david_zeitler@mindsatwork.com

December 2, 2015 at 3:30 pm #2485

From the May 1, 2005 “Fast Company” article:

“….Dr. Edward Miller, the dean of the medical school and CEO of the hospital at Johns Hopkins University. He turned the discussion to patients whose heart disease is so severe that they undergo bypass surgery, a traumatic and expensive procedure that can cost more than $100,000 if complications arise. About 600,000 people have bypasses every year in the United States, and 1.3 million heart patients have angioplasties — all at a total cost of around $30 billion. The procedures temporarily relieve chest pains but rarely prevent heart attacks or prolong lives. Around half of the time, the bypass grafts clog up in a few years; the angioplasties, in a few months. The causes of this so-called restenosis are complex. It’s sometimes a reaction to the trauma of the surgery itself. But many patients could avoid the return of pain and the need to repeat the surgery — not to mention arrest the course of their disease before it kills them — by switching to healthier lifestyles. Yet very few do.
“If you look at people after coronary-artery bypass grafting two years later, 90% of them have not changed their lifestyle,” Miller said. “And that’s been studied over and over and over again. And so we’re missing some link in there. Even though they know they have a very bad disease and they know they should change their lifestyle, for whatever reason, they can’t….”

SO, if you want an academic source, you’ll have to research Dr. Edward Miller from Johns Hopkins.
I hope this was helpful!
-David

david_zeitler@mindsatwork.com

October 27, 2015 at 4:18 pm #2386

Johannes,
Thanks for always being active and involved and helping to connect the ITC community with itself 🙂

In one week I will go for LCP certification, and I look forward to joining you in such ventures as those you mention above.
I’m wondering how you find the relationship – if any – between Column One in the ITC Map and the LCP?
thanks,
David

david_zeitler@mindsatwork.com

October 27, 2015 at 4:15 pm #2385

Hi Linda,
There are no fewer than three distinct psychological theories you are bringing up here (and thank you for bringing them up!):
1) Developmental psychology
2) Personality psychology
3) Psychoanalytic psychology

Object-Relations theory is the evolution of psychoanalysis, and brings in the interpersonal as another one of the “drives” that “drives” growth. What the branches of Object-Relations theory share with it’s psychoanalytic roots is this idea that there are intrinsic “drivers” of development, and (more importantly), that the “stages” are actually “milestones,” not “stages” like Piaget, Loevinger, Cook-Greuter, Maslow, Kohlberg, Gilligan, or Kegan & Lahey use the term “stages.”

You are correct that going back and reading “The Evolving Self” will definitely help you understand the bridge between “stages” of development in #’s 1 & 3 above. (Especially the first several chapters.)

Personality psychology has no concept of stages. Whether we are discussing Myers-Briggs, Gareth Hill’s Dynamic/Static-Masculine/Feminine, or Enneagram (I’m a “Type 7” apparently), these models are “flat” in the sense that they sort people into different “types.”

So as you can see, your question brings up many complicated relationships between theory and practice.
I think it’s wonderful that you are using ITC with the Enneagram! In the book “Immunity to Change,” Bob and Lisa discuss a case study where they use the Myers-Briggs typology to help anchor the ITC work within an intact team in a business.

To answer your question: Object-Relations theory did not directly influence “Immunity to Change,” but it did influence Bob’s take on Piaget and Kohlberg and their take on stages of development. Essentially, the Object-Relations theory milestones line up with the naturally unfolding Subject-Object dynamics that define a true “stage” of identity (which includes cognitive, emotional, interpersonal, and intra-personal lines of development – Object-Relations theory influenced Bob’s inclusion of that interpersonal line, and supported his take on the underlying Subject-Object dynamic that forms the basis of every stage-transformation.

I hope this was more helpful than complicated!
-David