279 - Marvin Oka: The Nature of Second Order Leadership

[Music] Welcome back. This is the Coaches Rising podcast. I'm really delighted to share this conversation with you today. I'm joined by Marvin Oker and Marvin, as you will, find out has a very vast, sophisticated understanding of inner and outer change. We're going to explore today Martin's approach to the work he does with the leaders doing systemic change and we will talk about many, many things. It's a long conversation. I highly recommend you listen to this whole thing. We're going to talk about the different types of learning that we can engage in. Why first order learning is not enough if we are being invited into a bigger transformation. We need to engage in second order change. Marvin will talk about what that is, what are the ingredients of it? How can we enter into truly transformational, generative learning? We'll talk about the connection between the inner work we do and leading systemic change. In fact, how we can't really separate those two. Marvin or share his views on what leadership truly is. It's a beautiful distinction. We will go right into Marvin's ontologically generative move. The moves that he makes with clients, which comes towards the end of the conversation. There's so many powerful ideas shared in this podcast that I can't possibly name them all in this intro. There's some great ones I'm forgetting. You can maybe feel there's an excitement in me when I come across someone like Marvin who has dedicated his life to understanding transformation on this level of sophistication. We're going to do a second part to this conversation where we explore explicitly complex decision making on an individual and collective level. Just to say a few more words about Marvin. Marvin is a highly sought after international consultant and speaker working with leaders exploring, supporting them to make systemic change. He trains leaders, he trains consultants and coaches. He is an innovator and created a field known as behavioral modeling, which examines various forms of human talent and expertise and seeks to create models and methods that replicate these forms of superior performance in others. All that being said we're in great hands. Let's dive in to the podcast with Marvin, Okah. Wait, wait, wait, wait, before we dive in actually I want to take a moment to tell you about the power of embodied transformation. This is our live online coach training program and it's enrolling now. It's our tenth year doing this and I used to say this program is incredibly relevant for our times but I don't actually say that anymore. I say it's essential and there are several reasons for that. Let me tell you because if we are to meet the uncertainty and the intensity of our times we cannot do that from our rational minds, they're not equipped for it. We have to access the intelligence of our embodiment, of our deeper embodied life and if we want to support our clients to make progress to create lives around the things that are most important to them. Again, we have to drop between just talking to our clients. We have to help them access where the ways that they are stuck around the things that matter most are deeply rooted in their bodies. Once that happens, once we help them bring awareness to that then transformation can take place and we can support them to embody new ways of being that help them live into the things that are most important to them. This is what our clients want from us and I believe this intelligence, this embodied intelligence helps us to transmute, to metabolize the intensity of our times and to access our deeper wisdom. Another thing, this program will teach you how to do on top of all that is that our clients come in and their nervous systems are dysregulated in these times, understandably. But if that's the case, we can't actually have the coaching conversation. So we need to be able to help our clients to shift, to move back into a regulated state and this program will go into that as well and that's where the real coaching can happen. So you will be led by a truly world class faculty in this program, Stacey Haynes, I think one of the world's best teachers of how do you coach them. We did a masterclass with Stacey the other week and if you want to see the potency of this work, there's a coaching demo that we unpack and in 15 minutes it goes incredibly deep and potent shift opens up. Stacey will be joined by Amanda Blake, a real thought leader in neuroscience and embodiment and designing practices that stick. I think this is an edge for many clients. How do you actually design transformational practices in body practices for your clients? Also, Richard Strussi-Heckler will join us, one of the true founders of this field and his capacity to discern his clients embodiment is masterful. And he's going to be teaching about how he does that alongside some other incredible faculty. So if you are inspired to join us, then you can head to coachesrising.com/powerofembodiedtransformation to book your spot. So Marvin, welcome to the coaches rising podcast and I have been really looking forward to this conversation. Ever since we first met and we were able to talk about the process of the process, we've been really looking forward to this conversation. Ever since we first met and I just had this electrifying conversation with you, what I appreciate about you was not only did the way you think about transformational change really resonate with me, but you just felt like you had this deeply broad and systemic way of being able to speak about transformation from so many different angles and facets. So we're going to get right into your work today. And first of all, could you say how basically how you are and just give us this brief introduction of what you're up to in the world? Yes, great. Thanks, Joel. It's great. It's an honor to be here and to be with you. So yeah, I'm doing fine. I had a, it's late at night tonight, but had a big day with a good, with a client today and we got through a lot of things. So that's always really rewarding. My, to tell a bit about the background, there's quite a bit to it. So I'll try and keep it as succinct as possible. My job is what's known as neurobehavioral modeling. Now, big fancier word basically what it means is we look at forms of human ability or human competence. And our job is to essentially replicate it or at least some aspect of it. And the challenge is that all forms of human competence requires psychological neurological other types of biological processes occurring outside the awareness of the expert or the performer. So as an example, I'll often ask an audience to just wiggle their fingers and then I'll ask let's say the world's greatest finger wiggler for some strange reason and I want to know how to do what they do. So I asked them tell me, oh, master finger wiggler, how do you do that? And they'll say, well, you hold up your hand and wiggle. So I haven't met anybody who can actually explain to me exactly how you do a simple task like wiggling your fingers. So holding up your hand and wiggling is as we say in the field, it's accurate but uninformative. It's great. It's true. That's what you do. But if I don't know how to do that, that set of instructions doesn't help. And so you can't if you can't even explain how to wiggle your fingers, how do you explain things like complex leadership looking at whole system change or trying to make wise decisions and complex ambiguous environments. So as how do you know whether or not your action is going to have positive or negative consequences, it takes a very different set of internal processing. So our job I've been often. And sometimes we call the neurological hacker, for instance, we sort of get in and find out what's occurring in the psychological neurological biological processes of the human. Even outside their own awareness, they wouldn't even think to explain. And when we can start to decode a lot of it and map it. We will contest it to see if we can replicate the behavior, then we have what's called a neural behavioral model. Then the job is to now commercialize it monetize it or find ways in which it's learnable by other people or rebuild it into the design of. You know, job trainings programs job design, whatever it might be. So it's kind of a there's much more to it, but this kind of the short end of how it actually works. Now I've got colleagues. in my particular field that look at what I think are kind of obvious things like sports performance. And that's wonderful. And it's great. And I learn a lot from what they find. But I'm particularly more interested in looking at how to elevate the consciousness for wise decision-making in society. I am more interested in how leaders are able to facilitate whole system change, which have a real systemic cultural transformation, what's known as second order change. Or in the context of coaches, how do you facilitate emergent consciousness? So what's called vertical change, which is another way of saying second order change to one's current level of consciousness. I look at those kinds of areas, because the goal that I'm after is elevate wisdom of decision-making in society. I take a look at a range of other fields. I don't have any bias towards anything. I look at anything and everything. And as a modeler, I'll look at anything that helps me find ways to make distinctions and put language to very complex things that have then involved humans. So whether it's internal to the human, for coaching processes, whether it's more externalized in terms of interactions with other people, all the way to how does it particularly second order leaders facilitate the emergence of second order systemic cultural change. So it's kind of a shortened curly of it all. I'm going to ask you about second order change, second order leadership in a moment. But could you say something first about what? Something you said in an interview I saw really spoke to me, which is that systems often operate in homeostasis. And right now, if we look at the world, it feels like many things are in a state of disruption or flux and certainty, which can be intense. I just find it a better word for its intense. But what you said was also when that is the case, actually there is a potential in that system for transformation because the normal kind of governing structures are loosened and opened. So could you say something about what you see happening in the world right now and the impact on leadership? And also tie that to what you said about leadership not being a top down endeavor, but emerging from collective angst. I think that will contextualize then our dive into second order, generative learning. Okay, this is brilliant. Thanks for that question because it's big obviously. There's a lot of different ways to even begin to answer that. First, let's start off with the premise that you're coming from around, particularly living systems. If we look at living systems, they move towards some kind of homeostasis where you want some sort of system that in a complex, what's called a complex adaptive system, the system is trying to balance itself so that it can stabilize itself and be able to survive in whatever kind of conditions that it is. However, that's only one part of the story, particularly in living systems, particularly with where humans are involved. There's always a dynamic tension between homeostasis, some sense of certainty, stability, so that it can be predictable and you know how to behave, but then there's also a competing tension around learning and growing and evolving and becoming. So this tension creates an interesting vector that now starts to happen that becomes the second order leadership space. You're trying to balance these two on an ongoing basis. Now, having said that, I'll qualify what I just said and unpack it a bit as we go, which is in the context of consciousness, the metaphors that are often used when people talk about consciousness is vertical. They often talk about levels higher and lower levels of consciousness, for instance. And there's a reason why that that metaphor, that linguistic metaphor, works in many situations. So at a particular level of consciousness, one might see one or the other of that tension. They might see, as you pointed out, I look out in the world and I see chaos, confusion, disruption, warfare, I see dysfunctionality on every step of the way and we're headed towards doom. And then there are others that say, look on the other side of the continuum and say, well, it's a beautiful world and there's life and everything's all great and we just have to come back to to being on track on things. And of course, both sides are thinking the other side is completely insane. Now, both are in play in a living system. Both things are in play and like a classic lack of better metaphors, if I go to something like, in trylectics, we're going to have a yin yang and we're going to have a doll. We're going to have the two seemingly opposing conflicting things. But actually there's an integration between them. When the context of second order leadership or emerging transformational change, what we're seeing is this tension between the need for stability. So if you see people that are just saying, oh, you know, what we need is more isolationism and more national security and the other people are threatening us and it's a very tribal mentality. And they're saying, I'm trying to reach for stability. I want this stability. But in a context of a world that's now becoming more integrated, interconnected, that stability is not possible in the old way of knowing what stability actually is. We have to reach now for more integration. But in that process, living systems will first, this is what I'm saying, it's big because how many ways can I go about this? I'll take a side tangent and explain something and then I'll bring it back. Okay, if that's okay. So there's many different models to look at what happens in what