In the first essay in this series, we concentrated on the “pure” versions of each leadership style and suggested that each of these styles, at its extreme, is aligned with MBTI introversion. The introverted leader stands alone, wanting to assert their own ideas (Ruby Red), inspire with their own vision (Azure Blue) or sit back in order to collect and analyze information from the vantage point of seeming “objectivity” (Golden Yellow). What then about those leaders who want to “mix it up” with other people and seek to engage in collaborative leadership, generating ideas, intentions and information through discussion and dialogue? And what about those leaders who choose to use all three leadership styles and even to find a way in which to integrate all three?
The Rainbow Leader of Integration and Collaboration
We assign the full color spectrum—the Rainbow—to these leaders. The rainbow, in turn, requires collaboration among several elements and ultimately a beautiful integration of these elements. What are the three elements: a rainbow is created when there is sufficient heat (Ruby Red), light (Golden Yellow) and sky (Azure Blue). This, however, is not enough. There must be a precipitating (excuse the pun) event–a convening challenge if you will. This event is rain. When the challenge is being met, the rainbow appears and is cause for our appreciation of the wonders of nature.
The Rainbow Relationship
Those with a Rainbow orientation enjoy relating to other people. The relationship itself is important. It doesn’t have to lead to any great outcomes and can be established even when the participants are not in agreement on everything in the world. The participants don’t even have to share values. Many Rainbow leaders actually like to wander into foreign territory and gain a fuller understanding of alternative perspectives. They can often even articulate the alternative perspective or value better than the person holding this perspective or value. This is the true sense of epistemological relativism (Perry, 1998): we can understand a different point of view without embracing or acting on it ourselves.
There is more here. The Rainbow leader’s interest in (even fascination with) relationships goes beyond interpersonal relationships. Rainbow leaders are often “group freaks!” They actually like to work in groups – and not just because groups can produce results. There is a genuine respect for the rich insights that can be gained from work with other people who come to the group with diverse perspectives. The Rainbow leader might even look forward to disagreements and conflict in the group: it is in the heat of battle that we come to a clearer sense of reality and purpose!” At their best, Rainbow leaders not only enjoy working in teams and groups—but are also skillful in facilitating in these groups—or at least they are involved and effective group participants. For the Rainbow leader the motto is: “Let’s Put Our Heads and Hearts Together!”
There is not just the upside to Rainbow leadership. Like the other three leadership styles, it can be overused or misused. Conflict is not always productive. Extended group meetings are not always either appreciated or productive. The Rainbow leader can get caught up in a primary concern for group/team process rather than outcomes. The group becomes “therapy for normal” rather than a setting in which work gets done. Participants might lead more about themselves and about how groups function, but they might leave having “wasted their time” when it comes to achievement of a tangible outcome.
There is also a tendency toward interpersonal neediness. The Rainbow leader is always looking to other people for self-confirmation and the fulfillment of many interpersonal needs. Will Schutz (1994) might suggest that these leaders enter relationships and groups with a full agenda of interpersonal needs to be met: inclusion, control and openness. Finally, it is important to recognize that someone with a Rainbow orientation might be agile in moving between different styles of leadership—that is all well and good. However, this could mean that this person seems to be unpredictable: “Who is Going to Show Up Today!” It is important that the agility is coupled with the capacity to clearly articulate the style being used at any one moment and the reason for use of this strategy.
A Rainbow Portrait
It is first important to reiterate that the Rainbow orientation is strongly aligned with the MBTI function of extraversion. Energy is generated by interacting with many other people. While the extreme Ruby Red, Azure Blue and Golden Yellow leader is likely to feel drained by too many meetings and too much collaboration with other people, the Rainbow leader will usually feel great at the end of a day of interpersonal relationships—and might feel drained when there are no interactions (a day spent alone reading or preparing a report). What is the Rainbow source of joy: being with other people—and most importantly (and often ignored) being all things to all people. This is the person in David Kolb’s (1984) scheme who is the accommodator, adjusting to all situations and changing strategies rather than stubbornly hanging on to one strategy (Kolb’s assimilator—which is more commonly among those with a Golden Yellow orientation or even the Extreme Ruby Reds and Azure Blues).
