Exploring Bernard Leivegoed's Application of Anthroposophy in Organisational Development

'Squaring the triangle' as a method for developing regenerative organisations

A shift in thinking and consciousness: Living thinking and integral consciousness

After reading around a dozen leading theorists and thinkers from the ‘regenerative’ paradigm’, almost the first thing they all say: is that to change the way we do things into being regenerative, the first thing that needs to change is the thinking.

Most of them also refer to consciousness development and the notion of a new paradigm - some call it integral, some metamodern, some anthroposophy, or some view it as an emerging phenomenon. Rudolf Steiner’s praxis (which is what Lievegoed’s work is based on) calls it ‘living thinking’ ‘heart thinking’ and ‘intuitive thinking’.
This new consciousness centres around thinking (as thinking is that through which we make sense of the world, of life), and on an essential level, again there is consensus that this new form of thinking is integrative as opposed to ‘mono-ontological’ - a multiplex of worldviews, all with valid partial truths, none with valid claim to knowing the whole. In this, emerging view, the notion of premeditated and therefore premature certainty becomes almost laughable - there are valid counter-arguments for almost any claim (especially in the social realm). Steiner beautifully wrote that
"The gift of thinking was not bestowed upon us for the purpose of a precipitate formulation of thought but for the purpose of searching and seeking.
Thinking as such should be regarded as a process which should remain such for as long as possible. And when a thought has been formulated it should be held in abeyance until we can feel assured that the facts have been turned over and over and looked at from every possible angle.
Very much will depend upon whether a sufficient number of human beings can realise and understand the significance of what has just been said.”

The desire for certainty, for knowing, that characterises an essence of modern thinking, becomes the very thing that halts future progress. Dan Cheon found, "the conclusion is the part where you got tired of thinking" and it seems we often slip 'back' into a false sense of certainty, fed by a notion that the world can be understood entirely from within the perspective where one resides.

Jean Gebser calls this thinking ‘post-dialectic’ (going beyond dualism), ‘a-perspectival’ (going beyond even a multiplex of perspectives) and with a quality of ‘time-freedom’ or freedom-from-(linear)time. He wrote "The perspective fixates the perceiver as well as the perceived… On one side man who due to this isolating fixation has to stress his I more and more, on the other side the world as an opposite, an enemy which becomes stronger by taking more and more space."
This points towards a core issue in attempting to shift consciousness into this new mode, one which circumstance both demands, and provides the tools for. If we are operating from a dualistic mode of thought, then the world naturally inhabits a characterisation of either/or, us vs them, hero's and villains, correct vs incorrect and so on.
It is seductive to be certain, to be right. If you are also then one of the hero's in the battle for good - well this offers license to bend reality and to commit all sorts of transgressions against our innate sense of right and wrong - such as we have witnessed, and still witness in today's world.
In business, this often plays out much quicker, and the end result (of this cognitive, soul dissonance) is burn out and organisational failure.

Bernard Leivegoed, a hugely influential figure in the field of organisational development, worked for his whole life studying and applying the ideas and isights of Rudolf Steiner. One of his core insights was in picking up a key message within Steiner's later writings and lectures of the importance of 'squaring the triangle', and how this can be seen as the essence of Anthropsophy (Steiner's praxis). Squaring the triangle is concerned with how to truly manifest ideals into reality in a way that maintains behavioural integrity with the ideals that one wants to manifest.

The underlying approach from Lievegoed is to apply ‘living thinking’ to everything in the organisation, which itself can be seen as a living being, reflecting the humans that create, operate and interact with it. Lievegoed suggests that as an organisation is conceived and operated, and as strategy is formed, if one starts with the action within the context at hand as primary, and works through to the insights and wisdom (or once this is in place, one constantly re-iterates awareness of the living context), the knowledge is alive and adapted to the organisation, context, and the situation.
This is in contrast to the old thought form, which begins with seeking insight/wisdom and working this through into action through planning and executing - this is the form that places concepts and ideals as a blueprint to which reality must be shaped.
The new approach integrates the rational mind into its proper role as searcher and seeker, shining light onto areas that arise as needing to be explored with full (embodied) consciousness, rather than ploughing forwards with preconceived knowing, assuming that the world, or even the context, can be understood entirely in pre-thought-out strategies. The complexity and volatility of today's world simply does not match this older use of thinking, which Steiner refers to as 'dead', in that it is entirely forming conclusions based on yesterday's snapshots, rather than attuning with life as it is flowing through the present moment, connected to past and future, but not tied to them. Old forms of thinking - the pre-regenerative paradigm if you like - enact a thought-form that always has a primary perspective (this could even be ‘integral’ or ‘metamodern’). The mind is then fixer and former of conclusions, and the certainties become the instrument through which unintentionally destructive leadership and stragey-formation occurs.
Another way of seeing this is in how we structure the organisation in terms of power. If the hierarchy of roles necessary to operate efficiently, becomes a hierarchy of people - then the result for the organisation is that a lot of crucial information gets lost (as everything filters through the bottleneck of the manager and their biases). A more dynamic system such as Holacracy tries to bring this integrative spirit into the HR are frameworks, reflecting the new form of thinking that seems to be emerging.

