JEDI Adult Development
What's in this month's Newsletter?
Main Feature: JEDI Adult Development
Jobs and Talent
What’s On My Mind & What I’ve Been Reading
Personal and Professional Updates
JEDI Adult Development
“It’s the best academic article I’ve ever read.”
While a statement like this might amount to average Tuesday hyperbole coming from me, my colleague Julia is less prone to excitement-plagued exaggeration. So I read it. And although I’m not sure it qualifies as the best academic article ever, it is certainly the single best article applying adult development to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (JEDI) that I’ve come across. Full stop.
For one, it doesn’t read like an academic article. It doesn’t use pretentious journal-sounding jargon. It’s not boring. In fact, much of it involves a first-person hypothetical narrative.
More importantly, it beautifully captures the thinking of various action-logics with respect to the topic of JEDI.
Action-logics are essentially the ‘stages’ that make up Dr. William Torbert’s well-known framework of adult development. Torbert’s research concludes that there are seven ascending levels of action-logics. Each is a different paradigm through which adults at that stage engage with the world. Adults can be at different stages – which function like plateaus on the linear growth trajectory that can occur as we develop – with respect to different dimensions of their lives, and as Erfan (p. 115) enumerates: “to the degree that we can categorize a person at a stage, we may do so by estimating their center of gravity action-logic, a kind of weighted average of their stage of development across multiple dimensions at a specific time.”
So we might describe someone as “at” one of these seven action-logics, which is basically to say that’s where they average-out (developmentally) across aspects of their life.
Torbert’s action-logics approach to adult development has commonalities with many other stage-based developmental frameworks (e.g. Kegan, Gould, Levinson, Perry, Perun & Bielby, etc.). As with many of these models, the further along the continuum (higher) you are, the (generally) better. A version of Torbert’s model (taken from the GLP version) is summarized as follows (from Erfan (2021) citing Petrie (2020)):
1. Opportunist – Deeply concerned with their own needs. Tries to win any way possible.
2. Diplomat – Focuses on conforming with the rules and norms of the organization or peers.
3. Expert – Motivated to gain mastery and expertise. Values logic and respects other experts.
4. Achiever – Driven by goals, achievement, and meeting the standards they have set for themselves.
5. Redefining (Individualist) – Inspired by meaning and purpose. Challenges the status quo to find new ways.
6. Transforming (Strategist) – Generates organizational and personal transformations. Sees the system they are in.
7. Alchemist – Leads with fluidity, seeing the interdependent nature of things. Integrates wisdom and a global conscience.
Beyond just Torbert’s particular framework, I have several critiques of these ascension-focused models of adult development. This is probably an insufficient articulation, but most of these ontologies appear to presuppose underlying metaethical postulates that they don’t sufficiently substantiate. This critique is most obviously applicable to Kohlberg’s theory which is explicitly based on moral development. But I find that various other models (Torbert, Kegan, etc.) assume a metaethical relativism (or subjectivism?) that privileges interdependence and incessant change. Currently, I don’t believe I disagree with such ontologies, rather I simply believe that these background assumptions warrant more validation.
That brief bit of armchair philosophy aside, I think Erfan’s application of Torbert’s framework to JEDI and the workplace is spot on. I absolutely suggest you read it and I also suggest (insist?) you email me with your thoughts and questions afterwards for further discussion!
To whet your appetite, here are some select quotes from the piece where Erfan adopts a first-person approach in explaining how JEDI concerns might be viewed by individuals at all seven levels of Torbert’s model:
Opportunist: “My support for the equal opportunity programs that claim they are leveling the playing field depends on whether they will benefit me or not. If I fall into one of the identity categories that will get ahead because of the program, then I am all for it.”
Diplomat: “JEDI is fashionable right now? I’ll be all about it! I will look for and comply with the explicit rules and the unwritten ones. I’ll memorize the right things to say to be politically correct, not because I think they are right in an objective sense, but because I would hate to upset anybody.”
Expert: “The suggestion that my research questions or conclusions are driven by my politics is ludicrous and you would know it if only you cared about evidence as much as I do.”
Achiever: “I believe that justice can both feel good and be good for business, and I’m mostly interested in the kind of justice that is good for business. I want to decolonize bigger, better, faster (never mind that bigger, better, faster are colonial adjectives – I don’t get the irony) and I use a change management framework to do it right. [...] We actively build a positive, collaborative culture where differences are valued – but it is our commonalities we emphasize. Our diversity trainings begin and end with ‘at the end of the day, we all want the same things.’ We are all one.”
Redefining: “As Redefining I am at the centre of a massive social reactions [sic] to what feels, to many, like the American Lie. I am the social justice warrior. [...] Since I am aware of the existence of multiplicity of perspectives in connection with multiplicity of identities, I see collaboration as a pre-requisite to justice. Exercises of unilateral power feel wrong to me. I will share power and involve others in decision-making, sometimes to a fault (not recognizing that I myself am unilaterally insisting on collaboration). I myself will feel betrayed if excluded from decisions. “Nothing about us without us,” I insist, and I categorically reject the legitimacy of any initiative that doesn’t have justice-denied people sitting at the table. I invite conflict and have some ability to create shared vision across differences. Unfortunately, many of the groups I work with end up having an oppressor who recreates the very dynamics we are trying to work against, and they destroy the group. The bitterness of these repeated experiences of betrayal feeds my disillusionment with the world and renews my commitment to fight.”
