Alcoholic Recovery: Changes In Worldview

By: Gary J. Salton, Ph.D.
Chief: Research & Development
Professional Communications, Inc.


INTRODUCTION
Organizational Development focuses on how the individual contributes to organizational goals. But the current in this stream also runs the other way. Organizations can affect the individual.

This study focuses on 103 recovering alcoholics who are members of Alcoholics Anonymous (AA). They agreed to participate in the research on an individual basis. In compliance with the traditions of AA, there was no participation by the organization itself in any form whatsoever.

The study finds a statistically significant relationship between the length of sobriety and the information processing strategies being used to navigate life. The degree of direction and degree of change are both predictable and explainable.

This study is the evidence-based foundation of a three
research blog series. Research blogs covering the 12-Steps and another addressing AA organizational factors are available in the Applied Research listing on www.iopt.com. A video summary of all three research blogs in this series can be found at www.iopt.com in the "Coffee Break
Videos" section or by clicking the icon on the right.



PROCESS
Alcoholism is a bio-chemical dependency. It is not a behavioral defect. Information processing elections did not cause the condition and changes in it cannot “cure” the dependency. However, knowledge of the processes involved may help to manage it.

Any form of control is predicated on the information processing strategies. No control system will work if the subject is not paying attention to the control variables. This applies to external controls and those created for self-control by the individual themselves.

Alcoholism is supported by the information processing strategy being used. The strategy consists of accepting a particular form of input, processing (i.e., interpreting) it in a specific way and issuing behavior (i.e., output) of a typical character. Repeated application of this mechanism produces beliefs (e.g., things that continue to work are deemed “true") and values (e.g., the frequency with which a behavioral option tends to be used evidences perceived value).

This process can create “worldview” which is compatible with alcoholism. A change in worldview is an often cited as a condition of maintaining sobriety(1). This is an implied recognition of the centrality of information processing in successfully recovering from alcohol dependency.

The concept of “worldview” is expressed in this study using the term "I Opt" strategic profile. A strategic profile has a specific meaning that can be measured, quantified and tested. It is a superior research tool to the more nebulous concepts of “worldview” that rely on adjectives and analogies for definition.


GENDER DISTRIBUTION OF THE SAMPLE
The research sample included 45 women and 58 men. Graphic 1 compares these proportions to a national sample of about 7,500 members published by Alcoholics Anonymous (2004) (2).

Graphic 1
GENDER COMPARISON OF RESEARCH SAMPLE TO
NATIONAL ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS SAMPLE

A z-ratio test for the difference in proportion indicates that gender differences do not rise to levels of academic significance. It is reasonable to judge that the sample to be representative of the roughly 60%-40% split of the larger AA population.

The strategic profiles of males and females within the research sample were compared. The results are shown in Graphic 2.

Graphic 2
MALE AND FEMALE STRATEGIC STYLE COMMITMENT

On average, the two genders are virtually identical in the “I Opt” strategies that they use. Therefore it is reasonable to assume that any discoveries made in this research are equally applicable to both genders.


AGE DISTRIBUTION OF THE SAMPLE
The age distribution of both the research sample and the national Alcoholics Anonymous sample are shown in Graphic 3.

Graphic 3
AGE COMPARISON OF RESEARCH SAMPLE TO
NATIONAL ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS SAMPLE

Graphic 3 shows a clear distinction between the sample and the AA population. The average age for the national AA sample was 48 years while the research sample respondents averaged 26.4 years old. This is a marked difference. It gives rise to a key question. Is age related to the choice of the strategic styles used to navigate life?

One way of approaching this issue is to plot age against the strength of a strategic style. Graphic 4 shows the result of this comparison applied to the LP (i.e., disciplined action) style.

Graphic 4
AGE VERSUS LOGICAL PROCESSOR STRATEGIC STYLE

Visually there is no apparent relationship between age and the LP style. An R2 statistic confirms this. R2 describes the degree that a variable (e.g., age) can be used to predict another (e.g., LP style strength). In Graphic 4, age predicts (“explains” in statistic jargon) about 1.5% of the Logical Processor variation. Table 1 shows that the remaining styles also minimal effect.

Table 1
INFLUENCE OF AGE ON STRATEGIC STYLE (R2)

While not conclusive, the data strongly suggests that age and strategic styles are unrelated. This view is confirmed by experience in over 200,000 measurements conducted using “I Opt” technology. It is reasonable to conclude that the age distribution of the research sample will not be an impediment to the conclusions of this research.

SOBRIETY AND “I OPT” STRATEGIC STYLE

The research compared the average strategic style profiles at different lengths of sobriety. The results are shown in Graphic 5.

