Clare Graves and the Existential Staircase

“Damn it all, a person has the right to be who he is.”

Graves, in Beck and Cowan (1996, p. 28)

Clare W. Graves worked as professor of psychology at the Union College in the upper Hudson Valley in Connecticut, America. The aftermath of the Second World War stimulated him to search for a fresh reason for the shifting views of human nature. As a developmental theorist, Graves was interested in the ways in which different people conceptualized maturity differently, and why some, but not others, navigated through emerging and often chaotic phases of human existence. In the book Spiral Dynamics, Beck and Cowan explained that the Gravesian orientation was to integrate bio-, psycho- and socio-dynamics; and to “mesh human knowledge and breaching the walls of academia that separated disciplines and fields” (1996, p. 29). In Figure 2.1, Clare Graves in his prime can be seen.

Graves was a professor of psychology and originator of a theory of adult human development. He was born in New Richmond, Indiana. He was deeply rooted in the work of Freud, Watson and Skinner, Rogers and the Maslow conceptual system. He even studied the latest cognitive psychological theories of the time. Students would ask him which theory was right. This created a deep-rooted conflict in Graves. This dilemma can be seen in the argumentation of different political stances; why are there different economic arguments, different views at conferences; why all the different theories and why do they conflict? Graves even considered leaving the academic space; but in 1951, he undertook research to try and understand the phenomenon better. He asked people to conceptualize the phenomenon by reflecting on the following:

• Healthy people are …
• People who are mature are …
• People who have it together are …

Graves had literally thousands of these conceptualizations. Initially he tried to map the themes from the data in Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, but soon realized that there were additional patterns where people did not always ask individual questions. Sometimes self-sacrificial systems are also addressed. It became quite clear that:

• Different people expressed different world views.
• Different people said different things over a period of time.
• Certain patterns appeared in his data analysis of changes from one world view to another.

Graves (1996, p. 28) was a visionary in his conceptualization of this systemic framework, which he described as “the psychology of the mature human being is an unfolding, emergent, oscillating spiralling process marked by progressive subordination of older, lower-order behavior systems to newer, higher-order systems as a man's existential problems change.” Graves (1974) assumed that:

• Human nature is not static or finite but as conditions of existence change, new systems are formed. Old systems stay with us.
• As a new system is activated, our psychology and adaptation to new conditions emerge.
• The world is an open system of values with an infinite number of models of living available to us, and there is no final stage to which we must all aspire.
• Social systems (individual, groups, societies) can respond positively only to the principles, appeals, formulas and legal or ethical codes that are congruent with our current level of human existence.

Graves's theory of human emergence, change and transformation is still acknowledged today. It offers a unique ability to deal with differences of behavior on an individual, but also on a global, level. The overall intent of the model is to unify and integrate.

In his article “The Deterioration in Work Standards,” published in the Harvard Business Review of November 1967, Graves applied his thinking to total quality and re-engineering. Beck and Cowan (1996, p. 30) highlight that the Gravesian framework “maps out how to transform a company or a culture to make it healthy and receptive for the introduction of complex technologies and rapid change.” In Figure 2.2, the Existential Staircase, as initially described by Graves in The Futurist of 1974, is presented.¹

Beyond Maslow and Other Development Minds

Abraham Maslow is widely known for his attempt to describe motivational theory. His popular hierarchy of needs starts with basic needs, and as these needs are satisfied, ultimately people strive for self-actualization. As an adult development theorist, Graves studied similar dynamics. Graves often stood in for Maslow as a lecturer in New York. Graves, however, thought that there might be additional levels of human emergence – later they agreed that there was no final stage to human development; and that different people self-actualized in different ways. He strongly believed that a healthy personality in action that was not based on individual personal needs was at play beyond the Maslow self-actualization level. Friendly debates continued for years between the two academic gurus. For Maslow, once a need is met on his/her hierarchy of needs, a person automatically jumps to the next level of motivation. Graves believed that this is not always the case. There is no guarantee that the next system will appear.

From all the data-gathering, certain patterns appeared to emerge. Graves did not deliberately designate categories to the themes. He used an emerging research design by suspending previous assumptions and ways of meaning-making. What differentiates Graves from other developmental psychologists of his time is the depth of research and the integral conceptualization of mature adult behavior, namely the unique positioning of a value system as a bio-psycho-social construct.

Initially, two self-sacrificial systems and two expressive systems were identified. Graves turned to data from theory-determined tests such as the MMPI, open-mindedness and close-mindedness scale and the dogmatist scale, through correlation studies. By then, six different systems were identified – three were sacrificial and three were expressive. The nature of the tests, however, structures the answers. Due to this concern he designed a comprehensive speed-of-recognition-symbol test. This was a deep psycho-physical measurement.

