Modes and their Properties

Types versus Modes

Moving from the partial procedural quality of Types to the holistic contextual and value-based quality of Modes may not be easy in practice. Whereas one method can be learned and used to the exclusion of other methods, modes must be potentially inclusive because they are part of a whole represented by the Spiral.

The distinction between Types and Modes is examined here in detail as a preparation for the Topics to follow.

Naming

Types and Modes typically have the same name, but always have different formulas.

A specific Type-n (n = 1 to 7) is Level-n in a Typology formula, and may be referred to as L'n or Type-n.

Its corresponding Mode might therefore be labelled Mode-n. But Modes are more sensibly numbered in accord with the Stage in which they appear in the Spiral. They can then be assigned the corresponding number: μ-m (μ for Mode). Φ is the label used when numbering Stages.

The Type number and Stage number are always different, hence Type-n = Mode-m, but the pattern is identical in every Principal Typology, as shown below.

Type-n	→	Mode-m	Type-n	→	Mode-m
L'5	→	μ7	L'7	→	μ6
L'7	→	μ6	L'6	→	μ2
L'2	→	μ5	L'5	→	μ7
L'1	→	μ4	L'4	→	μ3
L'4	→	μ3	L'3	→	μ1
L'6	→	μ2	L'2	→	μ5
L'3	→	μ1	L'1	→	μ4

Substance

A Type is content: a method that purports to guarantee «the best way» to handle a particular Primary Hierarchy/Root Level, given its psychosocial pressure. There are 7 Types («best ways») for each RL/PH.
A Mode is the context aspect of a Type. It is part of the Spiral mechanism that enables delivery of the Primal Need of the same Root Level/Primary Hierarchy. There are 7 Modes and all are needed for a maximum feasible outcome.

Modes are social values (PH6L5) that integrate a community, and can themselves be integrated. This contrasts with Types that are incompatible value systems (PH6L6) that differentiate experts (and sometimes the rest of us) into antagonistic tribes.
More on Value Systems

Unlike Types that derive from just one RL, some Modes contribute by recruiting the next higher Root Level with its different psychosocial pressure.

If you use the Type, then you welcome its Mode. However, the reverse does not apply: it is possible to accept and even welcome the Mode but dislike or even reject the Type.
Effect in Practice

Essence of a Mode

Principles for construction of Modes have not been developed, and clearer guidance in identifying Mode components is desirable. In the absence of any theoretical infrastructure, Mode value sets were based on observations, literature findings and analytic-intuitions of what seemed to be required.

More recently, a logic has been identified as explained below.

The critical feature of a Mode has been referred to as its «essence» in Satellite postings. This arises directly from an unmistakable major characteristic of the originating Type.

When a Mode comes into focus in the Spiral evolution, everyone involved is ready and willing to accept the essence as necessary for pursuit of the Primal Need of the Spiral (and its originating Root Level).

The Mode includes other values to support that essence. However, these are oriented to the entity/endeavour as a whole. So Type features are handled selectively and modified appropriately.

Modes appear to possess three components in accord with psychosocial reality:

Social/Output Focus

Psychological/Group Focus

Personal/Self Focus

Examples:

Improved Logic for Specifying Mode Values

It was not unequivocally established above that the Mode is a «Mode of the Primal Need».

Given that the Types all offer their own particular optimization to meet the Domain's Primal Need, the focus in identifying Mode values that address the Primal Need is necessarily on the Domain's psychosocial pressure. This pressure is precisely what makes everyone "ready and willing" to accept the values.

So the "Social/Output" focus is better termed the Primary Focus and has the form:
Promoting [Principal Psychosocial Pressure]
The "Psychological/Group" focus is about using that pressure effectively in the Domain's social environment. So it is now re-named:
Handling [Relevant Social Group]
The Personal/Self focus is mainly unchanged, but is re-named
Finding a Source of [Personal Quality]

In the above two examples, the Mode's value sets must now be re-named
as follows:

See the Table of Primary Spiral Conceptions as at 15-Jun-2015:

Primal Means	Modes (Primal Need)	Primary Focus	Social Setting	Personal Focus
PH'1C: Strengthening Management	Achieving	Promoting Performance	Handling Co-workers	Finding a Source of Confidence
PH'2C: Establishing Conjectures	Knowing	Promoting Certainty	Handling Colleagues	Finding a Source of Conviction
PH'3C: Improving Clarification	Fitting in OR Realizing	Promoting Acceptability	Handling a Community	Finding a Source of Support
PH'4C: Strengthening a Sense of Self	Individualizing	Promoting Well-being	Handling the Social Milieu	Finding a Source of Self-Esteem
PH'5C: Embedding a Shared Reality	Associating	Promoting Understanding	Handling Valued Others	Finding a Source of Belonging
PH'6C: Maturing Politics	Governing	Promoting Autonomy	Handling the People	Finding a Source of Civic Pride
PH'7C: Enhancing Effectiveness	Competence (?)	Promoting Selflessness	Handling Recipients? Beneficiaries?	Finding a Source of ??
RH'C: Ensuring Coping	Thriving	Promoting Survival	Handling Socio-Physical Situations	Finding a Source of ??

This basis, incomplete as it is, permits an examination of the psychosocial rationale that drives the Spiral process.

Initially posted: 30-Nov-2013. Amended: 15-Jun-2015. Last updated: 8-Jan-2023

Type-n	→	Mode-m	Type-n	→	Mode-m
L'5	→	μ7	L'7	→	μ6
L'7	→	μ6	L'6	→	μ2
L'2	→	μ5	L'5	→	μ7
L'1	→	μ4	L'4	→	μ3
L'4	→	μ3	L'3	→	μ1
L'6	→	μ2	L'2	→	μ5
L'3	→	μ1	L'1	→	μ4

Type-n	→	Mode-m	Type-n	→	Mode-m
L'5	→	μ7	L'7	→	μ6
L'7	→	μ6	L'6	→	μ2
L'2	→	μ5	L'5	→	μ7
L'1	→	μ4	L'4	→	μ3
L'4	→	μ3	L'3	→	μ1
L'6	→	μ2	L'2	→	μ5
L'3	→	μ1	L'1	→	μ4

Type-n	→	Mode-m	Type-n	→	Mode-m
L'5	→	μ7	L'7	→	μ6
L'7	→	μ6	L'6	→	μ2
L'2	→	μ5	L'5	→	μ7
L'1	→	μ4	L'4	→	μ3
L'4	→	μ3	L'3	→	μ1
L'6	→	μ2	L'2	→	μ5
L'3	→	μ1	L'1	→	μ4