect positive linear

correlation to the Einsteinian-Quantum values (1 and 2) respectively. Thus the

construct when aggregated as a primary variable shows in total a +0.70 large

positive linear correlation. Thus, this secondary variable must be controlled for in

the QLQ, and excluded if not meaningful within the QLM.

• Einsteinian-Quantum value 3 (Mindfulness / Synchronicity) correlates to Maslow

motivational value 3 (Exploration) = 0. No correlation exists. This is an

unexpected result. However in the aggregated primary variable analysis

Einsteinian-Quantum value has a large positive linear correlation to Maslow

needs value and the control variable of behaviour.

6.2.5. Application of anomaly findings to QLQ and the method of research

Where anomalies in expected correlation outcomes are found the following treatment

has been applied:

1. Questions have been checked to ensure that they are framed correctly within the

correct context.

2. Questions have been checked again to ensure that they have been aligned to the

QLM and that they are in line with content analysis matrices.

6.2.6. Quantum individuation analysis

6.2.6.1. Correlations between variables

Quantum entanglement occurs through the integration of four behavioural elements

within the psyche as a response to the variables within constructs as determined by

262

the QLM (Refer to Chapter 4 Section 4.2.5). These four constructs are focused multi-

dimensional introverted re-contextualisation, collaborative explorative perception,

empowered intuitive decision making and conscious participative relativity. The

validity of this integration is analysed through correlation statistical analysis of the

four constructs and their individual predictor variables. Furthermore a shift towards

this correlation from before transition point to after transition point is determined to

validate if an increase in correlation between variables is attained. This test is done

within the pilot test data in preparation for the sample data to check for any

anomalies.

(i) Correlation of constructs before transition (see table 6.10)

Large positive correlations exist between all variables between all constructs.

(ii) Correlation of constructs after transition (see table 6.11)

Large positive correlations exist between all variables between all constructs.

263

TABLE 6.10: PILOT STUDY CORRELATION ANALYSIS (BEFORE TRANSITION)

Pilot study Correlation analysis

of Before transition

Maslow

motivational

value

Einsteinian-

Quantum

value

Org.

model

Scientific

paradigm

Maslow

motivational

value

Einsteinian-

Quantum

value

Org.

model

Scientific

paradigm

Maslow

motivational

value

Einsteinian-

Quantum

value Org. model

Scientific

paradigm

Maslow

motivational

value

Einsteinian-

Quantum

value

Org.

model

Scientific

paradigm

Focused Multi-dimensional

Introverted Re-contextualisation

Maslow motivational value 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 1.0 1.0Organisational model 0.9 0.9 1.0Scientific paradigm 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0Collaborative Explorative

Perception 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0Maslow motivational value 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0Organisational model 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0Scientific paradigm 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0Empowered Intuitive Decision

Making 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0Maslow motivational value 1.0 0.9 0.7 0.7 0.8 0.9 0.7 0.7 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0Organisational model 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.9 1.0Scientific paradigm 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.0Conscious Participative

Relativity 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.0Maslow motivational value 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0Organisational model 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0Scientific paradigm 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.7 0.9 1.0 1.0 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0

Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re- Collaborative Explorative Perception Empowered Intuitive Decision Making Conscious Participative Relativity

TABLE 6.11: PILOT STUDY CORRELATION ANALYSIS (AFTER TRANSITION)

Pilot study Correlation analysis

of After transition

Behaviour

control

variable

Maslow need

value

Maslow

motivational

value

Einsteinian-

Quantum

value

Org.

model

Scientific

paradigm

Maslow

motivational

value

Einsteinian-

Quantum

value

Org.

model

Scientific

paradigm

Maslow

motivational

value

Einsteinian-

Quantum

value

Org.

model

Scientific

paradigm

Maslow

motivational

value

Einsteinian-

Quantum

value

Org.

model

Scientific

paradigm


Introverted Re-contextualisation 1.0Maslow need value 1.0 1.0Maslow motivational value -1.0 -1.0 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0Organisational model 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0Scientific paradigm 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0Collaborative Explorative

Perception 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0Maslow need value 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0Maslow motivational value 0.6 0.6 -0.6 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0Organisational model 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0Scientific paradigm 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0Empowered Intuitive Decision

Making 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0Maslow need value 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0Maslow motivational value 0.5 0.5 -0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.0 0.4 0.4 0.4 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0Organisational model 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0Scientific paradigm 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0Conscious Participative

Relativity 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0Maslow need value 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0Maslow motivational value -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.3 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 1.0Organisational model 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 1.0 1.0Scientific paradigm 0.6 0.6 -0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.7 1.0 1.0 1.0

Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation Collaborative Explorative Perception Empowered Intuitive Decision Making Conscious Participative Relativity

264

6.2.6.2. Pilot study descriptive statistical analysis

All variables associated with the constructs included in quantum entangled

individuation, show a positive shift from before transition to after transition, except for

the Maslow motivational variable within the behavioural construct of focused multi-

dimensional introverted re-contextualisation. (Refer to see Table 6.12)

TABLE 6.12: PILOT STUDY DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS (BEFORE VS. AFTER TRANSITION)

6.2.7. Causality analysis between pilot test variables

Although correlation analysis is predictive, it cannot prove causality between

variables and as such this is a limitation in the study in terms of the QLM which

requires causality between primary variables.

Bef\ore vs. After transition

Predictor variable Total before Total after Diff (Shift) % shift

Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted

Re-contextualisation 22.50 31.50 9.00 140.0%

Maslow need value 14.50 31.50 17.00 217.2%

Maslow motivational value 24.75 24.25 -0.50 98.0%

Einsteinian-Quantum value 25.75 33.75 8.00 131.1%

Organisational model 27.00 33.75 6.75 125.0%

Scientific paradigm 27.00 33.75 6.75 125.0%

Collaborative Explorative Perception 27.00 33.75 6.75 125.0%


Maslow motivational value 26.75 29.75 3.00 111.2%




Empowered Intuitive Decision Making 27.00 33.75 6.75 125.0%






Conscious Participative Relativity 27.00 33.75 6.75 125.0%






SHIFT

265

6.2.8. Summary of analysis on pilot test data

No meaningful anomalies are found within the pilot test data to signify that the QLQ

is not valid in terms of the variables applied and the relationships expected between

variables as associated with the individual QLM constructs.

6.3. Quantitative QLM validity analysis through purposive sampling (Refer to

4.3.4.3, Chapter 4)

6.3.1. Introduction

QLQ analysis in Section 6.2 determined internal validity between QLQ variable sets

within the individual constructs of the QLQ, this was achieved through the pilot study,

thus validating the QLQ prior to utilising this questionnaire for the sample group.

The data from the sample group, being a purposive sample (Refer to Chapter 5,

Section 5.3.4.6), is used to determine in a ‘real-world’ setting the validity of

assumptions and predictive outcomes suggested by the QLM.

Firstly, the sample data will be applied to determine the quantum entanglement

between constructs by determining the relationships between constructs as per the

QLM (Refer to Chapter 4, Figure 4.6), through correlation analysis (Refer to Chapter

4, Section 4.2.5). Both before and after transition data sets are used to further

determine if entanglement as per the pilot data anomaly also is evident in the sample

study data. In addition the shift between before-transition and after-transition is also

determined, to validate if a further behavioural shift occurred due to the

organisational transition itself, on the individuals and the group.

Secondly, the data will be applied to determine the quantum entanglement

directional effect or predictability of outcomes on other constructs as suggested by

the QLM, through scatter plot graphical analysis (Refer to Chapter 4, Section 4.2.5).

Thirdly, the data will be applied to determine the value of the quantum leadership

shift effect by comparing before transition and after transition data as determined by

266

the QLQ, by construct as suggested within the QLM in Chapter 4 (as per Chapter 4,

Section 4.2.6.2). The transition point is a point of change where:

• There is a dramatic share price increase point as shown by a time stamped

inflection point, within the Impala Platinum Limited (Implats) Johannesburg Stock

Exchange (JSE) share price data (1994).

• There is a cultural shift period between 1990 and 1999 that took place within

Implats, captured within the before and after data using the QLQ as aligned to the

QLM.

Further to this cultural shift as predicted by the QLM, quantitative and qualitative

analysis of the Implat’s annual reports and one-on-one interviews with the key

members of the change team at Implats will be used to substantiate and support the

QLM in answering the research hypothesis through the ex-post facto case study

methodology applied in Implats and applied within Chapter 6 as part of the

triangulation of findings to answer the research hypothesis.

6.3.2. Limitations

Usable data from the sample were limited to seven of the nine executives involved

within the turnaround process at Impala platinum. Thus usable data are limited to

78% of the sample.

As these two individuals excluded from the quantitative data sets are influential

members of the team, being the then Chairman and the Chief financial officer over

the transition point, in-depth interviews were conducted with these individuals. This

information will be triangulated to form a holistic informational set (qualitative and

quantitative) to align findings and conclusions.

Furthermore from a quantitative perspective, as the sample size is small, linear

regression analysis cannot be utilised to show directional causality as suggested

within the QLM (Chapter 4, Figure. 4.7). This type of linear causality study is left for

further research into countries that have larger sample sizes, such as the eleven US

companies in the Good to Great study sample. However scatter plot diagrams will be

267

utilised to indicate directional predictability for groups of constructs as suggested by

the QLM.

6.3.3. Analysis

6.3.3.1. Initial analysis to align pilot and sample studies

In 6.2.6 it was suggested that as the correlations of data within the QLQ pilot test

study within behavioural constructs were sufficiently high to exclude the Maslow

psyche elements from the QLQ. The researcher has found it prudent to test again for

these correlative relationships between the primary and secondary variables, with

regards to Maslow’s psyche variables, within constructs, within the sample test data.

The data from the section of the QLQ for ‘after transition’ was used as this data was

deemed to be the most recent understandings of self by the participants.

Analysis of data shows a single anomaly, within behavioural constructs. This

reflected in the data from the construct of extroverted bounded instability. All other

constructs reflect, through correlative analysis, positive correlations as per the pilot

test study.

TABLE 6.13: CORRELATION ANALYSIS – EXTROVERTED BOUNDED INSTABILITY (IMPLATS)

Sample data: After transition data

Extroverted

bounded instability

Maslow need

value

Maslow

motivational

value

Einsteinian-

Quantum

value

Organisational

model

Scientific

paradigm

Extroverted bounded instability 1.0Maslow need value -0.5 1.0Maslow motivational value 0.6 0.2 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.3 0.1 0.5 1.0Organisational model 0.3 -0.1 0.5 0.8 1.0Scientific paradigm -0.3 0.1 -0.1 0.7 0.4 1.0

Small negative correlations were found between scientific paradigm, and Maslow

motivational need and the behavioural control variable. These were expected to be

positive. In addition, a small negative correlation was found between organisational

model and Maslow needs value. A positive correlation was expected.

However a positive correlation is found between the organisational model,

Einsteinian-Quantum value, Maslow needs value and the control behavioural

variable. Thus, suggesting that the question relating to science and Maslow needs

268

value as correlated to behavioural response outcomes in this construct needs to be

controlled for. Furthermore, in relation to the rest of the QLQ, no anomalies were

found.

6.3.3.2. Analysis to determine quantum entanglement between constructs

(Refer to 4.3.5, Chapter 4)

As per Chapter 4, Section 4.2.5, quantum entanglement occurs through the

integration of four behavioural elements within the psyche as a response to the value

variables within constructs as determined by the QLM. These four constructs are

focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation, collaborative explorative

perception, empowered intuitive decision making and conscious participative

relativity. The validity of this integration is analysed through correlation statistical

analysis of the four constructs and their individual predictor variables. In addition, a

shift in correlation from before transition point to after transition point is determined to

see if an increase in correlation between variables is attained. Furthermore

descriptive analysis of QLQ scores is used to determine shift between before

transition and after transition.

(i) Correlation of constructs before transition (Ref. table 6.14 (a) and (b) - column:

Before):

Large correlations exist between all variables between all constructs.

(ii) Correlation of constructs after transition (Ref. table 6.14 (a) and (b) - column:

After):

Large correlations exist between all variables between all constructs.

(iii) Shift in correlation (Ref. table 6.14 (a) and (b) - column: Shift)

A positive shift in correlation strength between variables is observed in the data from

before transition to after transition, except the correlations between the behavioural

control variable and Maslow motivational value in the construct: focused

multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation. Here a low negative correlation is

found of -0.1. All other variables suggest that a higher synergy or connectivity

between these constructs was noted after the transition period, within the Implats’

269

data. Indicating that a higher level of quantum entangled individuation is present

after transition than before.

270

TABLE 6.14: SAMPLE STUDY CORRELATION TABLES – QUANTUM ENTANGLED INDIVIDUATION CONSTRUCTS (IMPLATS)

Before vs After transition shift

in correlations between

variables

Quantum entangled individuation

behavioural constructs

Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift


introverted recontextualisation 1.0 1.0 0.0Maslow motivational value 0.6 0.7 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Organisational model 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0Scientific paradigm 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Collaborative Explorative

Perception 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Maslow motivational value 0.6 0.5 -0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.9 0.3 1.0 1.0 0.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0Organisational model 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0Scientific paradigm 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Empowered intuitive decision

making 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Maslow motivational value 0.4 0.5 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.6 1.0 0.4Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1Organisational model 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Scientific paradigm 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Conscious participative

relativity 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Maslow motivational value 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.9 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.7 1.0 0.2Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.9 0.9 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1Organisational model 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Scientific paradigm 0.3 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 0.9 0.3 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0

Maslow motivational

value Einsteinian-Quantum value

Behaviour control variable

Focused multidimensional introverted recontextualisation

Organisational mental

model Scientific paradigm

Collaborative Explorative Perception


Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum

value



TABLE 6.14 (CONT.): SAMPLE STUDY CORRELATION TABLES – QUANTUM ENTANGLED INDIVIDUATION CONSTRUCTS (IMPLATS)

Before vs After transition shift

in correlations between

variables

Quantum entangled individuation

behavioural constructs

Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift Before After Shift


introverted recontextualisation

Maslow motivational valueEinsteinian-Quantum valueOrganisational modelScientific paradigmCollaborative Explorative

Perception

Maslow motivational valueEinsteinian-Quantum valueOrganisational modelScientific paradigmEmpowered intuitive decision

making 1.0 1.0 0.0Maslow motivational value 0.6 1.0 0.4 1.0 1.0 0.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0Organisational model 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0Scientific paradigm 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Conscious participative

relativity 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0Maslow motivational value 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.7 1.0 0.2 1.0 1.0 0.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0Organisational model 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0Scientific paradigm 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.6 1.0 0.4 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0 0.7 1.0 0.2 0.9 1.0 0.1 1.0 1.0 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.0

Empowered intuitive decision making Conscious participative relativity


Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum

value




Maslow motivational

value

Einsteinian-Quantum

value



271

6.3.3.3. Descriptive analysis of shift (see table 6.15 and Refer to 4.3.6,

Chapter 6)

QLQ scoring indicates positive shift from before to after transition across each of the

constructs required for quantum entanglement.

Approximately 90% of the change (supported by interview data and annual report

analysis in Section 6.4 of this Chapter) happened within the operational areas of the

organisation and as the QLQ is focused at individuals, this impact can skew the data

when aggregated together for purposes of correlation analysis. Therefore to achieve

a more in-depth analysis, the QLQ scores (Refer to Table 6.15) have been split

between FIXCO (full Implats change team), and then within the FIXCO team into:

professional administrative executives (prof. execs) and operational executives (ops

execs). The split between operational executives and professional administrative

executives is as follows:

Impala FIXCO (change) team

Operational executives (at time of transition):

Case 1: GM - mining operations (Currently CEO of a separate mining operation)

Case 3: GM - mining operations (Currently executive director: operations)

Case 5: Not executive external - mining operations (Currently executive director:

corporate affairs)

Case 7: Engineering consultant – mining operations (Retired as CEO)

Professional administrative executives (at time of transition)

Case 2: Legal executive – strategic (Retired as executive director: legal)

Case 4: Marketing executive – strategic (Currently executive director: marketing)

Case 6: Human resources executive – strategic (Retired as executive director: HR)

From the data (Refer to Table 6.15), it evident that the shift in quantum individuation

as measured by the four constructs (across all variables) represented in table 6.15,

is larger in the case of ops execs. than for the prof. execs. (For full before and after

data analysis see Annexure 4, 5 and 6)

272

TABLE: 6.15: SUMMARY SAMPLE STUDY DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS - QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT SHIFT

(IMPLATS)

Before vs. After Quantum individuation shift

Construct Variables FIXCO

PROF

EXECS

OPS

EXECS FIXCO

PROF

EXECS

OPS

EXECS Diff

Quantum

individuation shift Diff

Quantum

individuation shift Diff

Quantum individuation

shift

0. Quantum Entangled Individuation

(Control variable) 94.50 42.00 52.50 120.75 47.25 73.50 26.25 127.8% 5.25 112.5% 21.00 140.0%

Maslow need value 89.25 31.50 57.75 105.00 42.00 63.00 15.75 117.6% 10.50 133.3% 5.25 109.1%

Maslow motivational value 104.25 42.75 61.50 111.50 47.75 63.75 7.25 107.0% 5.00 111.7% 2.25 103.7%

Einsteinian-Quantum value 99.75 42.00 57.75 102.75 39.75 63.00 3.00 103.0% -2.25 94.6% 5.25 109.1%

Organisational model 99.75 42.00 57.75 110.25 47.25 63.00 10.50 110.5% 5.25 112.5% 5.25 109.1%

Scientific paradigm 99.75 42.00 57.75 110.25 47.25 63.00 10.50 110.5% 5.25 112.5% 5.25 109.1%Ave 113.18% Ave 112.93% Ave 114.19%

1. Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-

contextualisation 49.50 22.50 27.00 56.25 24.75 31.50 6.75 113.6% 2.25 110.0% 4.50 116.7%

Maslow need value 25.00 11.25 13.75 22.50 8.75 13.75 -2.50 90.0% -2.50 77.8% 0.00 100.0%


Einsteinian-Quantum value 40.26 14.51 25.75 47.25 15.75 31.50 6.99 117.4% 1.24 108.6% 5.75 122.3%



2. Collaborative Explorative Perception 42.75 15.75 27.00 47.25 15.75 31.50 4.50 110.5% 0.00 100.0% 4.50 116.7%






3. Empowered Intuitive Decision Making 42.75 15.75 27.00 47.25 15.75 31.50 4.50 110.5% 0.00 100.0% 4.50 116.7%






4. Conscious Participative Relativity 42.75 15.75 27.00 47.25 15.75 31.50 4.50 110.5% 0.00 100.0% 4.50 116.7%






SHIFT OPS EXECSSHIFT FIXCOTOTAL BEFORE TOTAL AFTER SHIFT PROF EXECS

6.3.3.4. Analysis to determine the quantum entanglement directional effect

between constructs (Refer to 4.3.5, Chapter 4)

It is suggested that if quantum entanglement (Maslow’s self-actualisation) occurs

between the four constructs of focused multi-dimensional introverted re-

contextualisation, collaborative explorative perception, empowered intuitive decision

making and conscious participative relativity, then a multiplier is applied due to

quantum individuation (Maslow’s peak experiences). This then leads to an impact on

the related juxtaposed constructs and associated values as per the QLM and

predicts a resultant responsive behaviour as aligned to this change in value set

(Refer to In Section 4.2.5 phase 5, stage 6, Chapter 4).

In Section 6.3.3.1 it has been shown that positive correlations are visible between

273

the four constructs of focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation,

collaborative explorative perception, empowered intuitive decision making and

conscious participative relativity, thus implying that quantum entanglement can occur

and that this effect can have positive directional influence on the values of the

opposing constructs within the QLM (Quantum leadership shift effect). To determine

the quantum entanglement impact on individual constructs post-transition data was

tested for correlations between the Einsteinian-Quantum value variables between

constructs (Quantum entanglement constructs in relation to individual juxtaposed

constructs).

In addition predictive analysis through scatter plot diagrams was applied to

understand if the directional shift in the Einsteinian-Quantum values within the

quantum entangled behavioural constructs predicted a similar directional shift in the

Einsteinian-Quantum values as within the juxtaposed behavioural constructs.

(i) Construct 1: Focused multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation as

juxtaposedly related to Construct 5: Extroverted bounded instability (opposing

behavioural constructs on a single continuum.

Einsteinian-Quantum values correlation

• Analysis of FIXCO team (Professional administrative and Operational

executives):

A positive correlation exists between Einsteinian quantum value sets between

constructs. This is an expected outcome and satisfies the requirements of the QLM.

Thus suggesting that, a positive relational influence between focused

multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation and extroverted bounded instability

exists. This does not suggest that causality exists.

TABLE 6.16: CORRELATION ANALYSIS - FOCUSED MULTIDIMENSIONAL INTROVERTED RE-

CONTEXTUALISATION & EXTROVERTED BOUNDED INSTABILITY (IMPLATS: FIXCO)


Focused multidimensional introverted

recontextualisation Einsteinian-Quantum value Organisational model Scientific paradigm

Extroverted bounded instability 0.4 1.0 1.0 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.3Organisational model 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.3Scientific paradigm 0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3

274

• Analysis of operational executives only (within the FIXCO team):

A positive correlation exists between Einsteinian quantum values between


Thus suggesting that, a positive relational influence between focused

multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation and extroverted bounded instability

exists and is higher within the operational executives than the professional

administrative executives within the Implats data. This does not suggest that

causality exists.

TABLE 6.17: CORRELATION ANALYSIS - FOCUSED MULTIDIMENSIONAL INTROVERTED RE-

CONTEXTUALISATION & EXTROVERTED BOUNDED INSTABILITY (IMPLATS: OPS EXECS)


introverted recontextualisation Einsteinian-Quantum value Organisational model Scientific paradigm

Extroverted bounded instability 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8Organisational model 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7Scientific paradigm 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Einsteinian-Quantum values - Scatter plot predictive analysis

• Analysis of FIXCO team (Prof. administrative and Operational executives) (Refer

to Figure. 6.1):

Analysis of the FIXCO team as a whole indicates a weak directional predictive

influence between Einsteinian-Quantum values between juxtaposed constructs. This

does not suggest that causality exists.

• Analysis of operational executives only (within the FIXCO team) (Refer to Figure.

6.2):

Analysis of Ops execs indicates a strong predictive directional influence between

Einsteinian-Quantum values between juxtaposed constructs. This does not suggest

that causality exists.

275

Construct 1: Focused multidimensional introverted

recontextualisation directional influence / prediction for

Construct 5: Extroverted bounded instability

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516171819No of cases

QLQ

Score

Construct 1: Einsteinian-Quantum value


Linear (Construct 1:Einsteinian-Quantum value)


Construct 1: Focused multidimensional introverted

recontextualisation directional influence / prediction for

Construct 5: Extroverted bounded instability

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

9.00

10.00

0 5 10 15 20No of cases

QLQ

Sco

re





Figure. 6.1: Sample scatter plot diagram

(focused multidimensional introverted re-

contextualisation & extroverted bounded

instability (Implats: FIXCO)

Figure. 6.2: Sample scatter plot diagram

(focused multidimensional introverted re-

contextualisation & extroverted bounded

instability (Implats: Ops execs)

(ii) Construct 2: Collaborative explorative perception as juxtaposedly related to

Construct 6: Diversified compassionate judging (opposing behavioural constructs on

a single continuum)


• Analysis of the FIXCO team (Prof. administrative and Operational executives):

A positive correlation exists between Einsteinian quantum value sets between


Thus suggesting that, a positive relational influence between collaborative

explorative perception and diversified compassionate judging exists. This does not

suggest that causality exists.

TABLE 6.18: CORRELATION ANALYSIS - COLLABORATIVE EXPLORATIVE PERCEPTION & DIVERSIFIED

COMPASSIONATE JUDGING (IMPLATS: FIXCO)

Sample data: After transition data Collaborative Explorative Perception Einsteinian-Quantum value Organisational model Scientific paradigm

Diversified compassionate judging 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3Organisational model 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3Scientific paradigm 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

• Analysis of operational executives only (within the FIXCO team):

A high positive correlation exists between Einsteinian quantum value sets between


276

Thus suggesting that, a positive relational influence between collaborative

explorative perception and diversified compassionate judging exists and is higher in

the operational executive data than within the professional administrative executives

within the Implats data. This does not suggest that causality exists.

TABLE 6.19: CORRELATION ANALYSIS - COLLABORATIVE EXPLORATIVE PERCEPTION & DIVERSIFIED

COMPASSIONATE JUDGING (IMPLATS: OPS EXECS)

Collaborative Explorative

Perception Einsteinian-Quantum value Organisational model Scientific paradigm

Diversified compassionate judging 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6Organisational model 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6Scientific paradigm -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6



to Figure 6.3):




• Analysis of operational executives only (within the FIXCO team) (Refer to Figure

6.4):

Analysis of Ops execs indicates a strong directional predictive influence between



Construct 2: Collaborative explorative perceptive directional

influence / prediction for Construct 6: Diversified

compassionate judging

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516171819No of cases

QLQ

Score





Construct 2: Collaborative explorative perceptive directional

influence / prediction for Construct 6: Diversified

compassionate judging

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

0 5 10 15 20No of cases

QLQ

Score





Figure 6.3: Sample scatter plot diagram:

collaborative explorative perception and

diversified compassionate judging (Implats:

FIXCO)

Figure 6.4: Sample scatter plot diagram:

collaborative explorative perception and

diversified compassionate judging (Implats:

Ops execs)

277

(iii) Construct 3: Empowered intuitive decision making as juxtaposedly related to

Construct 7: Flexible partnered sensing (opposing behavioural constructs on a single

continuum)


• Analysis of the FIXCO team (Prof. administrative and Operational executives)

No correlation exists between Einsteinian quantum value sets between constructs. A

positive correlation was expected. This is an anomaly and does not satisfy the

requirements of the QLM. Thus the positive correlative nature between empowered

intuitive decision making and flexible partnered sensing expected is not evident.