biology calls the point of bifurcation. At what point does the organism or the species have as a choice point or metaphorically a choice point, not always a choice, but to either grow or die, to actually evolve or go extinct. Now, I'm going to step aside from moving, go to a physical metaphor, because it's the easiest one to understand and I'll bring it back to a living system in just a moment. So many years back, I'm sure probably some of your listeners will know about this. Many years ago, the Ilya Priggein won a Nobel Prize for his theory of dissipative structures and he was a chemical physicist and he started identifying, as an example, let's say we have a pot of water on the stove and the pot of water is in a state of balance, I'm home, the state. So the water stays at a particular temperature as much as possible. But let's say we start applying energy to that system. We apply heat to that system. Well, the system now has to take this incoming energy and dissipate it somehow. So how does it do that? It starts off by radiant heat. It starts to just get hot. But if the heat turns up and it doesn't go away, the heat stays on, then the water amount, I'm going to take license with a lot of metaphors here, the water molecule will start vibrating and they start, as it starts getting closer and closer to a burning point, they start bouncing off of each other. Now the technical term for that is the system is now in perturbation, the systems perturbed, all the little elements are perturbed and they're trying to find all these different connections as water, as a system known as water, it's trying to find all these connections to try and dissipate the heat. But at some point, if the heat stays on long enough and hot enough, then the system reaches a threshold point. In physical terms in the old days, it would be, it would be called a catastrophe point. So you can bend for instance a piece of metal and it'll bend back and it'll bounce back and it'll bend and bounce back. But if you bend it too far, at some point, it structurally hits a catastrophe and it changes its form. On this case, the water hits this threshold point where the only way it can dissipate the heat is transformed. It actually has to change is a very formation. So it turns into steam and as steam, it can dissipate the heat. But it's completely transformed at that point. That's a second order change. It's now a different different thing altogether. Now if you think about that, in terms of what's happening in the system today, we're seeing pockets of the world trying to stabilize themselves. The problem is we don't live in an isolationist world. We are interconnected. Things do affect each other. Interdependencies now come into play and right to the front of mind. So what's going to happen? Well, like the water molecule is bouncing back and forth, you're going to see people going to conflict. You're going to see them going into defense, attack, whatever it might be. And they're trying anything they can, they're trying to just come back to the life that they know that they're trying to preserve. Now at some point, we're going to hit a threshold if we haven't already, where it will be grow or die time. It'll either be, we're going to hit such a catastrophe point, where we've got to reorganize and rethink, otherwise, we're mutual extinction every step of the way. Or it will be that. It will be collapse. It will be the other option to grow or die. You can grow or you can die. We can't go extinct. That can happen. And so in terms of that, that's what we're seeing now. Now coming back, pulling it back to second order leadership. This is where we start to see the the call to leadership, where we know that the conflict situations are not going to be sustainable. Now, here's the amazing thing, right, which is, and this is where second order change and first order change needs to be understood. First order change needs to be understood as much as second order change. So not all first order change, first order change is not bad. In the right context, it's an appropriate thing. But first order change is the maintaining of the current system. And over the years, I've identified four types of first order change that any good second order leader needs to be able to recognize very early, well in advance. So one is, believe it or not, improvement. When things improve, people think, ah, that was great. You know, the things are now better. Well, yes and no. If the system itself was problematic, and it was the system itself that needed to transform and evolve, improvement actually makes matters worse. Because what it does is it actually reduces the cognitive dissonance and the tension that's occurring in the system, because things are now better. So there's no need to transform, right, when you're improved. It's gotten better. In many ways, if you want steam, if you want the pot of water to boil and turn it to steam, that would be like reducing the heat. It's like, let me take the heat down. Isn't that better? Yes, it's better, but it's not getting us to steam. It's what we need for the steam engine, right? So another one is the fix. The fix, it comes back to the way it used to be. And this is the way you see most people approach health, for instance, is that they have a health problem. They go to the doctor and they want a fix. They want the pill or they want the surgery or they want something. And sometimes it's absolutely needed. Don't get me wrong. I'm not, I'm not discounting into that. It's just that that's only one part of it. If needed was a real transformation about how a person approaches their lifestyle, for instance. So it's one thing, if they have heart disease and it's like, oh great, you can take these pills, which will help reduce your blood pressure and help potentially help clean out your arteries. But if your lifestyle doesn't change, then this is a very first order move. And you'll feel better. Things have improved for a little while. And if you keep smoking and drinking and doing all the kind of things to excess, what causes a heart attack in the first place is that system is still in place. And that's what needs to transform. You can't just reduce the energy. You can't reduce the cognitive dissonance. This is why sometimes in coaching, you kind of want to sometimes, not always, sometimes amplify the problem for the client. So that they really understand the imperative to actually make a really big significant change. That's what's called for, if, big F. The third type of first order change is much to do about nothing. It's the classic rearranging debt shares on the Titanic. And I think anyone who's worked in organizations has seen numerous change programs that, at the end of the day, after all of a sudden, money has been spent, effort has been done. We're really right back to status quo, right? Maybe names and faces have changed, labels have changed, but still kind of the same culture, the same, everything. So that's classic, just rearranged things. And the fourth type of first order change is changes that actually lock in the current system. They make it even harder to change. Many times our election cycles are that way. Right? It's kind of like, well, or sometimes changing the CEO. Well, yeah, but if the remineration package is the same, you still rewarded on the same metric, you're still going to get the same kind of CEO, producing the same kind of results. So it's sometimes it just locks it in harder and harder. And bringing it back now, the idea is you don't want to just reduce the perturbation that's going on in the system. And so when you see this tension between homeostasis versus a poll towards evolution or a call to learning and growth, you know, and we've experienced it within ourselves, within our own psyche, right? We kind of, we kind of like our comfort zone because it's comfortable. But at the same time, we also want to learn and grow. And then we instantly hit this tension point. It's like, I want to learn and grow. But gee, that means I'd have to change. Yeah, that's right. Right? There's the same kind of dynamic. It's kind of like, oh, yeah, but I want to really pursue my calling, but I don't want to leave my job because it's secure and I need the money. It's like, yeah, you're in that same pattern right now, right? I mean, homeostasis and growth. And what it looks like internally is chaos. It's for them is the human. It's confusion. What do I do? You know, it's uncertainty. I'm sure I want this, but I don't want to let go of this. And so as you're probably aware in transition coaching, as William Bridges used to say, you know, all transitions begin with an end. You know, they all begin with something has to finish and you have to let go of a lot of things. They need to go, going to go into the second stage of a transition, which is the limbo land, what do you call the neutrals are? But for me, it's more of a limbo where you're in this tension between, I want to know, I want to go back to what I know stable and secure versus, but I want to, I want to grow and go into something new at the same time. And this tension without coming back now to the level of consciousness required, if you're at only a level of consciousness that sees the either or you're stuck, but if you can get to a different order of consciousness, where you can see that both are in platenit once and either bad or good, and all it is is a dynamic and that your job now is to navigate this dynamic in your own life with your own choices. Then now it becomes what is the wisdom of choices to navigate this when there's things I have to let go. There's some things I can take with me into the future, but there's some things that don't apply anymore, like my, you know, I need to upgrade my identity, for instance, some aspects of my identity stay the same, some need to completely transform. And now how do we navigate it from this higher order of a metacognition and metameta cognition? Now, coming back now to your question, what are the implications for leadership? Well, number one, what leaders do multiple things? When the system itself is problematic, one of the first things the leader has to bring to the system is consciousness, and it has to bring energy for change because it takes energy to transform. In many ways, if we go back to the part of water metaphora, or analogy, the leader is the heat. Guess what's going to happen, say in an organization when you bring in the heat of change? Well, all the particles, the EGE, all the people in the organization are going to go bounce back before it gets perturbed, and the natural instinct is to either resist or some will embrace and are ready for the transformation. But there's going to be this ongoing tension. The leader now has to manage the tension, but not in a transactional way. For real second order change to occur in my context of bringing wisdom into society, you need to bring higher orders of consciousness into the game. Now, not everybody's up for that, not everybody's ready for that, but the leader better be, a second order leader better be. And so this part of their job is to manage just the bring in energy. They will cause perturbation if they're doing great things. Their job is to be able to frame, reframe appropriately, to be able to keep elevating people's consciousness to make meaning of events at a higher order level, one that more expresses who could become if we move to this new way of being. And then they can have a transformative impact on the living system that they are enabling. So it's not, I don't go over the leader follower type metaphor. There are more of like a catalyst and if you want, we can get more into the thoughts on bottom up leadership and how it's an emergent property of the collective, but without having to ramble on for too long. I said to you earlier, just catch me because I can go onto diverse angles very quickly. But this is what I'm saying in the world as well. You're seeing a set of dynamics just naturally occurring because of the interdependencies of the world. And world views that are not at, not at not all different, not all the world views that are out there at the same level of consciousness. So they are some that are trying to protect their stability and they, and they, they see the way to do that is is war. For instance, and then there are others that are saying, oh no, you know, stop the wars. Well, yeah, nice, but that's not how the whole system works because the planet is comprised of human beings at different orders of consciousness of which one order of consciousness is war. And it will be there in the system, right? To say stop the wars is naive. It's going to happen, right? And probably the one of the first victims of the people, you know, the one of the first victims of war is going to be the ones who don't want to go to war. Now I'm not saying go to war. What I'm saying is it's not a dichotomy. You have to know that all are in play. We need a meta view of how to actually enable this. None of that is prescriptive. Nobody's got the technical answer. We have to emerge it as we move forward via what my colleague Richard Haynes and I, what we call transformational conversation or transformational narrative. And there are, there are ways to go about it. Not easy, not prescriptive. There's no magic bullet. However, there are ways to figure things out as we go from a higher order of God, as we go into the future from higher orders of consciousness. But it takes people to start there and have an intention there. And that's going to be the beginning of what I call second order leadership. That makes sense. That makes sense. That I ran below. It did make sense. And I made some notes because there was many things you shared that I'd love to like double click on and expand a little bit further. And I think, you know, in a sense, and maybe this is a question to you about which direction we go in first. You know, there's the systemic, the outer change in the world. And this