Transforming: “I am keenly aware of the influence of systems and individual agency when it comes to JEDI issues. In moments of conflict, I don’t assume that what is happening is strictly interpersonal, nor do I read it purely as systemic. The conflict between men and women in my department over who is doing more of the institutional housekeeping or emotional labour, is not only their fight. It sits against the backdrop of patriarchy and the unconscious expectations of gender roles that subtly colour our thinking and action. I recognize and make these patterns and histories explicit, but reserve enough of a beginner’s mind to then look at the specifics of the situation.”
Alchemist: “My role is really fluid and my time is structured by a clear sense of priorities that aren’t spelled out in my job description or work plan (did I even remember to make one of those this year?) Many people seek my council, and an equal number have written me off as the half-mad fixture of the organization. I am equally happy to name the elephant in the room, play the peace-maker, break into tears in the middle of a meeting, or be the person everyone needs to blame to feel better. I show up the next day and see what is required then. And if I am fired, it doesn’t matter all that much.”
Erfan’s perspective-taking here is – and I don’t use this word lightly – rather brilliant. I encourage you to read the entire 17-page article which includes implications for practice.
A word of caution: In reading this and self-evaluating you may find that you’re at a lower stage than you’d like to believe. Most of us fancy ourselves distracted Alchemists beseeched by the inevitabilities of everyday life. It’s important to remember that our views here are those with respect to JEDI matters and can be different from our threshold in other dimensions of life (or overall averaged developmental stage). That said, as a pure matter of statistical fact, most individuals are not at the high end of the developmental maturity ladder (although, of course, all of my readers are the Alchemists that even the Alchemists admire…).
So as you’re reading this article and self-evaluating, notice what you’re noticing:
- What are your initial reactions to the narrator in the piece that sounds most like you?
- If it’s lower than you’d like, do you dismiss it out of hand?
- Is your reaction to challenge the construct and therefore disapprove of the whole exercise?
- Do you instead get upset with yourself?
What do you want to do next?
Jobs and Talent
Jobs: There are loads of jobs out there – but none I was asked to highlight this month! Let me know if I can share any for you next month!
Talent:
An NYC-based professional looking to re-enter the workforce following a break for maternity - seeking work in the People Operations/HR space. They have people ops experience at a variety of great organizations (Google, etc.) and are more interested in working for a great organization that the specifics of the people-ops position. Let me know if you’d like to connect with her!
If your organization is looking to build or improve your podcast and don’t know where to turn, check out podcast.love. My friend, Alex Kapelman, has been creating and producing podcasts for nearly a decade (before they were really cool) and is a master of his craft.
What’s On My Mind
I’ve had little time the past month to chronicle various thoughts… so far, this new section of the newsletter has been hard to track. I’ll try and be better!
This idea for a “Dream Job” feature on LinkedIn. Do me a favor and go and ‘Like’ the post so it gets more visibility? They should make this!
What I’ve Been Reading:
Reminder: On the 4th of every month, the fuller version of this section premiers on LinkedIn.
An NYTimes article on resumes.
Charter piece on compensation.
More from Bloomberg on one of my favorite topics – the four day workweek.
NYTimes article on the approach that BNY Mellon is taking to return to the office.
Info on a PWC study of how companies are planning to go hybrid.
This enjoyable essay on driving a new (big) car and how impressive automated driving is becoming.
Interesting take from former MLB player Doug Glanville on keeping steroid users out of the hall of fame.
The book Woke Racism by John McWhorter.
Personal & Professional Updates
I’m currently in Austin for the Endeavorun running retreat and having a great (exhausting) time. In person events are overall better when done right. That’s how we’re wired.
Strange as it might sound, getting home delivery of the morning paper has been one of the best decisions I’ve made in the past year. It has completely changed my relationship with social media for the better and noticeably led to more happiness. I highly recommend giving it a try for 5-8 weeks.
Charlotte has been quite the 2-year-old lately. She is telling jokes! (They need some work – her big one now is ‘What’s my tummy’s name?… Belly-button!’ and substituting various random nouns into Elmo songs – but she’ll get there. Her Netflix comedy special is still a year or two away). We also have to watch ourselves now, as she’s having classic 2-year-old tantrums and they can be quite funny. Sometimes it’s hard not to laugh when she’s having a meltdown. Last week, she was playing on the stairs with a stuffed animal when I reminded her that the stairs are for walking and not safe for playing. Her response? “No… No! Go a-WAY! Go READ the NEWSPAPER!”
That's it for this edition - please reach out if I can be at all helpful.
Be compassionate and intentional.