The most frequent source of energy comes from the challenge of bringing together diverse perspectives and competing interests. Those with a Rainbow orientation are likely to focus their attention on influencing other people and the relationships between themselves and other people. They are also likely to attend to ways they can influence the nature of groups functioning—whether in the role of leader, facilitator or member. Their strength is inspiring other people to be interpersonally “sensitive”– so that they will do what you (as the Rainbow expert) believe is the “right” way to behave. At their best as Rainbow leaders, these “group freaks” can get others to savor the rich dynamics associated with working in teams and groups.
What are the major challenges for the Rainbow: being asked to be consistent (a request often brought up by a Golden Yellow) and being asked to be more principled and less expedient (often brought up by an Azure Blue). The Ruby Red offer their own challenge: they ask the Rainbow leader to help get it done immediately and not overdo the group facilitation. The existential threat for someone with a Rainbow orientation is to be left alone without support, information or guidance—and to be ineffective in their interpersonal or group relationships.
The Rainbow of Integration
The Rainbow leader, in the extreme, is the ultimate pragmatist who is only interested in what is immediately useful or applicable. Idealists (the Azure Blue) are too abstract for them, realists (Golden Yellow) too slow and data-bound and activists (Ruby Red) too reckless. But a pragmatist’s lens on utilitarian decision-making and action tends to short-change an organization when it needs a broader vision or longer-term perspective. Such a longer view may require investments before the pragmatist can be convinced of their utility, or research that slows down what seem to be working, tried-and-true activities.
Effective leadership requires something more than pragmatism. It requires a balance between, or even an integration of the three different perspectives. The Rainbow leader can provide this balance and even an integration of these perspectives. This requires that pragmatism, realism, idealism, and activism be combined or used in turn, situationally. Effective problem solving and planning will shift between the domains of information, intentions, and ideas. When confronted with a new, unpredictable situation, a balanced problem-solving leader will tend to become realistic by attempting to assimilate this new reality. When confronted with an old, unchanging environment, the balanced problem-solving leader will tend to become more of a daydreamer, creating images of how this environment might be transformed. When confronted with the press of time and events, the balanced leader will tend to mobilize their activism, creating proposals to meet these challenges. They will engage their own pragmatism (or the pragmatism of others in their team/group) when expediency would save the day and would gain the organization some time and money to regroup and redirect its efforts.
The balanced Rainbow leader is someone who will adapt to changing conditions by moving through all three domains. By contrast, the extreme realist will attempt to collect information even when the environment is unchanging. In this way, the extreme realist will contribute to the resistance of this environment to change. Similarly, the extreme idealist will daydream not only un- der conditions of relative stability, where a shake-up would be beneficial, but also under conditions of rapid change and instability, and in this way will add to the instability of the environment and to its unpredictability. The idealist under stress retreats to another, safer world, when he or she should be confronting the current situation. The extreme activist will respond with hasty actions even when there is no press of time or events. He will even create crises where there are none in order to justify precipitous action. The failure in the activist’s haste may in turn produce a new crisis that makes activism appear to be appropriate, thereby initiating a self-reinforcing crisis-management mentality.
Put quite simply, all four of these extreme preferences tend to be ineffective in some settings and to create more problems than they solve. Reflection must be balanced against action. Furthermore, the period of reflection must provide opportunities for both the collection of new information and the clarification of intentions. An effective balancing and integration of reflection and action requires that action produce and be based on information, that action inform and clarify intentions, and that reflection lead to decision and action. The successful process of Rainbow integration inevitably involves movement between the domains of information, intentions and ideas, and a balancing between reflection and action.