Figure 2.3 shows the two themes that emerged throughout history – namely a WE-orientated and an ME-orientated system.

Figure 2.3 shows the two orientations that occur throughout history both in individuals and in society. Graves (1974, n.p.) explained in his classic publication:

At each stage of human existence, the adult man is off on his quest for his holy grail, the way of life he seeks by which to live … As he sets off on each quest, he believes he will find the answer to his existence. Yet, much to his surprise and much to his dismay, he finds at each stage that the solution to existence is not the solution he has come to find. Every stage he reaches leaves him disconcerted and perplexed. It is simply that as he solves one set of human problems, he finds a new one in its place. The quest he finds is never-ending.

The Meeting of Two Visionary Minds

During April 1974, in his office at the University of North Texas, Beck read the now famous article by Graves in The Futurist. Rather than offering another bleak depressed view of recession and depression, Graves presented a meta-analysis of themes of human emergence. Instead of viewing signs and challenges in society as problematic, Graves framed them as signs of regeneration. He described essential patterns that were stages in human history where conditions were constructed to set up the world in a new way. Beck immediately made contact, and was invited to visit Graves.

Professor Graves and Dr Beck connected immediately and continued to elaborate on the phenomenon of human existence for years to come (see Figure 2.4).

Early in 1975 a 39-year-old Beck visited Graves. Beck fondly remembers meeting a tall, angular and impressive figure wearing a Russian fur cap waiting for him at the airport. He was invited to fly to Rexford, New York to visit Graves in an exploration of working together. Little did both professors know that this would be the beginning of what was to become much more than a following of their philosophy and approach. This was to be a living, exponential understanding of the ways in which humanity makes sense, develops or shifts back, given certain life conditions.

Beck met Graves's family, and for the next 11 years they worked closely together. Owing to ill health, Graves was not able to complete the book he was working on. Although at the time Beck was a full professor with children in college, he contacted Graves, and passionately offered to dedicate the next ten years of his life to an in-depth study of Gravesian thinking. In a private conversation Beck shared that he insisted on continuing with his thought leadership, while he (Beck) provided financial and emotional support to ensure vibrant, engaging and thought-provoking conversations.

They referred to the “emergent, cyclical, double-helix, bio-psycho-social model” as Spiral Dynamics. The eight different systems that emerged from data can be seen in Figure 2.5. In this Figure, the eight categories that emerged from the 32 years of Gravesian research are displayed. After Graves coded the themes that emerged, the categories AN, BO, CP, DQ, ER, FS, GT and HU were assigned to the different value systems. Each of the value systems had a very specific bottom line that described the question of existence of that system. He later uniquely started to refer to the different value systems as codes. In the next chapter, Beck's unique contribution to the foundation laid by Graves is illustrated.

Beck compared Gravesian thinking with 42 other systems that described behavior. He found the integrated, complex and ever-emerging Gravesian approach to adult human development and existential questions much more systemic and integral than previous attempts at describing human nature. Beck began to speak of the dance of the double helix – a lifelong inquiry into the ways in which humans and societies emerge. The different value systems or codes and their bottom lines are presented in Figure 2.5.

Graves and Beck often spent time at Graves's ranch (see Figure 2.6). They devoted ample time to discussing the world and the human dynamics of it. Before Graves passed away in 1986, they discussed the case of South Africa, where a combination of all the thinking systems in their prime were at play. Beck promised to go and immerse himself in the cauldron of differences in the country that was then plagued by Apartheid and all its side effects. Graves shared with Beck that he too would love to share in the opportunity to go to South Africa, and explore the interplay of these systems together in real life.

In Figure 2.7 Beck and Graves can be seen attending a university event together.

Beck promised Graves that he would always anchor his work in the deep, theoretical, construct-based system that emerged over so many years of academic research. Even today, Beck still gives credit to his mentor and friend when he lectures, teaches and writes. Beck also instilled this discipline in his associates. The prominent acknowledgement of Graves in this book also confirms this stance.

Clare Graves on the Future

In the Graves (1974) article, he declared that a part of humanity was ready to move to a different level of existence, a distinctly human level. He predicted that we would likely then see a dramatic transformation of human institutions. Graves warned that the consciousness of humans would be moving forward at an exponentially accelerating speed, with a resulting set of thinking systems that would emerge. These thinking systems would consist of a radical reversal of the entire historical progression of systems that have brought humanity to the present point.

Different letter pairs (AN, BO, CP) were initially used, and Graves and Beck were told that this was too confusing. They then used numerical levels – One, Two, Three – and were told that that created the impression that the higher numbers were better than the lower levels, as Charles Darwin would claim. Then they used names such as Tribalistic, Egocentric, Absolutistic – and were criticized for being too simplistic, as though each of these complex systems could be described in a single word. Pairs of words were an option – KinSpirits, PowerGods, TruthForce – but again were semantic traps. Then Beck started to use colors since they were neutral, made possible the graphic design of blends and hues, and were graphically attractive. Warm colors were assigned to the expressive individual systems – therefore AN became BEIGE, CP – RED, ER – ORANGE and GT – YELLOW. The collective systems were assigned the following cooler colors: BO – PURPLE; DQ – BLUE, FS – GREEN and HU for TURQUOISE.

Graves called the old values “subsistence levels” and the new values “being levels.” He further viewed the latter as a “higher-grade reversal” of the former. In effect, he was arguing that humanity would start again from a new beginning with the YELLOW generation taking over the world, and enabling a new humanity with them in the transcendence to the next level. Laubscher (2013) highlighted that Graves said YELLOW was BEIGE to the square. Again, we are faced with questions of survival, but now at a different level of complexity, where we look at survival of self and others, and thus humanity at large.

Graves (1974) identified the following three basic scenarios:

1. The chance that we might fail to stabilize our world, and regress through successive catastrophes, as far back as when humanity started.
2. Another option could be that there will be a fixation on the BLUE/ORANGE/GREEN social complex. For Graves, this combination would promise a tyrannical, manipulative government with a glossy veneer of humanitarian thought and moralistic rationalizations.
3. The last possibility was that we could emerge into the Second-Tier YELLOW level, and proceed toward stabilizing our world so that all life could continue.

The first two options are indeed frightening. This book could not have come at a more important time. Unless leaders in social systems, whether these are in the individual, group, organizational, national or geo-political domain, understand the different thinking structures or codes, as Beck refers to the deep underlying organizing principles of humanity, and start doing things in a very different way, the future will probably be doomed. It is critical to understand natural design principles, or we may contribute to being in a diabolical loop of civilization.

If, however, we succeed in the last scenario, a different world from that which is currently known to us will evolve. New life conditions will stimulate new thinking structures. We will no longer be living in a world of excessive self-expression and self-indulgence. YELLOW (GT) determines functionality not by applying dogma, religion and fundamentalism, but systemic flow. This thinking will lead to a world where everyone can survive, and that involves learning to act within the limits inherent in the balance of life.

GT is free from fear, guilt and shame. It is egoless, and focused on the greater good. It is transpersonal, existential and assertive, but cautious, practical and never superfluous. It is conscious of living in a complex, paradoxical universe. As social uprisings increase internationally, fundamentalist groups polarize across religion, land and beliefs, current economic and political structures will crumble. The divide between the haves and have-nots will increase and the forces in the collective ecology may become so opposing that the whole world may regress to more primitive levels of existence. Graves described the ecological crisis, energy crisis, population crisis and limits to growth as T-problems. The individualistic nature of GT thinking, and the flexibility thereof, may enable it to deal with systemic issues from within the thinking that created it in the first place. For Graves, a person with YELLOW coding views rules, money, achievement and philanthropy as artificial substitutes for unconditional love.

It has become important to transcend the old divisions, to join forces and to work together to achieve a shared superordinate goal, so that we can miraculously leap forward, as predicted by Graves.

The history and research of Clare Graves were published in a work by Krumm, Parstoffer and Fayyad. It stated that Graves did not get much credit for his research, deep insight and theory while he was alive and that all the interest and knowledge about the theory is due to Beck and Chris Cowan. Although the book is in German, it also includes many English passages.

Beck promised Graves that he would continue with his work, and spent the next 50 years of his life doing just that. Graves is remembered fondly by the community, and acknowledged for his foundational contribution to the field of study. In Figure 2.8 a photo can be seen of a Spiral Dynamics expert who made a presentation at the 2nd Integral European Conference (IEC) in Siofok, Hungary, in 2016.

The photo provides evidence that the work of Beck is still anchored in Gravesian thinking – even 30 years later.

Conclusion

Graves (1974, p. 28) said: “the psychology of the mature human being is an unfolding, emergent, oscillating, spiralling process marked by progression subordination of older, lower-order behavior systems to newer, higher-order systems as man's existential problems change.” This chapter aims to familiarize the reader with the concepts of Spiral Dynamics, adult human development as described by Graves and the impact these have on other thinking systems. The famous developmental theorist Piaget once said that Graves continued where he left off. It is this conceptualization of adult existential theory that forms the basis of this book.

Graves entrusted Beck with:

As explained earlier, they both started to refer to it as the Spiral due to the oscillating zig-zag nature between the I:ME:MINE and the WE:US:OUR poles.

In the next two chapters, the way in which Beck explains the Spiral – namely as codes in people and not codes of people – is discussed.