Such movements are not in themselves a step backwards. They show that organizations are reacting to new challenges – with patterns of thought and action that have a more stable effect on them at this moment.
Prof. Clare W. Graves already described these observations when he studied human and organizational development in the 1970s.
In organizational and cultural development, but also when accompanying change processes, the Graves model helps to classify developments, identify/understand conflicts and work specifically with needs and values.
Each value field is required
The Graves model describes different levels on which people, teams and organizations think and act differently. Starting with “beige” – this is about survival, and “purple” (us or the others). Then come levels such as “red” (power, assertion), “blue” (order, rules), “orange” (performance, success), “green” (community, meaning) through to “yellow” and “turquoise”, where thinking is systemic and integrative.
Although the method is arranged like an up and down, this is deceptive. There is no “better” or “worse”. Each field has its own strengths and risks. Your own development is about going through one field after the other, each has its time. The military, for example, needs blue behavior/structures/processes in order to be able to act. Many sales organizations also function very well in blue. Innovation development thrives on “orange”. Community orientation works on “green”.
Sometimes systems suddenly move into fields they have already passed through, e.g. from “green” to “blue”. This is often an expression of stress, excessive demands or cultural friction. This is also noticeable in German politics: while some push for reform and change, others cling to old systems of order. Understanding becomes difficult when thought models no longer fit together.
Two fields difference is one too many
And this is precisely where the explosive power lies: when people are on different fields, they often talk past each other. A difference of two (or more) fields is enough to cause friction. This happens, for example, when a management team communicates in “blue” – clear, number-driven, with structures – and the team thinks in “green”/“yellow” – involved, sense-oriented, at eye level. The topics come to a standstill. Not because someone doesn’t want to, but because the thinking logics don’t match up and different topics are important to different people.
This is a real risk for organizations. After all, they can only work successfully if the task, culture and lived level fit together. If there are too many levels of thinking and values between management, team and structure, energy is lost. Communication fizzles out. In the worst case, change fails.
So what to do?
The first step: recognizing. The Graves model gives language and structure to what was previously diffuse. If you understand where a team/organization stands and where tensions can arise, you can take targeted measures.
The second step: act consciously. On several levels. Managers need clarity about their own level of thinking and values in order to be able to lead according to the situation. Cultural work should remain compatible – instead of chasing after a desired culture, it is worth looking at what is realistic. Communication is only effective if it fits the respective field of values – tone, format and content must be consistent. And in change processes, it becomes particularly clear where values collide. This is where the Graves model becomes a navigation system – for communication, change and organizational development.
Ultimately, it is about creating smooth transitions between the value levels instead of working against them. If you can do this, you can harness the energy of change, provide orientation and enable real development. Even if it doesn’t feel like progress at the time.
If you are wondering where your organization really stands right now, how you can advance your value development and which paths are possible: Get in touch with us. Or use our checklist. It will help you to identify your organization’s current values and derive initial impulses for leadership, communication and development.