The Pot of Gold
As we have just noted, effective Rainbow leadership is something more than just short-term, results-oriented pragmatist. The Rainbow leader dreams of the mythic pot of gold to be found at the end of the rainbow. This pot of gold, however, is elusive (especially when it requires Integration and Collaboration. Perhaps that is why it exists in myth but not often in reality. The pot of gold is elusive because collaboration is often hard to achieve—easily becoming collusion (Bergquist, 2013)—and because Integration often falls apart under conditions of anxiety and uncertainty (we tend to regress to a deeply-held preference for one of the three primary styles).
An Appreciative and Constructive Dialogue
How do we move to sustained collaboration? It begins with acknowledgement and appreciation for all three of the primary styles of leadership and interpersonal preferences associated with these styles. We need the Ruby Red, to ensure that we don’t get stuck in analysis paralysis (Golden Yellow) or become too dreamy (Azure Blue). We need Azure Blue so that we might be clear about the direction in which we are headed. We don’t want to leap out of the foxhole without knowing the cause for which we are willing to give our life (or at least devote our time and energy) (Ruby Red).
Furthermore, we need to know what kind of information we are collecting and for what purpose—valid information is of no use if it is not goal-specific. The Golden Yellow is also important and must be engaged (even if those with this orientation are reticent to get engaged in these collective endeavors). Without Golden Yellow, a group can be charging out of the foxhole without adequate ammunition (Ruby Red) or can remain in the foxhole or never get to the foxhole while espousing a dream of peace that is unrealistic and unattainable (Azure Blue).
A clear articulation of the contributions to be made by each perspective, as well as recognition of the other two-color blends (to which we turn shortly) help to make the Integration possible. An even more important process is required. This is something often called “process consultation” (Schein, 1998). A team or group that is seeking to operate in an Integrative manner should periodically stop their work and focus on the way in which the team or group is operating. Some of the questions to be asked are:
- How are we making use of each orientation? Have we ignored one or more of the three domains (information, intentions, and ideas), while focusing on only one? [Teams/groups frequently fail to return to the domains of information or intentions once they move on to the domain of ideas. Once an idea is being entertained, it is often critical to return to the domain of information to see if this idea is realistic. It is also critical to return to the domain of intentions to see if this idea is actually aligned with our intended purposes. Information/Intentions/Ideas should be engaged in a reiterative process: one can begin in any one of the three domains and return to it many times.]
- Have we failed to elicit contributions from the quieter or less active members of our team/group who might represent one of the three orientations that we are inclined to ignore? [Teams/Groups will often “plop” (ignore or talk over) members who are less likely to assert themselves. These members often represent are women or minorities–and may come from a culture that does not promote individual assertiveness. A team/group should never assume that someone who has been plopped with ask to be heard—for this request is often plopped itself, or the group becomes condescending in its compliance with the request. The monitoring of plops is the responsibility of all team/group members, as is the commitment to minimize this very destructive process.]
- Have we articulated our appreciation for contributions made by those members who represent an orientation that is in the minority (and is therefore particularly important)? [It is hard being in the minority and contributions by these members should be honored]
Essentially, this concern about team/group process is founded on the principle that with diversity of perspective comes both creativity and clarity (Page, 2011). Furthermore, diversity is only engaged in a constructive manner if there is a process in place that provides safety, respect and sustained communication (that leads to the surfacing of underlying assumptions and biases, as well as shared appreciation for the strengths inherent in the team/group’s membership). These principles are brought together in a concept and strategy called “constructive dialogue.” (Gergen and Gergen, 2004)
It is a matter of dialogue (respectful hearing of alternative perspectives) rather than discussion (determining who has the best argument). It is a matter of “constructive” because the purpose is to move beyond rhetoric to action. This requires that the team/group constructs a shared perspective on reality (domain of information)—which is best achieved through collaborative, appreciative dialogue (Gergen and Gergen, 2004). It is achieved through construction of a shared, compelling vision (domain of intentions) that accounts for the interests of all relevant stakeholders. It is achieved through the construction of a viable plan of action (domain of ideas). Rather than determining who is the winner and who is the loser of a discussion, we “lean into the future” (Bergquist and Mura, 2011) by engaging in and completing an appreciative and constructive dialogue.