TABLE 6.20: CORRELATION ANALYSIS - EMPOWERED INTUITIVE DECISION MAKING AND FLEXIBLE PARTNERED

SENSING (IMPLATS: FIXCO)


Empowered intuitive decision

making Einsteinian-Quantum value Organisational model Scientific paradigm

Flexible partnered sensing 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Organisational model 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Scientific paradigm 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

• Analysis of operational executives only (within the FIXCO team)

A negative correlation exists between Einsteinian quantum values between

constructs. A positive correlation was expected. This is an anomaly and does not

satisfy the requirements of the QLM. Thus the positive correlative nature expected

between empowered intuitive decision making and flexible partnered sensing

expected is not evident and that the operational executives displayed a negative

correlation between these two constructs to a larger degree than the professional

administration executives.

TABLE 6.21: CORRELATION ANALYSIS - EMPOWERED INTUITIVE DECISION MAKING AND FLEXIBLE PARTNERED

SENSING (IMPLATS: OPS EXECS)

Empowered intuitive

decision making Einsteinian-Quantum value Organisational model Scientific paradigm

Flexible partnered sensing -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6Einsteinian-Quantum value -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6Organisational model -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6Scientific paradigm -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6

278


• Analysis of FIXCO team (Prof. administrative and Operational executives)(Refer

to Figure. 6.5):





6.6):




Construct 3: Empowered intuitive decision making directional

influence / prediction for Construct 7: Flexible partnered

sensing

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516171819No of cases

QLQ

Score



Linear (Construct 3:Einsteinian-Quantumvalue)

Linear (Construct 7:Einsteinian-Quantumvalue)

Construct 3: Empowered intuitive decision making directional

influence / prediction for Construct 7: Flexible partnered

sensing

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16No of cases

QLQ

Score





Figure. 6.5: Sample scatter plot diagram:

empowered intuitive decision making and

flexible partnered sensing (Implats:FIXCO)


empowered intuitive decision making and

flexible partnered sensing (Implats: Ops execs)

(iv) Construct 4: Conscious participative relativity as juxtaposedly related to

Construct 8: Diversified emergent creative thinking (opposing behavioural constructs

on a single continuum)


• Analysis of the FIXCO team (Prof. Administrative and Operational executives)

A low negative correlation exists between Einsteinian quantum value sets between

constructs. A positive correlation was expected. This is an anomaly and does not

satisfy the requirements of the QLM. Thus, the positive directional influence between

279

conscious participative relativity and diversified emergent creative thinking that was

expected does not exist in the Impala data.

TABLE 6.22: CORRELATION ANALYSIS - CONSCIOUS PARTICIPATIVE RELATIVITY AND DIVERSIFIED EMERGENT

CREATIVE THINKING (IMPLATS: FIXCO)

Sample data: After transition data Conscious participative relativity

Einsteinian-Quantum


Scientific

paradigm

Diversified emergent creative thinking (Incl.

Belonging) -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2Einsteinian-Quantum value -0.2 -0.2 -0.2 -0.2Organisational model -0.1 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1Scientific paradigm 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3

• Analysis of operational executives only (within the FIXCO team)

A low positive correlation exists between Einsteinian quantum values between

constructs. Therefore data analysis related to the operational executives, satisfy the

requirements of the QLM. This then suggests that, the positive directional influence

between conscious participative relativity and diversified emergent creative thinking

that was expected does exist for operational executives in the Impala data set and

that the negative influence of the professional administration executives influences

the outcomes of the Implats sample.

TABLE 6.23: CORRELATION ANALYSIS - CONSCIOUS PARTICIPATIVE RELATIVITY AND DIVERSIFIED EMERGENT

CREATIVE THINKING (IMPLATS: OPS EXECS)

Conscious participative

relativity Einsteinian-Quantum value Organisational model Scientific paradigm

Diversified emergent creative thinking 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0Einsteinian-Quantum value 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2Organisational model 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4Scientific paradigm 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6

280



to Figure. 6.7):





6.8):




Construct 4: Conscious participative relativity directional

influence / prediction for Construct 8: Diversified emergent

creative thinking (incl. Belonging)

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516171819No of cases

QLQ

Score





Construct 4: Conscious participative relativity directional

influence / prediction for Construct 8: Diversified emergent


0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

0 5 10 15 20No of cases

QLQ

Score






conscious participative relativity and

diversified emergent creative thinking

(Implats: FIXCO)


conscious participative relativity and

diversified emergent creative thinking

(Implats: Ops execs)

6.3.3.5. Quantum leadership shift effect analysis (Refer to Section 4.3.6,

Chapter 4)

(i) Construct analysis by actual weighted data scoring as associated with before and

after transition to determine the quantum leadership shift effect at Implats.

Einsteinian-Quantum values within quantum entangled behavioural constructs

(extroverted bounded instability, diversified compassionate judging, flexible

partnered sensing, diversified emergent creative thinking relativity) positively impact

281

on the juxtaposed values within constructs, as directly associated (focused multi-


empowered intuitive decision making and conscious participative) due to quantum

individuation as per the QLM (Refer to Chapter 4, Section 4.2.6.2). This impact has

positive resultant response behaviours. These quantum values are only present

when quantum individuation occurs through entanglement, and as such directly

affects the negative values associated with Maslow’s paradigm (Zohar and Marshall,

2001 & 2004) on the opposing juxtaposed constructs when these opposing scores

are aggregated.

Initial analysis was done without using the impact of Einsteinian-Quantum values

due to quantum individuation (through quantum entanglement) to the juxtaposed

constructs as related to the quantum entangled constructs, as per the QLM (Refer to

Section 4.2.6.2, Chapter 4). Furthermore the analysis was once again split between

the total sample of the FIXCO executives at Implats (Professional administrative

executives and Operational executives) to find indicators of shift between

professional administrative executives vs. operational executives. This is done as the

change at Implats was operational and a higher impact is sought amongst the

operational executives.

In Section 6.3.3.1 it has been analysed that the individual personal data for the

internal team chosen to manage the transition of Implats prior too and after the

transition period through the four constructs required for quantum individuation to

occur, elicited positive correlations between all variables. Thus showing an

intuitiveness of the organisational leadership, in establishing a team with the right

values and responsive behavioural characteristics, to manage the organisational

change required.

The purpose of the study is however to validate the QLM and to suggest that this

model is exemplified within successful companies through outcomes resultant of

specific behaviour patterns.

The researcher, due to the quantum individuation being present before and after the

transition period at Implats, will seek to show the quantum leadership shift effect for

282

both periods (prior to the transition point and after transition point). These two

periods will then be analysed to seek for extended quantum leadership shift effects

through the transition period (pre-transition shift versus post-transition shift).

(ii) Quantum leadership shift effect before organisational transition at Implats

Quantum leadership shift differences on total FIXCO team at Implats (Table 6.24):

A total differential average shift of -681.72% is indicated across all cases, through

analysis. The negative shift is indicative of a turnaround shift from an average of -

1.4 (Maslow motivational value) to a positive of +8.1 when the Einsteinian-Quantum

values (due to quantum individuation) are applied to these constructs. (Refer to full

analysis by individual construct in Annexure 4,5 and 6)

TABLE 6.24: BEFORE-TRANSITION QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT (IMPLATS: FIXCO)

Predictive analysis across all variables within all constructs of the QLM

Scatter plot diagram (Refer to Figure. 6.9) using scores from the QLQ, shows a

positive directional predictive influence between variables within the constructs of the

QLM (using quantum individuated scoring).



Maslow motivational

values applied

Quantum values applied after

Quantum entanglement


multiplier

Quantum leadership shift

effect

Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation & Extroverted bounded instability 10.8 14.8 4.0 37.22%Collaborative Explorative Perception &


Empowered Intuitive Decision Making & Flexible Partnered Sensing -6.4 5.8 12.1 -189.94%

Conscious Participative Relativity &Diversified emergent creative thinking (incl. Belonging) -1.7 6.0 7.7 -455.51%Total -5.5 32.2 37.8 -681.72%

Average -1.4 8.1 9.4 -681.72%



Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership Questionnaire (QLQ) © - Behavioural Constructs Pre-transition (Total Average Fixco scores)

283

Scatter Plot of Before transition scores accross all QLM contructs

-25.00

-20.00

-15.00

-10.00

-5.00

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

-15.00 -10.00 -5.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00

Case 3 Case 5 Case 7 Case 2 Case 4 Case 6

Figure 6.9: Pre-transition: Scatter plot predictive analysis diagram - QLM constructs

(Implats)

Graphic (descriptive) analysis of quantum leadership shift effect

• Implats pre-transition (FIXCO) scoring as per QLQ (excluding quantum

entangled individuation):

Graphic analysis indicates the following parameters (Refer to the QLM in

Chapter 4, Section 4.2.6). Excludes quantum individuated values being applied

and is scored using the Maslow motivational value scores:

o Quantum entanglement constructs (Maslow scoring – before Quantum

individuation):

- Focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation: +9

- Collaborative explorative perception: +9

- Empowered intuitive decision making: +9

- Conscious participative relativity: +9

o Juxtaposed constructs

- Extroverted bounded instability: +6

- Diversified compassionate judging: -21

- Flexible partnered sensing: -21

- Diversified emergent creative thinking: -15

284

Scoring from the QLQ is applied as per table 6.24. The product impact of predictor

variables (Maslow motivational values) across juxtaposed constructs is indicated

graphically on the bar graphs in Figure. 6.10. The total average product is shown at

the bottom of Figure. 6.10. This is an indicator of the holistic ‘being’ directional

motivation (-1.4) to which behaviour is a response.

0

Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation

Extroverted bounded instability

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0


Diversified Compassionate

Judging

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



Judging

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0

Empowered Intuitive Decision Making

Flexible Partnered Sensing

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0

Conscious Participative RelativityDiversified emergent


+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0

Total average positive product impact on Being

Total average negative product impact on Being

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

FIXCO TEAM (Pre-transition) directional predictor variables (values) product impact (behaviour as a response)

(scores reflect zero quantum entangled individuation – utilising Maslow motivational scores)

///////////

/////////

///

//////

-8.2

-1.7

-6.4

///

-21

-21

+6

-15

-12.75

+9

+9

+9

+9

+9

-1.4

FIXCO TEAM (Pre-transition) Total average directional predictor impact (product) of value motivators on Being (Total

holistic self)(scores reflect zero quantum entangled individuation – utilising Maslow motivational scores)

+10.8

Figure 6.10: Pre-transition directional predictor variables (values) impact (product) on

behaviour constructs (Maslow values pre-quantum individuation) (Implats: FIXCO)

• Implats pre-transition (FIXCO) scoring as per QLQ (including quantum

individuated entanglement) (Refer to Figure 6.11):

o Graphic analysis indicates the following parameters (Refer to the QLM in Chapter

4, Section 4.2.6).

Includes quantum individuated values being applied and is scored using the

Einsteinian-Quantum values scores as garnered from the QLQ:

Quantum entanglement constructs (Einsteinian-Quantum scoring).

Includes an additional +21 from due to quantum individuation (peak experiences)

see Figure 4.7 in Chapter 4:

- Focused multi-dimensional introverted re-contextualisation: +30

285

- Collaborative explorative perception: +30

- Empowered intuitive decision making: +30

- Conscious participative relativity: +30

o Juxtaposed constructs

- Extroverted bounded instability: +6

- Diversified compassionate judging: -21

- Flexible partnered sensing: -21

- Diversified emergent creative thinking: -15

Scoring from the QLQ is applied (including quantum entanglement value scores) as

per table 6.24. The product impact of predictor variables (Maslow motivational

values) across juxtaposed constructs is indicated graphically on the bar graphs in

Figure. 6.11. The total average product is shown at the bottom of Figure. 6.11 This is

an indicator of the holistic ‘being’ directional motivation (+8.1) to which behaviour is a

response.

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



Judging

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



Judging

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

FIXCO TEAM (Pre-transition) directional predictor variables (values) product impact (behaviour as a response)(scores reflect quantum entangled individuation and impact on juxtaposed behavioural constructs – utilising Einsteinian-

Quantum value scores for quantum entangled behaviour and impact on Maslow motivational scores for juxtaposed behaviours)

////////////////

//////

//////

+5.8

+5.8

////////+8.1

//////

-21

-21

+6

-15

-12.75

+30

+30

+30

+30

+30

FIXCO TEAM (Pre-transition) Total average directional predictor impact (product) of value motivators on Being (Total holistic self)

(scores reflect quantum entangled individuation and impact on juxtaposed behavioural constructs – utilising Einsteinian-Quantum value scores for quantum entangled behaviour and impact on Maslow motivational scores for juxtaposed behaviours)

+6.0

+14.8

Figure 6.11: Pre-transition directional predictor variables (values) impact (product) on

behaviour constructs (scoring utilises Einsteinian-Quantum values as per quantum

individuation) (Implats: FIXCO)

286

• Graphic analysis of the Implats pre-transition (FIXCO) quantum leadership shift

effect (Figure 6.12):

In Figure 6.11, the quantum leadership shift is indicated as the

difference between the average total product between constructs for

pre-quantum entangled individuation and post-quantum entangled

individuation. The difference indicates a total shift of -681.72%.

0

Total average positive product impact on Being (Maslow ’ s positive values)


(Maslow motivational values)

+30+25 +20+15+10+5 -5- 10 - 15 - 20 -25 - 30 0

Total average positive product impact on Being (Maslow ’ s positive values)


(Maslow motivational values)

+30+25 +20+15+10+5 -5- 10 - 15 - 20 -25 - 30

//- 1.4

-12.75 +9

0

Total average positive product impact on Being through Quantum entanglement (Einsteinian- Quantum values as predictor variables)

Total average negative product impact on

Being (after Quantum entangled (Einsteinian-

Quantum values) are aligned to offset

juxtaposed negative Maslow motivational

values)

+30+25+20 +15+10 +5-5-10 - 15 -20 - 25 - 30 0

Total average positive product impact on Being through Quantum entanglement (Einsteinian- Quantum values as predictor variables)


Being (after Quantum entangled (Einsteinian-

Quantum values) are aligned to offset

juxtaposed negative Maslow motivational

values)

+30+25+20 +15+10 +5-5-10 - 15 -20 - 25 - 30

////////+8.1

- 12.75 +30

FIXCO TEAM (Pre - transition) directional predictor variables (values) product impact (behaviour as a response)Quantum shift in behaviour once Quantum entangled individuation is enabled

Total average negative product impact on being (prior to

Quantum entanglement) = -1.4

Total average positive product impact on Being through Quantum entanglement (Einsteinian -Quantum values as predictor variables) = +8.1

Total average quantum leadership shift effect on being = 681.72%

Figure 6.12: Pre-transition quantum leadership shift effect (Implats: FIXCO)

Quantum leadership shift differences on sub-teams:

• Analysis of professional administrative executives within FIXCO (Table 6.25):

Analysis of professional administrative executives (prof execs) indicated an

average shift across all constructs of +9.3, from an average position of -1.8

when Maslow’s values were applied to an average score of 7.5 after the

Einsteinian-Quantum values (due to quantum individuation) were applied to

the juxtaposed constructs. The overall average quantum leadership shift

impact (pre-transition) due to Quantum individuation for the prof. execs is

determined to be -509.12%. The negative indicator shows a shift from a

negative position.

287

TABLE 6.25: PRE-TRANSITION QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT ON PROF EXECS (IMPLATS)

• Analysis of operational executives within FIXCO (Table 6.26):

Analysis of operational (ops execs) indicated an average shift across all

constructs of +9.5 from an average position of -1.1 when Maslow’s values were

applied to an average score of +8.5 after the Einsteinian-Quantum values (due to

quantum individuation) were applied to the juxtaposed constructs.

The overall average quantum leadership shift impact (pre-transition) due to

quantum individuation for the ops execs is determined to be -907.74%. The

negative indicator shows a shift from a negative position.

TABLE 6.26: PRE-TRANSITION QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT ON OPS EXECS (IMPLATS)




Quantuvalues applied after Quantum entanglement


multiplierQuantum leadership

shift effect





Average -1.8 7.5 9.3 -509.12%



Pre-transition (Total Average Professional administrative xecutives scores)Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership

Questionnaire (QLQ) © - Behavioural Constructs







shift effect





Average -1.1 8.5 9.5 -907.74%



Pre-transition (Total Average Operational executives scores)Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership


288

(iii) Quantum leadership shift effect after organisational transition at Implats:

Quantum leadership shift differences on FIXCO team at Implats (Table 6.27):

A total differential average shift of -702.16% is indicated by the analysis, across all

cases post-transition. The negative shift is indicative of a turnaround shift from an

average of -1.6 to a positive of +9.4 when the Einsteinian-Quantum values (due to

quantum individuation) are applied to these constructs. (View full analysis by

individual construct in Annexure 3, 4, 5)

TABLE 6.27: POST-TRANSITION QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT ON FIXCO TEAM (IMPLATS)







multiplier


effect





Average -1.6 9.4 11.0 -702.16%



Post-transition (Total Average Fixco scores)Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership


289

Post-transition predictive analysis across constructs (Figure 6.12):

Scatter plot diagram (Figure. 6.12) using scores from the QLQ scores from post-

transition tables and shows a positive directional predictive influence between

variables within the constructs of the QLM. The slope of the positive linearity is

steeper than the pre-transition slope (including quantum individuated scoring), and is

consistent to the increase in Quantum question scores (science, models, values and

behavioural control variables) versus the pre-transition scores.

Scatter Plot of After transition scores accross all QLM contructs

-25.00

-20.00

-15.00

-10.00

-5.00

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

-20.00 -15.00 -10.00 -5.00 0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00

Case 3 Case 5 Case 7 Case 2 Case 4 Case 6

Figure 6.13: Post-transition: Scatter plot predictive analysis diagram - QLM constructs

(Implats)

Graphic (descriptive) analysis of quantum leadership shift effect

• Implats post-transition (FIXCO) scoring as per QLQ (excluding quantum

individuation):

Scoring from the QLQ is applied as per table 6.27. The product impact of

predictor variables (Maslow motivational values) across juxtaposed constructs is

indicated graphically on the bar graphs in Figure. 6.14. The total average product

is shown at the bottom of Figure. 6.14. This is an indicator of the holistic ‘being’

directional motivation (-1.6) to which behaviour is a response.

290

Figure 6.14: Post-transition directional predictor variables (values) impact (product)

on behaviour constructs (Maslow values pre-quantum entanglement) (Implats:

FIXCO)

• Implats post-transition (FIXCO) scoring as per QLQ (including quantum

individuation) (Figure 6.11):

Graphic analysis indicates the following parameters (as per the QLM in Chapter

4, Section 4.27). Includes quantum individuated values being applied and is

scored using the Einsteinian-Quantum values scores as garnered from the

QLQ.

Scoring from the QLQ is applied (including quantum entanglement scores) as

per table 6.24. The product impact of predictor variables (Maslow motivational

values) across juxtaposed constructs is indicated graphically on the bar graphs

in Figure. 6.15. The total average product is shown at the bottom of Figure. 6.15

This is an indicator of the holistic ‘being’ directional motivation (+9.4) to which

behaviour is a response.

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



Judging

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



Judging

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

FIXCO TEAM (Post-transition) directional predictor variables (values) product impact (behaviour as a response)(scores reflect zero quantum entangled individuation – utilising Maslow motivational scores)

/////////////

//////////

/

/////////

+12.4

-9.5

-1.2

-8

///

-1.6

-21

-21

+6

-15

-12.75

+9

+9

+9

+9

+9

FIXCO TEAM (Post-transition) Total average directional predictor impact (product) of value motivators on Being (Total holistic self)

(scores reflect zero quantum entangled individuation – utilising Maslow motivational scores)

291

Figure 6.15: Post-transition directional predictor variables (values) impact (product)

on behaviour constructs (scoring utilises Einsteinian-Quantum values as per

quantum entangled individuation) (Implats: FIXCO)

• Graphic analysis of the Implats pre-transition (FIXCO) quantum leadership shift

effect (Figure 6.16):

In Figure 6.16, the quantum leadership shift is indicated as the difference

between the average total product between constructs for pre-quantum

individuation and post-quantum individuation. The difference indicates a total shift

of -702.16%. The negative indicator reflects a shift from a negative position.

0

Total average positive product impact on Being (Maslow’s positive motivational values)


(Maslow negative motivational values)

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0

Total average positive product impact on Being (Maslow’s positive motivational values)


(Maslow negative motivational values)

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

///-1.6

+3.1

-12.75 +9

0

Total average positive product impact on Being through Quantum entanglement (Einsteinian-Quantum values as predictor variables)


Being (after Quantum entangled

(Einsteinian-Quantum values) are aligned to

offset juxtaposed negative Maslow

motivational values)

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0

Total average positive product impact on Being through Quantum entanglement (Einsteinian-Quantum values as predictor variables)


Being (after Quantum entangled

(Einsteinian-Quantum values) are aligned to

offset juxtaposed negative Maslow

motivational values)

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

/////////////+9.4

-12.75 +30

FIXCO TEAM (Post-transition) directional predictor variables (values) product impact (behaviour as a response)Quantum shift in behaviour once Quantum entangled individuation is enabled

Total average negative product impact on being (prior to

Quantum entanglement) = -1.6

Total average positive product impact on Being through Quantum entanglement (Einsteinian-Quantum values as predictor variables) = +9.4

Total average quantum leadership shift effect on being = 702.16% Figure 6.16: Post-transition quantum leadership shift effect (Implats: FIXCO)

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



Judging

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



Judging

+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30 0



+30+25+20+15+10+5-5-10-15-20-25-30

FIXCO TEAM (Post-transition) directional predictor variables (values) product impact (behaviour as a response)(scores reflect quantum entangled individuation and impact on juxtaposed behavioural constructs – utilising Einsteinian-

Quantum value scores for quantum entangled behaviour and impact on Maslow motivational scores for juxtaposed behaviours)

/////////////////////

/////////

////////

+17

+6.8

+6.8

/////////////+9.4

////////////

-21

-21

+6

-15

-12.75

+30

+30

+30

+30

+30

FIXCO TEAM (Post-transition) Total average directional predictor impact (product) of value motivators on Being (Total holistic self)

(scores reflect quantum entangled individuation and impact on juxtaposed behavioural constructs – utilising Einsteinian-Quantum value scores for quantum entangled behaviour and impact on Maslow motivational scores for juxtaposed behaviours)

+8.5

292

Quantum leadership shift effect on sub-teams within FIXCO

• Analysis of professional administrative executives within FIXCO (Table 6.28):

Analysis of professional administrative executives (prof execs) indicated an

average shift across all constructs of +10.6, from an average position of -2.6

when Maslow’s values were applied to an average score of +8.0 after the

Einsteinian-Quantum values (due to quantum individuation) were applied to the

juxtaposed constructs.

The overall average quantum leadership shift impact (post-transition) for the prof.

execs is determined to be -409.97%. The negative indicator reflects a shift from a

negative position.

TABLE 6.28: POST-TRANSITION QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT ON OPS EXECS (IMPLATS)








shift effect





Average -2.6 8.0 10.6 -409.97%



Post-transition (Total Average Professional administrative executives scores)Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership


• Analysis of operational executives within FIXCO (Table 6.29):

Analysis of operational (ops execs) indicated an average shift across all

constructs of +11.3 from an average position of -0.8 when Maslow’s values were

applied to an average score of +10.5 after the Einsteinian-Quantum values (due

to quantum individuation) were applied to the juxtaposed constructs.

293

The overall average quantum leadership shift impact (post-transition) due to

Quantum individuation for the ops execs is determined to be -1412.11%. The

negative indicator reflects a shift from a negative position.

TABLE 6.29: POST-TRANSITION QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT ON OPS EXECS (IMPLATS)




Quantum values applied after Quantum

entanglement



shift effect





Average -0.8 10.5 11.3 -1412.11%



Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership Questionnaire (QLQ) © - Behavioural Constructs Post-transition (Total Average Operational executives scores)

(iv) Quantum leadership shift effect comparison analysis of before and after

organisational transition at Implats:

Differential descriptive analysis of the Implats pre-transition (FIXCO) quantum

leadership shift effect (Table 6.24) vs. the Implats post transition (FIXCO) quantum

leadership effect (Table. 6.27):

The difference between data from Table 6.24 and Table 6.27 is shown in Table 6.30.

This analysis shows the difference in pre-transition versus post-transition quantum

leadership shift effects. The shift is indicated for the FIXCO team, the prof execs

within the FIXCO team as well as the ops execs within the FIXCO team at Implats.