is a very simplistic and maybe illusory separation, dualism, I'm creating, but the outer change in the world. And you're describing that, but there's also the inner change of the leader. And it seems like they, you know, as you're saying, they go hand in hand, you know, that actually, it's a second order leader that can affect second order change. You know, it's a particular way of being in a particular kind of consciousness in the world. So I'd like to unpack now, like what, how do we enact second order change? You know, you described like transitions that we find ourselves in that are inviting that kind of learning. And, and then, you know, tie that to as well, how do we then enact second order change in systems? And so maybe, yeah, maybe we, maybe we start with like second order consciousness itself, because that seems like fundamental to be able to enact second order systemic change. Could you say, what, what kind of things are, you know, you talked in the beginning about neuro behavioral modeling and complex decision making? What is that pathway into, let me, let me ask this is a question I have. So is second order learning a mode that we enter into, you know, sometimes we are in first order learning and that's fine. And then we enter second order learning. Or is it a kind of stage of maturity that we access where in, we're always in a kind of second order learning? Or is it both? What a lovely question. It's a very insightful query that you have there. Okay. Lots of angles to try and unpack this from maybe an entry point is to start with levels of learning. Alright, so back in the HEs, I ran across a paper by Gregory Bateson in which he described the title was around logical types of learning when in fact what is running about they were logical types, but he's actually talking about logical levels of learning. So instead of just categorizations, they're actually talking about levels of abstraction. And he talked about how it went from, you know, to keep it simple, you call that learning level 0, 1, 2, 3, but it went on add in for an item. And because it was conceptual, it's a theoretical paper and it was conceptual. And he talked about how after about learning four or so, he said it was pointless to talk about it because it got so abstract at that point that human couldn't do anything with it. So it just becomes concept after concept after that. Now as a modeler, as a norbe have a modeler, I was reading this paper thinking this is fantastic. The distinction he was making was fantastic, but what do I do with it? How do I turn it into something I can do something with. And so I started taking the concept and turning it into an approach and a time methodology for learning. And at the time, I just simply called it generative learning. And then much just my surprise, the term showed up in things like Peter saying he's fifth discipline, etc. Obviously it's a term people use, but I kind of just thought it on my own for my own use. But it goes the first four levels, even though it goes up to learning three, because the first level is zero, learning level zero. It's important to start there because then I'll link it to the different mode of learning. And then therefore where the second order learning occurs within the individual, then what it means for therefore for leaders to work. And then what it relates to the interdependency between the internal and the external coming back to your train of questions there. So first learn just explain it very simply. This is actually quite lengthy, but I'll cut to the chase on it. At the most surface level, there's learning levels zero. Learning level zero is straight stimulus response conditioning is straight road memory. So the way we learn the times tables, it's the way we learn our alphabet, it's the way we learn the musical scale. Any kind of technical knowledge, if you're a tax person, it's the way you learn all the tax formulas and tax laws. You just have to drill it in. It's just wrote. And it's the beginning of things. Then there is learning level one. Now to simplify what Bateson was saying, I'll call learning level one applied learning. This is the focus of all training of real training, which is to take knowledge that you'll get or content knowledge that you'll get at learning level zero and do something with it. Apply it. So a classic thing might be you might learn your times tables, but then you get a math exam that says terrific. If you have, if there's three people with two apples each, how many apples do you have? And you now have to now figure out how do I apply my multiplication tables to this problem? And so this is how you learn any trade work to whatever might be skill development, classic skill development. Learning level two is pattern recognition. This is the world of learning how to learn. And this is where you have patterning now involved. And so this is the classic, this is the land where the classic phrase is, you know, classic give a person a fish, feed them for a day, teach him how to fish, feed them for a lifetime. And so this is where the world of accelerated learning comes in. This is where we learn how to use nomonics for better zero learning. This is where we learn how to use colors to activate the limbic system for better emotional coding of things. This is how we use imagery like we learn how to learn a lot of these areas. This is also in the land of personal learning. This is where we get insights and a ha's. And we see the pattern, like during coaching session, someone says, now that explains so many things that have happened in my life. They've hit a learning to distinction went, oh, they can see that I'll just ripple the cross so many different contexts. Now, if I were to, with all due respect, just kind of building on the old phrase, you know, if, if you give a person a fish and you feed them for a day and you teach them how to fish and you feed them for a lifetime, that's wonderful. But what if they don't like fish? And now what? Now, learning level three is a completely different game unto itself. So learning three is what I call the generative learning or transformational learning or sometimes I call it reorganizational learning. And this is more ontological. This is where and at this level, as we spoke about it, you know, previously when we first spoke, there's now six domains where I will see if someone's in a mode of transformative learning or generative learning. I will see transformations, meaning really qualitative, qualitative changes in six domains, six categories. One is going to be ontological. Their way of being changes. Right. Who they are in the world, how they know themselves to be in the world epistemological the way they know the world itself, the way they create reality for themselves. Teleological, their sense of end purpose, whereas I lovingly like to say, what's it all about? Alfie, you know, at the end of the day, what are you trying to fulfill? What are you trying to achieve? What is it? There's also going to be phenomenal logical, which is your experience of the world. How do things occur to you? How do things arise in your consciousness? Then there's going to be praxis, which will probably be closer to where I think a lot of your programs are on embodied learning, right? Or embodied changes, embodied coaching, and praxis, which is how do you take what you know? Oh, and how does it become embodied into your behavior? How does it translate into what you do? Now, what you do at an ontological level, because doing and being become become the same thing at that point, not at a learning one skill level, where you do it sometimes, not other times. It's more like this is now how you do things in the world, your praxis. And then the sixth domain will be levels of your metacognition and metacognition. So your ability to reflect on your own internal processes, and then your ability to reflect on the way you reflect on your own internal processes. Now, to give an example of how significant that what we call a logical level shift actually is is sometimes, you know, the phrase getting met us sometimes sometimes having metacognition and being aware of your own internal processes by and of itself can be wildly empowering. And at other times, wildly disempowering, right? And people kind of go, what would it, what do you mean? Isn't awareness like curative will depends depends on the level of consciousness that's underpinning that awareness. So for instance, if someone ever makes the comment, this is something like, oh, you know, I just went to my my counselor therapist or psychiatrist or coach or whatever it might be. And I suddenly realize all these patterns that I've been really using to mess up my life and all my limiting patterns. I mean, it's now I now I know why I'm screwed. It's like, okay, this is this is not a really empowering level of metacognition. I'm glad you're aware that you've got these really limiting thoughts, but that awareness just locks you, it's the fourth, you know, for sort of change. It locks you in now to these limiting thoughts, because now you identify with being someone who's got these limiting thoughts. That's going to be a harder change now. So sometimes you need a meta-meda cognition to kind of go, "Okay, you've ended up with one way of thinking that you're screwed for life because of these thoughts that you have. That's one way you could have interpreted this insight, this learning to insight. Is there other ways you could have interpreted this?" And then what is the conscious, which you choose, which way you're going to interpret something? Now, that's a completely different order of processing altogether. And so I found that the people that are really good at second order change that are intentional about it have high degrees of meta-cognition. Many of them have high degrees of meta-meda cognition, but they have at least good meta-cognition. They're able to reflect on the way they're approaching something, and the really good ones challenge the way they're actually doing that as well. So we're looking at this. Now, when you come at it from this level, things that you knew in the past also transformed. So for instance, I'm about to tell you something that I had learned decades ago, but it was only probably in the last four or five years that I suddenly went, "Oh my gosh!" Let me just rethink what I thought I knew about this thing. So Jean-Pierre J.A. when he was looking at how children learn, he made one of the things he made was the difference between a similar to versus a common date of learning. Now for people that know, David Colbs of Learning Cycle and then what Bernie Smacarte did with it in terms of the format system, you're going to see what particularly with David Colbs, you have a similar, these are the what quadrant learners that like content. And on the diametrically opposite side of a four vector model, you've got the accommodators. The accommodative learning are the what if learners, they're like your classic entrepreneurs that say, "Oh, if that's the case, then why don't we just do this with it?" They're off exploring and innovating on a lot of things. And that's the way I understood a similar to the accommodative learning for a long time. Until I really looked at it from a general learning viewpoint, I went, "Oh my gosh!" I was trying to wrestle with the idea of, "Why don't, how is it that people don't just automatically change?" Like if you give them a great insight, a great learning to insight, how come they don't just go, "Wow, that just changes everything." Whereas others will just go, "Oh yeah, that's interesting." And then they'll move on and be like, "How they were before you said this great insight." And so I was like, "Look at this, going, how was this, I did this by the way because I was getting frustrated." Yeah, with some clients going, "Oh, come, they don't learn." And I started, I was like, "Ah, look, the assimilative learner, which we all do, it's not either or we all do this, when we are in a similar mode, we're taking new distinctions that people are telling us and we're fitting it into what we already know. So try to make it match to what we already know." And that is a very efficient way of learning. What is this like that I already know that I can learn it easier? Now when you look at how people change, for instance, I think in the book, how minds change and they were looking at the use of the Socratic method and how you can challenge people by introducing discrepancy in their own belief systems. And what happens is when someone is in a similar mode, when you get an anomaly or discrepancy to your worldview, what you already know. The first instinct, trying to preserve homeostasis of my worldview, is you just read it off as an anomaly and you just move it to the side. People do this when they just go, "Oh, that's just a conspiracy theory, they're just wiping it to the side without actually wondering, what if there's any basis to some of this?" So it's like, "Oh, that's just an exception. They move it to the side as if it didn't matter." But when those exceptions and those contradictions start stacking up and you get enough of them, it's like coming back to the analogies we've set up already. It's like adding more heat to the pot of water where your epistemological pot of water is not perturbating. And I've got so many anomalies now coming from credible sources, I can't just discount them anymore. What do I do? And that's when your worldview starts rearranging and reorganizing so that it can accommodate, you start going into steam, you know, steam coming out of the ears. It starts going into steam where you reach a different way of knowing the world where you can integrate. It's no longer light and dark, but there is a, it's no longer Yin and Yang, there's a dial that integrates the two. And you get to this higher order and that's accommodative learning. That's when you start reorganizing and rearranging. That's generative learning at that