Moving to Initiation and Insight
The pot of gold is attained by a team or group seeking Integration and Collaboration when the constructive and appreciative dialogue leads to movement beyond the three domains to the other two “I’s” – Initiation and Insight. This means that we must go beyond information, intentions and ideas. We have to try out the idea—hopefully in a setting that is safe and yields important new insights about information that is still needed and greater clarification of intentions that is also needed. It is when we move to Initiation that the three domains of Information, Intentions and Ideas become fully engaged and it is at the point of Initiation that the distinctive strengths of Ruby Red, Azure Blue and Golden Yellow are most needed.
The fifth “I” (Insight) concerns what we learn from taking the Initiative and seeing what happens. As two 20th Century thought leaders, John Dewey (1929) and Kurt Lewin (Lippitt, Watson and Westley, 1958) both noted: we can often learn by doing. Both suggested that we often gain useful knowledge about a system only when we give it a “kick” (try to change it). This is a process called “action learning.” (Argyris and Schon, 1978; Senge, 1990). We learn by not avoiding making mistakes (which is inevitable in our VUCA-plus world), but by learning from these mistakes – so that we don’t keep repeating them.
This means that we must build in tight feedback systems (program evaluation tools and processes) when moving forward with an idea. Our Golden Yellows can help create a system that yields valid and useful information, while our Azure Blues can identify the criteria for determining if we have been successful (with the Golden Yellows ensuring that the criteria are measurable or at least observable). The Ruby Reds can ensure that this process of review is well organized and moving forward so that we can soon return to the field of action and can return, if necessary (which is often the case), to this fifth domain of Insight, for further program evaluation, review and adjustment.
The Blending of Leadership Styles
While the Rainbow orientation and style of leadership brings together all three of the primary orientations and ways of being a leader, there are combinations of two orientations that yield interesting and important variations on the four other styles. I have once again borrowed from the color spectrum in identifying and describing each of these blends. Orange is constituted of red and yellow. Green is produced by combing yellow and blue. When red and blue are combined the color, purple is produced. I will briefly describe each of these three blends and even suggest ways in which there are slight variations on a specific blend depending on the proportion of each color (style/orientation) in this blend. I begin with Orange.
Tangy Orange: Thoughtful Action
As a combination of Ruby Red and Golden Yellow, the Tangy Orange style of leadership and the Tangy Orange orientation to the world of organizational life is focused on moving to action (Ruby Red) in a thoughtful, data-driven (Golden Yellow) manner. It is a “tangy” orientation because it can be a bit pungent and bitter—given the challenge of engaging action in the midst of a world that is often volatile, uncertain, complex, ambiguous, turbulent and contradictory (VUCA-Plus).
When we turn to the MBTI functions, the Tangy Orange orientation is clearly aligned with the sensing function—it is all about reality as both the source of information and the arena in which the Tangy Orange leader will be operating (just the opposite from Azure Blue). There is also a tendency to see reality as a not very pleasant place in which to operate (enneagram: type 6)—think of the external threat category in a SWOT analysis (along with the internal weakness category). In planning meetings, one is likely to see the Azure Blues focusing on internal strengths and external opportunities in reaction against the more “negative” appraisals of those with a Tangy Orange orientation.
At the more Golden Yellow end of Tangy Orange, we find advocates for longer-term strategic planning with an emphasis on the systematic collection and organization of data to achieve specifiable and measurable goals. Conversely, at the Ruby Red end of Tangy Orange we are likely to find advocates for short term tactical planning with an emphasis on “just-in-time” data gathering and analysis, along with the focus on “action learning” that we described regarding the Rainbow orientation (the emphasis in a reddish Tangy Orange orientation is on action rather than on learning).