• Total FIXCO team:

Average difference across all constructs (holistic being) equals to +0.5, which

represents a 17.12% positive quantum leadership shift effect from a pre-transition

to a post-transition in behaviour.

294

• Professional administrative executives within the FIXCO team:




• Operational executives within the FIXCO team:




TABLE 6.30: PRE-TRANSITION VS. POST-TRANSITION QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT (IMPLATS)

Diff. Pre vs. Post-transition (Total Average Fixco

scores)

Diff. Pre vs. Post-transition (Total Average Prof. Exec.

scores)

Diff. Pre vs. Post-transition (Total Average Ops. Exec.

scores)



Diff. (Pre vs. Post transition)Quantuvalues applied after Quantum

entanglement


entanglement


entanglement

Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation & Extroverted bounded instability 2.3 0.8 3.4Collaborative Explorative Perception &

Diversified Compassionate Judging 1.0 0.4 1.4

Empowered Intuitive Decision Making & Flexible Partnered Sensing 1.0 0.4 1.4

Conscious Participative Relativity &Diversified emergent creative thinking (incl. Belonging) 1.2 0.5 1.8Total 5.5 2.1 8.1

Average 1.4 0.5 2.0

Total differenceQuantum leadership shift effect (Total diff) 17.12% 7.10% 23.77%

Average differenceQuantum leadership shift effect (Ave. diff) 17.12% 7.10% 23.77%

Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership Questionnaire (QLQ) © - Behavioural Constructs

6.4. Analysis of Impact of the Quantum leadership model on organisational

outcomes (examples) (as per Chapter 4, Section 4.2.7)

Organisational outcomes as linked to the shift in paradigm as associated with the

quantum entangled dimension of the QLM and the positive impact that this has on

the responsive behavioural constructs in the QLM and especially on the directional

predictive impact that this change has on the juxtaposed behavioural responses to

the Einsteinian-Quantum values.

295

These behaviours have an impact on organisational outcomes as pre-supposed in

the paradigm shift model (Refer to Figure 5.7, Chapter5). These outcomes as linked

to the QLM behavioural constructs (Refer to Section 4.2.4.3, Chapter 4) as follows in

Table 6.31:

TABLE 6.31: ORGANISATIONAL OUTCOMES AS LINKED TO QLM BEHAVIOURAL CONSTRUCTS

Org. /

Capital

outcomes

Quantum

entangled

Behavioural

constructs

Org. model &

directed

outcome

Juxtaposed

behavioural

constructs

(Einsteinian-

Quantum values

applied)

Org. model &

directed outcome

Vision

(Spiritual

Capital)

Collaborative

(inclusive)

explorative

perceptive:

conscious

visionary

- Empowered

decision-making

relationships

- Cross-boundary

processes

infused with

information

Diversified,

compassionate

judging: conscious

organisational

change evolution

-Central identity of

meaning

-Change through self-

organising

-Value adding

processes controlled

and improved

Strategy

(Spiritual

Capital)

Focused multi-

dimensional

Introverted re-

contextualisatio

n: conscious

solution finding

- Empowered

decision-making

relationships

- Cross-boundary

processes

infused with

information

Extroverted

bounded instability:

conscious cross-

boundary

organisational

design

- Conscious design of

systems (strategy,

structure, reward)

- Conscious participant

in self-designing

processes

- Internal commitment

and knowledge growth

- mindfulness /

synchronicity

Structural

planning

and design

(Material

Capital)

Conscious

participative

relativity:

conscious

structural

- Empowered

decision-making

relationships

- Cross-boundary

processes

infused with

Emergent creative

thinking: conscious

multi-dimensional

analysis

- Consciously

empowered multi-

dimensional flexible

analysis systems

- Conscious participant

in self-designing

296

information processes

Execution

(Social

Capital)

Empowered

intuitive

decision-

making:

conscious

strategic

- Empowered

decision-making

relationships

- Cross-boundary

processes

infused with

information

Flexible, partnered

sensing: conscious

collaborative

implementation

-Central identity of

meaning

-Change through self-

organising

-Value adding

processes controlled

and improved

6.4.1. Recontextualisation of examples into capital outcomes

The researcher has re-contextualised the organisational examples as per Table

6.31, into the impacted capital outcomes as suggested by Zohar and Marshall (2001,

2003). The researcher uses this context to investigate through quantitative and

qualitative analysis the outcomes at Impala Platinum Ltd, through the period of

transition, by way of qualitative contextualised content analysis of their Annual

reports, quantitative Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) data and one-on-one

interviews conducted with the executive team responsible for the change.

6.4.1.1. Analysis of spiritual capital as related to vision and strategy (SQ):

Examples of spiritual capital in the form of conscious visioning, organisational

change evolution, conscious solution finding and conscious cross-boundary

organisational design (refer to Table 6.31 for links to behavioural constructs) is

analysed through written information in the company’s annual reports and verbatims’

from the qualitative interview process.

Spiritual capital is defined as:

‘..the wealth that helps to make the future of humanity sustainable as well as wealth

that sustains and nourishes the human spirit. It is reflected in what a company or

organisation believes in, what a company or organisation exists for, what it aspires

too, (and) what it takes responsibility for’ (Zohar and Marshall, 2004, p. 28).

297

(i) Vision (SQ)


compassionate judging behaviour allows for conscious visioning (empowered

decision-making relationships and cross-boundary processes infused with

information) in context to an organisation that is conscious of the organisational

change evolution (central identity of meaning, change through self-organising and

value adding processes controlled and improved) that needs to occur to remain

competitive in a complex environment, taking into account all stakeholders.

Question applied:

Did Implats use empowered decision making relationships, and cross-boundary

processes and related information to re-establish a vision around a central identity of

meaning allowing for self-organised change?

Analysis - Vision, mission, and business objectives

Prior to 1997 Implats never had a stated vision for the organisation. Within their

mission statement, they had several statements that covered: business objectives

(primary and secondary) and company values (These did not change through the

period under review):

TABLE 6.32: IMPLATS MISSION STATEMENT (1996 – 2001)

Mission Details Measures Business Implats is in the business of mining,

beneficiating and marketing platinum group metals (PGM), nickel and copper. We also engage in downstream secondary sourcing where our core competencies bring us a competitive advantage.

Primary objective

Increase wealth of shareholders Share price and dividends

Secondary objectives

1. Continuous improvement in operational efficiencies to become the lowest PGM cost producer

1.1 Cost per Kg PGM matte from smelter

1.2 Cost per ounce of refined platinum

298

1.3 Sales discounts and marketing costs

2. Start, acquire, develop and exit

businesses 3. Cover against the replacement of

wasting assets 4. Address the interests of stakeholders 5. Generate public income

6. Monitor and control against the margin earned

7. Competitive advantage through beneficiation technology

8. Deliver products of quality Sound dividend policy

9. Operate and manage at appropriate liquidity and gearing ratios

10. Reward which is directly recognises contribution to primary objective

Economic Value Add (EVA)

Values 1. Act with integrity in all our transactions 2. Be sensitive to the environment and

play and active role in conservation 3. Encourage our employees to realise

their potential through development, education and training

4. Remove discrimination 5. Practice affirmative action 6. Assist employees who wish too, to live

with their families 7. Respect and promote the safety and

health of all

During 1997, an operational vision of ‘One Team – One Vision’ was introduced to

focus strategy throughout the company on a central tenet of meaning related to

change from the inside out. This was a move away from pure technical, financial and

structural change implemented top-down, to one of engaging the workforce into a

common vision, in an attempt to re-create the company, from the bottom up.

McMahon the, CEO during the 6 year ‘saving’ or technical restructuring phase, in the

1997 annual report is quoted as follows:

‘Over the past 6 year impala has carried through a technical revolution that has

mechanised underground operations, improved recoveries at the concentrator and

the smelter, and upgraded and modernised the refinery. This process has reduced

the total complement from 46,000 to 31,000 and delivered industry record

underground efficiencies, company record metallurgical efficiencies and lower costs.

299

Nevertheless the retrenchment process has harmed employee relations, and the

excellent overall improvement masks inconsistent individual, team and shaft

performances. In a new initiative, designed to identify and transfer 'best practice'

across the property, and to generate a next generation of improvements, a process

of engaging the whole workforce under the banner of 'One team - One vision', was

launched in December’ (McMahon, 1997, pp. 6:7).

The ‘One Team – One Vision’ initiative had a vision to:

- Deliver cost initiatives resulting in a real reduction in unit costs over a five

year planning period

- Deliver a capital efficient and affordable mining plan at a minimum production

level of 1,0 million ounces of platinum pa, and

- Unlocking the potential of Implats’ people

(ii) Strategy (SQ)


extroverted bounded instability behaviour allows for conscious solution finding

(empowered decision-making relationships and cross-boundary processes infused

with information) within a conscious cross-boundary organisational design

(conscious design of systems (strategy, structure, reward), conscious participant in

self-designing processes, internal commitment to knowledge growth, mindfulness /

synchronicity) leading to innovation throughout the integrated organisation between

all stakeholders.

Question applied


processes and related information to consciously design systems (strategy,

structure, reward) and through this strategy did they include the participation of the

organisation in self-designing processes, gain commitment by the organisation to

knowledge and growth and create a conscious mindful connectivity through the

network in the organisation leading to integrated innovation?

300

Analysis

Prior to 1997, the strategy behind the technical and commercial turnaround had

delivered on the following strategic elements (McMahon, 1998):

- Marketing and contractual disadvantages were eliminated

- Underground mining methodology was changed

- Sub-declines were started as a more capital efficient access to ore

reserves

- UG2 and Merensky shaft processing was separated

- Concentrator and smelter technology was updated

- Refinery and particularly rhodium recoveries were optimised

- Implats became the second largest recycler of spent automobile catalysts

in the world

- The most progressive industrial relations in the industry was developed

- Total staffing reduced by one third - while maintaining the same

production levels

However, this technical and commercial turnaround (1990 to 1997) did not generate

sufficient impetuous to make a radical change in the organisational outcomes. It was

sufficient to save the organisation and to technically stabilise it to a point where

Implats was delivering according to an accepted rate of return, yet it was

haemorrhaging internally. To the credit of McMahon, then Chairman and CEO he

changed the strategic direction of the organisation to focus on the people in an

attempt to re-build. He (McMahon) stated in the 1998 annual report that, ‘..a

recognition that the benefits of these changes, however substantial, were insufficient

to insulate the company from steadily weakening market conditions, generated a

second phase (One Team-One Vision), aimed at accessing the knowledge and skills

buried in the organisation’ (McMahon, 1998, p. 4).

To support the vision of ‘One Team - One Vision’, Implats implemented a number of

strategic changes.

Firstly, the organisational change started with a restructure in the executive suite, to

ensure that the leadership was positioned to execute the change required:

301

‘In December the roles of Chairman and Managing Director, which previously I had

held, were separated, and Mr. Steve Kearney, Consulting Engineer Operations,

and the man responsible for the modernisation of the Mines and of Mineral

Processes was appointed as Managing Director (referred to as CEO in later annual

reports). Mr Kearney's demonstrated leadership qualities will now be applied

across the full spectrum of our business’ (McMahon, 1997, p. 9)

This new initiative required a new style of leadership and it needed someone who

knew how to unlock the potential of Implats’ people. Markus (2008) stated that,

‘Steve (Kearney) had the keys to unlock the relationships between all stakeholders.

Michael (McMahon) also had the keys… just didn’t know how to put them in the lock.

Michael (McMahon) and Vivienne Mennell took Implats to the place of survival. But

the next phase of the turnaround strategy required ‘..getting the best out of

people…(which) was what Steve was about. Not a manipulation, but really just

genuinely how he was. Others genuinely wanted to help him. The ability to draw that

(the best) out of people was his secret sauce, not that he had worked it out, that’s

just how he was’ (Markus, 2008).

Secondly, a committee known as FIXCO was established to ‘unlock the potential of

our people' (McMahon, p. 4, 1998), and during the 1998 annual reporting time frame

delivered on the following strategic objectives (McMahon, 1998, p. 4):

- Accelerated the roll out of best mining practice across the property

- Delivered the most efficient underground hard rock mine in the country

(South Africa)

- Improved concentrator recoveries

- Improved smelter throughput

- Turned Implats into a major toll smelter and refiner for outside parties

- Faultlessly commissioned a new technology precious metals refinery

- Reduced staff to 55% of the 1990 levels

- Increased production for two years in a row

- Contained costs below inflation, over a six year period.

- Dramatically improved our competitive position

302

`FIXCO started with ‘..interviews conducted at all levels of the company right down

to `miners’ (Paton, 2008), this lead to a ‘..bottom-up approach to rationalisation and

consolidation from teams. It didn’t come from Kearney (CEO) and McMahon

(Chairman)’

Furthermore McMahon (p. 4, 1998) sates that, ‘…this process, which is far from

complete, has delivered a company robust enough to weather the troughs in our

markets, and positioned such that any strength in the market flows straight through

to the bottom line - as we have just seen this year.’ From a people perspective as

aligned to outcomes, Kearney, who became CEO in 1997 commented (1997, p. 23)

that, ‘..the operational vision and new management structures have revitalised our

employees and created a sense of purpose and direction. Together with the

identified working cost initiatives, increased volumes from the mines and our capital

efficient incline systems, the company is strongly positioned to benefit from improved

metal prices and further increased earnings.’

To support the steady progress of FIXCO, post 1997, in the 1998 annual report after

FIXCO had been running for more than a year, Kearney reported, ‘..the response (to

One Team-One Vision) has been a 9.7% increase in overall productivity (square

metre per man per total man months) and a 5% increase in platinum production. The

improved volumes helped contain the overall increase in Rand costs per ounce of

refined platinum to 4%. We now lead the industry in mining productivity, smelter

performance and refining technology’ (1998, p. 9) and that ‘the participation

process…has allowed all employees to take ownership of the goals’ (1998, p. 31).

Furthermore, Kearney (1998, p. 31) stated ‘..along with continued operational focus,

management has identified a number of initiatives which have potential for

leveraging our core competencies (e.g. people management, smelting and refining)

to generate growth for the company’. This is supported by a statement in the annual

report where Kearney (1998) states that a suggestion scheme yielded 1400 ideas, of

which 575 were accepted and 200 implemented, which resulted in a twenty million

Rand saving for the year. These statements indicate a shift in strategic priorities

within the organisation away from pure technical change, towards the priority of

bottom-up change through empowering people at all levels within the organisation.

Gilmour (2008), supports this in saying that he initially felt that ‘..the majority of the

303

mining industry was about technology, but I found that it didn’t matter if we had all

the technology, without people we had nothing’.

6.4.1.2. Analysis of material capital as related to structural planning and

design (IQ)

Examples of material capital flows in the form of conscious structural and conscious

multi-dimensional analysis (refer to Table 6.31 for links to behavioural constructs) is

initially analysed through the filtering approach as applied in the purposive sampling

technique (refer to Section 5.3.4.6, Chapter 5), which pointed to Impala platinum Ltd

as the company of choice over a 30 year period, through share price performance.

These material capital flows are further supported by financial analysis taken from

the published annual reports during the period of transition.

Material capital is defined as: capital measured in money (Zohar and Marshall, 2004)

Structural planning and design an outcome of conscious participative relativity

behaviour combined with diversified emergent creative thinking behaviour allows for

the design of conscious structural (empowered decision-making relationships and

cross-boundary processes infused with information) impacts on the holistic


conscious multi-dimensional analysis (consciously empowered multi-dimensional

flexible analysis systems and conscious participant in self-designing processes)

Question applied:


processes and related information to design empowered multi-dimensional flexible

analysis systems and did they include all organisational participants to re-design

processes for measurement? i.e. does the change in metrics applied reflect directly

on the bottom line, and were all employees party to the selection of these metrics

and the processes used for measurement?

304

Analysis

• Financial reporting analysis

From 1997 (post introduction of FIXCO), the financial analysis indicates a positive

change and cost of sales indicates a steady decrease (refer to Table 6.33). Post

1999, another shift is evident in the financial results reported, indicating a larger rate

change in turnover, operational income, and attributable income against a steady

cost of sales figure (refer to Figure 6.17). The financial results are reflective of new

metrics applied across the organisation in 1998. Paton (2008) stated that this was a

fundamental shift in thinking, ‘..our FIXCO intervention lead to finance and budgets

being looked at on a weekly basis, to ensure that needs were being met, this was a

move away from last month actuals equals next month’s budget’.

TABLE 6.33: FINANCIAL REPORTING (IMPLATS 1995-2001)

Financial data (USD 000's)

Impala Platinum Ltd 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Turnover 679 630 618 682 757 1,108 1,573Cost of sales 563 574 528 528 491 617 673

INCOME FROM METALS MINED 116 56 90 154 266 491 900Royalties -7 -3 -1 -19 -39 -64 -117 Insurance claims 8OPERATING INCOME FROM

PLATINUM MINING 109 61 89 135 227 427 783Income from 3rd party refining 1 2 2 3 0 0 0Other income / (expenses) 1 -3 -1 -2 2 10 12Net Financial income (+other) 1 5 0 9 34 36 50Share of net income from associates 13 9 5 11 34 53 136INCOME BEFORE TAXATION 125 74 95 157 297 526 981Tax 52 22 25 67 88 168 370Outsider shareholder interest -0 0 -0 -1 1 0 1ATTRIBUTABLE INCOME 73 52 71 90 208 358 611

305

Financials - Impala Platinum Ltd

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

1,400

1,600

1,800

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Year

US

D (000's

)Turnover

Cost of sales

INCOME FROMMETALS MINED

OPERATINGINCOME FROMPLATINUM MININGINCOME BEFORETAXATION

ATTRIBUTABLEINCOME

Figure 6.17: Graphic analysis of financial reporting (Implats 2005-2001)

During 1998 new operational metrics were adjusted and retro-actively applied to the

measures within Implats. These measures were made transparent across all mining

operations and to the entire workforce, which was a first in the mining industry.

These metrics were simple to understand and easy to measure. These new

measures included: m² per stoping employee and Tonnes per employee. The

metrics associated (refer to Table 6.33) are indicative of an increase across all

measures, unfortunately this was against an increase in mine fatalities.

TABLE 6.33: OPERATIONAL METRICS APPLIED - IMPLATS

Operational metrics

Impala Platinum Ltd 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Tonnes milled ex mine 13,703 13,475 13,775 14,509 14,638 14,662 14,840SafetyFatality accident rate (per mio man hrs) 0.10 0.18 0.14 0.20 0.09 0.09 0.16Lost time Injury Frequ rate (per mio man hrs) 27 29 21 21 11 13 9m2 per stoping employee 32 34 36 40 41 40 41no of employees 33,100 31,100 31,000 29,500 28,700 28,300 28,000Tonnes per employee 41 42 44 48 51 51 53

Graphic analysis of these descriptive statistics indicate a sharp increase in tonnes

milled (1997) and then again another increase although at a lesser gradient in 1999

(refer to Figure 6.18). At the same time metres stoped per employee also increased

sharply from 1996 and plateaued beyond 1999 (refer Figure 6.19). This against a

306

backdrop of decreased employee numbers from 1996 onwards (refer Figure 6.20)

resulting in an increase in tonnes per employee (refer to Figure 6.21) which indicates

a gradual increase from 1996 onwards and then trends toward a plateau post 1999.

Tonnes milled ex mine - Impala Platinum Ltd

12,500

13,000

13,500

14,000

14,500

15,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Tonnes s

Figure 6.18: Tonnage milled ex mine p/m (Implats 1995–2001)

Meters (m2) stoped per employee p/m - Impala Platinum Ltd

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Metr

es

Figure 6.19: m² stoped per employee p/m (Implats 1995-2001)

No of emplyees - Impala Platinum Ltd

25,000

26,000

27,000

28,000

29,000

30,000

31,000

32,000

33,000

34,000

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Num

ber

Figure 6.20: No. of employees pa (Implats 1995-2001)

Tonnes per employee - Impala Platinum Ltd

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001

Tonnes

Figure 6.21: Tonnes per employee pa (1995-2001)

• Share price analysis

Share price analysis is an indication of market perception with regards to future

outcomes / examples of organisational performance. Results in the market as

perceived through the share price index, show a shift in market perception over the

30 year history (1974 to 2005) – data obtained from the Johannesburg Stock

Exchange (JSE).

Implats’ nearest competitor, Anglo Platinum (Angloplats) was strongly viewed by the

platinum mining sub-sector as the benchmark due to its enormous funding which

allowed it to ride out market anomalies. This is indicated in share price movements

over the period under review (December 1974 to December 2001), where Angloplats

(except for short period between 1995 and 1996) was valued at a higher share price

307

than Implats, until midway through 1999 where Implats’ share price increased

beyond Angloplats.

In the graphic analysis in Figures 6.22 (JSE Listed companies share price % above

All share average), 6.23 (Mining sector share price) and 6.24 (Mining companies

share price % above sector and sub-sector average share price), it is indicated

through the periods when phase one of the turnaround started and ended (technical

and commercial) between 1990 and 1996 to 2001, that the share price of Implats

remained flat. The analysis of financial and market metrics support this price point in

phase one of the strategy (technical and commercial change), as being a stabilising

impact for Implats, which saved it from bankruptcy. The data however indicate that it

is through the midpoint of the phase two, ‘One Team-One Vision’ cultural change

strategy that Implats share price passed Angloplats (1998). In addition the data

again point to phase two of the strategy (cultural change) which through unlocking of

the potential of the people within Implats, re-established a new working practice and

structured the organisation into innovating across all functions, and thus achieving

the record breaking metrics as per the annual report analysis discussed.

Furthermore, the data indicate and as shown in the graphic analysis (market

conditions being equal), the impact of the phase two cultural change at Implats was

strong enough to not only to sustain the growth beyond Angloplats, but to increase

the distance in market perception (in future potential earnings) as indicated through

the share price differential between Angloplats, up to and including 2005 as the final

period under review.

308

Figure 6.22: JSE Listed companies share price % above All share average (1974 - 2005)

Mining Sector JSE Main Board

(Dec 1974 - Dec 2005)

0

10000

20000

30000

40000

50000

60000

70000

80000

90000

Dec

-74

Dec

-75

Dec

-76

Dec

-77

Dec

-78

Dec

-79

Dec

-80

Dec

-81

Dec

-82

Dec

-83

Dec

-84

Dec

-85

Dec

-86

Dec

-87

Dec

-88

Dec

-89

Dec

-90

Dec

-91

Dec

-92

Dec

-93

Dec

-94

Dec

-95

Dec

-96

Dec

-97

Dec

-98

Dec

-99

Dec

-00

Dec

-01

Dec

-02

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05


Share

valu

e (ZA

R)

MINING (QMIN)HWANGE COLLIERY CO LTD (HWA)

AFGEM LIMITED (AFG)DIAMOND CORE RESOURCES LIMITED (DMR)GOOD HOPE DIAMOND MINES (KIMBERLY) (GDH)TAWANA RESOURCES LIMITED (TAW)TAWANA RESOURCES LIMITED OPTIONS (TAWO)THABEX EXPLORATION LIMITED (TBX)TRANS HEX GROUP LIMITED (TSX)

AFRICAN RAINBOW MINERALS LTD (ARI)ANGLO AMERICAN PLC (AGL)ASSORE LIMITED (ASR)BHP BILLITON PLC (BIL)KELGRAN AFRICA (KLG)KUMBA RESOURCES LIMITED (KMB)MATODZI RESOURCES LIMITED (MTZ)MERAFE RESOURCES LIMITED (MRF)METOREX LIMITED (MTX)MIRANDA MINERALS HOLDINGS LTD (MMH)MVELAPHANDA RESOURCES LIMITED (MVL)PETMIN LIMITED (PET)SALLIES LIMITED (SAL)SCHARRIG MINING LIMITED (SCN)SXR URANIUM ONE INC (SXR)

AFLEASE GOLD (AFO)ANGLOGOLD ASHANTI LIMITED (ANG)DRD GOLD LIMITED (DRD)GOLDFIELDS LIMITED (GFI)HALOGEN HOLDINGS SOCIETY ANONYNNE (HAL)HARMONY GOLD MINING COMPANY LIMITED (HAR)JCI LIMITED (JCD)RANDGOLD AND EXPLORATION COMPANY (RNG)SIMMER AND JACK MINES LIMITED (SIM)STILFONTEIN GOLD MINING COMPANY LIMITED (STI)SUB NIGEL GOLD MINING COMPANY LIMITED (SBN)VILLAGE MAIN REEF GOLD MINING COMPANY (1934) LTD (VIL)WESTERN AREAS LIMITED (WAR)

ANGLO PLATINUM (AMS)ANGLO PLATINUM PREFS (AMSP)AQUARIUS PLATINUM LIMITED (AQP)BARPLATS INVESTMENTS LIMITED (BPL)IMPALA PLATINUM HOLDINGS LIMITED (IMP)LONMIN PLC (LON)NORTHAM PLATINUM LIMITED (NHM)

Implats

Angloplats

Phase 1 Phase 2 Ph 2 Impact

Figure 6.23: Mining sector share price (1974 - 2005)

6.1.1.1.