Graphic 5
STRATEGIC STYLE PROFILE BY LENGTH OF SOBRIETY

Graphic 5 immediately reveals that a systematic process is in operation. For ease of reference, a circled number has been included on Graphic 5 to identify style.

The spontaneous RS (circled 1) column shows a drop (21%) as a person moves from short to mid term sobriety. Disciplined action LP (circled 2) picks up most of this drop by increasing its strength by 43%. This makes some sense. A greater shift to the analytical HA (circled 3—11% increase) would not be of great value to a mind clouded by alcohol. HA understanding must await effective computational resources. Similarly, idea generating RI (circled 4—a 4% drop) is not much affected in this initial phase. It still has value. For example, ideas can be generated showing to how the new LP behavior “fits in” to the person’s life.

Moving from mid to long-term sobriety the average strategic profile changes further. The quick acting RS (circled 1) drops still further but it is NOT picked up by the disciplined LP (circled 2). This again makes sense. At this stage the structured processes of the LP have already been installed. The mind is clearing. Now understanding is needed. The HA strategy responds (circled 3) with a large 36% increase in strength. With this knowledge, the person can fashion strategies that meet the unanticipated challenges that bio-chemical dependency will undoubtedly present in the future.

There is also a drop in the idea oriented RI (circled 4) as a person moves from mid to long-term sobriety. This is probably a secondary effect. Both the RS and the RI operate using unpatterned (e.g., spontaneous) input. The large drop in RS withdrew some of the “raw meat” that the RI needs. Without this “food source” the RI strategy drops in value. Hence the decline in usage.

The fact that there is systematic process is beyond challenge. However, there is a legitimate question as to whether this is just happenstance or if it betrays a fundamental underlying process. This is a question statistical significance is designed to answer. The results are shown in Table 2.

Table 2
STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE OF STYLE CHANGES
t-Test Assuming Unequal Variances

The significance tests bear out the logic outlined above. The shift from short-term RS to mid-term LP and HA styles stand out. Similarly, the shift from mid to long-term in the increased use of the analytical HA strategy fits in. The insignificance of the RI change appears to conform to the judgment that it is a derivative outcome. It is not in the causal chain.

The change in profiles describes a change in worldview. Different inputs are accepted, different processes (e.g., interpretation) are employed and different behaviors (output) are issued. A question remains. How does this fit into the Alcoholic Anonymous recovery program?

FIT WITH ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS

The famous AA 12-Steps are literally an exact fit to the results of this study (3). A full specification of the fit is beyond the scope of this evidence based research blog. It is addressed more thoroughly elsewhere (http://garysalton2.blogspot.com). For purposes of this research the logic is just outlined.

The 12-steps can be seen as a blueprint for the design, installation and maintenance of a control system. This perspective fits. AA does not claim cure, just control. Stripped of doctrine and viewed as staged process the 12-steps become guide to control individual information-processing strategies.

Table 3
ORIGINAL 12-STEPS OF ALCOHOLICS ANONYMOUS(3)

Steps 1 through 3 call for surrender and acknowledgment of a knowledge source that is outside of oneself. Accepting these prescriptions mean that addiction can be controlled and there is a way to do it. This is fundamental. Without this belief there would be no motive to abandon the strategy now being used.

Step 4 and 5 call for an inventory identifying behavioral shortcomings. These are to be specified EXACTLY. The BEHAVIORS that require change are firmly targeted. This is ground prep. It will become the scaffold for the structures used by the LP strategy to be adopted. Steps 6 and 7 continue this theme by obtaining an agreement that the identified behaviors require replacement, not just modification.

As progress proceeds though Step 7, behaviors have begun to be modified. Identifying something as “wrong” creates a tendency toward avoidance. Avoidance is a behavior change. Steps 8 through 10 require making amends to the specific people who have been harmed. This is a gut wrenching process that burns in the consequences of the “wrongs” that have been done. A person’s emotional systems are engaged in a massive way. The rational has now been combined with the emotional. The whole brain is now engaged.

Early in this process a sponsor was acquired as a guide to and guardian of the steps. They help insure that self-deception is kept to a minimum. Sponsors offer experience-based options and alternatives. They provide encouragement and act as stimulants to progress. Effectively, their role is to help a person begin to self-construct a behaviorally based framework on which they can rely.

Steps 11 and 12 now kick in. Step 11 calls for knowledge and understanding. To this point “reasons” have not been stressed. During the Phase 1 stage behavior is guided by the sponsor and by inference from the stories in the “Big Book.” The relatively small 11% change in the analytical HA strategy between the short and mid-term stages reflects this lack of “why” emphasis. The picture formed to this point is the installation of a practical behavioral framework fashioned by the individual to meet their own immediate situation.