point. Now what has to happen is, and I start to track this as a modeler, is when people are able to do this and do it naturally, easily, what's going on in their mind and in their world compared to those that don't. What's actually happening there is, and from modeling viewpoint, I start to recognize a few things. The ones who do this either intuitively or they've developed it as a skill or they can do it more frequently than others. One of the things that they are aware of because of their level of metacognition and metametacognition is they realize that their thoughts, their mental models, their representations of things are just that. Their just thoughts, their just mental models, their just maps, their just representations. They're not identified with them. At some point they come back into question their own thoughts because their thoughts. Whereas the others that don't, the thoughts are not just thoughts. It's them. Like the thoughts are what they believe. All right. It's not obelief. It's what they believe. They identify with it and they attach and they defend. If I could, yeah, go ahead, yeah, you want to just, I want to jump in in a moment just actually. Okay. So what's happening? I'm going to pull it back now to the original premise, which is if you're going to create second order change as a leader, if you're going to try and enable and facilitate second order change. First of all, it's emergent. So you can't prescribe second order change. You can't say this is the change I want and it's second order change. No, you don't know that. Second order change is second order. It's only when the system reorganizes. It's emergent. You don't know what it's going to look like. But what you can shape is the qualitative direction it's evolving into as a leader and the form will take care of itself as long as you keep shaping the qualitative aspect. But if you're going to shape conditions, you have to remember that we're part of the system too. As an agent, we are not separate from the system we operate within. We are part of that very system. So as the system around us changes, we have to change. We have to evolve. And so a good second order leader is continually doing a accommodative learning. They're continually upgrading between the ears, not just how things work, but who they are, their role, their identity. They have to evolve. So good second order leaders are continually evolving in their own way of being as well. If they're being truly effective. So at this point, the internal and the external are, you can't separate them. I remember we've got a good 50 years ago when I was a young lad. I remember reading this principle that said all learning is from biology. That all learning occurs between the organism and its interaction with its environment. And I'll let you out. Wow. That's it. Yeah. It's interesting because this idea of why is agency has really taken root in certain communities. I think it's being a kind of response to, well, first of all, that there are people who have agency in the world who don't seem to have a lot of wisdom sometimes. But then there are people who do a lot of inner work, but it doesn't translate into their effectiveness and agency in the world. So what is it to actually have both together, you know, kind of this, and actually that distinction between in and out. As you just described, it's like false. And I think the coaching community has been maybe a little guilty of over focusing on the inner and in-vert commas. So I want to come to like how you support leaders into that second order growth because it seems like, so what you're saying is, you know, we get to a point where that heat, you know, to the metaphor of the waters enough that we're perturbed. And, you know, I think this is a great point you made that the danger is weak. And I see this in the personal development circles. You get good at regulating yourself. So you actually regulate a way that that kind of perturbed. And you're doing yourself a bit of a disservice there, actually. It's sometimes good to expand your capacity. There's a book that I'm reading now about expanding our capacity to feel uncomfortable emotionally. which I think is in this territory rather than just regulating them away through sensation working with our bodies. So, and it seems like there is a shift, like you're describing how second-order leaders often have moved into this place where they recognize that I am creating my world through my cognition, through my set of maybe values or beliefs or what I believe the world to be. And you could see that also occurring on a collective level, you know, that we have certain collective beliefs like perpetual growth or, you know, that kind of really govern a lot of the way we interact. So, what I'm wondering is how do you support leaders to change? And what is the gestalt of that? Because it seems like, as you described, like metacognition is only one of those six kind of elements of the ontological, epistemological, teleological, phenomenological, and praxis also. So, yeah, let's get into like the, how do you actually, someone comes to you and they're like Marvin, I'm just afraid of. Or Marvin, hey, I lost my job or someone, you know, it's something happen and they're stuck, they feel lost or they know they're frustrated because I'm, you know, I'm leading this team and, you know, the same things keep happening. I want to make change, it's not happening. How can I, yeah, how can I evolve myself? Yeah, okay, beautiful. Okay, hello, again, I'm thinking so many different doorways to enter this, this conversation on, for this topic. First, let me just clarify something that, it's a second order change is not a thing, right? It's not a thing unto itself. As I mentioned before, it is an emergent property, it's out of reorganizing, but it's also, in linguistically, it's also what we call a comparative deletion, meaning second order compared to what? Right, the reference point has been deleted. It's second order compared to what? So because systems are nested, anything that looks second order might not be from a higher order, but from a lower order, it's second order. So if someone says, oh, you know, my coaching client came to me and they were highly stressed out and, you know, now I've talked them self-regulation skills and now they've learned to be able to manage themselves on the stress and they're just, it was transformational. Okay, was it? Right? From looking at it from level of, what has now changed in the conditions of their life, them being more at ease with those conditions was not second order at all. However, in the context of them being stressed out and disempowered to their conditions of life, them now being able to self-regulate is absolutely second order. All right, so yeah, it's second order compared to what? Like what's your reference point? We have to start there in terms of the system. Okay. So now, come back to what to do when when someone comes. So it depends on the context. So if they are, and again, also keep in mind when I'm using the word leader, I'm not necessarily talking about a formal position of authority. Okay. It doesn't mean that just because they're a senior manager, they're a leader, they may or may not be. All right. So someone on working at their desk may very well be a leader because they influence a lot of people with their opinions, even though they don't have the formal title of being a manager, let's say. So they might have the leadership influence. They might be leading a lot of people in ways of thinking, etc. So I'm not talking about a particular position, but let's say someone comes and they're saying, I'm absolutely frustrated with trying to make changes and I can't get people to get excited about it or even care. Okay. That's one entry point. If someone is just saying, look, you know, I held a pretty important position and I just got a redundancy package and now I don't know where I'm going now in my life. That's a very different entry point. Okay. Despite them being two very different entry points, I might enter to help them. I might enter along a similar path. And to explain what that similar path would be, I might need to for your listeners, maybe explain what you were referring to earlier when you're saying how we've spoken about how leadership, rule leadership function, not position, but the function is a bottom-up immersion property. So if this idea is not already familiar with a lot of your listeners, so the many, many years back, many a few decades back, Noam Chomsky came to Melbourne, Australia. And Noam Chomsky was a big influence in my particular field as well. So he was at the University of Melbourne giving a lecture. So of course I have to go. It's Noam Chomsky, my gosh. And he said so many profound things that night, but one of them in particular related to this conversation is he said, by this time he was still doing a lot of political and social activism. And he said, you know, in his years of looking at societies and how they change and they go through series of revolutions, etc. And he said, he has never seen leadership work in the way that it's typically written up in management books. He said, he's never seen somebody or a group of people go away on summer treat or something and they come up with some you-beaut vision that's wonderful and come back and sell it to the troops and he mobilizes everybody. All right. He says, he's never seen it actually really work that way. He said, for him, the real leadership function, not the role, but not the position, not the formal position, but the real leadership function as to what it does to a collective, what it what its role is in a collective. He said, it always started as a grassroots movement. That leadership emerged from the collective. It was it would bottom up, not top down. He said, there was always a group, a collective with a shared identity and they were experiencing some kind of existential angst that they couldn't put words to, but they all felt it. It was it was underneath everything, all the concerns, frustrations, all the things they were talking about, all the things they wanted to have happened, but there was something there. And then the group produced out of the group came a person or a group of people that could put words to it, that could put language to it, that could communicate it to it, could communicate it. And so once they did, the collective mobilized right behind them because it was already there in their psyche. It's just so happened that someone could crystallize it. Now, this is really important to understand that leadership in a living system, the function of leadership is an emergent property. It's an emergent property out of the collective, which means the leader has to be part, whoever emerges out of there needs to be part of that collective. They need to have that identity of that collective. You have to care. They have to feel what the group is feeling. So I think I mentioned to when we first spoke as well that one of my heroes is Gandhi and reading his autobiography, he had this line that I had to put the book down and leave it for a few days. Just think about what he just said, right? And he said, I could feel the spirit of India awakening within me. And I thought, oh, what kind of consciousness the someone have to be coming from, where that spirit of an entire country was awakening within him. Whoa. That's stunning isn't it? But here we have a leader that's an emergent property of the collective. It's not I'm going to sell you on an idea. I'll get you to buy in what crazy language is that. But it's like this is what concerns us. There's a we. There is a me equals you, right? My Akito sensei, I was to knew before I said the background in Akito, my Akito sensei said one of the shortest poems he ever heard. He said, he heard Caches Clay, and Muhammad Ali was still Caches Clay, was being interviewed. And Caches Clay said, the shortest poem he ever heard was I we. That's a cool poem. Like kind of sums it all up right there. So it comes out of this emergent property where you feel this. Okay. Now this is why this this whole took some time to explain that because this is why whether someone says I'm having I'm just frustrated in my organization. I'm trying to lead these changes and I'm stuck to someone that just says, you know, I've been retrenched in a big life change. And I don't know what to do for myself now. Those are two really different scenarios, but the entry point is going to be the same. Why? Because it's going to be bottom up emergent property. And it comes back to borrowing now from I like to credit my sources that people say, God, you mention a lot of names. It's not that I'm namesrocking. I like crediting my sources. So I learn I learn a lot and continue to learn a lot from al-Mas. You know, ah al-Mas and and and Muhammad Ali. And he talks about how you know your your concerns and a lot of even your ego fixations are blessings, their gifts because they are the doorways back to your essence, back to who you are. So if I take the person that says, all right. I'm frustrated, I do not lead them. I'm getting rebuffed all the way. The issue isn't a learning level zero or learning level one, what to do. There's going to be some what I call generative self-inquiry. Again, borrowing from Almos's work on self-inquiry, but other places have had self-inquiry as well, but I've applied a generative learning lens onto it as well. And I say, great, if we enter two, so if they use the word like frustration and I have it, I see non-verbals that go with it. So it's not like I go on frustrated, but they kind of go on frustrated. Okay, if you're going to use those kinds of non-verbals to go with that word, that word is what we call semantically dense or semantically packed, which means that word has a lot of unconscious somatic connections, mental, emotional and somatic connections associated to that word, semantically dense or semantically packed. I'm going to