JSE listed companies above All share average (%)

(Dec 1974 - Dec 2005)

0.00%

500.00%

1000.00%

1500.00%

2000.00%

2500.00%

3000.00%

Dec

-74

Dec

-75

Dec

-76

Dec

-77

Dec

-78

Dec

-79

Dec

-80

Dec

-81

Dec

-82

Dec

-83

Dec

-84

Dec

-85

Dec

-86

Dec

-87

Dec

-88

Dec

-89

Dec

-90

Dec

-91

Dec

-92

Dec

-93

Dec

-94

Dec

-95

Dec

-96

Dec

-97

Dec

-98

Dec

-99

Dec

-00

Dec

-01

Dec

-02

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05


% S

hare

s v

s A

ll s

hare

avera

ge

SAPPI LIMITED (SAP)

PALABORA MINING COMPANY LIMITED (PAM)





HARMONY GOLD MINING COMPANY LIMITED (HAR)



LONMIN PLC (LON)

AECI LIMITED (AFE)

METAIR INVESTMENTS LIMITED (MTA)

SABMILLER PLC (SAB)

TIGER BRANDS LIMITED (TBS)

TONGAAT-HULETT GROUP LIMITED (TNT)

NASPERS LIMITED -N (NPN)

ELLERINE HOLDINGS LIMITED (ELH)

ITALTILE LIMITED (ITE)

JD GROUP LIMITED (JDG)

SUN INTERNATIONAL LIMITED (SUI)

ABSA GROUP LIMITED (ASA)

NEDCOR GROUP LIMITED (NED)

STANDARD BANK GROUP LTD (SBK)

INVESTEC LIMITED (INL)

INVESTEC PLC (INP)

SANTAM LIMITED (SNT)

SOUTH AFRICAN EAGLE INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED (SAE)

Implats

Angloplats

Phase 1 Phase 2 Ph 2 Impact

Shift past Angloplats

309

Mining companies above Mining sector average (%)

(Dec 1974 - Dec 2005)

0.00%

100.00%

200.00%

300.00%

400.00%

500.00%

600.00%

700.00%

800.00%

900.00%

1000.00%

1100.00%

1200.00%D

ec-7

4

Dec

-75

Dec

-76

Dec

-77

Dec

-78

Dec

-79

Dec

-80

Dec

-81

Dec

-82

Dec

-83

Dec

-84

Dec

-85

Dec

-86

Dec

-87

Dec

-88

Dec

-89

Dec

-90

Dec

-91

Dec

-92

Dec

-93

Dec

-94

Dec

-95

Dec

-96

Dec

-97

Dec

-98

Dec

-99

Dec

-00

Dec

-01

Dec

-02

Dec

-03

Dec

-04

Dec

-05


Share

% v

s M

inin

g s

ecto

r avera

ge





HARMONY GOLD MINING COMPANYLIMITED (HAR)



LONMIN PLC (LON)

Implats

Angloplats

Phase 1 Phase 2

Ph 2 Impact

Figure 6.24: Mining companies share price % above sector and sub-sector average share

price (1974 – 2005)

6.4.1.3. Analysis of social capital as related to execution (EQ)

Examples of social capital through conscious strategic and conscious collaborative

implementation (refer to Table 6.31 for links to behavioural constructs) is analysed

from written information in the company’s annual reports and supported by

verbatims’ from the qualitative interview process supported within.

Social capital flows as defined by Zohar and Marshall (2004) is the wealth accrued

through the quality of relationships within the organisation:

‘..how well they communicate, much they trust each other and their senior

executives, how they function as teams, whether the emotional intelligence of the

group is high, whether they are effective networks of acquaintance and co-operation.

310

The stress is on interpersonal relationships within the company. It is a feature of the

organisation’s internal culture.’ (Zohar and Marshall, 2004, pp. 26:27).

Execution an outcome of Empowered intuitive decision-making behaviour combined

with flexible, partnered sensing behaviour allows for conscious strategic (empowered


information) implementation through conscious collaboration (central identity of

meaning, change through self-organising and value adding processes controlled and

improved) with all organisational stakeholders.

Question applied:


processes and related information to re-establish a vision, which created a central

identity of meaning, allowing for self-organising value-added processes that are

controlled and continually improved – through communication, trust, teamwork,

networks of acquaintance and cooperation, and interpersonal relationships as part of

the culture?

Analysis

• Communication

Communication prior to 1997, was formal and top-down. An indication is given in the

annual report, by the then Chairman and CEO (McMahon) of the approach to

disseminate information in the following excerpt: ‘..communication with workers is

conducted by worker representative committees…the annual results are directly

communicated to these committees by the Chairman’ (1996, p. 24).

Post 1996, and appointment of a new CEO to lead the cultural change at Implats, the

same section of the annual report reflects a tone and empowerment to lower levels

of the organisation, indicating a transparency and devolution of power: ‘Annual and

interim results are communicated to these committees by senior management’

(1997, p.27).

311

To support the close in gap between the executives and the workforce was

demonstrated when the One Team-One Vision was ‘presented by the Chairman and

the Managing Director to all 31,000 employees through a series of presentations and

feedback sessions’ (Kearney, 1997, p. 27)

In 1998, communication was seen to be key to the growth of change in Implats

through the FIXCO process. Gilmour (2008) states that ‘..there were no rules. I’m a

mining guy, I haven’t read any text books on people or what to do, I did it by gut feel,

intuition. I said to Les (Paton), I think what we need to do is speak to the people. We

did this for six to nine months maybe longer. We split the organisation down the

middle and went and interviewed the people. We would target shift bosses, mine

overseers, shaft managers, general managers, geologists and held a one hour

interview per person. It wasn’t about the typical things we were measuring, it was

about - what can we do to help you? And we went form the top all the way down’.

• Values of: Trust, teamwork and empowerment:

Gilmour (2008) states that before FIXCO and the changes brought about by

McMahon and Kearney from 1997 onwards, ‘Everyone was in their box…and

everyone did there little bit. That was my box, you weren’t really asked to think out of

your box…if I tried to do anything outside of my box, I was slapped down.’

To counter this culture, FIXCO introduced trust and empowerment and teamwork as

fundamentals cornerstones to re-invent their company from within, Kearney (1997, p.

15) stated that ‘..as part of the process (FIXCO), the traditional mine organisational

structure is being challenged and changed, with each shaft being treated as an

operating unit devolving decision making, authority and responsibility to the

appropriate levels. Kearney (1997, p. 15) further states that the achievement of a

joint and combined vision includes, ‘..a call for teamwork and requires cohesive

commitment by all employees to common goals….when viewed against the major

downsizing of past years, it has been gratifying to see the positive approach taken by

so many employees towards shaping the future of our company’. Mennel (2008)

stated that ‘..for organisations that function well, you have to have a good team. You

cannot have a single star. It’s like some people you have an intuitive link with. The

312

secret with Impala was, they had a team that thought logically, did analysis, not

paralysis and knew intuitively what had to be done.’

In the following year’s report Kearney (1998) again revisited teamwork and trust as a

cornerstone of the change at Implats when he stated that ‘..the operational vision

has not only resulted in our people recognising the power of working together as a

team, it has also created an environment of trust, mutual respect (long missing in the

mining industry) and confidence in the future of Impala. This can only strengthen the

company going forward’ Kearney, 1998, p. P9). Furthermore in 1998 Kearney

addressed empowering the organisation to take ownership and stewardship of their

own destiny when he stated that, ‘..the participation process has enabled the

devolution of power to the lowest levels within the organisation and has allowed all

employees to take ownership of the goals.’ Kearney (1998) in the CEO’s report

states, ‘..the key to the success of the FIXCO process has been participation by all

stakeholders at all levels of the organisation. This was achieved through the

education of our employees at a cost of 86 Million Rand (145 572 man days) and by

continuous FIXCO communications

In comparison to Angloplats, Implats’ nearest competitor, this fundamental shift in

culture made an enormous difference to the base business. Markus (2008) stated

that McMahon always said, ‘..they (Angloplats) have the ore body, but we have the

people’. Gilmour (2008) adds value to the understanding of the rivalry versus

Angloplats when he states that, ‘..Anglo (plats) has never been able to change...it’s

always been arrogant…it’s still arrogant, ego centric, no-one can do better than

them. They looked down at us and said that they could never do it…they are just

going to screw it up again. That famous statement (of theirs)…there will be blood on

the seat but it wont be ours. Everyone (at Angloplats) believed that…down to the

mine managers. I suggest that if that is our competition it does help.’ In contrast, to

support the introverted nature of this change, the executives at Implats ‘..humble in

all things, had made a conscious decision not to crow about their successes to the

market and analysts’ (Engelbrecht, 2008).

The executive team’s leadership culture was all about trust and teamwork in a

complex environment of constant change. Mennel (2008) states that, ‘..one of the

313

things that one has to manage in those circumstances (turnarounds) is that you have

to live comfortably in a very duplicated universe where things are not in step and

often diametrically opposed. This forces you into a mindset of working in an

extremely complicated environment. Frequently decisions are intuitive because you

do not have perfect information. We ran on adrenalin. We had a good team. But the

investment community took a while to understand.’

With specific reference to the Kearney’s leadership abilities: Paton said of Kearney,

‘..I would not have been a director today had it not been for Steve Kearney giving me

the opportunity to extend himself, and step out of my discipline as a geologist, in the

FIXCO projects. It allowed me to gain a broader understanding of the organisation

from the rock face to the refinery. Steve (Kearney) said to Bob (Gilmour) and I

(Paton), you are the squeaky wheels, now go and do something about it…he

recognised the experience of the organisation from a wider view.’ Mennel (2008)

supports this statement, ‘..the big change had to come from operations. You can’t

just live in your own discipline. A lot of the guys were forced to get out of their holes,

and to say excuse me who are you what are you doing, can we look out of the

window together?’

Kearney ’..was open to challenge…he was inclusive, he listened and debated, but

was always respected’ (Engelbrecht, 2008). He also had a great understanding of

how values influenced an organisation,. An example is given by Olifant (2008) when

he refers to a question he posed to Kearney in a Trade Union meeting when they

(Olifant and Kearney) were espousing the importance of values. ‘I gave an example;

often it happens…you find a guy who is a very good manager, in terms of the results

that he produces, but only to find that the values that we put up on the board are

totally ignored, they are not taken care of, what is the company going to do about

that? The delegation of the union and a fair amount of the people from management

side, to be sure, expected Steve to confirm that regardless of the results, he would

fire him. Steve didn’t say that…what he said was, anybody who falls outside of the

norms and values that we have created here, if we are committed to them, he would

feel uncomfortable and the system would kick him out, nobody would have to fire

him. I confronted Steve later about his cowardice. It was then that I realised he

(Steve) was neither avoiding the question nor being coward about answering it. He

314

truly believed in it. He believed that the (value) system, if it is implemented - is so

strong, it will be supported by all levels of the organisation, regardless of loyalty.’

Engelbrecht (2008) commented further that ‘..value systems were much more visible

and were used to make decisions all the way down the line’. This was supported by

incentives as ‘..share options (in the past) were only allocated to the top one

hundred executives and now are allocated to all workers’ (Engelbrecht, 2008).

• Networks:

In 1997 when FIXCO was established it was ‘..to identify and implement

performance improvement initiatives across Impala. FIXCO’s task includes removing

obstacles to change and transferring best practice throughout Impala’ (Kearney,

1997, p. 15). ’We went through a year of discovering the moose’s to be put on the

table and shot’ (Gilmour, 2008).

This cross-company initiative resulted in bottom-up structural and measurement

changes leading to the consolidation of mining operations. Mennel (2008), from a

financial perspective recounts that ‘..the guys that ran Impala interesting enough

were almost without exception metallurgists. They were a secretive, closed society

and exceptionally compartmentalised. There was no sharing of information. To run

the business, we needed information that people could trust. One of the first jobs

was to get people to share information.

The restructuring stopped mine shafts competing, and allowed for transparency of

information across the organisation. The networks of cooperation began to show

fruits when monthly shaft strategic reviews moved from a closed session to include

outsiders from the FIXCO committee. In addition to the mine manager, the mine

overseer and senior staff, these reviews also began to include finance people,

geologists and metallurgists. ‘These sessions moved from being a numbers based

‘shouting session’ to a value adding solution findings session and quicker decision

making was the result’ (Paton, 2008). This further allowed for the cross-pollination of

best practice and shared ideas. Kearney reports in 1998 that ‘..(the) suggestion

scheme has yielded 1400 ideas of which 575 have been accepted and 200

implemented, equalled a R 20 Million saving (5%)’. Furthermore finance managers

were introduced at each shaft and Smithies (GM) taught the mine managers to use

315

this to their advantage. ‘They started running the shaft as a business and the

accountant was there to help and not to act as the policeman, so he became a

facilitator of funding for priority projects’ (Paton, 2008).

• Relationships as part of the culture:

Relationships in the South African mining industry have traditionally been tenuous,

due to the military style organisational structures and the apartheid laws, ensuring

separation of race groups into management (mine management and shift bosses)

and workers. To the extent that legislation prohibited a mine worker from obtaining a

blasting certificate in fear that it would put explosive in the hands of a subjected

nation. This prevented promotion and as such empowerment was limited prior to

1995. To gain any representation trade unions were set up for collective bargaining

which created its own politically motivated repercussions, as trade unions were

supported by the banned communist party. As such trade unions became the

unofficial political face for the communist party. This stigma attached to the unions

lingered long after South Africa became a democracy and the communist party was

unbanned in 1994.

However, when Kearney took over as CEO in 1997, ‘..(he) Steve had to come in to

heal the organisation, and for me it earned Steve the title, in my mind of: Jesus in

Jeans. Steve was a renegade he didn’t like protocol, he didn’t like board meetings,

he didn’t wear a suite, a tie (unless he had too), his shirt would hang out. The one

thing with Steve, he could feel people, he had empathy, he had charisma, people

would do anything for him. He was a charming, likeable fellow. For the first time, I

saw a guy that was not only loved by the entire Impala work force, but also by the

Unions, they were very fond of him. Because Steve was not a politician, he told it as

he saw it.’ (Olifant, 2008). Mennel (2008) support Olifant and comments that, ‘..it

wasn’t a conscious management of values - it was just, this is how it is. We didn’t

put any polish on it. If something is wrong don’t put a spin on it ‘cos (sic) it’ll come

back and bite you. Tell it straight up and down…furthermore, it wasn’t a culture

about me, it was a culture about us. This is a difference in a lot of senior executives

where its about me and not about us.’

316

With this understanding of relationship, Kearny took the initiative to change structure

and empower Implats’ workforce through FIXCO. Kearney states that:

‘..within FIXCO, Impala has implemented a unique model for participation by

including employee representatives. This is providing a fresh insight into the

operational challenges facing the company. It recognises that a fundamental shift

away from the top driven change over the past five years, is necessary to deliver the

vision. The model neither co-opts nor diminishes the strength of employee

representation and allows for conflict over issue such as wages to be handled by

existing, established structures (Trade Unions)’ (Kearney, 1997, p. 15).

This was a unique model in the mining industry and changed the game plan, from

one of conflict resolution between parties, to solution finding. This is reflected in

Kearney’s statement in the annual report in 1998, where he mentions that ‘..there is

a significant improvement in morale and commitment to operational performance and

excellence…a new culture is emerging in which there is a realisation of the need to

co-operate for the benefit of all. Relationship building has been tackled successfully

and has resulted in the signing with the National Union of Mineworkers of the first

threshold Agreement in the mining industry’ (1998, p. 16).

In terms of the executives that went through the change in culture and support its

continuation, Engelbrecht (2008) comments that ‘..Implats is a great place to work,

although many executives do not need to work due to share options, but still come in

everyday. They love this business, there is a team atmosphere about everything we

do, plus the environment and the industry is fascinating, and above all we don’t have

any beurocracy…like Angloplats’. From a beurocracy perspective, ‘The culture was

(and still is) so strong after the success of FIXCO, that even when Rumble was

appointed as CEO in 1999, and commented on managers having too much authority

and then put the screws on to dial back the empowerment. The culture eventually

elbowed him out. The team continues to fight hard to keep out beurocracy and to

maintain the culture. This is our differentiator.’ (Engelbrecht, 2008). Further to this

statement and in support of it, Gilmour (2008) states ‘..We’re a team, if anything

happens were here shoulder to shoulder. A culture truly beyond successive

management’

317

6.4.2. Conclusion:

As a summary, an extract from a speech given at Harvard by Olifant and Kearney on

the Implats turnaround, is utilised:

• Know your strengths and weaknesses. Be transparent. Beef up your weaknesses

with others – be part of a team.

• It seems that if you are going to walk the desert, have a map, but be prepared to

change the route – don’t make it your Bible. When we theorise, we make

assumptions. Learn from mistakes… be prepared to change your plan.

• The real innovation at Implats is this one: Sometimes the plan does not work - we

are still not sure that the next stage is the right one.

Chapter 7 takes this analysis and articulates findings against the thesis purpose,

research hypothesis and the primary objectives. In addition, triangulation of findings

against the gap analysis as induced in chapter 2 and 3 of this thesis is discussed

and interpreted against the analysis in chapter 6.

318

CHAPTER 7: FINDINGS

7.1. Introduction

This chapter seeks to deduce findings from the analysis in chapter 6, within the

context of the normative theory phase (Refer to Section 5.3.4.1) of the research

methodology applied. The analysis is deductive in intent and is used to predict the

circumstances under which the phenomena and anomalies present themselves, as

described and contextualised within the normative theory building phase of the

researchers applied methodology. In doing so the researcher attempts to find

solutions to primary research sub-objectives of validating the QLQ and the QLM

(Refer to Chapter 8, Section 8.1), through quantitative and qualitative analysis

results (Refer to Chapter 6). In addition, the researcher will triangulate these findings

against the literature review gap analysis (Refer to Chapter 2, Section 2.5; Chapter

3, Section 3.2.3 and Section 3.4) to ensure consistency and integrity of approach

towards the delivering on the research objectives in answering the research

hypothesis.

The findings are presented in a systematic manner (Refer to Figure 7.1).

Initially findings in chapter 7, seek to find consistency and validity of the variables

and constructs within the QLQ, so that the QLQ as designed can be proved to be fit-

for-use as a measurement instrument for the QLM. This is achieved through

quantitative analysis (Refer to Chapter 6, 6.3.1) of correlative relationships between

primary and secondary variables within the constructs of the QLM (as per the

research methodology, Chapter 5), as structured within the QLQ. This analysis is

conducted with data obtained from a selected pilot study group. The method applied

is one of internal validation analysis of the measurement instrument (QLQ) in terms

of: the questions, relationships between variables within constructs and the scoring

and weightings applied as indicated within the derivation of the QLM (Refer to

Chapter 4, 4.2.5). The outcome of this analysis is to determine the validity of the

QLQ as a measurement instrument, and its fit-for-use status for validating the QLM

within a purposive sample (Refer to Figure 7.1)

319

Figure 7.1: Analysis leading to expected outcomes (findings)

In addition, findings seek to prove the validity of the QLM (Refer to Chapter 6,

Section 6.3.2) through two distinct phases. In phase 1, correlative relationships are

sought between primary variables. For this purpose and to validate the QLM in a real

world setting and case study design (Refer to Chapter 5, Section 5.3.4.5) is used

sample data through a purposive sampling data technique (Refer to Chapter 5,

Section 5.3.4.6). Purposive sampling data are analysed in Chapter 6 and findings

(phase 1) in this regard are focused on seeking positive relationships between

primary variables within the behavioural constructs, associated with quantum

entanglement (Maslow’s self-actualisation) and that, a positive predictive directional

influence from the quantum entangled behaviours (in response to values) towards

the juxtaposed behaviours as per Jung (1954, 1959, 1961, 1965) exist (Refer to

Figure 7.1).

Furthermore, in phase 2 of the QLM validation, findings in respect of behavioural

shifts are sought, due to quantum individuation (Maslow’s peak experiences /

enlightenment), brought about through the quantum entanglement of behavioural

constructs (response to aligned values), which influence the juxtaposed negative

Maslow value sets and resultant behaviour by a sufficiently positive quantitative

•Validation of QLQ•Fit-for-use to measure QLM

Purposive sample: Impala Platinum Ltd

Quantum leadership shift effect as per QLM

Organisational examples as per QLM

Internal consistency & validity of QLM

Internal consistency & validity of QLQ

Findings

Pilot test group

GroupAnalysis

Validation of QLMQuantitative•Correlative relationships•Predictive directional statistics•Descriptive statistics

Qualitative•Annual report content analysis•One-on-One Interviews

•Correlative relationships•Predictive directional statistics

Quantitative and Qualitative Measures

applied







Findings

Pilot test group

GroupAnalysis





applied







Findings

Pilot test group

GroupAnalysis





applied







Findings

Pilot test group

GroupAnalysis





applied

320

amount, resulting in a shift in overall holistic behaviour (quantum individuated being /

being (Jung). This result thus, validates the QLM and the quantum leadership shift

effect (Refer to Chapter 4, Section 4.2.6.2 and to Figure 7.1).

Lastly, the quantum leadership effect on organisational outcomes is sought. The

premise is that, if quantum entangled individuation is found (measured using the

QLQ) within the purposive sample of a highly successful company (measured by

share price performance versus peers within the same industry globally, and versus

the aggregated traded companies within the country), then findings to validate the

QLM in respect of examples consistent with the expected examples as predicted

through the QLM in respect of spiritual, material and social capital (Zohar and

Marshall, 2001) should be evident. This analysis is qualified through content analysis

of annual reports and one-on-one interviews with executives within the purposive

sample (Chapter 5, Section 5.3.4.6 and to Figure 7.1).

7.2. QLQ - Internal validity analysis findings

Findings seek consistency and reliability of data to validate the QLQ, through

statistical correlation between primary variables and secondary variables and

between primary and secondary variables within constructs, against the QLM model

derived.

Correlation analysis was performed for each construct and then specifically in

respect of the quantum individuation constructs to validate this premise within the

QLM. In addition descriptive statistical analysis was done on the QLQ data scores to

determine shift between scored from pre-transition to post-transition. This is done in

two sets: pre-transition and post-transition (pilot test study group).

7.2.1. Correlative statistical analysis findings (relationships between variables)

7.2.1.1. Correlation findings of variables within constructs before-transition

Findings of statistical correlative analysis sought between those variables within

constructs related to quantum entanglement, however positive correlations were

found to exist between all variables between all constructs. This was not expected

321

from the pre-transition data. Due to the nature of the participants, it ahs been

deduced that it is likely that quantum entanglement can occur before transition, from

one worldview (Newtonian-Cartesian company culture) to another (Einsteinian-

Quantum company culture), and is within the psyche of individuals and not

necessarily determinable at a point in time. This is part of the complexity of

understanding the human psyche and as individual responses are used and then

aggregated in the study, the inclusion of individuals that have already transcended to

higher levels of understanding is possible, especially when dealing with executives

who are at the levels of maturity of those included in the pilot study. This anomaly

again is displayed within the individuals in the sample study group. (Refer top Table

6.10)

7.2.1.2. Correlation findings of variables within constructs after-transition

Findings of statistical correlative analysis between those variables within constructs

related to quantum entanglement however positive correlations were found to exist

between all variables between all constructs. This then validates the QLQ variables

within constructs and additionally between constructs. (Refer to table 6.11)

7.2.2. Descriptive statistical quantum leadership shift analysis findings

Descriptive statistical findings indicate that all variables associated with the

constructs included in quantum entangled individuation, show a positive shift from

pre-transition to post-transition (when measured from a pre-individuated state vs. a

post-individuated state, including Einsteinian-Quantum value scores, applicable once

quantum individuation occurs as a result of quantum entanglement), except for the

Maslow motivational variable within the behavioural construct of focused multi-

dimensional introverted re-contextualisation, however positive correlations are found

to be present with the control behavioural variable. This indicates that the impact of

the Quantum worldview, associated organisational models, values and responsive

behaviours increased between organisations that were deemed to be

underperforming, to organisations that were deemed to be performing, based on the

pilot study’s individual assessment from a personal impact perspective comparing

shifts between organisations, during their careers. The question that remains is: is

322

the change in behaviour a contributor to this shift in organisational performance?

This is then the subject of the sample study. (Refer to table 6.11)

7.2.3. Findings in respect of internal validation of the QLQ

Findings of statistical correlative analysis within constructs, between primary and

secondary variables, as per the QLM derivation and subsequent QLQ derivation,

based on the QLM, it is found that: no meaningful anomalies are found within the

pilot test data to signify that the QLQ is not valid in terms of the variables applied and

the relationships expected between variables as associated with the individual QLM

constructs. It is thus determined that the QLQ be used for testing the sample study

group.

7.3. QLM - validity analysis findings

Initial analysis findings for alignment of pilot and sample studies found that Within the

construct of extroverted bounded instability an anomaly in the result was found,

suggesting that the question relating to science, and Maslow needs value as

correlated to behavioural response outcomes in this construct needs to be controlled

for. In relation to the rest of the QLQ where no anomalies were found, and as

related to the pilot test findings, if Maslow’s psyche variables are excluded only the

science paradigm in this construct then needs to be controlled for. In this instance

however, a positive correlation between the scientific paradigm and organisational

model exists and a positive correlation between scientific paradigm and Einsteinian-

Quantum value exists. (Refer to 4.3.4.3, Chapter 4)

In light of these findings and the structure of the QLM, no changes to extroverted

bounded instability construct questions within the QLQ were made.