For those oriented toward Tangy Orange, the major source of joy (and energy) comes from building this effective plan (be it strategic or tactical). Whatever the latest planning fad–it will be cheerfully employed (be it an old-fashion GANTT chart, a much newer OKR template or deployment of Hoshin-Kanri software). The Tangy Orange leader is likely to focus their attention and the attention of others with whom the work on finding the resources to get a job done (this is the person who asks if the soldiers have sufficient ammunition and training before they leap out of the foxhole. David Kolb description of convergence fits the bill here. Convergence is about moving something from an idea state to a state of actual production: this is the engineer who moves the design of a bridge to the actual plan for construction of the bridge.
The strength that a Tangy Orange Leader provides to an organization is seeing the perils and pitfalls underlying any plan (Golden Yellow), while also encouraging the organization to move forward with this plan (Ruby Red). It takes courage to move forward with fully knowledge of the challenges that are likely to be faced. In many ways, the Tangy Orange leader is the most courageous of the various types we have identified.
The challenge for a Tangy Orange leader is being asked to keep the end point always in sight (a concern that is often voiced by an Azure Blue)/ The threat for a Tangy Orange leader is based on an understandable fear of failing to take all relevant factors into account —which is especially likely to occur under conditions of VUCA-Plus. As we noted regarding the Rainbow orientation, it is a matter of learning from our mistakes rather than never making a mistake. Without this action-learning orientation, the Tangy Orange leader is inclined to never move forward—despite being courageous.
Verdant Green: Thoughtful Human Services
Verdant Green is a combination of Golden Yellow and Azure Blue. Ideally, it brings together the thoughtfulness and data-based orientation of the Golden Yellow with the caring, service-oriented orientation of Azure Blue. We find this orientation to be abundant in the human service sectors of our society and in the human relations divisions of contemporary organizations.
This orientation resides opposite to Ruby Red and is often the source of critiques about the “human costs” of taking a precipitous action. Verdant Green is also about opening the options for action (once again contrasting with the tendency of Ruby Reds to close off the options too quickly). The perceiving function of the MBTI is closely aligned with Verdant Green. The term Verdant is used because this is a Green that is fully alive (perhaps even overgrown) with abundant foliage (choices).
At the Golden Yellow end of Verdant Green, we find those human service schools of thought that are highly rational and systematic. Think of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy or the use of career aptitude inventories (such as the Strong Interest Inventory or Holland’s Career Aptitude Test) or career planning processes). By contrast, we find more depth-oriented psychotherapies and aspirational career planning processes, such as those advocated by Richard Bolles (2019), at the Azure Blue end of Verdant Green.
For the Verdant Green leader and member of an organization, the major source of joy is gaining insight about a relationship or a human development process. Enneagram Five tends to align with this Verdant Green orientation—these people are often quietly observant and careful in the way they care for other people. They want to be helpful—but would like to know how best to deliver this assistance. The Verdant Green human service practitioners often chose among strategies and practices that are based in evidence (especially if they reside toward the Golden Yellow end of the Verdant Green spectrum). Energy often is associated with an abundance of options (the verdant nature of Green).
Those with the Verdant Green orientation want to keep the options open [MBTI: perceiving]—that’s why they often thrive as career counsellors and advocates for us finding our “bliss” (especially if they reside at the Azure Blue end of the Verdant Green spectrum). This preference for a verdant perspective is evident in the focus of attention for those with this orientation: they are aligned with David Kolb’s divergent view of the world.