enter via that word. So first thing is you can't do it without, as we just talked about around self-regulation. Now here's the difference. For coaches that teach self-regulation, do you teach self-regulation as a stress reduction tool which A is needed, but B, if it's left there, you are now in one of the first or, first one or two forms of first order change. All right, great, you're improved because now you're relaxed or okay, you can fix your stress problem by just breathing or whatever it might be, right? And all you're doing is turning the heat down and that's okay if that's what's needed, right? If you don't want the water to go to steam, then turn the heat down. But if you need it to actually transform, you got to keep the heat on. But how do you do it without distress? How do you move from distress to you stress? So it's healthy. Well, that's where our proposed is going to require metacognition and metametacognition. And it's going to be very difficult to reach levels of consciousness where you have a lot of facility with your metacognition and metametacognition if you are autonomically stressed or depressed. So you do need self-regulation, but as a tool to access a different order of consciousness from which to reorganize the way you know yourself and the way you're knowing the world. So it's the first doorway in. It's not stress reduction. It's access to a different order of consciousness, a second order of consciousness. So get yourself ready late. Then I might explore with them a little bit further and saying, so what is it that's so frustrating? Like why is it frustrating? When I say, why? I don't mean I want your rationale or I want your story. There's going to be another set of semantically dense words that is qualitative. And if we come back and if I borrow some of the language from almos, there's going to be certain characteristics or qualia as we call it, the philosophical term is, a qualitative experience that is related to, as almos calls it, your essence. There's something about your essential self, your essential vibration that is you. Beyond your name, beyond your conditioning, beyond everything that is just essentially, with beyond pre-language that is you, of which these words have some kind of resonance to that. What is that? And as I explore things through a generative inquiry process and I keep tracing what's underneath it, what's underneath that? That at some point, it flips. It goes from what they don't want to what they do on. And you'll see it will naturally occur, as long as they're self-regulating. Then I go, why is it so important? And what makes it so frustrating for you? What's so important to you that it makes it so frustrating? Because, you know, it seems like people don't care. So what is it about caring and not caring? What's so important about, so what if they don't care? What about that? Well, it shows that, they don't have any self-respect. What is it about self-respect? I don't know if they'll start to go, well, they should have intention. And also, it's now flipped. It's gone from what they don't want to. We're now starting to trace something really important to them. And intention might lead to something like choice. Choice might lead something to, you know, some aspect of a level of consciousness. And it'll trace it back to an essence point. So let's be spoke about before. Once we can, I can get them to disidentify, first dissociate, then get meta, then disidentify, to detach from all their representations, from the pictures they're making in their head, what they're the story they're telling themselves. And the voice tones that go with it. Even the body sensations that go with it. Because the body sensations are reacting to the storyline and the pictures that they're making in their head. And again, we're disidentify that it's not them, then what's left. And as we spoke about when we first talked, we're doing now as the process of al-Athia, we're not doing unconcealment. Not I, not this is not me, this is not me, this is not me, I'm not my pictures, I'm not the story, I'm not even these muscle tensions. There's a me that notices this. If there's a me that notices this, then I'm not that, which I'm noticing. There's a me that's noticing. What is that? And you keep going back farther and farther until all that's what's left is, and again, I borrowed terms from Heiterger now. What's left is a clearing. What's left is just a space. In Buddhism, it'll be the no thing, no identity, no I. What's left. And what's left will be as best as they can experience it at this point of their development would be the closest they will get to consciousness, just an experience of, as I almost would call it, presencing. Their actual way of being is becoming known to themselves at an essence-based level. Right? From here, if you stay connected to that, what would be a natural expression to deal with whatever you gotta deal with? 'Cause you still gotta live in the world, as the Zen say and goes, right? You say, before enlightenment chopping wood, carrying water, after enlightenment, chopping wood, carrying water. You still gotta go live in the world. But can you do it without the ego getting caught up in all of its fixations of what it should be and instead come back to essence and express that particular quality that's related to that particular issue? What would be the most natural expression for you to do now? Sometimes it's do nothing at all. Sometimes it's all, I know exactly what I'll do. There's no more problem. There's just you being you, doing you in the world. There's practice of you doing you in the world. Now, in this particular case, if someone is saying, well, great, what is the call to consciousness that is required now? Remember, there's the internal related to the external conditions. Your organization is going through what? Who is the tribe you identify with? What is the community you serve, of which you are a part of? And if you're feeling all of this frustration, like you're having cultural angst or whatever it might be, and you're the one that can see it, and you're the one that can put language to it, then it's calling to you to respond. Because to not respond will be to deny what your essence is trying to express itself into, right? So what would you naturally want to do next? And this will now start to be coming and come back to Joseph Campbell's, "Hero's Journey," this is now the call to adventure. This is now your about to embark on your own hero's journey on this one, right? As a leader, this is a call to your hero's journey. Now, similarly to the person who says, "I've just been retrenched. I don't know what I'm doing." I'm lost. Okay, how are you feeling? Well, I don't know who I am anymore. So why is it important for you to know who you are? No, because I need to have, you know, I've always been, I've always seen myself as someone successful. Okay, why is success important to you? And you can, you probe, you probe, you probe, at some point it will flip, and it will lead you back to their essence. From there, it's like, great. Now, you connect back to that. What do you want to do next in life? What would express yourself best? Right? And it just makes life a lot more congruent. So a lot more literally authentic or self, by the word authentic, I don't mean sincere. I mean, self-authoring. You are writing your own story here. This is powerful. First of all, I get a sense of this kind of citizenship that could emerge if people started to recognize that the angst they feel is, you know, is a fall to adventure. And that because they're sensing it is the very, it's the very intention into their leadership, you know. Yeah. And there's so much in what you just shared here that I want to speak about from moment and kind of flip it back to you. One of my mentors, Steve March, has this coaching school called Alithia. So I want to name one of my mentors and sources here. And what I find so exciting about what you're describing here is what I've learned from him. And what was my own intuition 15 years ago when I came across like integral theory, you know, and there was a lot of conceptual theory and mapping, but then quite quickly, me and my friends were like, how do we live this, you know? And we found a practice called circling, which was inspired by Heidegger. And it was really about being in the intimacy, moment to moment of connection with yourself and others as it unfolded. and there was no. trying to change anything. It was all about just making deeper and deeper contact. And suddenly we'd enter the states of, I think, rapid learning, rapid growth. And I was like, this is what we were looking for. And so I feel Steve's work is in this same lineage. And I feel yours is too. And I feel it's a counter to this self-improvement paradigm, which is kind of proliferated around the world, which can often compound a sense of lack. You know, it's like you're not, you want it to be somewhere else other than where you are. And you're not actually meeting that sense of lack. And so there may be a sit-down, you know, almost rights about holes, even in some of his words. And so the way, as you're describing into your development is by embracing that tension or that lack that you're feeling rather than trying to get away from it. And so here I'm kind of pivoting to the questions I might have for you. You know, what I learned from Steve is there's like almost like an ontologically generative metacompotency in his lineage, which is letting be, letting unfold deeply inspired by it. He was also in the diamond approach. Ah, exactly. I think so, yes. And so it's this notion of like you're just helping your clients make deeper and deeper contact with themselves. And as they do, their experience unfolds. It reveals more of its depths as you're describing. So beautifully. And so a question I have for you is, you know, is there something like that in what you're describing like almost like this kind of ontologically generative metacompotency? And when you talk about metacognition and metametacognition, this is one of the things that comes up for me. It was like one of the things I became dissatisfied with was, and this is what I think was going on with integral theory, was like I was like almost like abstracting more and more out of my experience, you know, into concepts. And it was beautiful, but this move with with elitia coaching and with circling was almost the opposite. It was like moving into immediacy, like the visceral felt sense vibrational immediacy of experience, which included thinking, you know, using Jenlyn's work, I think has been very influential for me here as well. And I hear echoes of that in what you show is that, you know, a word one brings is so laden with like what is unspoken, you know, so you can, you can palpate these, you know, embodied expressions through like, you know, with your client help them palpate them so they unfold. And so, so, you know, are you talking about a similar process to in this, you know, that it's not just metametacognition, you know, abstracting out into thinking more and more, but it's, it's like including our visceral embodied social and body physical, sensory or experience as well. And there's a metabolization, harmonization, an chemical process unfolding there. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Sure answers. Yes. I don't explain it a bit further though. Okay, put some bones to it. So you would have heard in Wilbur's work as well, you know, Wilbur will use the phrase transcend and include when he's working with his holons. And so every time you have an emergent hold on, when you have a nested system, then you have to transcend it, but also include all the previous. Now, it also relates to the the etymology of the word healing. So, yeah, you're probably aware. So the etymology of healing is to make whole. So health is wholeness. And so to make whole is a process of integration. So this is occurs when there's this integration. And usually there's a big disagree in integration between consciousness and body. Right. And so you'll see it when, for instance, if someone's got, you know, say a stiff shoulder and there. If the pain signal is there for a continuous period of time, after a while, the brain, what calls that sensory signal into awareness simply gets numbed out. It just becomes a constant signal and you just acclimate to it and you num it out. So as a result, people will hold certain tensions in their body for a lifetime, simply because it's disintegrated. It's out of awareness. Right. And a good chunk of a lot of integrative bodywork, for instance, brings consciousness back into the system where you become aware. And that once it reintegrates back into your way of being and the way of doing yourself, the way of actually holding yourself and doing yourself, then wellness begins to emerge as an as an emergent property. Now, the this notion of integration and wholeness is really important. So when you think of the metaphors, or we either go up, down, left, right, in or out in these directions, the it's not either or you're trying to integrate them all altogether. So when you say, for instance, as many people would have experienced similar things, going into something where it's really intellectual, and you're going to into a mind of space. And but then you get disconnected from your body. Then you can go into a pure bodywork type of space where you get so into your body. But then you lose degrees of metacognition because you think your sensations now are it. Like this is me or I'm now feeling like, okay, so hang on. And like how we talked about before about homeostasis and growth, how they can at one level of consciousness, they appeared dichotomous, right? But another level of consciousness, they're integrated. They make whole. So if something goes only mind or only body, well, you've disintegrated because you're you're neither you're not just one of those. You're your mind, body, emotions, spirit, energy, you're