Living thinking can also be characterised as thinking that is heart-centred and most of all guided by the intuitive, through embodied action.
Gebser referred to this as integral consciousness, and along with his notion of 'a-perspectival' (holding a multiples of perspectives, including a perspective beyond perspectives) awareness, he suggests an aspect that sees the human being becoming 'free from time', (free from the constraints of linear clock time - something that is core to the modern way of life). One is reconnected with the origin that is ever-present, and can begin to connect with the future that is trying to emerge.

Becoming aware of what 'mode' one might be operating from.

In all forms of integral thinking there are notions of levels of consciousness, and in framing why this can be important, Lievegoed’s notion of which level one is operating from is very illuminative in exploring the question of regenerative leadership.
The following three ‘levels’ (not to be confused with stages or states of consciousness - more like ‘modes’, although there is a sequential nature that is ever more towards the archetypal), are:
The ‘imaginative’ - intellectual mind. Regenerative leadership from this mode is about proper methods, adequate plans and strategies - a largely quantitative although integrative approach. A key question being "Is it true?".
The ‘inspirational’ - emotional mind. The focus is on the qualitative effects of the (plans and) actions. It asks "Is it Beautiful?"
The ‘intuitive’ - embodied mind. The focus is on the moral - "Is it good?" This forms the basis for all action - and this requires constant questioning, constant learning, constant reflexivity.

These three 'modes' reflect the three core centres of the human being - head, heart and hands, thinking, feeling, doing - threeness, which Lievegoed characterises as that which is archetypal and perennial. In Rudolf Steiner's 'Foundation Stone Meditation' a fourth element is emphasised - the moment in time - development and growth, which both Gebser and Steiner refer to as the 4th dimension. The challenge is to manifest the truth of the threeness into the temporal/physical context of our 4-dimensional reality - squaring the triangle.

Balancing the ideal and archetypal with temporal/physical contextual realities - 'squaring the triangle'

A central point in Lievegoed’s approach is the notion that the work is in manifesting the threeness of archetype, form, vision through the fourness of development in time - the emphasis being that we must avoid attempting to (whether consciously or subconsciously) imprint our ideals onto reality - rather the archetypal inspiration ‘informs’ every step of development in time/context: we can check back to see (or ideally, to inhabit a state of presence that is mindful of) whether our actions are engendering the good, have beauty, and are truthful - or, whether we are developing fraternity in economic activity; working from/with equality in governance (and with transparent use-of-power); and that we are engendering freedom in culture, thinking and spirituality.

There is no universal blueprint or process that will work in all situations, that will actually manifest the ideal into reality - at best initiatives working from this kind of impulse fail, at worst they become (behaviourally) inverse to the very ideals they uphold. An extreme example of how this so often transpires is communism.
This means that we have the constant challenge of how to manifest the ideal into reality in a way that does not end up destroying the very ideals that are espoused, and that gave life to the initiative in the first place - and this element is to be found in how we enact our ideals.

Lievegoed's suggestion is that Steiner offered a way through this conundrum, by way of becoming ever more conscious of context, physical and temporal, and endeavouring to creatively co-discover how the ideal can be brought-out into the context, through focus on the practical - ensuring, striving to ensure, that the actions are indeed good (in light of espoused ideals). In other words to simply get on with the work at hand, but to do so while cultivating a deep sense of holistic awareness, of both self and world. The other, most crucial side of this is of course become ever more conscious of yourself ''as a behaving personality'', which Steiner suggests, is the only way to truly see what actually guides ones actions. Steiner gave a statement in one of his early books that has remained ever-present for me since I first read it at 19 years old. 'Every idea that becomes the (lived) ideal gives you power, every idea that does not, kills life force within you'. Integrity is a source of deep confidence and resilience.

Applying Steiner's 'social threefolding' through Lievegoed's 'squaring the triangle'.

The following table is a mapping of the points relevant to regenerative organisation development raised by applying Lievegoeds approach to Steiner's theory.

The ideals ('threeness') in the case of this table, are based both on Steiner's 'Social Threefolding' theory as well as his developmental framing of working with the three human centres of head/thought, heart/feeling and body/enactment - as they apply to the collective and the individual.
Social Threefolding, which is neither utopian, nor dependent on system change, is the idea that society could be improved if the areas of justice/power/politics, economics/business/money and culture/religion/thinking can be separated and integrated, rather than being in the kind of muddle we currently have. For example, freedom belongs to the cultural sphere (rather than the economic which should rather be based around mutual gain), and equality belongs to the justice sphere (rather than economics). Such differentiation allows the identification of healthy boundaries between these three distinct spheres of society, and subsequently the chance for a more harmonious integration. Steiner's core personal development path similarly works at first differentiating and becoming fully conscious of thinking, feeling and willing/doing, and then integrating them into a more holistic and attuned form of consciousness and thinking, and therefore action.