This divergence is manifest in a desire to look at the world and one’s place in this world from multiple perspectives and in the Verdant Green’s enjoyment of a wide variety of relationships. Cross-cultural experiences are a source of great excitement rather than dread and there is often wide-ranging interest in books, music, theater and any other venue that offers something new and different regarding the human condition (enneagram: five)
This interest in diversity leads to the major strength offered by those with a Verdant Green orientation. They enjoy (and are often skillful) in building a rich, compelling model of the culture in which they are operating (inside their organization) and in which their organization is operating. The primary challenge for those with a Verdant Green orientation occurs when they are asked to be less “sensitive” and more concerned with the bottom line (a concern often voiced by a Ruby Red). The primary threat in their life is associated with the fear of losing their freedom (enneagram: Five). They worry that the options are closing for them. The nightmare is that they will be forced to accept a tunnel vision of the world (the preference of an extreme Ruby Red).
Royal Purple: Enacting Social Justice
Royal Purple is a blending of Azure Blue and Ruby Red. For those with a Royal Purple orientation the world is one in which a pathway must be forged toward social justice. Royal Purple is about advocacy. It blends the Azure Blue concern about human beings and about envisioning a compelling future with the Ruby Red concern for moving to action. When you are in trouble, there is no one better to have on your side than a Royal Purple leader.
This orientation is identified as Royal because it is all about power and authority: who has the power and who has the authority? Are they the right people to represent the interests of all people? If not, then we need to act! Golden Yellow is opposite to Royal Purple and is often detested by those with a Royal Purple orientation: this is no time to sit on the sidelines and keep score. This is a time to be engaged!
The feeling function of the MBTI is directly aligned with the Royal Purple orientation. This function is not just about emotions. It is about a deep concern for the values that underlie our actions. Similarly, the Royal Purple orientation is aligned with the Enneagram 4—which is concerned with depth of feeling and experience. Royal Purple leaders truly care about those who are looking to them for leadership and do not stop caring or taking action until some level of social justice is achieved for all people. It is an unending task for many with the Royal Purple orientation and can easily lead to fatigue, burnout and ultimate disillusionment.
The primary source of joy for the Royal Purple leader is ensuring that justice is done, and appropriate service are being delivered to those who are often under-served. A major source of energy is the questioning by Royal Purple of those in authority; do the ends justify the means? Does “might always lead to right” or (as King Arthur declared in Camelot, does “right create might” The Royal Purple focus of attention is on defending the weak and disadvantaged by ensuring consistency in policies, procedures and actions.
This can occur in one’s society or even in one’s organization—with attention being given to such issues as sexual harassment and gender or racial discrimination. David Kolb describes the process of assimilation whereby a set of rules and procedures are firmly established to ensure consistency in organizational behavior—for this Royal Purple this assimilation focuses on the creation and implementation of fair and consistent policies and procedures leading to equity and justice.
The strength of Royal Purple leadership often resides in this leader’s provision of great drama. There are demonstrations, elegant gestures that are heroic in nature and that express the deep feelings underlying the actions that are taken [enneagram 4] The accompanying challenge takes place when the Royal Purple leader is being asked to be less “deep” and to live more often in the real, expedient world (this concern is often voiced by a Golden Yellow).
The Golden Yellow member of an organization (or society) might agree that social reform is a good thing; however, “can’t we take it a bit slower and buttress this reform with some evidence of the injustice that has actually been done?” The important, existential threat for someone with a Royal Purple orientation is being judged as someone who is trivial, unimportant or unoriginal [enneagram 4] To be ignored or taken lightly is the ultimate curse for someone deeply involved in the work of reform in an organization or society: “rather you fight against me then not even notice that I exist.”
Fantastical Perspectives on Blended Perspectives and Practices
In the previous essay, I brought in three of the principal characters that were featured in each of two fanciful narrative of the past century—these were The Wizard of Oz and Star Trek. The three characters in the Wizard of Oz represented the three primary perspectives and practices of this essay: the Scarecrow (Golden Yellow), the Tin Man (Azure Blue) and the Cowardly Lion (Ruby Red). The same three perspectives and practices were represented in the three principal characters in Star Trek: Captain Kirk (Ruby Red), Doctor McCoy (Azure Blue) and Mr. Spock (Golden Yellow). What I purposefully failed to do was to introduce the other major characters in both narratives. These are the ones that represented blended orientations and were key to keeping everything working in their world of Fantasy.