all those. You think of all of these. So they do come together now. There's something that I learned from Rupert Spira, another one of my favorite spiritual teachers. He did some amazing ways of how he articulates spiritual things. And then I'll bring it back to what you were referring earlier about whether or not my work is aligned to or similar to this this ontological metacompotency. So Rupert Spira had this lovely little analogy where he was talking about someone asked him the question around what Gurgie have use of the word self remembering. And they asked Rupert Spira, what did Gurgie have mean when he used the term self remembering? And Rupert Spira said, yeah, he said, Gurgie have probably could have used a better term, but that's the term that he used. And it's not so much about self remembering per se because part of it was the notion that you are who you are and then we forget because we get caught up in all our ego fixations. And so he's saying remember who you're true as himself is but it's a bit more than that. So he did this lovely little analogy and he said, think of it like there's a mother and her little child. And when the child's really young, it cleans to mother, right? Because mother is the all-knowing all-seeing and it's safe and you cling to mother. And then after a while, you know, the child recognizes as a world outside of mother and the child looks out into the world but still holds on to mother. Then as the child goes up a little bit, the child starts to kind of reaches out a little bit still holding on to the mother but reaches out kind of grabs a few things. Then after a while, I might let go of mother to go and get something but then it quickly runs back to mother. And then over time, it just goes out a little bit farther stays out a little longer but comes back to mother. Until at some point, it's staying out for a really long periods of time until it needs to come back home to mother. And then at some point, it can kind of just go on its way knowing that mother's always there. And it's that now it's kind of like this when you're doing self-remembering when you have this consciousness about you and your consciousness is home and this is mother. And so you kind of like clink to this a lot and then over time as we're as sort of gross as human beings, we look out into the world. And then we start reaching out but every now and then the stresses of the world are too much so we have to come back home and maybe meditate a little bit or do some reflection or chill out and do a hobby so we can come back to who we are. Then we go back and deal with the world again but then we need a week end for a break, but then we'll go back to work again. For some point, we keep going back in and out and out and out. So, but when you're actually training your consciousness, and you're training your meditation, you train yourself to be at home with your mother. While you go out and you deal with the world, and sometimes you deal with the world and you get stressed, but then you have to come back and meditate a little bit. Maybe you meditate a couple of times a day. After all, you might only need to meditate a couple of days, now, every couple of days, sometimes once a week. But you keep training yourself to hold this consciousness about you while you deal with the world. And then at some point, ideally, who knows when, but if you practice enough and you master the state of consciousness, you're able to go out in the world and mothers, you just know, mothers always there in the back while you deal with the world. Now, this is a lovely little metaphor. And in some ways it's like this. It's great. We need to teach you to come back to your body and then maybe do self-regulation processes or whatever it might be. But if that's what it is and if that's all it is, it's going to be helpful, but whether it's really transformational, it might be a different question again, transformation compared to what. But it might be different. But if I learn to get into my body while I hold this metacognition about things, this is a very different qualitative competency I'm developing. I have a very different human capability. So it doesn't become I'm all in a headspace or I'm all in a body space. How do I be in a body space while holding a metacognition about it? And at the same time, how do I be in my body while also being aware I'm in my body at the same time? And trying to tell, they become just simply inseparable. I'm in my body at the same time I know I'm in my body and I'm aware of it and I'm processing my sensations, but I'm still in my sensations at the same time. So at one level of consciousness it seems dichotomous, you either are or you aren't, but another it's like, yeah, it can be happening at the same time. They're just happening at different orders of consciousness, that's all. So it becomes a different thing. So in that sense, yes, our work is parallel. I'm always, if I'm going to help, for instance, I've put in a tea before, if I'm teaching someone, for instance, the beginnings, just usually very early on, session one or two, teaching them self-regulation skills. If they're really, if they're highly stressed and their level of metacognition is not that great, it's a set of neural patterns they haven't really developed much yet. I might, I might just have to go for a straight first order, just breathe and relax, right? Relax a lot of the traumas and tensions going on. But I know what that's doing is setting up the neural patterns, what I call what in our language we call the reference structure, the neurological reference structure. And what you can build future generalizations on, because that's where I'm going to head in future sessions with them. But that's, I know that's what I'm doing. I know I'm not just limiting them to just a stress relief technique, right? Because I'm going to come back to it and build on it over time. However, they do have levels of metacognition. I'll do that, but I'll also use something again. Peace, like I said, I pull from everywhere. One of the books, I hope a lot of your listeners have either heard of it or read it, and if not, they should, it's a book by Julian James called The Origin of Consciousness and the Breakdown of the By Camel Mind. Wonderful book, Life Changing Book, Scary is All Heck, because the implications are just huge. But of the many, many great things he said in there, what's relevant here is he's, he uses this term called, "structions." Not instructions, but just instructions. And I said, these were like the fundamental, before instruction of what to do. There's just a mechanism that occurs where, loosely using the metaphor, mechanism, linguistic metaphor, of something that causes a train of events to occur along a particular path. A good way to explore this is, probably, I don't know, 25 years ago. So I got introduced to a form of chiropractic called network chiropractic, or network care, Donald Epstein's work. And I went to a demo of it and I hadn't seen it before. And the chiropractor there said, does anyone want to, I'd like to do a demonstration, does anyone want to volunteer? I said, well, yeah, absolutely, I'll volunteer. I want to experience this thing. Sounds wonderful. I like to experience it. And he kept saying around how, you know, it's not him. He's sending signals and stimuli to the central nervous system, so the central nervous system can reorganize itself. I found that all very second order. And I really, I really love the concept. I was wondering how the heck did this actually work in practice. And he said, you know, I'm not going to, I'm not going to instruct to do anything. And I'm thinking, I don't see how that's possible, right? In my mind, I'm critiquing it, just going, I don't see how that's possible because without some kind of context or guidelines, this would just simply be noise. Like, if you're doing a touch or sound, it's just noise to my central nervous system. And all you're doing is increasing entropy, right? Just increasing a variety. I don't understand how it works. And then he had me breathing. He had me doing some particular type of breathing up and down. And then he made a comment to the group and he said, okay, let's see what his central nervous system does with this. And then he did a light touch on my back. And as soon as he said it, I thought to myself, there it is. There's the instruction. There's the instruction that will now cause the emergent property to happen, right? He sent the system into a trajectory. There was no instruction. It was just the instruction that just now shaped the direction, my central nervous system going to reorganize into. And I went, there we go. But that would be the ontologically generative, like metamethic competency. Yeah, in some ways it is an ontological, an emergent, an emergent ontological nudge. Exactly. You know, dictating where it should go. Not dictating anything. Conditions, that it. Conditions for it to go in a particular direction. That's right. For a certain, certain qualia, which is, if I facilitate second order change in cultures, you're doing systemic nudging and you're watching the qualia, the qualitative direction in which it's emerging. And you look for not just to shape it in a useful direction, but you have no idea what form it's going to take because it's emergent, right? We don't know, right? We just want to make sure it doesn't emerge in a dysfunctional way because that too happened, right? And so this is what's going to happen. So, in the coming to your context, there's going to be a continual balancing of metamethic cognition with whatever work, even if it's somatic, whether I'm doing self-regulation or whether I'm doing like using Glenn and his work on focusing on particular areas and we're going to enter through there or whatever it might be. But there's always going to be the integration, the making homelessness of a consciousness aspect. There's also going to be a heart intelligence aspect. I mentioned you before, my colleague and I from 2012 published a book on the findings at the time of three complex adaptive neural networks that are technically brains, but not metaphorically. Technically, they are functioning brains. Your head, heart, and your gut. And they have different signals. They do different things. And when you tap into their intelligence, it's a completely different game. But you need to have metacognition, otherwise all it is is Disneyland. All it is is a good ride. And people mistake a transformative experience from what we call the plus K or what we call the positive kinesthetic, right? Someone feels great. It feels profound. And they kind of go, that was profound. That was transformational. Was it? Or was it just a big feeling? Right? Nothing wrong with the big feeling. How do you know the difference? Six domains. Right? Right? Right? Right? Does it show up? One of these, in terms of metacognition, metacognition, we'll hear it in your language. We'll hear it in the very structure of your narratives. We'll start to change. Right? And we'll hear it. We can see it in your way of being. You'll see it. Somatically, you'll see it. You'll be holding your posture differently. You'll be walking differently. Your movements will have a different qualitative aspect to them. Right? And it'll come back to very, very common things you'll see. You can use words like centeredness, more groundness, more, more whatever. But whatever words someone uses that they resonate with, you'll see many similar things. And I think almost is right, which is, well, there is something unique about the individual. There's no question. There is also something really common to all forms of human essence, because we all are a fractal of part of the one. So we're going to see really common things. And we see it in wisdom traditions across millennia. There are all these similar terms for these higher orders of consciousness and ways of being. You know, they might call it specifically different labels, but they're going to be really similar. I have one last question. I'm aware of our times. Is it okay if I dive in and I know? Yeah. And in a way, you've just segwayed beautifully into it, because when you spoke earlier about, you know, in a sense, you're helping clients when they come to you to disidentify from the, you know, the shaping, the patterning of representations. Yeah, they're about. How they're being. And then they kind of open into essence. That really speaks to me. I think of this universal journey of transformation that I've noticed. And, you know, Steve, Steve talks about these four depths, parts, process, presence and non-duality and how, you know, we open into deeper depths. Although the goal is not to do that. the goal is more fluidity because these depths are going to keep arising. more of, but I see that in other places where it's like, yeah, there's a contraction and identification, a reaction, reactivity, and then through the way we can be with ourselves with a coach who helps us you know, make it okay where we are and it could become curious and make deeper contact with ourselves and there's a sense making taking place where presencing as you described. And often there's an opening, a shift that occurs like the identification releases and we open into this, you know, this this place of essence where often I've noticed with clients they contact particular qualities like love, strength, capacity, and you know, Almus writes about this, is those qualities of presence that are the healing agents also for that level of contraction that was occurring there earlier. So, they were not caught in the game of, you know, trying to solve the problem from the same level of consciousness that created it, it's like it's the expanded states that are the healing factors. So, my question is, you know, and maybe the complex decision-making has to be in part two, because I really want to talk to you about that, that's really, I really want to talk to you about that, but my question now is how do you see and you and you just started talking about this actually. So, maybe it's a moot question, but in my mind, in my mind, the shift is instead of the old paradigm self-improvement, I'm here and now I've got a vision of where I want to be and I'm going to strive to get to that place and but it's often coming from those parts that don't feel like and they feel a sense of lack and etc. It's like the new structure of who I'm becoming emerges, you know, out of this process of inquiry and you can't necessarily define what that will be. It emerges, but there's a kind of intelligence to the way we unfold. Do you see it similar to that, you know, that, you know, a leader suddenly, if we kind of, this is where I get really curious, because I find myself in this situation, the leader is in a system and there's a sense this system wants to transform, but hey, I'm at my edge and my capacity here. Do you find then that through this process you're describing, the leader will start to have new insights around who they can be, how they can hold presence, how they can, you know, support that level of perturbeds in that system. Do you define that that's, yeah, I'm losing my question a little bit, but I think you get to. I think I get it. Yeah. Okay, like all things, the short answer and longer answer, the short answer is yes, but there's a bit more on the longer side, there's a bit more contextualization that has to happen. So first thing is in terms of the classic, you know, performance improvement style of coaching approach, there are contexts where that is 100% appropriate. That's what's needed and that's cool. It's just that my context is around helping develop or evolve second-order leaders and often it's not a performance improvement issue. It comes back to, you know, this bottom-up leadership, you got to connect to self then what are you resonating with that's part of the collective, now serve the collective by stepping up and enabling the collective to reorganize. Because one of the things of how second-order change works and again this will be probably the next conversation around systems, complex decision making. One of the things that enables second-order to, second-order emergent properties to arise is that the rules between the agents change, the rules of relating and interacting change. So as long as the rules stay the same and the agents, all the operatives in a system or whatever, have to have to operate within the same rules and the same mode of relating, the emergent properties will always be what they are, right? Names and faces may change, but it will be the same game. The game won't change until the rules change. Until we can know it, we've got a license to be able to interact with each other differently, then emergent properties change, and I can interact with different people differently, then emergent properties start to change. So the system is a system because of its relationships between the parties. So that's an important thing. Now the reason why that's also important is with an individual, say in an organization that wants to do some real transformative change, sometimes the larger system, e.g. the organization or the society or whatever or the industry or whatever, you're going to label as the system wherever you're going to put the boundaries on the system. Sometimes the system is not up for that and it doesn't want that. And despite the fact that it might need it, but it's not ready for it or, again, in systems thinking, the language will be it has enough requisite variety or systemic variety where it can neutralize, it has more options to neutralize change to it than any change program has to change the system itself. And so as a result, sometimes someone who's really into transformative change might realize that the system that they're in or the part of the system that they're in is low leverage for whole system change. And in fact, it might be impossible from where they are, which means they might need to leave those conditions. They might need to go somewhere else, either somewhere else in the system or exit the system altogether to find somewhere else that they can make a difference that matters to them. Because pretty much no individual will have all the requisite variety required within themselves to change the entire system. Unless they can mobilize parts of the system that are critical, they will call critical balancing loops, where the system will then reorganize around those balancing loops. Unless they can do that, they're going to get absorbed by the system. And sometimes it just comes to realization that it's like, even if they could, is it worth it? Is it worth the time and effort? Or could they actually get better traction and make real second-order difference somewhere else? No, that's more important. And maybe come back and influence the system later at another point or whatever it might be. But it could very well be at this point and time the system is too stabilized right now. Now, because back to also the chaos point, by the way, I'm going to remind me on this, which is a question, which is, you know at that point when, if we go back to the analysis using, where the water is beginning to boil oil and maybe it's boiling, but it hasn't gone into full-blown steam as of yet. It's just right at that threshold. And you see the water bubbling away like crazy. You see the water very agitated. It's very important to realize that transformation. The reorganization of a system occurs at the point when the system is the most unstable. Because that's when it can reorganize. The more stable the system is, the harder it is to reorganize. Because it's stable. And so, part of the job of a good leader making transformation makes for change is to destabilize a lot of key stabilizing structures or they're going to get neutralized. And so, sometimes when the individual is recognizing that to lead real transformational change, what it's going to take to destabilize the system, the cost is too great at a personal level. And you can see it in politics. If a real politician want to make real change, they better be up for getting personally attacked, investigated, the media nailing them. Like, they, forces will rise to try to neutralize them. Despite their good intentions. And people that are power brokers, the last thing they want is the system to change because they will destabilize their power base. So, they're going to amass forces covert and overt to neutralize real change in many ways. And so, unless you're up for it, you might think there must be a better way. And so, this is why often I find a lot of people that are really into leading real societal change. They don't go into politics. They figure out something else. They might create a social enterprise so they might do something else. But they're not going to put the hand up to be a politician because they're just going to get, it'll just be a power game left and right. But anyway, come back to that point. So, come back to your question then. Yes, they, they, they, they learn to hold themselves better under pressure. In fact, we've got several programs now right now, like one we call leading under pressure, which is exactly that under pressure when everything is, is like a better metaphor is causing your brain to downshift, right? Your blood flow wants to pull away from your, from your executive center and your prefrontal cortex. It's going to drive your limbic system. It's going to drive your brain stem to go into reactive responses, right? Polyvagal theory will be in full flight where you're going to go into fight flight or freeze responses. And what point? Where is the consciousness for leadership now? So without being being able to hold your presence, not just self-regulation, but you have to be connected why the hell are we here in the first place? Why are you there in the first place? What's so important to you that you would withstand this kind of pressure and be able to roll with it? And so because it's so important to you and who you are at a deep essence level. This is one of the first things we call a leadership anchor line. You have to be really connected to who you are and what is the quality of your way of being that needs to be maintained under specific high pressure situations. And you got to name these high pressure situations, right? When you're called out in a public mode, when you are time pressed for a critical decision, when stakeholders want you to make what you know is going to be the wrong decision, but there's consequences if you go with the right decision, right? Under these types of conditions, you have to remind yourself, who am I? What do I stand for at this point in time? Right. What am I here for? Unless you can come back to that, you're going to downshift and you're going to go reactive. You're going to lose consciousness. So these are things that need to be trained. And so, come back. I said, contextualize anything though. Sometimes they might find, yep, while I'm holding my presence, I might realize I need to be somewhere else. This is powerful. I'd love to unpack this further in our second conversation. Just as to ground this as we start to wrap up, like if someone is, and I know this is, as you said, it depends on the context, you know? But if someone is sat with what they feel is an invitation into a generative learning, you know, second order learning within themselves and their life and somehow, what, what, you know, could you share like a couple of questions they might ask themselves to help them to kind of start to access a generative level of learning? Is there, you know, other, like a couple, you know, and again, I get that, you know, it really depends on the context and specific instance. But I wonder if there might be a kind of general couple of questions someone might be able to ask themselves if they find themselves in that, what they feel is that place? Yeah, there's, there's, there are, I'm just thinking though, how many of them require neurological reference structures to do well first, but maybe I can start by, that is, explaining some of them. So first is recognizing, okay, start with assuming, okay, regardless, if someone is feeling stressed out whether they're, or whether it's anxiety, some form of anxiousness or whether it's some form of depression or lethargy or apathy, either or just know that you won't be able to do much inner work if you can't self-regulate. So you're going to have to regulate your autonomic nervous system, come back to autonomic coherence, right through it through your diaphragmatic breathing, et cetera. And if you've got any other vagus nerve calming type exercises or things of that nature, and do that, it's first step. It's one where you have to, I have to train some of my clients this way, it's like, don't think, don't analyze, don't try and figure out what you need to do next, there's, there's only one thing you just have to zero learning road memory do. Breathe diaphragmatically, come back to autonomic coherence, you can't go anywhere without that. You won't figure out anything if you're stressed or depressed. So forget it, just try and get back to some form of regulation. The point being, get to regulation enough where you can get to the first degree of metacognition. And you have to memorize the phrase, the map is not the territory, right, it's called Africa Zypschis term from General Semantics. So you have to remember that there's only six building blocks in which we are creating our subjective world. It's only six building blocks, right? Now these six though are quite complicated, there's lots of minor things underneath, but at the highest level there's only six things. There's your five sentences and then there's language. It says what you see here, feel smell taste and then your stories, your language, right? So first thing to recognize is whatever's going on in your head about reality or your frustrations or what do you think you want to do a generative self inquiry on or whatever it might be. A concern you might have, an issue that's going on. Recognize you're not responding to anything out there. What you're responding to right now is a picture you're making in your head or some movie of it, something you're telling yourself about it in some kind of voice tonality. And you're holding some body sensations connected to that, connected to that story in those images. And if it's appropriate, it might be smells and tastes. That's what you're responding to. So the first step is dissociate from them and recognize what are the pictures I'm making in my head. What am I saying to myself and what voice tones, what tonality? What are my body sensations that's connected to this? What smells and tastes, if it's appropriate, are involved here. What's the story and language I'm using for all of this? Dissociate, get metatoid, then disidentify from it. Recognize the fact that you see a picture in your head means you're not the picture. The fact that you hear yourself talking to yourself means you're not the one talking to yourself because you're noticing that. The fact that you notice your body sensations means you're not your body alone. There's a you that's aware of what your body is experiencing. The step when disidentify from all of that, don't get caught up on it. All the drama is within those representations, within those maps. So step away and what's left, what's left is just you observing. Okay, from here, now ask yourself, what's so important to me about this? Okay, if that's what's important to me, what's important to me about that? Okay, if that's what's important, what's so important about that? Just keep going until at some point, reach a point that's going to be far more ontological. There's something that's going to be far more, oh gosh, it's about this and you'll feel it. It'll feel different. As Almas says, "Presencing is a different feel than a person's thing of joy is different than the feeling of joy." Right. You can feel joy, yes, but when joy is present, it's an ontological person's thing. It feels heavier, more substantial, more solid, more real. Right. It's not a fleeting emotion. Right. And you start to go, "Oh, this is it." And you're trying to chase. What is, and it's not your total essence either. It's only one aspect of your essence that's related to this particular issue. This seems to be prominent in this specific issue. Okay, if that's the thing, how do I be, keep embodying this, this, this, this, and just, what do I do now? What's the natural practice from here? What would I just do? But if you just keep asking yourself, what's, what's important about it? What's so fresh? I'll give you a, I don't know if I told you this story. I'll give you this example. And for the, for your, any of your listeners that know the Enigram, so just, you know, FYI, so left to my own devices is if I kind of go unconscious, then I'm going to get fixated at the Enigram one point and subtype self-price. And so it was surely after COVID lockdowns. And in Melbourne here, we had the hardest lockdowns in the world, right? And so one of the first places, once the lockdowns got lifted, one of the first places that went berserk was the hairdressers. Now, back then, surely after, after, after COVID, because everybody just had, you know, we were looking like Wolfman Jack. And back then, I had it here at the time too, right? And so I said, and I went, I go to this, this particular barber and it's one of those where you, you don't make reservations. You just got to rock up, right? And then it's one where you just rock up and then you go into whoever's available next. But there's only one guy that I like. So not only that I have to stand in a queue. When I got there, then I stopped the way to make sure it was the guy that I particularly wanted. And the queue was really long. It was really, it was really long after COVID lockdowns. And I'm in front of this guy with a family and he's got kids. And the queue's already long and I'm thinking, oh, no, you know, there's got the kids. I hope he's not, this doesn't end up where he happens to be going to the guy that I want because I've done that before where the guy now has to cut all the kids here and now it takes him, what should have been one turn now becomes three, four turns I gotta wait. And so sure enough is going through the, I already had to wait an hour and a half before we got to the front door just in the queue. It's how long it took. So an hour and a half later I met the front queue and I'm watching and sure enough, the guy that I want frees up just in time for the guy in front of me and his family to go to the guy I want, right? I'm going, right? And by this time I am fuming for those, for the people that know the, the anyogram one fixation, right? I'm mega pissed off. And I'm seeing people going, why it passed me because I've had a way now in multiple turns and I am just fuming and I'm getting so unresourced full. Then I catch myself, right? And I'm thinking, this is really like unenlightened. (laughs) This is really low level. I'm really ashamed of embarrassed of myself on this one. So I said, all right, what am I upset about? What am I so attached to here? And I said, well, God, you know, of all of you, it's just my lock and the person on front of me and I shouldn't have to wait this long. And you know, and you shouldn't have had to bring his whole family, I hear all these sheds in my language, all right? And I'm going, well, all right, so let me just catch this. So what actually the problem is, I shouldn't have to wait this long. Well, how should it go? But I'm asking myself this, it should just be easy and flow long. Okay, and if that happened, what does that do for me? What's the important about that? Well, then I could relax. All right, and if I could relax, what does that do for me? What's so important about that? Well, then I would feel at ease. Okay, so if I did that, what's the point of that? Well, then I would feel more at peace, all right? Ah, okay, so I feel more at peace. What's the point of that? Well, then I would know everything's okay. All right, and everything's okay. Well, then I would feel good about myself. Oh, and so if I felt good about myself, what's the point of that? Well, then I would remember that I was actually connected back to a God consciousness. And if you did that, what's the point of that? Well, then I would just be in flow. And that's what I went, I'm really big about being in flow. Flow is a really important thing, right? It's a real vibration, yeah, sense vibration for me. I went, ah, then it came back to some basic things around Lester Levinson's work on letting go, but letting go process, and it was like, okay, could I be in flow now? Yeah, I could. So then I borrow some buy and Katie's work. So when you think the thought that it shouldn't be happening, what does that do to your being? Well, it takes me out of flow. Okay, so is there any real reason why I should hold on to that thought? No, the back to Lester Levinson's work. So could I let that thought go? Yeah, am I willing to let it go? Yeah, when could I let it go? No, okay, then let it go. What, great, let it go. Where's it leave me? Back in flow. And I tell you, I was looking at that guy getting his hair, hey, and he's getting a haircut. And I thought, what a nice family they are. And I thought, thank God they showed up in front of me because I just had one major self-learning lesson here. I would never have had if they hadn't stood and gotten in front of me and got me so upset and bring me back to myself that it's just, it wasn't just the fact that I was back in flow. It was the fact that they were, I would never have figured this, I would never have come back to this. If they hadn't been there in front of me, I'd love them for it. It was just like, far out, this is great. It was a great afternoon. It was one of the better views that story a lot. And my turn is like this one of the better afternoon ever. That reminds me of how I think an important shift in my own development in our clients is when you start to see that those challenging moments are a gift, they're actually the portal into our own unfolding. So it's not the not in the way of our, they are the way through as you're describing. And I'm struck by how, I see this with my clients and in my own experiences. And I'm mindful we're gonna open up another question, but there's a process of dissociation from the way of being the contraction, with its thinking and acceptance, embodiment. And you beautifully describe that. And then I might, well, once you inquire, what's important about that, you get to peace. And often I notice that's when I'm, well peace and it starts to show up. I might notice like, oh, as I notice peace is important, I'm actually connecting to a sense of peace. And you took that further, that's very interesting to me because often I'll might stay with, well, let's just stay with peace. If peace is here right now, and I might even invite clients to be peace. There's for me an in process of now it's identifying with that essential quality. So it's like as peace, or if you go deeper, as flow, what's true about this situation? And for you it was like, well, what a beautiful family. So I'm kind of tying this up with what you said earlier about, for me there's a way where when people drop into essence, there's a kind of spontaneous intelligence in that, that it has a particular way of seeing and being, which is quite different than when I'm in that contracted space. And there's more strategic kind of effort than it's. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, Marvin, I know we've gone way over and I've just really delighted to be with you and you're so generous and you're sharing. And that was a really beautiful example that I think tied a lot together. Yeah, I just want to say it's real joy to talk with you. And where can people find out more about your work too? I imagine like me, there's a lot of people listening who you want to learn from you and yeah. Yeah, there's a couple of places. Where I teach the neurobehave role modeling is probably the starting point. So there's behavioralmodeling.com. There's spell British style, beaver modeling. And then I'm about to launch, there's a placeholder website there for professional change agents network. We're working with second order change, second order change agents ranging from consultants to leaders in authority positions as well as coaches. Right now the placeholder website is pecan.online. So PCAN.online. And then there's my own coaching website, which is marfanocca.com. Any one of those? Is there anything you want to share as just a kind of closing statement? And you've shared so much, but I just wanted to offer that. Probably the only thing is maybe to contextualize. Very early on, I started to identify-- there were three types of approaches to coaching. And then of course, there's a fourth, which is the hybrid, the fluidity between them. It's important to know which one you are, and therefore not to lump all coaching into one thing. So there is performance coaching. So the performance coaching, the most obvious things will be like sports coaches. But also a lot of business coaches are performance coaches. And they are the ones that will go, this is the goal you want. And so let me coach you about how to get there and how to achieve that goal. And there's clearly a time and place for that and where that's appropriate. There's process-based coaching, which is more life-like life coaches. And they have process questions. They have process formats. They don't necessarily have all the answers themselves. But they've got a process to help you find your own answers. And then there's the inner work coaches. And the inner work coaches can-- there's different types of inner work, ranging from just clarity all the way to things like, because we've been talking about vertical change, or evolving consciousness within the client, and everywhere in between. And sometimes you have to do a blend of them all. But just recognize what type of coaching is needed when. Not everybody needs transformational coaching. Some people just want to get stuff done. And it's like, yeah, OK, that's fine. For others, they might need transformational coaching, but they're not ready for it yet. And so you might have to enter with either performance coaching or or process-based coaching as an entry to doorway until they're more psychologically ready or receptive to be able to get into some of the deeper inner work type of things. So just kind of know. And at the same time, for some people, as I said, one of the core domains of transformation is praxis. Where does it show up? So if someone-- for instance, one of the entry programs for the professional change in network is what I call your theory of transformational change. It's the whole program about how to develop how you think transformational change really works. And therefore, we have to introduce things like middle language, like second-order change, emerging properties, understand first principles of how systems and consciousness-- evolves and how it reorganizes what methodologies lend themselves to more second-order work, etc. So there's a whole thing around your theory of transverse milk change. So part of it now is this. If you think, if your theory of transformational change is the person's qualitative experience at the end of your coaching session, that's one theory of change. In my particular approach, I want to see praxis, which means there might need to be some performance coaching or process coaching involved that basically is saying, given now your new awareness of yourself or the new way that you now know yourself, what changes in the way that you actually do chopping wood and carrying water, like what specific things. And what are some of the things you'd like to investigate or explore, how that could be different for you. And sometimes you've got to need to bring it back to some basic performance coaching. Not done as a strict prescriptive. I'll help you get from here here. But there has to be something where, unless there's going to be a praxis to this, for all you know, it was just a good feeling that ended up with. So I think understanding these three types of coaching and blending them and integrating and knowing when to use which in what right ratio and balance is going to be an important thing that you can't just discard one or the other. Beautiful. Yeah. Thank you for highlighting that kind of not being a, like a, you know, a hammer seeing nails everywhere and being a hammer, but being sensitive to what's needed. Marvin, yeah, Marvin, thank you so much. And I'll refrain from asking questions about what you just said and let's do part two. So thanks so much. Great. I hope it helped. I mean, I've seen you've had so many very impressive people in your podcast. So I was thinking, go, what am I going to tell Joel? Gee, who is? You got a lot to share. Okay, thanks for tuning into the podcast. I hope you enjoyed it. And at reminder, the early bird enrollment for our upcoming live online training program, the power of embodied transformation is open. And it's going to teach you how to tap into the transformational arena that is the embodied life of your client. It's an necessity in our times. So you can create lasting change with your clients. So just head to coaches rising dot com forward slash power of embodied transformation to book your spot. And the early bird discount is open until February the 20th. Here we are. We're at the end of the podcast. Just a heads up again. If you're not on our mailing list and you want to stay in the loop about other things we create, then head to coaches rising dot com. Put your name in the sign up box there. You'll also find some of our other offerings are online trainings for coaches there. And just want to end by wishing you well. And I'll see you again next time.