Insults
A quick, and different, way to gain insight into each of the levels is to think about how people at each level might be most easily insulted:
Level 1: Survival – not applicable
Level 2: Tribal – “you don’t belong here!”
Level 3: Power – “you are weak!”
Level 4: Justice – “you are wrong!”
Level 5: Achievement – “you are a failure!”
Level 6: People – “you don’t care!”
Level 7: Systems – “you don’t understand!”
Level 8: Global – too early to be sure but possibly: “you are a control freak!”
How the levels see each other
 | No real discrimination at this level, so all are ok if Beige’s own immediate needs are met |
 | • Sees Purple as “one of us” or “one of them” • Sees Red as the strong leader and, therefore, to be obeyed • Sees Blue as the State or remote Government • Sees Orange as either their saviour (way out of poverty) or their next master • Sees Green as very helpful or as “do-gooders” • Can’t easily see Yellow or Turquoise except when an exceptional, beneficial, sustainable intervention occurs which would be attributed to Orange or Green |
 | • Sees Purple as tools to be used • Sees Red as a threat to be overcome or as the next leader if he or she is strong enough • Sees Blue as authoritarian, and probably the enemy • Sees Orange all around and wants its’ toys now • Sees Green as lunch • Can’t see Yellow or Turquoise and certainly wouldn’t value them if it could |
 | • Sees Purple as the “Noble Savage” in need of saving • Sees Red as “bad” and knows they should be locked Sees Purple as the “Noble Savage” in need of saving • Sees Red as “bad” and knows they should be locked up • Sees Blue as being right, provided they have the same “Truth” as we do • Sees Orange as arrogant, self-serving, nouveau riche and greedy • Sees Green as “wishy-washy” and probably irrelevant • Sees Yellow and Turquoise as flaky or “out with the fairies |
 | • Sees Purple as resources to be exploited • Sees Red as dangerous although may use its tactics if the “unhealthy” face is showing • Sees Blue as “stuck” and bureaucratic • Sees Orange as either someone to aspire towards, or as a competitor, • Sees Green as irrelevant to personal success and therefore to be ignored • Sees Yellow and Turquoise as making things overly complicated |
 | • Sees Purple as wonderful communities that should be valued • Sees Red as needing to be saved or educated into other ways of behaving • Sees Blue as authoritarian, biased and unfair • Sees Orange as greedy and exploitative • Sees Green as an enlightened, caring equal • Sees Yellow as insensitive and intellectualising emotions • Sees Turquoise as OK but lacking in emotional sensitivity |
 | • Sees everybody as “interesting” and will match them as the situation demands. However, will walk away if “you just don’t get it – come and talk to me again when you’re ready.” • Risk of frustration with Blue because of perceived intransigence • Relates particularly strongly to others coming out of Yellow as it reduces the possible loneliness • Supportive of Turquoise |
 | • No real evidence yet because of the very low numbers. Should bring the pragmatic acceptance and curiosity of Yellow forward into the resolution of global problems. • The biggest risk could be that it adopts a command and control approach |
Stress Test: reflections on financial crises
In politics, the values driving decisions taken at a time of economic growth need to be pretty much opposite to those needed when addressing a potential financial meltdown. The former US Secretary of the Treasury, Timothy Geithner articulates this very well in his superb book “Stress Test”:
“The inconvenient truth of financial-crisis response is that the actions that feel right are often wrong. The natural instinct is to wait as long as possible before intervening, to escalate as gradually as possible, to minimise taxpayer exposure to losses, to impose stringent conditions on assistance, to teach the arsonists a lesson, to address the root causes of the crisis. Let failing firms fail. Let the creditors who financed their binges pay the price. But that is a recipe for making a systemic crisis worse. The public will want Old Testament justice, punishment for the venal. The moral hazard fundamentalists will want to send a message that irresponsible behaviour will not be rewarded. If policymakers listen, they will court disaster.
The principles of effective crisis response are mostly counterintuitive. The more you commit to do, the less you’ll have to do. If you take the extreme risk out of the market, you’ll assume less risk of extreme losses, and you’ll attract more private capital to provide stability that would otherwise require government capital. You should err on the side of doing too much rather than too little; you’ll make mistakes no matter what, but you should try to make the mistakes that are cheaper to correct. It’s easier to arrest a financial panic than to clean up after an economic disaster.
Eventually, you’ll want to address the root causes of the crisis, to reform the financial system, to rein in excessive leverage. But, as Saint Augustine said, “Give me chastity and continence, but not yet”. In an emergency, you need to lean against the forces of panic, to restore confidence, to reduce uncertainty, to make the system investable again. That means no messy failures of systemic firms and no haircuts that would encourage runs. The goal is to make it irrational to run away. There will be immense pressure to let major firms fail, avoid moral hazard, minimize government intervention. But that’s a formula for a larger crisis that will ultimately require greater government intervention and create more moral hazard.”
Although Geithner uses the language of leaning against the forces of panic, what he’s actually saying is utilise, and go with, those forces, rather than attempting to fight them. In other words, deliberately use the underlying values that are operating to get to a different, more positive, outcome. In the financial world an unhealthy Orange (level 5) bubble would traditionally be addressed by a rigorous application of Blue (level 4) values. However, by utilising the fear of losing everything, in an unhealthy Orange, we are more likely to get the result we want