Wizard of Oz
How appropriate it is to refer to the Wizard of Oz when writing about the Rainbow orientation—given that Oz resides somewhere over the rainbow. The two major characters not mentioned in the first essay were the principal protagonist, Dorothy, and her companion, Toto (the dog). Dorothy was inevitably aligning with one or another of the three perspectives and practices during her journey to Oz-at times being smart, at times compassionate and at times quite brave. And Toto was always at her side and playing a central role in unmasking both the Lion’s fake ferocity and the Wizard’s fake power,, as well as leading Dorothy’s three companions to the castle where the Wicked Witch was keeping her captive and threatening her life.
All of this intermingling of the three primary colors and various combinations of two colors (such as the Purple demand for justice when meeting with the Wizard) was on behalf of Dorothy’s immediate goal: returning to her home. The scarecrow might have gotten his diploma, the Tin Man his heart shaped watch and the Lion his medal—but the real winner was Dorothy. And she had the others (including Toto) to thank for the successful journey and the ultimate goal—which was the fuller appreciation of those who loved her (and she loved in return).
Star Trek
Set in a quite different setting (I don’t think we are in Kansas anymore), Star Trek also requires (like the Wizard of Oz) that additional characters be acknowledged. The Star Trek narrative isn’t all about Kirk, McCoy and Spock. It is also about the crew members of the Enterprise – and Uhura, Sulu, and Scotty in particular. These three characters not only represented diversity of background, they also represented the flexibility of style. Each of them could be brave, smart or caring depending on what the situation demanded of them.
Many of the story lines concerned Kirk, McCoy or Spock being out on their own. One of them was stranded on some alien celestial body. Being left alone, each of them often engaged their strength in an inappropriate or overused manner. Kirk’ bravery led to foolhardy actions that got him in trouble. McCoy’s caring led him to sacrifice himself in a manner that hurt rather then helped the situation he was in. Spock’s analytic skills were overused, leaving him with little appreciation of the human factors that ultimately determined success of failure. It often took one of the three other members of the crew to save Kirk, McCoy or Spock from their strength. At the end of each episode, we find all six of the main characters assembled on the flight deck. They are offering us a portrait of Rainbow Integration and Collaboration. The stage is set for a future adventure. Kirk, McCoy, Spock, Uhura, Sulu, and Scotty are ready to continue going where no person has gone before—searching for another Pot of Gold!
__________
References
Argyris, Chris and Schon, Donald, Organizational Learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1978
Bergquist, William (2013) “Collective Intelligence: Collaboration or Collusion?” Library of Professional Coaching. https://libraryofprofessionalcoaching.com/concepts/organizational-theory/collective-intelligence-collaboration-or-collusion/
Bergquist, William and Agnes Mura (2011) Coachbook: A Guide to Organizational Coaching Strategies and Practices. Sacramento, CA: Pacific Soundings Press.
Bolles, Richard (2019) What Color is Your Parachute? New York: Random House/Ten Speed Press.
Dewey, John (1929) The Quest for Certainty. New York: Putnam.
Gergen, Ken and Mary Gergen (2004) Social Construction: Entering the Dialogue. Chagrin Falls, Ohio: Taos Institute Publications.
Kolb, David (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Lippitt, Ronald Jeanne Watson and Bruce Westley (1958), The Dynamics of Planned Change. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.
Page, Scott (2011) Diversity and Complexity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Perry, William (1998) Forms of Ethical and Intellectual Development in the College Years. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schein, Edgar (1998) Process Consultation Revised. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Schutz, Will (1994) The Human Element. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Senge, Peter (1990) The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday.