A Practitioners’ Perspective on Developmental Models, Metrics and Community

Abstract

This article builds on a paper by Stein and Heikkinen (2009), and suggestsways to expand and improve our measurement of the quality of the developmentalmodels, metrics and instruments and the results we get in collaborating with clients. Wesuggest that this dialogue needs to be about more than stage development measured by(even calibrated) stage development-focused, linguistic-based, developmental psychologymetrics that produce lead indicators and are shown to be reliable and valid bypsychometric qualities alone. The article first provides a brief overview of ourbackground and biases, and an applied version of Ken Wilber’s Integral OperatingSystem that has provided increased development, client satisfaction, and contribution toour communities measured by verifiable, tangible results (as well as intangible resultssuch as increased ability to cope with complex surroundings, reduced stress and growthin developmental stages to better fit to the environment in which our clients wereengaged at that time). It then addresses four key points raised by Stein and Heikkinen(need for quality control, defining and deciding on appropriate metrics, building a systemto evaluate models and metrics, and clarifying and increasing the reliability and validityof the models and metrics we use) by providing initial concrete steps to:• Adopt a systemic value-chain approach• Measure results in addition to language• Build on the evaluation system for instruments, models and metrics suggested byStein & Heikkinen• Clarify and improve the reliability and validity of the instruments, models andmetrics we useWe complete the article with an echoing call for the community of AppliedDevelopmental Theory suggested by Ross (2008) and Stein and Heikkinen, a briefdescription of that community (from our perspective), and a table that builds on Table 2proposed by Stein and Heikkinen.