Step 12 provides a motive continuing the quest. Knowledge is the vector on which the message mandated by Step 12 will be carried. Further, teaching someone else is the surest way of learning yourself. These two steps—11 and 12— almost mandate the use of the analytical HA strategy. And this is exactly what happens. Between the mid and long-term phases of the thought-based HA style increases 37% while the action based LP remains at its higher level without change. The scaffold had already been created. Now it is a matter of strengthening it.

Strategic styles can respond to persistent influences from any source. The 12-steps have built-in methods of controlling for these external influences. Step 10 calls for repeated behavioral reassessment and adjustment. Step 11 creates a continuous process of ever increasing understanding. Step 12 insures that the entire AA process remains engaged on an active level.

There are other tools embedded in the AA arsenal. The participation in AA meetings reinforces as well as introducing elements of social control. The 12-traditions limit external influences from both outside and within AA. The AA system is designed to give the individual an environment in which they can construct their own personally tailored solution.

SUMMARY

This study has provided evidence-based support for the veracity of the AA 12-step system. It has also shown how that system works to produce a systematic change in the way people perceive, understand and operate in the world—a change in worldview (4).

It has shown how the 12-steps can be stripped of their doctrinal element and viewed as a formula for the construction and maintenance of a self-constructed management system. This view does not negate the religious overtones of AA. It just introduces another dimension. Both views can coexist. Acceptance of one does not exclude the other.

Programs trying to emulate the success of AA can benefit by an understanding offered in this analysis. For example, in the AA the subject selects the sponsor themselves and the sponsor agrees to the undertaking. This automatically ensures both parties will understand each other. Non-AA programs tend to rely on assigned counselors. The degree of “fit” between the counselor and client is a matter of chance. We now know how information processing works (i.e., input>process>output) and can measure it. This means that the selection of counselors can be refined with a likely improvement in sobriety outcomes.

Charities and government agencies supporting the recovery of alcoholics might also benefit. They now must rely on a “one size fits all” approach. By introducing measurement, this study offers a vehicle for judging the resources required for a particular person or group. For example, it can be reasonably anticipated that someone highly committed to the spontaneous RS strategy will require support longer than another person who is less RS committed.

The understanding contributed by this research is judged to be material. However, in closing homage must be paid to Alcoholics Anonymous. It is a system that guides a person toward to constructing their own individually tailored solution to help control their affliction. The 12-Traditions protect the process itself from being “taken over” by either internal factions or external agencies. Regardless of the iterative manner in which it was constructed, the work of Bill Wilson and Bob Smith in creating AA bears the mark of genius.

REFERENCES

(1) Referencing the Google Search Engine will produce hundreds of thousands of examples. Citing specific authors to lend credibility or authority to this statement of worldview change in the recovery from alcoholism is superfluous.

(2) Alcoholics Anonymous 2004 Membership Survey. Alcoholics Anonymous World Services' General Service Office. 2005. http://www.webcitation.org/5lyIHfv6f. Retrieved 6-27-2010.

(3) Alcoholics Anonymous (June 2001). "Chapter 5: How It Works" (PDF). Alcoholics Anonymous (4th ed.). Alcoholics Anonymous World Services. ISBN 1893007162. OCLC 32014950. http://www.aa.org/bigbookonline/en_bigbook_chapt5.pdf.

(4) The self-imposed brevity of Research Blog studies preclude elaboration on the implications of these findings. They are set out in greater length on the Applications Research Blog at www.garysalton2.blogspot.com.

The Pastor as a Leader

By: Gary J. Salton, Ph.D., Chief R&D and CEO
Professional Communications, Inc.

INTRODUCTION
A leader’s position determines their information needs. A supervisor in charge of a specific process works with a short-range horizon and much detail (input). Well-defined processes convert raw information into usable form. The desired outcome is usually explicit (output).

A CEO has a long-run horizon with few details (input). The processes are undefined and vague. The outcome is a judgment that requires balancing often-competing factors (output). Different positions favor different approaches. But helping the transition between levels goes far beyond just learning new competencies. It involves changing world views.

Information is the only vehicle we have to understand the world. The different information flows at the different levels create different understandings. There is situational variation. But there will also be commonalities. In other words, there will be variation around a central theme. The point of central tendency and the degree of variation give us something to study.

The suitability of a strategy determines how well a job can be done. If you pay attention to detail, your long-range vision will be compromised. Details compound geometrically with time and will exhaust the capacity of any mind. If you do not pay attention to detail, you cannot be precise. You will not have the needed data. It is a trade-off. “I Opt” technology translates this common sense observation into a framework of assessment. This gives us a way to conduct the study.