However, a key point reiterated by Lievegoed, is that one cannot simply imprint this ideal onto reality like a blueprint, so therefore an approach founded around 'squaring the triangle' will, instead of seeking universal claims and certainties (which is what enables control), encourage us to be constantly seeking, aiming to discover how we can best do what needs to be done, in a way that is truly harmonious with the values that inspire and motivate us. This can only be discovered, in the context within which an initiative (or organisation) operates, and through the people that populate and steer it. It is a way of listening and learning, rather than controlling and forming certainties (the integrity of which are so often questionable).

Lievegoed wrote In 'Eye of the needple): "Mostly I heard people speak about threeness: social problems are solved by threefolding! But real life demands a confluence of threeness and fourness. Fourness is about four qualitative steps in a process of development. (...) Enthusiasm, insight, action, result those are the successive phases of the development process of fourness. Threeness plays a role from the first phase in the enthusiasm for the goal until the last phase in guarding the realized form. Threeness provides the foundation for the entire development process." and "Fourness is development, and threeness "cannot be pushed over the existing realities but must be realised step by step by people who never stop searching for factual possibilities. Every social organisation, every family, must be brought into a growth process by its own members, on its way to an ideal form."
That is why the threefold social order is something that wasn't fully formed - it is an ideal form that must be "found in the concrete situation, by people who stand in that situation and have the necessary competence in their field." (p77) To realise such ideals "you must dare to go into fourness, into development in time".

"Thus again, cooperation! To bring into a fruitful relationship, that which formerly was separate, the truth of threeness and the activity of fourness."

The organisational strategy and enactment then become more qualitatively-balanced, and leadership is developed with awareness of the constant need for reflexivity in co-creating conditions conducive to growth.

Tabel: ‘Squaring the triangle’ in Organisation design and development

The following table is a working idea - I would be very grateful for any questions, input or feedback. My intimation is that this can serve as a useful orienteering framework in developing a regenerative organisation (for example applied to structuring leadership training).

Threeness (the archetypal): freedom in culture; equality in justice, fraternity in economics; and imagination, clarity and beholding in thinking, inspiration, humility and communion in feeling, intution, integrity and recalling in doing - the inspiration.

Fourness (development in time) through the steps of: enthusiasm, insight, action and result: the (reflexive & iterative) process in time and context - the enactment.

Integrating threeness into the steps of fourness: Applying these ideas to the regenerative organisational context:

Questions that arise from the applying threeness through the steps of fourness:

Design ingredients:
In OD terms, what are the ‘ingredients’ for engendering enthusiasm? E.g. sense of security, good communication/culture, sense of agency, sense of purpose, responsibility, freedom and dignity.
As an organisation how can we meet the individual and ‘speak to’ what is highest in them. What are their unique gifts? What makes them sing? Where can they shine?

Integrative strategy:
Integration into context and development in time. Organisationally, we need systems to ensure the maximisation of learning and for our processes to be dynamic and adaptable. The balance is between the fixedness of form, of threeness, and the chaos of fourness. If we hold too close to the ideal, rigidity takes hold - too much development and fluidity, and chaos ensues.
Inter-organisationally, through becoming ever more clear and conscious of our own design principles and enactment, we can find suitable partners with whom a mutual sharing of ideas and trade can occur.
In leadership how can we engender participation, inspiration and integrative and alive dialogue.

Enactment with integrity:
How can we work toward the ideal of community and collective leadership whilst being mindful of what is currently real? Growing into full realisation through the phase of new growth and consolidation is the antecedent condition for integration to emerge and grow. How can we manage the practical and immediate in a way that truly reflects our values?
How do we as organisations (and leaders of them) ensure that we first recognise, and also nurture new life that comes towards us, and don’t unwittingly quell the enthusiasm that is being gifted, also ensuring that new energy does not adversely affect what is already growing?
Steiner and Lievegoed would suggest a single will born of integrated beholding, communing and recalling embodied through conscious action - founded in our hearts, directed in our heads, given through love.

Impact over intention
How can we be sure that actions are good (in line with espoused ideals, aligned with wider ethical concerns)? How can we remain learners, and be constantly mindful to check that our actions are indeed what we want them to be, whilst also becoming/remaining confident and competent in our role(s).
The way to ‘sell’ ideas and/or ideals, is through enacting them so well that people want to know your ‘secret’.
We need to constantly strive to align with the living-ness of our organisation - so often what was once the right thing, becomes a key obstacle in developing further.