323

7.3.1. Determining quantum entanglement between constructs

7.3.1.1. Correlation findings of constructs before-transition

Findings of statistical correlative analysis between variables for quantum

entanglement, indicated that not only is there positive correlations between variables

within individual constructs, but also that positive correlations exist between all

variables between all constructs, related to quantum entanglement, as analysed from

pre-transition data. This is noted within 7.2.1.1, where in the pilot study similar

phenomenon was displayed. It is determined that as these members of the sample

study group are all seasoned mature executives, that their psyche is already at a

point of quantum entanglement, as per the findings (7.3.1.1), and that to attempt to

separate them from this mental model, by asking questions of before and after

transition to specifically test for pre-individuation versus post-individuation, in this

manner is a limiting factor of this technique of questioning, within the QLQ. (Refer to

Section 4.3.5 and to Table 6.14 (a) and (b) - column: Before)

7.3.1.2. Correlation findings of constructs after-transition

Findings of statistical correlative analysis between variables for quantum

entanglement, indicated that not only is positive correlations between variables

within individual constructs, but also that positive correlations exist between all

variables between all constructs, related to quantum entanglement, as analysed from

post-transition data. (Refer to Table 6.14 (a) and (b) - column: After)

7.3.1.3. Findings: Shift in correlation

A positive shift in correlation strength between variables is observed in the data from

before transition to after transition, except the correlations between the behavioural

control variable and Maslow motivational value in the construct: focused

multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation. A low negative correlation is found

of -01. This is consistent with the pilot data study. All other variables suggest that a

higher synergy or connectivity between these constructs was noted after the

transition period, within the Implats’ data. This result indicates that a higher level of

324

quantum entanglement occurred after transition than before. (Refer to Table 6.14 (a)

and (b) - column: Shift)

7.3.2. Quantum individuation shift findings

Findings from analysis performed on constructs associated with quantum

entanglement, indicates that (Refer to Table 6.15) the shift in quantum individuation

(across all variables within constructs and between constructs), is larger in the case

of ops execs. than for the prof. execs. This is a significant finding as the operational

change within Implats as supported by Mennel (2008) was the largest and most

significant part of the organisation, Mennel states that ‘..the big change had to come

from operations.’

In summary it is noted that quantum individuation occurred individually and across

the aggregated teams of: FIXCO, Prof. Exec. and Ops Exec.

7.3.3. Findings related to the quantum entanglement directional effect between

constructs and impact on organisational outcomes

After-transition data was used to analyse the correlation of the Einsteinian-Quantum

value variables within quantum entangled constructs to Einsteinian-Quantum value

variables within directly juxtaposed constructs. Furthermore, scatter plot directional

predictive analysis is done between these variables between constructs to find

indicators of prediction. Findings are made on the FIXCO team as a whole and on

the Ops executives within the FIXCO team as a subset due to the operational

importance of the change at Implats. (Refer to Section 4.3.6 and 4.3.7, Chapter 4)

In addition these findings are triangulated against the gap analysis in chapter 3 of

this thesis on leadership behaviour to align this outcome to the initial base upon

which the QLM was deduced.

Figure 7.2, indicates the juxtaposed quantum behaviours and the triangulation of

information to satisfy the purpose and research hypothesis.

325

Scientific model paradigm

Quantum mental model

(positive value state drivers) Motivational Needs Intelligence state

Quantum

behaviour

Leadership trait /

descriptor

Organisational model

examples of shift

Organisational model

examples of shift

Leadership trait /

descriptor Quantum Behaviour Intelligence state Needs Motivational

Quantum mental model (positive

value state drivers) Scientific model paradigm

Vision and value leadCreative visualisation

Positive use fo adversityFaith

Resiliance Self organisation

Celebrate diversityCompassion

Forgiveness Grace

FaithResiliance

Strange attractors

The eternal self orgnisation of relativistic universes

Evolutionary mutations

Forgiveness GraceFaith

ResilianceStrange attractors

The eternal self orgnisation of relativistic universes

Space-time curved and filled with energy

Reframe

Mastery (+4)Cross-boundary processes

infused with information

Values

SQ

IQ

EQ


Introverted Re-contextualisation

Self-Actualisation (+9)Conscious Solution-

Finding

Conscious cross-boundary

organisational designSQ

Consciosuly empowered

SQ


Quantum leadership

Values

Trust in life's processesChange through self-organising

Conscious collaborative

implementation

Sense of vocation

Multi-dimensional

Extroverted Ethical bounded instability

recontextualise environment Recontextualise environment

Central identity of meaning

Value adding processes - controlled and improved

Conscious Strategic

Conscious Visionary

EQ

SQ

Central identity of meaning

Value adding processes - controlled and improved

In dialogue with environment

Change through self-organising

Sense of vocation

In dialogue with environment

Evolutionary mutations

Trust in life's processes

Conscious organisational change

evolution

Apathy (-6)



Felixible systems Self-Esteem (+6)

Universe materialised by conscious participation


Conscious Participative

Relativity

Diversified, emergent creative thinking

Conscious StructuralConscious multi-

dimensional analysisIQ

recontextualise environment


ExploratoryExploratory

Ask why?

Flexible, partnered sensing

Quantum Entangled Individuation (+21)

Self transecendence / Peak Experiences

(+21)

Empowered decision making relationships

Cross-boundary processes infused with information

Collaborative (inclusive) Explorative Perceptive

Sponteneity

Mindful

Holism

Anguish (-5)

Self assertion(-1)

Field Independence

Responsible

Self awareness

Synchronicity

Ask why?

Recontextualise environment

Reframe

Anger (-2)

Self-Actualisation (+9)

Security (-12)Empowered decision making

relationships

Cross-boundary processes infused with information Belonging (-3)

Generativity (+5)

Mastery (+4)


Cross-boundary processes infused with information

Evolutionary mutatiosn of relativistic universes

Multidimensional universe

Generativity (+5)

Humility

Organisation as part of a greater whole

Non-seperability of consciousness & matter

Multidimensional emerging universe

Mastery (+4)

Generativity (+5)

Survival (-21)

Generativity (+5)

Self-Actualisation (+9)


Survival (-21)

Diversified compassionate

judging

Mastery (+4)

Self-Actualisation (+9)Empowered Intuitive

Decision Making

Enlightenment (+8)

World Soul (+7)

Higher Service (+6)


Ask why?

Exploratory Exploratory


Reframe



SQEQIQ

Eternal self-organisation fo eternal universes that are in continual

dialogue with one another

Grace

Compassion



Power-within (+3)

Exploration (+1)

Gregariousness and cooperation (+2)



Apathy (-6)

Craving (-3)

Fear (-4)

Ask why?



Reframe

Outside control destructive

Probablistic uncertainty

Self organisation

Bounded instability

Non-seperability of consciousness & matter

Eternal connections in the universe

Figure 7.2 Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) – showing juxtaposed organisational outcomes (within constructs) and supporting variables

326

7.3.3.1. Findings

Construct 1: focused multidimensional introverted re-contextualisation as

juxtaposedly related to construct 5: extroverted bounded instability, and construct 2:

collaborative explorative perception as juxtaposedly related to construct 6: diversified

compassionate judging, as related to organisational examples of vision and strategy,

respectively within the context of spiritual capital flows (SQ).

Correlative relationship analysis findings

Findings indicate a positive correlation between the Einsteinian-Quantum value

variable for FIXCO and a positive relational correlation exists between the

Einsteinian-Quantum value variable for ops executives. This is in line with expected

outcomes as suggested by the QLM and suggests that these constructs will have

joint impacts on strategy and visioning as organisational examples, respectively.

Scatter plot directional predictive analysis findings

Findings indicate that a weak positive indictor of prediction exists for FIXCO as a

whole but a strong positive directional predictive gradient exists for the ops

executives. Suggesting that for these two juxtaposed behavioural constructs a

positive predictive nature exists. It is noted that this does not indicate causality. This

finding satisfies the implied positive directional impact that of these constructs on

expected organisational outcomes of strategy and vision, respectively as suggested

within the QLM.

Qualitative triangulation findings

Qualitative triangulation findings between behavioural construct alignment (as per

the QLM), Implats qualitative data and the proposed solutions to the literature review

gap analysis in respect of expected organisational outcomes in examples of strategy

and vision (mission and objectives) as related to Spiritual capital (SQ)

• Vision, mission, and business objectives

327


compassionate judging behaviour allows for conscious visioning (empowered


information) in context to an organisation that is conscious of the organisational

change evolution (central identity of meaning, change through self-organising and

value adding processes controlled and improved) that needs to occur to remain

competitive in a complex environment, taking into account all stakeholders.

In light of this statement did Implats use empowered decision making relationships,

cross-boundary processes and related information to re-establish a vision around a

central identity of meaning allowing for self-organised change?

The proposed solutions to the gap analysis in chapter 3, as captured within the QLM

(Section 4.3.4.3, Chapter 4), suggests that: from a behavioural aspect with a focus

on leadership, as predicted by Collins and Porras (1994), is that companies will

begin to organise themselves to be less dependent on charismatic leaders (as per

the transformational leadership theory), and that companies do not need visionary

leaders. They state that visionary leadership is a myth and that ‘..a charismatic

visionary leader is absolutely not required and in fact, can be detrimental to a

company’s long-term prospects’ (Collins and Porras, 1994, p. 64). Collins and Porras

(1994), further suggest that future organisations would seek to become visionary

companies by building flexibility and responsiveness into their organisational

systems. Various authors agree and add that this will take place through team-based

structures and through process re-engineering. (Emery and Purser, 1996; Weisbord,

1992; Landrum, Howell and Paris, 2000). Furthermore, this integrated organisational

system is enabled through the three elements of identity, information and

relationship; people need to be connected to the fundamental identity of the

organisation or community (who we are, what do we aspire too, how shall we be

together i.e. organisational culture and values). This then is the central identity of

meaning or vision and value system (Wheatley, 1999; Fairholm, 2004).

This is seen in the qualitative data as contextualised within chapter 6, where Prior to

1997, no official vision existed. Post-1997 once the One Team – One Vision

operational vision was established; it created a central identity of meaning around

328

‘team’. This vision was established by the Chairman and CEO, together with an

external consultancy team that had together with a cross-functional internal group,

known as FIXCO, understood through communicating with people right through the

organisation, what was needed to fix it. Thus, One Team – One Vision was

established through empowerment of a cross-functional team, which interviewed a

cross-functional section of the organisation all the way down to shaft manager level

to understand what needed to change and create a strategy that would address

these issues.

• Strategy


extroverted bounded instability behaviour allows for conscious solution finding

(empowered decision-making relationships and cross-boundary processes infused

with information) within a conscious cross-boundary organisational design

(conscious design of systems (strategy, structure, reward), conscious participant in

self-designing processes, internal commitment to knowledge growth, mindfulness /

synchronicity) leading to innovation throughout the integrated organisation between

all stakeholders.


and cross-boundary processes and related information to consciously design

systems (strategy, structure, reward) and through this strategy did they include the

participation of the organisation in self-designing processes, gain commitment by the

organisation to knowledge and growth and create a conscious mindful connectivity

through the network in the organisation leading to integrated innovation?

From the proposed solutions to the gap analysis in chapter 3, as captured within the

QLM (Refer to Section 4.3.4.3, Chapter 4) on leadership behaviour the focus on

strategy with regards to team based structures is evident. It is stated that the value

of this new type of organisational structure is that teams are also superior to

individuals in their judgement and problem-solving abilities (Bass and Stodgill, 1990;

Hennefrund, 1985; Koehler and Pankowski, 1996; Lawler, 1986; Pfeffer, 1999) and

share a greater source of knowledge (Lawler, 1986). Landrum, Howell and Paris

(2000) suggest that this strategic change through team-based organisational re-

329

design and process re-engineering, will be longer lasting and more responsive to

future changes.

Furthermore empowerment of the organisation to flatter structures and team-based

approaches within complex environments, suggest decision making at much lower

levels of the organisation and suggests a self-leadership direction, driven by intrinsic

assumptions, values and behaviours at every level of the organisation – a paradigm

shift in culture aligned to new organisational models, as supported by Follet where

‘..the leader must understand the situation, must see it as a whole, must see the

interrelation of all parts…He must see the evolving equation, the developing

situation. His wisdom, his judgement, is used not on a situation that is stationary, but

one that is changing all the time’ (Follett, 1933, in Humphreys et al, 2003, p. 51).

From the Implats data, findings in annual reports (1995-2001) and supported by

interviews, indicate that prior to 1997 strategy was focused on cost-cutting and

technology innovation. Post-1997 strategy was focused on unlocking the potential of

the people in the organisation. This change started right at the top of the

organisation with a restructure, which saw those who stood in the way of saving the

organisation forced out and a change at the top where the Chairman gave up his

joint role of CEO to a new leader. The new CEO, introduced One Team – One Vision

and FIXCO as the strategic implementation of this vision. Through the FIXCO team a

FIXCO process of change was established, focused on the people and teamwork.

This process involved relationships between the entire organisation, restructuring of

the separate mining operations into a single entity and establishing self-designed

cross-boundary processes across mine shafts and through integrated innovation,

established best practice initiatives across the organisation. These integrated

processes ensured that participation was at the top of the agenda. Initiatives were

supported by innovation incentive schemes and further incentivisation to the point of

involving even the workforce in a share option scheme.

Summary

Thus, the researcher contends that quantum individuation (due to quantum

entanglement) on the constructs discussed above, indicates that a positive

directional predictive influence between focused multidimensional introverted re-

330

contextualisation as juxtaposedly related to extroverted bounded instability, and

collaborative explorative perception as juxtaposedly related to diversified

compassionate judging exist and that this has an influence on the organisational

outcomes of vision and strategy as related to Spiritual capital (SQ) flows, within the

Implats data and satisfies the leadership gap analysis in chapter 3, through

validating the QLM behavioural outcomes.

7.3.3.2. Findings

Construct 3: empowered intuitive decision making as juxtaposedly related to

construct 7: flexible partnered sensing, as related to organisational examples of

execution within the context of social capital flows (EQ).


Findings indicate that no relational correlation is found between the Einsteinian-

Quantum values between juxtaposed constructs for the FIXCO team as a whole and

that a negative relational correlation exists between the Einsteinian-Quantum values

between juxtaposed constructs for the ops executives within the FIXCO team. This is

an anomaly and not an expected outcome as per the QLM. This finding suggests

that, within the Implats FIXCO executive team, empowered intuitive decision making

and flexible partnered sensing on the whole does not have a positive relationship

with execution as an example of the relationship between these behavioural

constructs. This finding is triangulated against qualitative interview data in 7.3.5.3,

which invalidates this statistical outcome and thus validates the nature of the

alignment of empowered intuitive decision making and flexible partnered sensing

through examples of execution within Implats.






finding is not aligned to the finding within the correlative analysis, as it satisfies the

expected outcome as per the QLM and suggests that empowered intuitive decision

331

making does have a directional predictive effect on flexible partnered sensing and

will have a predictive influence on organisational examples of execution and

validates the premise of the QLM.


Triangulation between behavioural construct alignment (as per the QLM), Implats

qualitative data and the proposed solutions to the literature review gap analysis in

respect of expected organisational outcomes in examples of execution as related to

Social capital flows (EQ).


processes and related information to re-establish a vision, which created a central

identity of meaning, allowing for self-organising value-added processes that are

controlled and continually improved – through communication, values of: trust,

teamwork, and empowerment, and networks of acquaintance and cooperation, and

interpersonal relationships as part of the culture?


(Refer to Section 4.3.4.3, Chapter 4) on leadership behaviour is triangulated against

the Implats data to understand this qualitative data against the theoretical premises

of this approach. From and Einsteinian-Quantum perspective, pure shareholder

value motives are replaced by a wider systems view of stakeholder value motivations

(Zohar et al., 2001, 2004). Value chains are measured from a holistic perspective

where, shared values drive empowered relations and interactions between self-

motion monads (conscious people) and knowledge and information sharing are

highly valued (Wheatley, 1999, Kilman, 2001). This is a systems view (Senge, 1989,

1990, 1994, 2006), taking into account the social context of their actions (EQ), their

ability to perceive future possibilities and opportunities grounded in shared

organisational meaning, through shared visioning and strategy (SQ) adding continual

value to the organisational stakeholders (see Table 2.10) (Zohar et al., 2001, 2004).

to be successful this will require a fundamental shift in ones understanding of

relationship (Jaworski, 1996; Fairholm, 2004) between organisational participants

within the bounds of legal entities, and within the framework of a systems view of

supply chains.

332

• Communication

Findings through the interviews conducted suggest that communication was seen to

be the key to the success of the FIXCO process by the CEO. The message of One

Team – One Vision was spread by the Chairman and CEO to the workforce in

person and interviews were conducted will all functions to understand what could be

done to help them achieve their objectives. Beyond this as already stated

transparent communication of metrics, shared best practices and innovations

became the culture.

Values of: Trust, teamwork and empowerment

Findings through the interview process suggest that values of trust, teamwork and

empowerment were a cornerstone of the FIXCO turnaround process. Post 1997, it

was commented on that teamwork became the basis upon which all stakeholders

could achieve their common goals and the shared vision. In addition trust was

established through shared commitment to goals, continual implementation of

innovations from the bottom-up, and empowerment of the workforce. Many of today’s

executives suggest that they would not have been in the position they are in today

(Directors), if they were not allowed (by Kearney) to step out of their discipline within

the FIXCO process. Furthermore, empowerment down to lower levels of the

organisation was fostered by educating the workforce at a cost of R 86 Million,

during 1998.

• Networks

Findings through the interview process support the question of establishing

networks, and suggest that networks were established for various reasons. For

instance a network of professional and business support was established to assist

mine managers get the best out of their mines and to find solutions to problems as

quick as possible. This was achieved through strategic structural planning and

design monthly review sessions post-1997. These meetings went beyond mining

practice (as was the case pre-1997) and included a spectrum of FIXCO executives

and finance managers responsible for not only measuring, but finding solutions to

problems. Beyond this business support network, formal networks of best practice

333

and information flows were developed through transparency and shared information.

Furthermore, the company worker suggestion scheme saved the company 5% from

new innovations at the rock face, through the shared innovation network.

• Relationships as part of the culture

Findings from interviews conducted indicate that the establishment of relationships

was the single biggest driver for change that Implats introduced. This was an

extremely strategic move made by the then Chairman and CEO (McMahon) when he

made Kearney CEO in 1997. McMahon states that Kearney was brought on board to

heal the organisation. Mennel (2008) states that, ‘Kearny put his big cuddly arms

around the organisation’.

It is because of the relationship culture that Kearney introduced into the organisation

that created a sense of trust and re-established relationships between the trade

unions and the organisation to a point that they signed the first threshold agreement

in mining industry history. In addition their greatest relationship triumph was the re-

establishment of the relationship between Implats and the Bafokeng royal nation (on

whose land 90% of the world’s platinum mines are established). This turnaround

from a court stalemate to a thirty year concession pushed Implat’s share price

through the roof, as it secured their future.

Kearney’s relationship style of leadership, created a culture that was: multi-

dimensionally focused, inclusive and transparent yet challenging, intuitive yet

execution oriented, and to some degree instable yet bounded, and above all people

oriented yet still technical by nature. This culture ultimately, post Kearney’s leaving

the company is kept alive today by those executives who were direct reports to him,

so much so that when a new CEO was introduced by McMahon post 1999, which

was averse to this culture and tried to introduce controls again, was eventually

elbowed out due to non-compliance by his strategic officers. These directors still hold

firmly onto the secret of what made them turn a company that was going to be

harvested in 1996 to the greatest platinum mining company in the world today.

This holistic qualitative finding through triangulation invalidates the quantitative

findings and suggests that a positive directional predictive directional relationship

exists between the constructs of empowered intuitive decision making and flexible

334

partnered sensing on the whole and suggests then that this aligns positive

relationship with execution as an example of the relationship between these

behavioural constructs does not exist.

Summary


findings and suggests then that a positive directional predictive relationship, as

indicated by the scatter plot diagram findings, exists between the constructs of

empowered intuitive decision making and flexible partnered sensing and this then on

the whole, through further triangulation to the gap analysis from chapter 3, indicates

that there is alignment with execution as an example as related to social capital (EQ)

flows, within the Implats data.

7.3.3.3. Findings

Construct 4: conscious participative relativity as juxtaposedly related to construct 8:

diversified emergent creative thinking, as related to organisational examples of

structural planning and design within the context of material capital flows (IQ):


Findings indicate that a low negative relational correlation is found between the

Einsteinian-Quantum values between juxtaposed constructs for the FIXCO team as

a whole and that a low positive relational correlation exists between the Einsteinian-

Quantum values between juxtaposed constructs for the ops executives within the

FIXCO team. This is not aligned to the relational correlation expected, between

these values between constructs for the FIXCO team as a whole. This finding

suggests that, within the Implats FIXCO executive team, conscious participative

relativity and diversified emergent creative thinking on the whole does not have a

positive relationship with structural planning and design as an example of the

relationship between these two behavioural constructs.

It is possible that conscious participative relativity as an influence on diversified

emergent creative thinking in relation to structural planning and design for prof.

administrative executives, not involved with the day-to-day operations, is counter-

335

intuitive and as such the data analysis then supports this premise. This insight is

supported by the analysis of the ops executives within the FIXCO team, where a

positive correlation is evident and suggests that for the ops team the positive

correlation between these behavioural constructs indicates that these constructs

would jointly influence structural planning and design as an organisational example.






finding is not aligned to the finding within the correlative analysis, as it satisfies the

expected outcome as per the QLM and suggests that conscious participative

relativity does have a directional predictive effect on diversified emergent creative

thinking and therefore jointly influences structural planning and design as an

organisational example.


Findings between behavioural construct alignment (as per the QLM), Implats

qualitative data and the proposed solutions to the literature review gap analysis in

respect of expected organisational outcomes in examples of structural planning and

design within the context of material capital flows (IQ)

Structural planning and design is an outcome of conscious participative relativity

behaviour combined with diversified emergent creative thinking behaviour allows for

the design of conscious structural (empowered decision-making relationships and

cross-boundary processes infused with information) impacts on the holistic


conscious multi-dimensional analysis (consciously empowered multi-dimensional

flexible analysis systems and conscious participant in self-designing processes).


and cross-boundary processes and related information to design empowered multi-

dimensional flexible analysis systems and did they include all organisational

336

participants to re-design processes for measurement? i.e. does the change in

metrics applied reflect directly on the bottom line, and were all employees party to

the selection of these metrics and the processes used for measurement?


(Refer to Section 4.3.4.3, Chapter 4) on leadership behaviour and expected

outcomes, Zohar (1997, p. 21) stated that, “quantum thinking will be the foundation

for all Trans-disciplinary creativity, paradigm shifts, and organisational

transformation”. Thus, suggesting a shift in scientific base to Quantum leadership to

understanding behaviour and its impact on organisational outcomes. Lee (2004)

suggested that future organisations based on systems thinking (Senge, 2006), as

aligned to the QLM, that to align supply chains within a systems view of the world the

following must apply;

• Provide all partners with equal access to forecasts, sales data, and plans

• Clarify partners' roles and responsibilities to avoid conflict.

• Redefine partnership terms to share risks, costs, and rewards for improving

supply chain performance.

• Align incentives so that players maximise overall chain performance while also

maximizing their returns from the partnership.

Findings in annual reports (1995-2001) indicate that through the FIXCO process of

interviews (multi-dimensional) conducted to understand gaps which required

solutions: non-existent, non-impactful and/or complicated measures were re-

designed into a simple set of measures and introduced on each mine shaft.

Outcomes as measured through these metrics were made transparent across shafts

and to the workforce (unprecedented in the industry). In addition as supported

through the interview process, the organisation was able to use these new metrics,

to continually improve, supported by correct budgeting as a support mechanism, and

not as a pure means of control? This measurement system assisted Implats to

become the benchmark in the industry for: tones milled per mine per month, meters

stoped per employee per month, and tones mined per employee per annum.

337

Financial reporting further suggests that these metrics lead to financial returns which

resulted in increased turnover, decreased cost of sales and ultimately higher

attributable profits. This turnaround is reflected in the market perception of Implats as

their share price increase tracks (over time) operational and financial results.

Summary


findings and suggests then that a positive directional predictive relationship as

indicated by the scatter plot diagram findings exist between the constructs of

conscious participative relativity and diversified emergent creative thinking and this

then on the whole indicates that there is alignment with structural planning and

design as triangulated against the gap analysis in chapter 3, as an example as

related to material capital flows (IQ), within the Implats data.

7.3.4. Quantum leadership shift effect findings

Einsteinian-Quantum values within quantum entangled behavioural constructs

(extroverted bounded instability, diversified compassionate judging, flexible

partnered sensing, diversified emergent creative thinking relativity) positively impact

on the juxtaposed values within constructs, as directly associated (focused multi-


empowered intuitive decision making and conscious participative) due to quantum

individuation as per the QLM (Refer to Chapter 4, Section 4.2.6.2). This impact has

resultant positive response behaviours. These quantum values are only present

when quantum individuation occurs through entanglement, and as such directly

affects the negative values associated with Maslow’s paradigm on the opposing

juxtaposed constructs when these opposing scores are aggregated.