This Research Blog uses “I Opt” technology to evaluate 40 Pastors from 10 Protestant Churches. Data from 160 CEOs, 703 VPs, 3574 managers and 653 supervisor are used as comparison points. The goal is to identify opportunities to improve the leadership performance of pastors.


SHORT-RANGE PREFERENCES
When people encounter situations requiring a decision they usually use a preferred strategic style. “I Opt” defines Strategic Styles as particular combinations of input/process/output elements. You can learn more at www.iopt.com and/or www.oeinstitute.org. You can also click the Styles and Patterns video on the right for a simple explanation.

Pastors are people. They are not exempt from the need to make an initial choice. Table 1 compares the pastor’s median commitment to particular strategies with other executives in the “I Opt” database. The yellow boxes show the initial approach most likely to be used.

Table 1
"I Opt" Strategic Style Commitment
Median Percent of Maximum Possible Commitment

Pastors appear to fit into the strategic style approach used at higher management levels. Pastors are equally likely to use the RI and HA strategies. The RI focuses on creating new options. The HA focuses on analysis and assessment. This posture seems to match common experience of a pastor as a thoughtful idea generator. It rings true.

Not only are the initial approaches compatible with the pastor’s position in the hierarchy, but their other strategic styles also fit in. Chart 1 shows a stair step relation in strategic style commitment at the various levels.

Chart 1
"I Opt" Strategic Style Commitment by Organization Level

Four distinct categories representing five different organizational levels are moving in a lock step. This kind of pattern is no accident. There is a cause driving the pattern. That cause is the information processing demands of each organizational level. In other words, the duties of a position cause people to favor a particular strategic style. They not only favor it in work, they favor it in life. It can come to define their persona in the eyes of others.

A question might arise whether pastors are a distinct category or whether they are merely a part of an existing one. Table 2 answers this question.

Table 2
STATISTICAL DIFFERENCE IN STYLE DISTRIBUTIONS

The first row of Table 2 shows that VPs and Managers handle information in totally different ways. They are truly distinct. They seek different kinds of information, process it differently and target different outcomes. There is no doubt but that VPs and Managers “see” different worlds.

Pastors have a foot in both camps. They differ from VPs in that they give more emphasis to analysis (HA). They differ from Managers in putting less stress on proven, well-understood methods (LP). It is reasonable to consider pastors a distinct category. In other words, pastors are a unique breed.

There are spiritual and secular consequences to the pastor’s choice of initial strategy. Spiritually, their choice is well considered. Spiritual choices tend to be long-run (e.g., salvation) and have intellectual resolution (i.e., what to do). Both analysis (HA) and idea generation (RI) are thought based strategies focused on the longer-term future. They fit with the spiritual mission.

The pastor’s strategy choice may be less than ideal for their secular responsibilities (the church, finances, and administration). This area tends to be shorter-range and responds to intervention (i.e., action). Pastors, as a group, will likely be slow to respond to secular challenges. Difficulties can compound during these delays. This is a point of exposure arising from the pastor’s preferred strategic style approach. A strategy that works well in one dimension may not work as well in another.

Secular and spiritual duties of the pastor are entwined. The church must be maintained as an efficient, functioning entity if the pastor’s spiritual mission is to be fully realized. Paradoxically, the long run HA and RI styles of the pastors can short-circuit actions needed for the secular viability of the church.

Pastoral leadership programs would do well to recognize the consequences of the pastor’s choice in initial strategy. They can give pastors tools to help them make better judgments on these initial decision approaches. It will not always be analysis and ideas.

Pastors have substantial capacity in both the RS (instant action) and LP (disciplined action) styles. Merely sensitizing pastors to this exposure may be enough to yield a gain for both the pastor and the church. Giving them tools for quickly assessing new situations can further improve outcomes. There is opportunity here.

LONG-RANGE PREFERENCES
Strategic Styles are the strategies a person uses to settle issues. If their favored style fails or if added decisions are needed to resolve an issue, people move to their next most favored strategy. The combinations of primary and secondary strategies are called Strategic Patterns.

Strategic Patterns have a precise and mathematical definition. However, for purposes of this research blog is perhaps best to typify them in terms of the maxim likely to be seen in behavior.

Changer:---------“I got an idea, let’s try it”
Conservator:---“Let’s do it once and do it right”
Perfector:-------“Great idea, let’s think it through”
Performer:-----“Let’s get it done! We’ll do it right if we can and anyway if we have to”

Strategic Patterns (i.e., long-term) tend to follow the same systematic progression as shown in Strategic Styles (i.e., short-term). In other words, the pastor’s long-term strategic pattern fits into a stair step hierarchy as neatly as does the short-term strategic style. This is shown in Chart 2.