338

7.3.4.1. Findings for the indicative quantum leadership shift effect due to

quantum individuation (before-transition)

(i) Total FIXCO team

Descriptive statistical findings indicate a total differential average shift of -681.72% is

indicated by the analysis, across all cases. The negative shift is indicative of a

turnaround shift from an average position of -1.4, when pre-individuation value

scoring (Maslow) was applied, to an average score of +8.1 after the Einsteinian-

Quantum values were applied to the quantum entangled constructs (due to quantum

individuation). Furthermore, scatter plot directional predictive analysis for all

constructs within the QLM (including quantum individuated scoring) indicates a

positive directional predictive trend. Thus findings indicate a quantum leadership shift

of significance, once quantum entanglement occurs, leading to quantum

individuation and the ability for these positive Einsteinian-Quantum values to impact

on the juxtaposed Maslow values, thus influencing overall behaviour of the individual

and the group.

(ii) Professional administrative executive team (within FIXCO)

Descriptive statistical findings of professional administrative executives (prof. execs)

indicated an average shift across all constructs of +9.3, from an average position of –

1.8 when pre-individuation value scoring (Maslow) was applied, to an average score

of +7.5 after the Einsteinian-Quantum values were applied to the quantum entangled

constructs (due to quantum individuation). The overall average quantum leadership

shift effect (pre-transition) for the prof. execs is determined to be -509.12%. The

negative indicator shows a shift from a negative position. Findings indicate for the

prof. execs (within FIXCO), due to quantum individuation being established, a

behavioural shift is measured in the overall being for individuals and the group.

(iii) Operational executive team (within FIXCO)

Descriptive statistical findings of operational (ops execs) indicated an average shift

across all constructs of +9.5 from an average position of -1.1 when pre-individuation

value scoring (Maslow) was applied, to an average score of +8.5 after the

Einsteinian-Quantum values were applied to the quantum entangled constructs (due

339

to quantum individuation). The overall average quantum leadership shift impact (pre-

transition) for the ops execs is determined to be -907.74%. The negative indicator

shows a shift from a negative position. Findings indicate that the ops. execs., due to

quantum individuation being established, a behavioural shift is measured in the

overall being for individuals and the group.

7.3.4.2. Findings for the indicative quantum leadership shift effect due to

quantum individuation (after-transition)


Descriptive statistical findings indicate a total differential average shift of -702.16% is

indicated by the analysis, across all cases. The negative shift is indicative of a

turnaround shift from an average position of -1.6, when pre-individuation value

scoring (Maslow) was applied, to an average score of +9.4 after the Einsteinian-

Quantum values were applied to the quantum entangled constructs (due to quantum

individuation). Findings therefore indicate a quantum leadership shift larger than the

shift effect observed in the pre-transition data, indicating that the organisational

cultural transition did have a positive effect on individual and group behavioural

outcomes. (Refer to Table 6.27).

Furthermore, scatter plot directional predictive analysis for all constructs across all

variables (science, models, values and behavioural control variables), including

quantum individuated scoring, indicates a positive directional predictive trend,

suggesting that that the predictive nature of the primary variables within the QLM as

suggested by the QLM derivation in Chapter 4, is thus validated.


Descriptive statistical findings of professional administrative executives (prof execs)

indicated an average shift across all constructs of +10.6, from an average position of

-2.6 when pre-individuation value scoring (Maslow) was applied, to an average score

of +8.0 after the Einsteinian-Quantum values were applied to the quantum entangled

constructs (due to quantum individuation). The overall average quantum leadership

shift impact (post-transition) for the prof. execs is determined to be -409.97%. The

340

negative indicator reflects a shift from a negative position. Findings indicate that as

per the FIXCO team, the prof. execs, due to quantum individuation being

established, show a behavioural shift individually and as a group. The quantum

leadership shift effect as measured against the shift in the pre-transition data is

lower. (Refer to Table 6.28)


Descriptive statistical findings of operational (ops execs) indicated an average shift

across all constructs of +11.3 from an average position of -0.8 when pre-

individuation value scoring (Maslow) was applied, to an average score of +10.5 after

the Einsteinian-Quantum values were applied to the quantum entangled constructs

(due to quantum individuation). The overall average quantum leadership shift effect

(post-transition) due to quantum individuation for the ops execs is determined to be -

1412.11%. The negative indicator reflects a shift from a negative position. Findings

indicate that as per the FIXCO team, the ops. execs., due to quantum individuation

being established, show a behavioural shift individually and as a group. Furthermore

this shift is larger than the prof. execs and larger than the shift observed in the pre-

transition shift data for ops execs, indicating that the impact through the hands-on

involvement in the change at Implats through the transition, had a larger impact on

behavioural outcomes for the ops execs, than for that of the prof execs, which

trended off after the transition.

7.3.4.3. Findings of the total quantum leadership shift effect due to quantum

individuation (before-transition vs. after-transition)

Findings of quantum leadership shift effects observed for pre-transition (including

quantum individuation) to post transition (including quantum individuation) are

compared for the full FIXCO team and the sub teams. This analysis was done to

observe if there were further shifts in behaviour due to the organisational transition.


Descriptive statistical findings indicate an average difference across all constructs

(holistic being) equals to +0.5, which represents a 17.12% positive quantum

341

leadership shift effect from a pre-transition to a post-transition. Thus findings indicate

that a further positive behavioural shift is observed post the transition period.




leadership shift effect from a pre-transition to a post-transition in behaviour. Thus

findings indicate that a further positive behavioural shift is observed post the

transition period.




leadership shift effect from a pre-transition to a post-transition in behaviour. Thus

findings indicate that a further positive behavioural shift is observed post the

transition period.

(iv) Findings summary of quantum leadership shift effect findings

Descriptive statistical findings related to the value of the quantum leadership shift

effect by comparing before transition and after transition data, through descriptive

analysis conducted, by construct, as suggested within the QLM (Refer to Chapter 4,

Section 4.2.6.2) indicate that: A quantum leadership shift effect was found between

behavioural constructs (Refer to Section 4.2.5 phase 5, stage 6, Chapter 4), when

quantum individuation was achieved through quantum entanglement versus the data

excluding the quantum individuation effect/multiplier (i.e. excluding the increase in

positive quantum values within the quantum individuated constructs).

When compared to the QLM, which suggests that a shift of -560% is possible

through including the additional values as associated with the quantum individuation

multiplier (Refer to Table 4.12 and Figure 4.10 in Chapter 4), the shift of -702.16%

(Refer to 7.3.3.2) is in excess of the shift expected and suggests that the multiplier,

as associated with quantum individuation (Maslow peak experiences) indicated

342

within the Maslow motivational value scoring model (Zohar and Marshall, 1999,

2001), is undervalued.

7.4. Limitations

Firstly, a limitation of the quantitative and qualitative data study was that in both data

sets (pilot and sample data), the data indicated that the individuals had sufficiently

positive correlations between all variables within the quantum individuated constructs

(whole being). Thus, pre and post-transition analysis did not show meaningful shifts

in construct averages (17.12%).

However, when analysis was done on the data sets (predictor variables within

constructs) excluding the Einsteinian-Quantum values associated with quantum

entanglement (which would have been the case if this was not present), extremely

large average shifts were indicated between juxtaposed constructs versus the

analysis where Einsteinian-Quantum value scores were included (-702.16%).

It is thus determined that the use of before and after-transition sections within the

questionnaire did not have the desired result of determining pre-individuation versus

post-individuation positions within the individuals and within the aggregated group as

a whole. It is therefore suggested that further study should be conducted on

Angloplats to determine the gap between Implats’ nearest competitor to ascertain the

gap in behavioural outcomes and utilise this as a control group to determine the gap

between these two organisations in terms of quantum individuated behaviour as

aligned to organisational examples of shift.

Secondly causation could not be shown due to the limited sample size, although

directional prediction was shown to be directionally meaningful, this is not sufficient

for causality.

7.5. Summary of data analysis findings

Findings indicate that meaningful shifts in behaviour as a response to science,

models and values is evidenced, due to the strength of correlations between

343

variables within constructs and between constructs, positive predictive directional

nature between these variables, quantum leadership shift effect through descriptive

statistical analysis and triangulation with organisational outcomes through annual

report analysis and one-on-one interviews.

In addition, findings indicate that the questions in the QLQ (internally validated

variables) as related to the QLM are sufficient to test for behavioural responses, thus

excluding the Maslow psyche components, as a part of the QLM. This indicates that,

the QLM can be a stand alone model for testing for behavioural responses within

and between constructs and associated variables through understanding;

worldviews, mental models and associated value systems.

Furthermore, findings indicate that the quantum positive value shift multiplier, does

exist due to quantum individuation, through quantum entanglement, to a larger

degree than expected through Maslow’s peak experiences, and leads to a state of

wholeness in the psyche through the state of quantum individuated being.

Lastly, findings indicate that the resultant impact on behaviour responses due to this

state of being (quantum entangled being) (Refer to Section 4.3.5, Chapter 4), has

fundamental external implications for organisational outcomes, and leads the

researcher to the determination that the QLQ and QLM constructs and directional

predictive nature between constructs has been validated (Refer to Section 4.3.4.3

and Section 4.3.5, Chapter 4) through the analysis in Chapter 6 as a new way of

measuring for leadership behaviours and behavioural shifts (Refer to Section 4.3.6,

Chapter 4) that lead to quantum shifts in outcomes (examples) within commercial

organisations (Refer to Section 4.3.7, Chapter 4).

7.6. Triangulation, discussion and interpretation

7.6.1. Triangulation of quantitative and qualitative analysis findings to

proposed solutions to the induced gap analysis

The process of triangulation to discuss whether the thesis has validated the

proposed solutions (as deduced into the QLM) to answer the gaps (in Chapter 2 and

344

3) is implied by the design of the methodology applied. The research methodology,

which was designed in such a way so as to deduce (from the premise of answering

the gap analysis) a model (QOM) and a measurement instrument (QLQ). The QLM

and QLQ if then found, through analysis (qualitative and quantitative) within an ex-

post facto case study environment (organisation) where the organisational has had

exponential performance versus it’s peers and the market (Implats), to be valid in

context of the organisational analysis observed, contextualised and measured – then

it is implied that the gap analysis has been solved and that the QLM and the QLQ to

measure the model is the solution.

In Chapter 6: analysis and Chapter 7: findings, the QLM and the QLQ have been

validated, within all constructs from the perspective of scientific paradigm, modelling

(mental and physical – shown by way of outcomes), value systems and responsive

behaviours (Refer to Figure 4.4, Chapter 4 and 7.2, Chapter 7), through quantitative

and qualitative analysis by way of satisfying the primary and secondary research

objectives:

(i) Define and deduce a Quantum Leadership Model (QLM)

• Define the QLM:

o Understand the paradigms of Newtonian and Quantum physics and their

defining features within a paradigm shift framework.

o Review current leadership models and their constructs in relation to this

broad approach.

• Deduce the QLM

(ii) Define and deduce a measurement instrument – the Quantum Leadership


• Define the requirements for a measurement instrument based on the QLM

• Derive the QLQ

345

(iii) Validate the QLQ and QLM

• Validate the QLQ, using scientifically acceptable methodologies and

measurement instruments

• Validate the QLM, using scientifically acceptable methodologies and

measurement instruments

Thus the QLM and QLQ, through satisfying the primary research objectives, answers

the research hypothesis postulated:

To use a quantum physics based worldview to: define, deduce and validate a

quantum leadership model and measurement instrument.

From this research hypothesis, it can further then be inferred, that the QLM can be

used as a model for leadership and in addition that the QLQ can be used to measure

the level of quantum leadership behaviour and supporting quantum leadership shift

(quantitative measure of the impact of quantum individuation, due to the quantum

entanglement of positively motivated behavioural constructs, and the resultant shift in

holistic behaviour within an individual), thus establishing a new leadership theory.

Thus the MLQ and QLQ satisfy the gap analysis as induced within the literature

review (Refer to Chapter 2 and Chapter 3) and is thus proposed as the solution as a

leadership model within organisations operating in dynamic complex environments.

7.6.2. Gap alignment, discussion and interpretation

By satisfying the primary objectives; answering the research hypothesis and in so

doing clarifying and fulfilling the purpose of this thesis: The development of a

Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) and Measurement instrument – The Quantum

Leadership Questionnaire (QLQ), the implication of the validation of this study for

organisations (people groups) is an important step in delivering on multi-dimensional

capital flows, through the cultural paradigm shift elements associated with the

Einsteinian-Quantum worldview (science), of models, values and behaviours within

society as suggested by various academics and authors as referred to in this thesis:

Einstein (1920), Jung (1969), Stapp (1975), Bohm (1980), Gribbin (1984), Herbert

346

(1987), Penrose (1989), (Senge, 1989, 1990, 1994, 2006), Wheatley (1992, 1999),

Collins and Porras (1994), Jaworski (1996), Zohar (1999), Zohar et al. (2001, 2004),

Shelton (2001, 2003), Fornaciari et al. (2001), Kilman (2001), Strack et al., (2002),

Strack (2002), Pellissier (1999, 2003), Shelton et al. (2001, 2003), Lee (2004),

Hocking (2005); Calder (2005), Gardner et al. (2005), Michie (2005); Fairholm (1998,

2006), Gummesson (2006), and Campbell (2007)

Due to these two statements above, one can begin to interpret the leadership and

organisational outcomes, as proposed by these academics and authors, pointed too,

based on the predictive premise of the QLM.

From the literature review it was clarified that two duelling scientific paradigms exist:

the Newtonian-Cartesian scientific paradigm and the Einsteinian-Quantum scientific

paradigm. As we have deduced through the paradigm shift model (Refer to Figure

6.4, Chapter 6), this forms the basis for mental models (as a metaphor) and as

suggested through the integration of consciousness with physics, beyond a

metaphor into the areas of metaphysics. In addition these models introduce values in

which these models are managed by the psyche and to which behaviour is a

response, eliciting physical organisational outcomes consistent with the mental

models.

The base Einsteinian-Quantum scientific worldview of: a universe of up to eleven

dimensions (Greene, 2004), filled with continually moving and vibrating self-motion

monads (Kilman, 2001) in space filled with matter and energy between these

monads indicates a fundamental shift in this science as opposed to Newtonian-

Cartesian science (Refer to Section 2.3.2.1). Due to this paradigm shift in thinking,

this scientific worldview must elicit a response in the implicit basic assumptions that

make up the constitutive mechanisms of the world around us and how we interpret

these assumptions in the construction of our world (Table 2.1) including the social

constructions. These social implications are driven by the monastic unification

between consciousness and matter, the uncertainty in terms of outcomes with self-

motion monads and the eternal connections between self-motion monads (Kilman,

2001). This is fundamental to our understanding of social systems within

347

organisations (people collectives) (Wheatley, 1992; Shelton et al., 2001, 2003;

Kilman, 2001; Fairholm, 2004), as people are self-motion monads (Bohm, 1980).

From the premise of a shift in paradigm towards an Einsteinian-Quantum science

theory, this is then purposed as a metaphor for organisational design, and suggests

a worldview in which organisations are conscious administrators of a dynamic

system: stakeholder driven, multi-dimensional, 360º systems, managed through the

empowered relations among active participants (people) up and down the value

chain (Wheatley, 1992, 1999; Kilman, 2001; Shelton et al., 2001, 2003; Lee 2004,

Gummeson, 2006). Integration occurs through shared vision and value systems,

infused with shared information, which forms boundaries (values) and guides

intuitive cross-functional decision making, capable of enabling self-designing cross-

boundary processes (Wheatley, 1999; Kilman, 2001) that ensure dynamic changes

can occur in the system when external environmental factors affect the bounded

instability (fractals in chaos theory) (Refer to Figure 2.3 and Table 2.3, Chapter 2).

This new paradigm relies on the internal active participation of people (Kilman, 2001;

Shelton et al., 2001, 2004).

However, as stated in this section, to guide these independently active

organisational participants a central tenet of meaning (Wheatley, 1992, 1999) or set

of values is required. From a values determination perspective (Refer to Section 2.4,

Chapter 2), the shift away from a pure Newtonian-Cartesian explicit value

measurement system towards an Einsteinian-Quantum view of the world and the

inclusion of implicit value measures has measurable implications for people-based

collectives (organisations) in society today.

From an Einsteinian-Quantum perspective, pure shareholder value motives are

replaced by a wider systems view of stakeholder value motivations (Zohar et al.,

2001, 2004). Value chains are measured from a holistic perspective where, shared

values drive empowered relations and interactions between self-motion monads

(consciously active participants - people) and knowledge and information sharing are

highly valued (Wheatley, 1999, Kilman, 2001). This is a systems view (Senge, 1989,

1990, 1994, 2006), and takes into account the social context of participant’s actions

(EQ), in addition organisational participant’s have the ability to perceive future

348

possibilities and opportunities, grounded in shared organisational meaning, through

shared visioning and strategy (SQ) which adds continual value to the organisational

stakeholders (see Table 2.10) (Zohar et al., 2001, 2004).

The responses to this value system, is presented in the behaviour of its participants,

which has a physical impact on organisational outcomes in terms material (financial),

social and spiritual capital (Zohar et al., 2004) as per the constructs deduced within

the QLM.

Through the validation of the QLM, the researcher contends that the QLM is a

holistic new leadership model, as it is based in scientific modelling and a cultural

framework, which aligns science and psychology through linking matter to

consciousness into a holistic model, in opposition to Newtonian-Cartesian styled

leadership as suggested by the gap analysis performed on the transformational

leadership model (Refer to Sections 3.2.3.3 and 2.2.4.3, Chapter 3). Together with

the QLQ, the QLM satisfies the criteria of a new holistic and predictive leadership

behavioural model and measurement instrument, as called for over many decades,

by the likes of: Follett (1933 in Humphreys et al. 2003), Hennefrund (1985), Lawler

(1986), Bass and Stodgill (1990), Weisbord (1992), Hennefrund (1985), Emery and

Purser (1996), Koehler and Pankowski (1996), Pfeffer (1999), Hinking (1999), Pfeffer

(1999), Landrum, Howell and Paris (2000), Alban-Metcalfe and Alimo-Metcalfe

(2000), De Charon (2001), Kent, Crotts and Azziz (2003), Humphrey and Einstein

(2003), Luthans and Avolio (2003) and Campbell (2007). The QLM introduces a

fundamental shift in the understanding of leadership behaviour and through the

validation of the QLM into a holistic model. Thus the conscious behavioural

interaction of leaders across the organisation will have fundamental impacts on

physical outcomes, as supported by the findings within the Implats data.

This researcher argues that a true unified and holistic theory of leadership and

specifically leadership behaviour can now be achieved due to the shift in science

from a Newtonian-Cartesian worldview to an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview which

forms the basis for the social constructions within our world. The leadership model

as proposed by the QLM, points to quantum individuated behaviour, as a response

to quantum individuation, as a key element in quantum leadership, which through the

349

resultant quantum multiplier effect on juxtaposed behavioural constructs, ensures

positive quantum leadership shift effects across the holistic behaviour of the

individual, thus positively impacting on organisational outcomes.

350

CHAPTER 8: CONCLUSIONS

8.1. Introduction

This research set out to review the paradigm shift between the Newtonian-Cartesian

and Einsteinian-Quantum worldviews with respect to leadership within a South

African context.

Within the research process adopted (Refer to Figure 5.1, Chapter 5), through a

descriptive theory approach, using the paradigm shift model framework (Refer to

Figure 5.7, Chapter 5), and an inductive method of enquiry, the constructs for the

QLM were identified and stratified. From this process of enquiry a common paradigm

shift alignment table was constructed to derive the constructs which formed the basis

for the deduction of the QLM and QLM. This model and questionnaire were then

validated, through a normative approach, from both a quantitative and qualitative

perspective, using inductive methods of enquiry. From the outcomes of this

triangulated analysis, the findings were deduced and presented.

Thus a QLM and QLQ were developed, and satisfies the purpose of this thesis.

8.2. Research synthesis

This research synthesis is an overview of the detail of the research conclusions

throughout the thesis.

A gap analysis was established through an in depth inductive literature review from

the scientific bases of Newtonian-Cartesian science and Einsteinian-Quantum

science to verify the research (Refer to Chapter 1). These gaps were induced by way

of using scientific models as a metaphor upon which to construct two separate

worldviews. These worldviews were then applied to organisations (as modelling

metaphors), using the paradigm shift model constructs: organisational design

(mental and physical models), and the values to support these models (Refer to

Chapter 2). In addition, through the quantum principle of integrating consciousness

and matter, the alignment of psychological values and behaviours (as a response) to

this paradigm was made possible through the alignment of Maslow motivational

351

values to CAS theory (Zohar et al., 2004). This behavioural alignment was then

triangulated against contemporary leadership models (transformational leadership

and authentic leadership) and measurement instrument constructs (Refer to Chapter

3). However, it was induced that transformational leadership (Bass and Avolio,

1999), due to the charismatic nature of the model, was based on a Newtonian-

Cartesian worldview and although authentic leadership (Avolio, 2007) had many

characteristics as defined for quantum leadership, no specific constructs had yet

been defined and no measurement instrument existed to understand the weightings

against constructs for measurement. This triangulation of leadership models against

the Einsteinian-Quantum requirements, further defined a leadership gap between

current contemporary leadership models of transformational leadership (Bass and

Avolio, 1999) and authentic leadership (Avolio, 2007) and the requirements for a

QLM.

Thus a gap between current organisational models (mental and physical), values

and leadership behaviours was defined. This gap was based on the difference

between a Newtonian-Cartesian worldview and an Einsteinium-Quantum worldview,

when used as a base to define these two paradigms.

To derive the QLM constructs, a common paradigm shift alignment table was

constructed and information derived in the form of secondary data (scientific

principles, models, values, behaviours) using content analysis from the literature

review. These were formatted into a common set of constructs using the paradigm

shift model as a framework. Thus the QLM constructs were derived and the QLM

deduced. From the construct elements primary and secondary variables were

derived and indicator variables were defined, for purposes of prediction.

The QLM, formed the structure for the construction of the QLQ. The QLQ was then

deduced based on the data and information contained within these constructs.

Questions were aligned to the constructs through content analysis data as per the

common paradigm shift alignment table contents, and scoring applied according to

the Likert scale. These scores were weighted across constructs according to a

Maslow motivational value scale (Zohar et al., 2004).

352

Through a normative approach, the QLQ and QLM were then validated through

inductive methods using both quantitative and qualitative methods.

Beyond validating the QLQ to ensure internal consistency and reliability against the

constructs as deduced for the QLM (validated in Chapter 6 using a pilot study

group), all of the QLM constructs were validated within a real world situation against

a purposive sample. The purposive sample organisation, Impala Platinum Ltd

(Implats) satisfied all of the gateway sampling filters. Implats was defined as an

organisation that had been through tremendous change. During this change they

had achieved a resultant quantum shift in measurable organisational outcomes.

These outcomes were large enough to ensure that, they were not only industry

segment leaders (off of a base of being a follower), but also industry and overall

total market leaders in terms of average returns (as measured by average share

price data by quarter) for at least five years, in relation to other organisations in the

South Africa.

This was an important element of the QLM validation, as the QLM is built on a

fundamental premise that: leadership behaviour which is grounded in the constructs

of the QLM (scientific worldview, organisational design models, and values systems)

would result in quantum shifts in leadership behaviour as a response, and that this

leadership behaviour would then elicit examples of quantum shifts in organisational

outcomes as measured by material (financial), social (stakeholders) and spiritual

(relationships) capital.

Through the analysis of correlations between primary and secondary variables within

and between constructs of the QLM, it was found that the constructs had sufficient

positive correlative relationships for internal validity and consistency. The

correlations further satisfied the requirements of quantum leaders to have quantum

individuated responses to the primary predictor variables (values), in terms of the

quantum entanglement of the constructs required for individuation. This was further

validation of the QLM’s premise.

In addition to satisfy the directional influence of behavioural constructs as a response

to the primary indicator variables (values) the correlative relational nature (through

353

correlation analysis) and directional predictiveness (through scatter plot diagrams) of

these variables between constructs, were also tested and found to be consistent with

the QLM premise.

Furthermore, descriptive statistical analyses was utilised to gauge the quantum

leadership shift effect between juxtaposed constructs as per the QLM. The findings

from the positive correlation analysis within and between constructs were such that

quantum individuation (through quantum entanglement between constructs) leads to

a predictive directional nature between behaviours as a response to quantum

individuation. This is in such a way so as to influence behaviour from a holistic

leadership perspective in a measurable direction, consistent with a quantum

multiplier effect, as proposed by both Jung (individuation) and Maslow (peak

experiences / self-enlightenment).

The quantum leadership shift effect due to this was measured to be 681.72% for the

total FIXCO team and 907.74% for the operational team within the Implats executive.

This shift as measured for pre-quantum individuation vs. post-quantum individuation

using descriptive statistics, is higher than the maximum expected for a quantum

leadership shift effect of 560%, as proposed by the Maslow scale of motivations, as

aligned to peak experiences (motivational predictor variable) scoring. Thus,

suggesting that quantum individuation (through quantum entanglement of quantum

behavioural constructs) leading to a quantum individuated (holistic) being (being as

per Jung), has a larger positive effect on negative motivations than expected through

current psyche theory postulated on the subject.

Finally, the purposive sample selection to a degree validated that Impala Platinum

Ltd had, had material capital exponential returns above its nearest competitors,

within its industry segment, against the industry as a whole and furthermore against

the entire market of 1700% aggregated over a 5 year period. However the premise

of the QLM was that the expected examples of outcomes would be holistic, beyond

material (financial) outcomes but also in respect of social and spiritual capital. The

researcher therefore triangulated qualitative information, gleaned from data through

content analysis from: one-on-one interviews with the Impala Platinum Ltd executive

team, and public information from annual reports, against expected material, social

354

and spiritual outcomes as premised by the QLM, through the alignment of

behavioural constructs to organisational outcomes. This triangulation further

substantiated the holistic nature of the QLM and aligned organisational outcome

examples of material, social and spiritual capital to the shift in leadership behaviours

as associated with the QLM constructs and to specific behavioural constructs. Thus,

it is contended that through the validation of this research that: quantum leadership

behaviours have a predictive directional influence on specific measurable

organisational outcomes.

The researcher thus, contends that the objectives of the research were achieved in

that, the researcher deduced a leadership model and validated this model as a

solution to the gap in research that exists between the worldviews established

through Einsteinian-Quantum physics and Newtonian-Cartesian as a base for

worldviews that impact on leadership behaviours. As such, the researcher re-defined

the nature of leadership within organisations. This paradigm shift is based on

understanding the quantum scientific paradigm and the model it represents as a

metaphor for organisational modelling, the values that support this model, the

behaviour as a response to these values that were established and the expected

organisational outcomes as a result. The result of this research answers the

research hypothesis postulated. In support of which, the researcher achieved the

primary objectives as established to:

• Define and deduce a Quantum Leadership Model (QLM)

• Define and deduce a measurement instrument – the Quantum Leadership


• Validate the QLQ and QLM

8.3. Value of the QLM and QLQ to society

8.3.1. Scientific value

(i) Impact on social and management sciences

The validation of the QLM and QLQ in South Africa has enormous implications for

organisational design, human resources management and business management

disciplines. It gives the sciences, a tool to utilise within complex environments to

355

investigate and understand the impact of leadership theory on physical outcomes

and opens up a new opportunity for the research community.

.

(ii) Impact on physics and natural sciences sectors

The impact on physics and natural sciences sectors through the integration of these

two fields of research is an important bridge to build in aligning cross-disciplined

research teams to collaborate in finding solutions to real world problems within the

social and management sciences disciplines. This research can form the basis for

the birth a number of new cross-discipline initiatives focused on understanding how

further research into complex systems behaviour can effect organisational design.

(iii) Impact on humanistic psychological sciences

From a humanistic psychological perspective, using physics as a metaphorical

model to understand multiple dimensions, integrates conscious interaction with

physical matter. This has, beyond physical dimensions, implications for

understanding spirituality within the discipline of clinical psychology.

In addition, from a pure behavioural modelling perspective, the shift in thinking from

a Maslow needs based psychological construct as a driver for behaviour, to a

motivational construct alone, suggests a shift in thinking away from typical

humanistic psychology.

Furthermore, the quantitative analysis of quantum individuation through alignment of

the quantum behavioural constructs (quantum entangled individuation) towards a

holistic quantum individuated being, satisfies Jungian theory from an analytical

perspective.

8.3.2. Academic value

8.3.2.1. Research methodology and process

As this research was focused on understanding leadership behaviour within an

organisational context, through the lens of quantum physics as a metaphor, it did not

lend itself to traditional structured organisational research. Research based in

complexity can not fit into a structured research design that is by nature linear. Such

356

a topic requires a non-linear approach. Thus a holistic approach was adopted for this

thesis into social systems.

Thus, the researcher investigated and synthesised various research theories and

methodologies to satisfy the requirements of a holistic research design to satisfy the

required outcomes, in line with the paradigm shift in thinking required, based on the

shift in science as postulated.

The use of the paradigm shift model as a framework around which to build the

research design, and the integrated use of inductive and deductive methods (due to

the multi-disciplinary and multi-level approach), beyond the use of quantitative and

qualitative techniques was in the spirit of a holistic approach to research. This as

suggested by the researcher, adds methodological value to other researchers for

future research that is cross-discipline and which may require a holistic approach

(Refer to Section 5.3.4.1 and Figure 5.1, Chapter 5) to their enquiry.

8.3.2.2. Theoretical value

The findings aligning quantum physics to organisational models, values and

behaviours as a result, advance the theoretical understanding of, quantum science

and the models it postulates as a metaphor for organisational behaviour. The further

successful testing of this model within the organisational setting of Implats as part of

an ex-post facto case study analysis, advances the theoretical understandings of

how examples within organisational outcomes can be linked to shifts in behaviour.

These findings have tremendous theoretical value for organisations wishing to drive

quantum change, in South Africa, emerging markets and possibly if generalise-able

(through further research), across a global spectrum of society.

8.3.3. Business value

The validation of the QLM within a global industry player in South Africa, is an

important indicator for emerging market economies needing to shift between the third

world and the first world to compete in this market space. This research therefore

has revealed important leadership findings for emerging market companies wanting

357

to compete at a global scale. The impact on commercial organisations can be

commented on, as the purposive sample was in this environment (outcomes for non-

commercial organisations may be different).

The impact of the QLM on commercial organisational designs (as evidenced through

the ex-post facto case study of Implats, may impact other organisations in the

following way (as evidenced at Implats):

• Organisations will be seen as a part of a greater whole within the environment. In

addition a systems view of the organisation is introduced, where all stakeholders

are involved.

• A central identity of meaning holds the organisation together and in the Implats

case study this was indicated in their vision statement of: One team, one vision.

• Empowered decision making relationships across organisational boundaries are

aligned across the organisation and between supply chain partners.

• Cross boundary processes are engineered, and collaborative systems are

introduced. These processes include transparent information flows between all

value chain partners.

• Value adding processes are introduced are controlled and continuously

improved, by the process owners within the value chain.

• Self-organising principles are applied and empowerment is filtered into teams

making decisions on organisational design and processes to align to demand or

supply movements, as and when required.

• Conscious empowerment is employed as a value. Decision making is taken down

to the lowest levels of the organisation and is encouraged and supported with

training.

• Flexible systems-thinking is employed throughout the organisation. Measurement

systems are not controlling but supporting, and can be changed to support the

organisational outcomes, by the teams who are responsible for delivery.

In addition, leadership and change value add, implementation of the QLM and QLQ,

for leadership training and hiring practices can lead to strategic value add in the

areas of: visioning, strategy, organisational structure and design and execution.

358

Furthermore, the predictive nature of organisational outcomes based on leadership

behaviours has implications for mergers, acquisitions and understanding the nature

of future growth of companies traded on public stock exchange markets.

8.4. Limitations of research

8.4.1. Limitations in theory and methodology

It is important to note that, due to the nature of the paradigm shift from a Newtonian-

Cartesian worldview to an Einsteinian-Quantum worldview an impact on ontological

positions is observed. The Newtonian-Cartesian worldview encourages an ontology

of; separateness of parts, causality and certainty. Whereas an Einsteinian-Quantum

worldview encourages the ontology of wholeness, interrelatedness and the principle

of uncertainty preside. Thus the use of empirical scientific methods, as much as it is

required to form causal and predictive inferences for future states (based on factual

known knowledge), the Einsteinian-Quantum worldview suggests that not all

variables are known and that outcomes are only predictable in a probabilistic sense.

This suggests that the outcomes of this thesis, by taking into account the inclusion of

a new scientific worldview, may vary depending on the circumstances in which the

QLM and QLQ are viewed. Yet, the purposive sampling technique targeting a

specific company in South Africa, selected due to their exponential growth against

competitors clearly showed the transition from a Newtonian-Cartesian worldview to

an Einsteinian-Quantum one. This made them the ideal case study to show the shift

in leadership experienced and the predictive nature of this change on material, social

and spiritual capital outcomes. Which is a focal point in satisfying, the objectives of

this thesis.

In addition the analysis conducted is on a South African, global mining company and

in context is culturally western in intent. Although the QLM suggests that as the base

upon which this model is derived is holistic, it is very possible that in circumstances

where this model is tested in a cultural setting other than a westernised culture that

the same shift may not observable.

359

8.4.2. Limitations in terms of available literature

The researcher experienced limitations in terms of available peer reviewed academic

literature on the subject of a holistic approach to leadership from the base of

integrating science and psyche, especially between the periods of 1999 to 2007.

8.4.3. Limitations in quantitative and qualitative analysis

8.4.3.1. Data volumes

Limitations in data volumes were experienced from the purposive sample study due

to the size of the sample. This limit restricts any form of external validity analysis as

well as directional causality between constructs as per the QLM derivation suggests.

This limits directional analysis between constructs to directional predictive analysis

through scatter plot diagrams (as used within the analysis in Chapter 6).

8.4.3.2. Purposive nature of pilot study group

Quantitative analysis of the QLQ was done utilising data from a purposive pilot

group. This group had been selected by the researcher, because of their personal

experiences of organisational transformations, from Newtonian-Cartesian styled

organisations to Einsteinian-Quantum styled organisations. This suggests a

subjective approach. However, the QLQ as utilised to analyse the QLM through the

purposive sample, did deliver information of a consistent and valid nature, so as to

validate the QLM.

8.4.3.3. Limitation in usable QLQ data

Usable QLQ data from the sample, was furthermore limited to seven of the nine

executives involved within the turnaround process at Impala Platinum Ltd. Thus

usable data are limited to 78% of the sample. As these two individuals excluded from

the quantitative data sets are influential members of the team, being the then

Chairman and the Chief financial officer over the transition point, in-depth interviews

were conducted with these individuals and used for qualitative triangulation

purposes.

360

8.4.4. Possible assumption based limitations

8.4.4.1. Physical science assumption

It was assumed that science (Quantum and Newtonian) in its understanding of the

world around us, both in a non-physical and a physical state has fundamentally been

well defined, studied and tested to be factual, within the limitations of research

methods available.

8.4.4.2. Psychological science assumption

It was assumed, that psychological concepts are too, fundamentally been defined,

studied and tested to be factual, within the limitations of research methods and case

study data available. As such, the researcher has accepted these theories to be

correct and that they could be utilised as stated in this thesis as science.

8.5. Future research opportunities

8.5.1. Causality of constructs

As the purposive sample size was small, linear regression analysis could not be

utilised to show directional causality between constructs as suggested within the

QLM (Refer to Chapter 4, Figure. 4.7). This is therefore viewed as an opportunity for

researchers in larger countries, with larger stock markets and therefore larger

sample size opportunities, such as the eleven companies in the Good to Great study

sample (Collins, 2001), based in the U.S.A. to do such causality testing.

8.5.2. Further sample study analysis

The researcher suggests that even though the sampling gateway technique was

robust, it is suggested that findings may not be conclusive and need to be tested

against a wider sample group and that further comparative studies (between

organisations) are needed for further external validation of the QLM. An example of

this would be the comparative study of senior executives within the competitor

example of Impala Platinum over the same period (1990 to 2001).

361

8.6. Concluding statements

The thesis set out to develop a QLM and a QLQ. In support of this, a unique

worldview is presented of leadership that, integrates perspectives from the quantum

physical, social and management, and humanistic psychological sciences, into one

holistic leadership model.

Furthermore, the leadership model as proposed by the QLM points to quantum

individuated behaviour, as a response to quantum individuation (due to quantum

entanglement of behavioural constructs), as a key element in quantum leadership.

Quantum individuation (through quantum entanglement) within the QLM, through the

resultant quantum multiplier effect on juxtaposed behavioural constructs, ensures

positive quantum leadership shift effects across the holistic behaviour of the

individual. The predictive nature of this leadership behavioural shift, positively

impacts on organisational outcomes.

It is finally contended, by the researcher that, the QLM and the QLQ can be used as

a unique approach, to measure holistic leadership behaviours, within organisations

operating in complex environments, to predict quantum leaps in material, social and

spiritual capital.

362

REFERENCES

Alban-Metcalfe R.J. & Alimo-Metcalfe, B. (2000). The transformational leadership

questionnaire (TLQ-LGV): a convergent and discriminant validation study.

Leadership & Organisational Development Journal, pp. 280 - 296.

Aristotle & Barnes, J. (1984). Complete Works of Aristotle. Vol. 2, Princeton

University Press.

Avolio, B.J. & Gardner, W.J. (2005). Authentic leadership development: getting to

the root of positive forms of leadership, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16, pp.

315 - 338.

Avolio, B.J. & Luthans, F. (2006). The High Impact Leader: Moments Matter in

accelerating Authentic Leadership Development, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.

Avolio, B.J., Waldman, D. A. & Yammarino, F. J. (1991). Leading in the 1990s:

The Four I's of Transformational Leadership, Journal of European Industrial

Training, Vol. 15, Iss. 4.

Axley, S. R. & McMahon, T. R. Complexity: A frontier for management education,

(2006). Journal of Management Education. Thousand Oaks, Vol. 30, Iss. 2, pp.

295 – 316.

Badaracco, J. L. (1992). Business ethics: four spheres of executive

responsibility, California Management Review, Vol. 34, No. 3, Spring, pp. 64 - 79.

Badaracco, J. L. (1998). The Discipline of building Character, Harvard Business

Review, Vol. 76, Iss. 2, pp. 114 – 124.

Barnard, C.I. (1938). The functions of the Executive. Harvard University Press,

Cambridge, MA 13th Anniversary ed.

Barton, S. (1994). Chaos, self-organisation, and psychology. American

Psychologist, pp. 5 - 14.

363

Bass, B. M. & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic

transformational leadership behaviour [Electronic Version]. Leadership Quarterly,

Vol. 10, p. 181.

Bass, B.M. (1999). Two Decades of Research and Development in

Transformational Leadership, European Journal of Organisational Psychology.

Vol. 8, Iss. 1, pp. 9 - 32.

Bass, B.M. & Avolio, B.J. (1994). Improving organisational effectiveness through

transformational leadership. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Bass, B.M. & Stodgill (1990). Bass and Stodgill's Handbook of Leadership:

Theory, Research and Managerial Applications, 3rd Ed., Free Press, New York,

NY.

Bates, M. & Kiersey, D.W. (1984). Please Understand Me, Prometheus Nemesis

Book Company, CA.

Beckhofer, F. (1974). Current approaches to empirical research: some central

ideas, Approaches to Sociology, London Rutledge.

Begley, P.T. (2006). Self-knowledge, capacity and sensitivity: Prerequisites to

authentic leadership by school principals, Journal of Educational Administration

Vol. 44, No. 6, pp. 570-589.

Bennis, W. & Nanus, B (1985). Leaders. New York: Harper and Row.

Beuche, F.J. (2005). Schaum's Outline of College Physics, 10th Ed., McGraw-

Hill.

Black, J. & Fabian, F.H. (2000). Fractals, Nested Resources and Competence

Based Competition. Theory Development for Competence-Based Strategic

Management, JAI Press series of Advances in Applied Business Strategy Series,

John Wiley & Sons.

364

Bohm, D. (1980). Wholeness and the Implicate Order. London: Ark Paperbacks.

Brown, F.W., Bryant, S.E. & Reilly, M.D. (2006). Does Emotional Intelligence –

as measured by the EQI – influence transformational leadership and/or desirable

outcomes? Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 27, Iss. 5.

Bryant, S.E. (2003). The Role of Transformational and Transactional Leadership

in Creating, Sharing and Exploiting Organizational Knowledge, Journal of

Leadership & Organizational Studies, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 32 – 44.

Bryman, A. (1992). Charisma & leadership in organizations, Sage Publications,

Newbury Park, C.A.

Burke, R. (1998). Downsizing and restructuring in organisations: research

findings and lessons learned introduction, Canadian Journal of Administrative

Sciences, No.15, pp. 297 - 299.

Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. NY: Harper & Row, Publishers.

Calder, N. (2005). Magic Universe, The Oxford Guide to Modern Science, Oxford

University Press.

Campbell, C.R. (2007). On the journey towards wholeness in leader theories,

Leadership and Organisation Development Journal, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 137 –

153.

Carey, M.R. (1992). Transformational leadership and the fundamental option for

self-transcendence, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 217 - 236.

Carlisle, P.R. & Christensen (2005). The cycles in theory building for

management research, Version 6.0, Harvard Business School.

Champy, J. (1995). Reengineering management. New York: Harper Business.

Champy, J. & Nohria, N. (1996). Fast forward: The best ideas on managing

business change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

365

Collins, J. (2001). Level 5 leadership: the triumph of humility and fierce resolve,

Harvard Business Review, Vol. 79, No. 1, pp. 67 - 76.

Collins, J. (2001). Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and

Others Don't, Collins Business, New York.

Collins, J. & Poras, J. (1994). Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary

Companies, Harper Collins, New York.

Conger, J. A. (1989). The charismatic leader. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Publishers.

Conger, J. A. & Kanungo, R. N. (1988). Charismatic leadership: The elusive

factor in organizational effectiveness, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cooper, C.D., Scandura, T.A. & Schriesheim, C.A. (2005). Looking forward but

learning from our past: Potential challenges to developing authentic leadership

theory and authentic leaders, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16, pp. 475 – 493.

Cooper, D.R., & Schindler, P.S. (2001). Business research methods, Irwin,

McGraw-Hill, Boston, USA, 7th Ed.

Crawford, C.B. (2005). Effects of transformational leadership and organizational

position on knowledge management, Journal of Knowledge Management; Vol. 9,

Iss. 6.

Davies, J., Easterby-Smith, M. (1984). Learning and Developing from managerial

work experiences, Journal of Management studies, Vol. 2, pp. 169 – 183.

Davies, M., Stankov, L. & Roberts, R.D. (1998). Emotional intelligence: in search

of an elusive construct, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 75, p.

98.

De Charon, L. (2003). A transformational leadership development program:

Jungian psychological type, Organization Development Journal, Vol. 21, No. 3, p.

9.

366

Dehler, G.E. & Welsh, M.A. (1994). Spirituality and organisational

transformation: implications for the new management paradigm, Journal of

Managerial Psychology, Vol. 9, No. 6, pp. 17 - 26.

Dicken, P. (1999). Global shift: Transforming the world economy, 3rd ed. London:

Paul Chapman.

Drath, W.H. & Palus, C.J. (1994). Making Common Sense: Leadership as

Meaning-making in a Community of Practice, Center for Creative Leadership,

Greensboro, NC.

Drucker, P.F. (1994). Managing for the future. London: Butterworth

Dubinsky, A.J., Yammarino, F.J., Jolson, M.A. & Spangler, W.D. (1995).

Transformational leadership: An investigation into Sales Management. Journal of

Personal Selling & Sales Management, Vol. 15, Iss. 2, pp. 17 - 31.

Dubrin (1965). The complete idiots guide to leadership. Alpha Books.

Dubrin, A. (2006). Leadership: Research Findings, Practice, and Skills. South-

Western College Pub; 5 Ed. (1st Ed, 1965).

Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R. & Lowerby, A. (2001). Management Research:

An Introduction. Sage Publications Ltd, 2nd Ed.

Einstein, A. (1920). Relativity: The Special and General Theory. New York,

Henry Holt.

Einstein, A. (1961). Relativity: The special and general theory. New York:

Bonanza Books.

Emery, M. & Purser, R. (1996). The Search Conference. San Francisco: Simon &

Schuster.

Euclid. (1956). The thirteen books of the elements. New York, Dover.

367

Fairholm, G.W. (1998). Perspectives on Leadership: From the Science of

Management to its Spiritual Heart, Quorum Books, Westport, CT.

Fairholm, M.R. (2004). A new sciences outline for leadership development. The

Leadership & Organization Development Journal, Vol. 25, No. 4, pp. 369 – 383.

Fayol, H. (1949). General and industrial management, London: Pitman.

Feyerabend, P. (1924 - 1994). Lecture II – Feyerabend (online). Available from:

http://www.sar.bolton.ac.uk/ltl/lecture2/feryerabend.htm (accessed 22 March

2006).

Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against method (online). Available from:

http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/ge/feyerabe.htm

(accessed 22 March 2006).

Fiedler, F.E. (1967). A theory of leadership effectiveness, New York: McGraw-

Hill.

Follett, M.P. (1933). The essentials of leadership, lecture delivered at

Department of Business Administration, London School of Economics and

Political Science.

Follett, M.P. (2003). Dynamic Administration: The Collected Papers of Mary

Follett: Early Sociology of Management and Organizations, Routledge.

Fornaciari, C.J & Dean, K.L. (2001). Making the quantum leap: Lessons from

physics on studying spirituality and religion in organisations, Journal of

Organisational Change Management, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 335 - 351. MCB

University Press.

Fry, L.W., Matherly (2006). Spiritual Leadership and Organizational

Performance: An Exploratory Study, Tarleton State University, Central Texas.

Furlong, N. & Lovelace, E. & Lovelace, K. (2000). Research methods and

statistics: An integrated approach. Orlando: Harcourt College Publishers

368

Gardner, W., Avolio, B., Luthans, F., May, D.R. & Walumbwa, F. (2005). Can you

see the real me? A self-based model of authentic leader and follower

development, The Leadership Quarterly Vol. 16, pp. 343 – 372.

Gates, W.H. & Hemingway, C.(1999). Business @ the speed of thought: Using a

digital nervous system. New York: Warner Books

Gilbreth, L. M. (1921). The Psychology of Management: The Function of the

Mind in Determining, Teaching and Installing Methods of Least Waste. Sturgis

and Walton Company, New York.

Goldstein, I.L. (1993). Training in Organizations: Needs Assessment,

Development, and Evaluation, Brooks/Cole Publishing, Pacific Grove, CA,

Goldstein, J. (1994). The Unshackled Organization, Productivity Press, Inc.,

Portland, OR.

Goswami, A. (1993). The self-aware universe: How consciousness creates the

material world. New York: Tarcher/Putnam.

Graham, P. (1996). Mary Parker Follett Prophet of Management, Harvard

Business School Press, Boston, MA.

Greene, B. (2004). The Elegant Universe: Superstrings, Hidden Dimensions, and

the Quest for the Ultimate Theory, New York: Random House Inc.

Gribbin, J. (1984). In search of Schrödinger’s cat: Quantum physics and reality.

New York: Bantam

Guillory, W.A. (2007). The Future Perfect organization: leadership for the twenty-

first century – Part I, Industrial and Commercial Training, Vol. 39, Iss. 1.

Gummesson, E. (2006). Qualitative research in management: addressing

complexity, context and persona, Management Decision, Vol. 44, pp. 167 – 179.

Handy, C. (1995). The age of unreason. London: Arrow.

369

Harman, G. (2002). Producing PhD graduates in Australia for the knowledge

economy, Higher Education Research & Development, Vol. 21, No.2, pp.179 -

190.

Hater, J.J. & Bass, B.M. (1988). Supervisors evaluations and subordinates

perceptions of transformational leadership, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.

73, pp. 695 - 702.

Hawking, S. (1999). A brief history of relativity, Time Magazine, Special tribute

issue to Albert Einstein, pp. 66 - 81.

Henderson, A.M. & Parsons, T. (1947). Theory of Social and Economic

Organization, Falcons wing press.

Herbert, N. (1987). Quantum reality: Beyond the new physics. New York: Anchor

Books.

Herbert, N. (1993), Elemental mind: Human consciousness and the new physics

New York, N.Y. Dutton.

Heylighen, F. (1988). Building a science of complexity. Invited paper, published

in: Proceedings of the 1988 Annual Conference of the Cybernetics Society,

London.

Hinkin, T.R. & Tracey, J.B. (1999). The relevance of charisma for

transformational leadership in stable organizations, Journal of Organizational

Change Management, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 105 - 119.

Hinkin, T.R. & Tracey, J.B. (1998). Transformational leadership, or effective

managerial practices? Group and Organisational Management, Vol. 23, No. 3,

pp. 220 - 236.

Hitt, M. A. & Ireland, R. D. (2002). The essence of strategic leadership:

Managing human and social capital. Journal of Leadership and Organisational

Studies, Vol.9, Iss. 1, pp. 3 - 14.

370

Hocking, T.B. (2005). The History of modern physics. Based on lectures by

Carson, C., UC Berkeley.

Holbrook, Morris B. (2003). Adventures in Complexity: An Essay on Dynamic

Open Complex Adaptive Systems, Butterfly Effects, Self-Organizing Order,

Coevolution, the Ecological Perspective, Fitness Landscapes, Market Spaces,

Emergent Beauty at the Edge of Chaos, and All That Jazz, Academy of

Marketing Science Review. Vancouver, Vol. 2003, pg. 1.

Horgan, (1994). Can science explain consciousness? Scientific American, pp. 88

- 94.

House, R.J. & Shamir, B. (1993). Toward the integration of transformational,

charismatic, and visionary theories, in Chemers, M.M., Ayman, R. (Eds),

Leadership Theory and Research: Perspectives and Directions, Academic Press

Inc., San Diego, CA, pp.81 - 103.

House, R.J. (1977). A 1976 theory of charismatic leadership, in Hunt, J.G. &

Larson, L.L. (Eds), Leadership: The cutting edge.

Howell, J.M. & Avolio, B.J. (1993). Transformational leadership, transactional

leadership, locus of control, and support for innovation: Key predictors of

business unit performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol. 78, pp. 891 -

902.