Chart 2
"I Opt" Strategic Pattern Commitment by Organization Level

Pastors seem to fit best with higher level executives (CEO and VP). Like them, pastors favor a Changer stance (“Great idea! Let’s try it!). Managers and Supervisors lean toward a Conservator posture (“Do it once, do it right!). These longer-term stances are more easily seen in Table 3.

Table 3
"I Opt" STRATEGIC PATTERN COMMITMENT BY RANK
Median Percent of Maximum Possible Commitment

A sharp-eyed reader will notice an anomaly in the otherwise orderly progression. The pastor’s strength in the Performer pattern (far right on Table 3) falls short of all other organizational levels. This is more clearly seen in Chart 3.

Chart 3
"I Opt" PERFORMER PATTERN COMMITMENT

The Performer strategic pattern results confirm the pastor as a unique category. The “Let’s get it done! We’ll do it right if we can and anyway if we have to” stance is ill suited to both the pastor’s secular and spiritual responsibilities. For a pastor, a low commitment to this pattern is the right posture.

Overall, the pastor’s long run decision stance seems to fit well into the leadership hierarchy. Standard leadership development tools are likely to be as effective as they are in the purely secular realm. However, there is a little secret embedded in the statistics.


THE LITTLE SECRET
This analysis used medians. This is the mid-point of a distribution. It is unaffected by people who hold extreme positions. Had we used averages a different aspect of the distribution of pastors would have become visible. Chart 4 shows this condition graphically.

Chart 4
"I Opt" PROFILE FOR PASTORS
(n =40)

There is clustering of pastors in the Conservator Pattern quadrant. A cluster is a bunching of people who tend to view the world through the same color glasses. They will tend to accept the same kind of variables as relevant, process them in roughly equivalent ways and seek the same character of outcomes. In other words, they can form a natural coalition.

The pastor cluster favors disciplined thought (HA) and disciplined action (LP) as a way of conducting life. They are detail sensitive. They tend to be thorough in processing information. They want to be right every time and seek certainty in the outcome. They see obstacles vividly and seek to avoid them.

In contrast, a majority of other pastors see opportunity more vividly than obstacles. They are more dispersed. They will try to realize the opportunity they see in different ways. However, there is commonality. They value new ideas. They are more willing to focus on central aspects of issues rather than details. They are willing to sacrifice certainty for the promise of large gains.

Clustering seems to be more pronounced among pastors than it is in other management categories. Charting the sample variance, an unbiased measure of dispersion in a group, makes this visible. For purposes of this research blog it is enough to say that the higher the sample variance, the more different are members of a group from each other. Chart 5 shows the results of this test.

Chart 5
SAMPLE VARIANCE OF STRATEGIC PATTERNS

The pastor’s Changer and Conservator categories stand out. This confirms that the pastor category is composed of two distinct subgroups that carry the same title. In other words, there is not one kind of pastor but two very different ones.

The “little secret” has implications for leadership. Leadership development programs drawn from the business community will miss the mark. These programs see leadership training in terms of continuum and have built their courses that way. In other words, they did not have clusters to worry about, so they did not build them in.

Adopting these business tools without modification is likely to short-change pastors. Focusing on opportunity oriented pastors automatically disenfranchises those that are obstacle oriented. The same applies in reverse. Focusing on obstacles will be of little value to a pastor whose world centers on creating opportunities. Neither category is “right” or “wrong.” Both obstacles and opportunities exist in the real world. Leadership training must address both of these legitimate stances.

One place to start leadership training for pastors is to introduce them to “I Opt” technology. Pastors in both subcategories are smart people. Showing them the biases inherent in their information-processing postures is often enough to produce a gain. A recognized bias can be offset. An invisible one cannot.

Training can also be adjusted. For example, “vision” is currently seen as a quality of leadership. This is the ability to envision and articulate an end state without knowing exactly how it will be realized. Vision is a natural quality of the Changer Pattern. It makes no sense at all to a Conservator. For them, it is the equivalent of a childhood wish.

Leadership training can be adjusted to accommodate these situations. For example, exercises can be developed to show the Conservator “how” to create a vision. Alternatively, they can be shown how to link a series of shorter-term goals into a system that resembles a long-term vision.

The point to be made is that standard programs do not have to be abandoned. They just need to be adjusted. They need to recognize that pastors are a unique breed with unique needs. Recognizing this gives us an opportunity to improve church leadership in both the secular and spiritual realms. It is an effort worth making.