Howell, J.M. & Frost, P.J. (1989). A laboratory study of charismatic leadership,

Organizational Behavior And Human Decision Processes, Vol. 43, No. 2, pp. 243

- 269.

Humphreys, J. H. & Parise, P. A. (2000). Shifting culture: The relationship

between transformational leadership and sales productivity during a period of

organizational turbulence. Interactive session presented at the 41st meeting of

the Western Academy of Management, Hawaii, April.

Humphreys, J.H. & Einstein, W.O. (2003). Nothing new under the sun:

371

transformational leadership from a historical perspective, Management Decision.

London, Vol. 41, Iss.1; pp. 85 – 96.

Hursel, E. (1946). ‘Phenomenology’, in Encyclopaedia Britannica, 14th Ed., Vol.

7.

Hussey, J., Hussey, R. (1997). Business Research: A Practical Guide for

Undergraduate and Postgraduate Students, Macmillan, Basingstoke.

Insch, G.S., Moore, J.E. & Murphy, L.D. (1997). Content analysis in leadership

research: Examples, procedures and suggestions for future use, Leadership

Quarterly, 8(l), I-25. JAI Press Inc.

Jankowicz, AD. (1995). Business research projects, 2nd Ed, London, Chapman

and Hall.

Jantsch, E. (1980). The self-organising universe. Oxford: Pergamon.

Jaworski, J. (1996). Synchronicity: The inner path of leadership. San Francisco:

Berrett-Khoeler Publishers, Inc.

Jensen, S.M. & Luthans, F. (2006). Entrepreneurs as authentic leaders: impact

on employees’ attitudes. Leadership and Organisation Development Journal, Vol.

27, No. 8, pp. 646 - 666.

Jung, C.G. (1977). Synchronicity and the Paranormal: Routledge, London.

Jung, C.G. (1972). Synchronicity — An Acausal Connecting Principle. Routledge

and Kegan Paul, London, UK.

Jung, C.G. (1995). Memories Dreams Reflections, HarperCollins Publishers.

Jung, CG. (1964). Man and His Symbols, Dell Publishing a division of Bantam

Doubelday Dell Publishing Group, New York, USA.

Kauffman S.A. (1984). Emergent Properties in Random Complex Automata,

Physical Vol. 10, p. 145.

372

Kent, T.W., Crotts, J.C. & Azziz, A. (2001). Four factors of transformational

leadership behaviour. Leadership & Organisational Development Journal, pp.

221 - 229.

Kessler, T.G. (1993). The relationship between transformational, transactional

and laizzes-faire leadership behaviours and job satisfaction in a research

environment. Unpublished dissertation, Nova University, Florida.

Kilman, R. H. (2001). Quantum organisations. Palo Alto: Davies-Black

Publishing.

Koehler, J. W. & Pankowski, J. (1996). Continual improvement in government:

Tools & methods, Delray Beach, Fla.: St. Lucie Press.

Kotler, P. (2000). Marketing management: The millennium edition., New Jersey:

Prentice-Hall.

Kotter, J. P. (1990). A force for change. New York: The Free Press.

Kouzes, J. M. & Posner, B. Z. (1956). The leadership challenge: How to keep

getting extraordinary done in organisations (2nd Ed). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Publishers.

Krishnan, V. R. (2001). Value systems of transformational leaders. Leadership &

Organisational Development Journal, pp. 126 - 131.

Kuhn T. S. (1962, 1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago:

Chicago University Press.

Landrum, N.E., Howell, J.P. & Paris, L. (2000). Leadership for strategic change,

Leadership & Organisational Development Journal, Vol. 21, Iss. 3, pp. 150 – 156.

Lank, A.G. & Lank, E.A. (1995). Legitimising the gut feel: the role of intuition in

business, Journal of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 10, No. 5, pp.18 - 23.

Lawler, E. (1986). High-involvement management, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

373

Leban, W. & Zulauf, C. (2004). Linking emotional intelligence abilities and

transformational leadership styles, Leadership & Organization Development

Journal, Vol. 25, Iss. 7, pp. 554 – 564.

Lee, H.L. (2004). The triple-A supply chain, Harvard business review, Harvard

business school publishing corporation, California.

Leedey, P.D. & Ormond, J.E. (2005). Practical research: planning and design,

Pearson – Merrill Prentice Hall, New Jersey, USA, 8th Ed.

Lewin, R. & Regine, B. (2001). Weaving Complexity and Business: Engaging the

Soul at Work, Texere, New York, NY.

Lowe, K.B., Kroeck, K.G. & Sivasubramaniam, N. (1996). Effectiveness

correlates of transformational and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic

review of the MLQ literature, Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 385 - 425.

Luthans, F. & Avolio, B. (2003). Authentic leadership: a positive development

approach, in Cameron, K.S., Dutton, J.E., Quinn, R.E., Positive Organisational

Scholarship, Berrett-Koehler, San Francisco, CA, pp. 241 – 258.

Luthans, F. & Youssef, C.M. (2004). Human, social, and now positive

psychological capital management: investing in people for competitive

advantage, Organisational Dynamics, Vol. 33, pp.143 - 160.

Mandelbrot B. (1982). The Fractal Geometry of Nature, Freeman, San Francisco.

Mandell, B. & Pherwani, S. (2003). Relationship between emotional Intelligence

and transformational leadership style: a gender comparison, Journal of Business

and Psychology, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 387 - 404.

Maravelias, C. (2001). Managing Network Organizations, Stockholm University,

Stockholm.

Maravelias, C. (2003). Post-bureaucracy – control through professional freedom,

Journal of Organisational Change Management, Vol. 16, Iss. 5, pp. 547 - 566,

374

MCB UP Ltd.

Mathews, K. M., White, M. C. & Long, R. G. (1999). Why study the complexity

sciences in the social sciences?, Journal Article in Human Relations (HR).

May, D., Chan, A. & Hodges, T. & Avolio, B. (2003). Developing the moral

component of authentic leadership, Organizational Dynamics, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp.

247 - 260.

Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum Qualitative

Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research [On-line Journal], 1(2).

Available at: http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs-texte/2-00/2-00mayring-

e.htm [Date of Access: 09/06/2008].

Meindl, J.R. (1990). On leadership: An alternative to the conventional wisdom. In

Staw, B.M. & Cummings, L.L. (Eds.), Research in organisational behavior, Vol.

12, pp. 159 - 203. London: JAI Press.

Michie, S. & Gooty, J. (2005). Values, emotions, and authenticity: Will the real

leader please stand up? The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16, pp. 441 – 457.

Mitroff, I.I. & Denton, E.A. (1999). A Spiritual Audit of Corporate America: A Hard

Look at Spirituality, Religion, and Values in the Workplace, Jossey-Bass, San

Francisco, CA.

Myerson, M. (1996). Everything I thought I knew about leadership is wrong: An

interview with Mort Meyerson (online), available at: http://www.

Fastcompany.com/magazine/02/meyerson.html (accessed: 16 December 2006).

Nee, W. (1969). The Spiritual Man, Living Stream Ministries, USA.

Neider, L. & Schriesheim, C. (2001). Research in Management, Vol. 2, pp. 23 -

63, Information Age Publishing, Greenwich, CT.

Nicolis G. & Prigogine I. (1986). Exploring Complexity, Piper Verlag.

375

Northouse, P. G. (2004). Leadership: Theory and practice, 3RD Ed. Thousand

Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc., USA.

Oakley, E. & Krug, D. (1991). Enlightened Leadership: Getting to the Heart of

Change, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY.

Overmars K.P., De Groot, W.T. & Huigen G.A. (2007). Comparing Inductive and

Deductive Modeling of Land Use Decisions: Principles, a Model and an

Illustration from the Philippines, Human Ecology, Vol. 35, No. 4.

Parry, K.W. & Proctor-Thomson, S.B. (2003). Leadership, culture and

performance: the case of the New Zealand public sector, Journal of Change

Management, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 376 – 399.

Pascale, R.T., Millemann, M. & Gioja, L. (2000). Surfing the Edge of Chaos: The

Laws of Nature and the New Laws of Business, Three River Press, New York,

NY.

Peat, F. D. (1991). The philosopher’s stone: Chaos, synchronicity and the hidden

order of the world. Bantam Books, New York.

Pellissier, R. (2001). Searching for the quantum organisation: The I.T. circle of

excellence. Lansdowne: Juta and Co., Cape Town, South Africa.

Pellissier, R. (2007). Business research made easy, Juta and Co., Cape Town,

South Africa.

Penrose, R. (1989). The Emperors new mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Pfeffer, J. (1998). The human equation: Building profits by putting people first,

Harvard Business School Press, Boston.

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. & Bommer, W.H. (1996). Transformational

leader behaviors and substitutes for leadership as determinants of employee

satisfaction, commitment, trust, and organizational citizenship behaviors, Journal

of Management, Vol. 22, No. 2, pp. 259 - 298.

376

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B. & Moorman, R.H. & Fetter, R. (1990).

Transformational leader behaviors and their effect on followers trust in leader,

satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors, Leadership Quarterly, Vol.

12, pp.107 - 142.

Prigogine, I. (1998). The end of certainty: Time, chaos, and the new laws of

nature. The Free Press, New York.

Richard L. Schott (1992). Leadership: A Jungian Perspective Abraham Maslow,

Humanistic Psychology, and Organisation, Journal of Humanistic Psychology;

Vol. 32, p. 106.

Robbins, S. (2003). Organizational Behavior, Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River,

NJ.

Rugman, A.M. & Hodgets, R.M. (1995). International business: A strategic

management approach, McGraw Hill, New York.

Sashkin, M. (1988). The visionary leader: Trainer guide – LBQ, New York:

Organizational Design and Development.

Schott, R. (1986). The psychological development of adults: Implications for

public administration. Public administration review, Vol. 46, pp. 657 – 667.

Schott, R. (1991). Administrative and organization behaviour: Some insights from

cognitive psychology. Administration & Society, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 54 – 73.

Senge, P. (1989, 1990, 1994, 1999, 2006). The Fifth Discipline. The Art and

Practice of the Learning organization, Currency Doubelday (Random House),

New York.

Serway, R.A., Faughn, J.S. & Vuille, C. (2008). College Physics, Brooks Cole; 8th

Ed.

Shapiro, S. & Spence, M. (1997). Managerial intuition: a conceptual and

operational framework, Business Horizons, Vol. 40, No.1, pp. 63 - 68.

377

Shavelson, R. J. (1981). Statistical reasoning for the behaviorial sciences, Allyn

and Bacon, Boston.

Shaw, B & Thomas, JT, Brown, HN. (2000), Research methodology, Oxford

Brookes University.

Shelton, C.K. (1998). Quantum Leaps: Seven Skills for Workplace Re-creation,

Elsivier Science and Technology, London.

Shelton, C. K. & Darling, J. R. (2001). The quantum skills model in management:

a new paradigm to enhance effective leadership. Leadership & Organisational

Development Journal, pp. 264 – 273.

Shelton, C.K. & Darling, J.R. (2003). From theory to practice: Using new science

concepts to create learning organisations, The Learning Organisation. Bradford:

Vol.10, Iss. 6, pp. 353 – 361.

Simonton, D. K. (1984). Genius, creativity and leadership, Harvard University

Press, Cambridge.

Sivanathan, C. & Fekken, G.C. (2002). Emotional intelligence, moral reasoning

and transformational leadership, Leadership & Organisational Development

Journal, Vol. 23, No.4, pp.198 – 204.

Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations,

Edinburgh: Strahan and Cadell.

Stacey, R.D. (2003), Strategic Management and Organizational Dynamics,

Prentice Hall, London.

Strack, G., Fottler, M.D., Wheatley, M.J. & Sodomka, P. (2002), Spirituality and

effective leadership in healthcare: is there a connection? Frontiers of Health

Services Management, Vol. 18, No. 4, pp. 3 - 19.

Takala, T. (1998). Plato on leadership, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 17, No.7,

378

pp. 785 - 798.

Taylor, F.W. (1911). The Principles of Scientific Management, New York: Harper

Bros.

Terpstra, V & Sarathy, R. (2000). International Marketing, 8th ed. The Dryden

Press, Orlando.

Tichy, N.M. & Devanna, M.A. (1986). The transformational Leader, New York:

Wiley.

Tischler, Bibernan & McKeage (2002). Linking emotional intelligence, spirituality

and workplace performance, definitions, models and ideas for research, Journal

of Managerial Psychology, Vol. 17, No. 3, pp. 206 - 218.

Torpman, J. (2004). The differentiating function of modern forms of leadership,

Management Decision, Vol. 42, Iss. 7, pp. 892 – 906.

Tucker, R. (1968). The theory of charismatic leadership, Daedulus, Vol. 97, pp.

731 – 756.

Van Eijnatten, F.M. (2004). Chaordic systems thinking: Some suggestions for a

complexity framework to inform a learning organization, The Learning

Organization, Vol. 11, Iss. 6

Visser, M. (2003). Communicational Gestalten - a theoretical analysis, Gestalt

Theory - An International Multidisciplinary Journal.

Von Neumann, J. (1955). The mathematical foundations of quantum mechanics,

Princeton University Press, Princeton.

Vroom V. H. & Yetton P. W. (1973). Leadership and decision-making, Pittsburgh:

University of Pittsburgh Press.

Waldman, D.A., Bass, M. & Yammarino, F.J. (1990). Adding to Contingent-

Reward Behavior. The Augmenting Effect of Charismatic Leadership. Group &

379

Organization Management, Vol. 15, No. 4, 381 - 394.

Weisbord, M.R. (1992). Discovering Common Ground. Berrett-Koehler Publ.,

San Francisco, CA.

Welch. J & Byrne, J.A. (2001). Jack: What I have learned leading a great

company and great people. Clays Ltd, St Ives.

Werman, V. (2000). Business measures in a quantum world. Institute of

Industrial Engineers, Inc. (IIE), Vol. 32, Iss.10, p39.

Wheatley, M.J. (1992), Leadership and the New Science: Discovering order in a

chaotic world, Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA.

Wheatley, M. J. (1999). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a

chaotic world, 2nd Ed., Berrett-Khoeler Publishers Inc. San Francisco, CA

Wiehrich, H. & Kroontz, H. (1993). Management: A Global perspective, McGraw-

Hill, New York, NY.

Wren, D.A. (1994). The evolution of management thought, John Wiley & Sons,

New York, NY.

Yammarino, F.J., Dionne, S.D. & Chun, J.U. (2005). Transformational and

charismatic leadership: A levels-of-analysis review of theory, measurement, data

analysis, and inferences, The Leadership Quarterly, Vol. 16, Iss. 6, pp. 879 -

919.

Yukl, G. A. (1989). Leadership in organizations, 2nd edition, Englewood Cliffs,

N.J.: Prentice Hall.

Zemke. R, Raines. C & Filipcak. (2000). Generations at work: Managing the

clash of veteran, boomers, xers and nexters in you workplace. Amacom, New

York.

Zohar, D. (1990). The quantum self: Human nature and consciousness defined

380

by the new physics. William Morrow, New York.

Zohar, D. & Marshall, I. (2004). Spiritual Capital. Wealth we can live by. Using

our rational, emotional and spiritual intelligence to transform ourselves and our

corporate culture. Bloomsbury Publishing, London.

381

ANNEXURE 1: QUANTUM LEADERSHIP QUESTIONNAIRE (QLQ)

Overview of the Quantum Leadership Questionnaire (QLQ) The Quantum QLQ has been designed to test the drivers for, and resultant shift in leadership behaviour due to a change in paradigm or worldview. This shift is typically a move from a cause-and-effect linear view of the organisation to a complex adaptive system's view of the organisation, leading to an effective / resultant shift in organisational outcomes - from average to exceptional.

Ethics and Confidentiality

• All responses are treated as confidential • Responses will be utilised in an aggregated manner, so as not to prejudice any individual

Answering the questions

• Set the page view to ‘Print Layout’ • Typically the document will open in design mode automatically – before continuing

please exit this mode by clicking on the design mode icon as follows:

• When completing designation and organisation please fill this in, in the position you occupied during your time at Impala Platinum, during the period 1990 – 2001.

• Questions, beyond the initial open ended questions, have been structured into logical dimensions of; Worldview, Organisational design Needs value state, Motivational value state and Behaviour.

• The questionnaire has two areas of completion; 'Before transition point' and 'After transition point'. These two areas represent the organisational view before the transition and the subsequent organisational view after the transition point, from your perspective across the logical groupings/dimensions.

• Answers range between: Totally disagree and Totally agree. Ensure that you consider your answer carefully – it may not necessarily be your first intuitive response.

• Please answer both areas of completion, i.e. 'Before' and 'After' for each of the groupings/dimensions.

• Please use the comment boxes provided at the end of each section to provide further insights in terms of any additional feedback as well as any clarifications for example where questions may have been misunderstood, or were difficult to interpret.

• The questionnaire should take approximately 40 minutes to complete, so please set aside an hour to comfortably read through each question, digest the information and then answer as accurately as possible

Definition clarification

• Behaviour: The way in which a person responds to a specific set of value-based conditions.

• Needs value state: Values that one essentially requires in order to have success or achieve a goal and to which behaviour is a response.

• Motivational value state: Values that activate behaviour or the reason which directs needs and behavioural responses.

• Organisational deign/model: The form and structure of the organisation (reporting structure, functional structure, value chain structure).

382

• Paradigm/Worldview: Used interchangeably in the questionnaire refers to one’s base understanding of how the world is constructed and therefore your responses will be guided by this understanding.

• Evolution: The use of the word evolution in the context of this research and questionnaire is defined as micro-evolution within the boundaries of a specific segment and not natural selection.

• Transition point: The process of personal behavioural change (possibly motivated by a change in leadership position, role or organisational change)

Organisation

Name

Age

Sex (M/F)

Title (Prof., Dr., Mr., Mrs., Ms, Miss)

Highest qualification

Designation

Date

383

Open ended questions:

1. Do you consider your industry within a global context to be a simple or complex environment?

2. How long is the business cycle for your industry?

3. Who do you consider to be stakeholders in the organisation?

4. Rank, in your view, the most important elements of production (1 = most important to 5 least

important): i.e. technology, people, process, structure, capital. Please add additional as you see fit.

5. If you would have answered any of the above 4 questions differently, before the transition strategy kicked in please advise below.

390

Many thanks for your participation, Kind regards, Heydon Hall

391

ANNEXURE 2: CUT 3 ELIMINATION CRITERIA

Terminology explanation for cut 3 elimination criteria: Transition (T)-year: The year

when stock returns showed a visible upward shift, Era of observable good

performance (X)-period: performance relative to the market immediately prior to the

transition year, Era of above market performance (Y)-period: immediately following

T-year

Cut 3 Elimination criterion:

1: No X-period

2: Flat to gradual rise in performance - No obvious shift to breakthrough

performance

3: X-period of less than 10 years

4: Company shifted from a downward trend to relative market performance – i.e.

classical turnaround strategies, but not breakthrough

5: Require a Y-period of at least 15 years

6: Company demonstrates breakthrough performance, but it is not sustained

through the period of the study (at least 15 years)

7: Volatile pattern, no definable X-period, T-year or Y-period.

8: Complete set of stock/share data is unavailable

9: A company that has spectacular performance prior to the X-period and then pulls

itself right again to show above average performance again. Thus eliminating

excellent companies who have fallen on hard time, rather than a good or

mediocre company that has transitioned to lead an industry

10: The company is acquired, merged and cannot be counted as a stand alone

company through the period of the study.

11: The company shows a mild Y-period but falls short of 3 times the market

average.

392

ANNEXURE 3: PLAGIARISM RESULTS

Turnitin Originality Report

From "Test sensitivity" (Econ and Bus Management Test)

Processed on 07-24-08 4:32 AM

PDTID: 71350793

Overall Similarity Index: 10%

393

ANNEXURE 4: QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT: BEFORE VS. AFTER-TRANSITION (TOTAL FIXCO SCORES) - IMPLATS

Diff. Before vs. After-transition (Total Average

Fixco scores)



Maslow motivational

values applied




multiplier


effectMaslow motivational

values applied




multiplier


effect

Diff. (Before vs. After transition) Quantum values

applied after Quantum entanglement

Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation & Extroverted bounded instability 10.8 14.8 4.0 37.22% 12.4 17.0 4.6 37.46% 2.3Collaborative Explorative Perception &

Diversified Compassionate Judging -8.2 5.8 14.0 -170.00% -9.5 6.8 16.2 -171.32% 1.0

Empowered Intuitive Decision Making & Flexible Partnered Sensing -6.4 5.8 12.1 -189.94% -8.0 6.8 14.7 -184.75% 1.0

Conscious Participative Relativity &Diversified emergent creative thinking (incl. Belonging) -1.7 6.0 7.7 -455.51% -1.2 7.2 8.5 -684.97% 1.2Total -5.5 32.2 37.8 -681.72% -6.3 37.8 44.0 -702.16% 5.5

Average -1.4 8.1 9.4 -681.72% -1.6 9.4 11.0 -702.16% 1.4

Total difference 37.8 44.0Quantum leadership shift effect (Total diff) -681.72% -702.16% 17.12%

Average difference 9.4 11.0Quantum leadership shift effect (Ave. diff) -681.72% -702.16% 17.12%

After-transition (Total Average Fixco scores)Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership

Questionnaire (QLQ) © - Behavioural Constructs Before-transition (Total Average Fixco scores)

394

ANNEXURE 5: QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT: BEFORE VS. AFTER-TRANSITION (TOTAL AVERAGE PROFESSIONAL

ADMINISTRATIVE EXECUTIVES SCORES) - IMPLATS

Diff. Before vs. After-transition (Total Average

Prof. Exec. scores)


Juctaposed behavioural constructs






shift effectMaslow motivational

values applied





shift effect



Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation & Extroverted bounded instability 10.8 14.8 3.9 36.17% 11.7 15.6 3.9 33.57% 0.8Collaborative Explorative Perception &

Diversified Compassionate Judging -8.2 4.8 13.0 -159.18% -9.5 5.3 14.8 -155.26% 0.4

Empowered Intuitive Decision Making & Flexible Partnered Sensing -7.1 4.8 11.9 -168.24% -9.8 5.3 15.1 -153.39% 0.4Conscious Participative Relativity &

Diversified emergent creative thinking (incl. Belonging) -2.9 5.6 8.5 -291.43% -2.7 6.1 8.8 -324.07% 0.5Total -7.3 30.0 37.3 -509.12% -10.4 32.1 42.5 -409.97% 2.1

Average -1.8 7.5 9.3 -509.12% -2.6 8.0 10.6 -409.97% 0.5



Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership Questionnaire (QLQ) © - Behavioural Constructs Before-transition (Total Average Professional administrative xecutives scores) After-transition (Total Average Professional administrative executives scores)

395

ANNEXURE 6: QUANTUM LEADERSHIP SHIFT EFFECT: BEFORE VS. AFTER-TRANSITION (TOTAL AVERAGE OPERATIONAL EXECUTIVES

SCORES) – IMPLATS

Diff. Before vs. After-

transition (Total Average Ops. Exec. scores)







shift effectMaslow motivational

values applied

Quantum values applied after Quantum

entanglement



shift effect



Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation & Extroverted bounded instability 10.7 14.8 4.1 38.01% 12.9 18.1 5.2 40.10% 3.4

Collaborative Explorative Perception &Diversified Compassionate Judging -8.3 6.4 14.7 -178.03% -9.4 7.9 17.3 -183.44% 1.4

Empowered Intuitive Decision Making & Flexible Partnered Sensing -5.9 6.4 12.3 -209.57% -6.6 7.9 14.4 -220.00% 1.4

Conscious Participative Relativity &Diversified emergent creative thinking (incl. Belonging) -0.8 6.3 7.1 -926.23% -0.1 8.1 8.3 -6000.00% 1.8Total -4.2 33.9 38.1 -907.74% -3.2 42.0 45.2 -1412.11% 8.1

Average -1.1 8.5 9.5 -907.74% -0.8 10.5 11.3 -1412.11% 2.0



Before-transition (Total Average Operational executives scores) After-transition (Total Average Operational executives scores)Quantum Leadership Model (QLM) © and Quantum Leadership


396

ANNEXURE 7: QLQ SCORING BY QLM BEHAVIOURAL CONSTRUCT AS ALIGNED TO MASLOW’S MOTIVATIONAL SCALE

QLQ alignment table (aligning QLQ

score sto the correct behavioural

construct scores) Score

Maslow motivational

scale

Final score multiplier -

multiplier to align scale to

Maslow motivational scale Final score

A B C D EC/B DxB

Quantum entangled individuation 4 21 5.25 21Conscious belonging 4 -3 -0.75 -3Focused Multi-dimensional Introverted Re-contextualisation 4 9 2.25 9Collaborative Explorative Perception 4 9 2.25 9

Empowered Intuitive Decision Making 4 9 2.25 9Conscious Participative Relativity 4 9 2.25 9Extroverted bounded instability 4 6 1.50 6

Diversified Emergent Creative Thinking 4 -12 -3.00 -12Diversified Compassionate Judging 4 -21 -5.25 -21Flexible Partnered Sensing 4 -21 -5.25 -21

Source for Maslow motivational scale: Zohar and Marshall, 2004

the development of a quantum leadership model and

Documents