The Distinction Between Training and True Development in the Workplace

Training vs. Development

In the age of artificial intelligence, human capability will remain the single most important factor in maintaining competitive advantage. We need leaders who can answer the challenge, and human resource programs that equip everyone in our organization with more sophisticated ways of approaching their work. Traditionally, learning and development programs have been relied upon for similar goals, but there is a problem.

Training and development are often conflated, but they are fundamentally different approaches to cultivating effective leaders. Most leadership development programs have little to do with development and would be more accurately described as leadership training or leadership education.

Training can be thought of as a horizontal approach. It focuses on acquiring new skills, knowledge, and behaviors within the individual’s existing mindset or worldview. It would be like installing a new program on your computer. The operating system is the same, but your computer can now perform a new task or function. For leaders, this might include workshops on public speaking, planning, or change management. It could also include individual courses on communication, leadership styles, or motivation. Any of these workshops or courses would expand the leader’s toolkit without fundamentally growing how they perceive themselves, others, or the world.

On the other hand, development focuses on vertical growth; it is a deeper, transformative process that evolves a leader’s meaning-making system, enabling them to handle greater levels of complexity, ambiguity, and interconnectedness. It is akin to installing a new operating system on your computer. Development isn’t just about what we know, but how we know it. It is shifting from embedded assumptions to reflective awareness.

Constructive development, a proven theory in developmental psychology, holds that we make meaning in the world by interacting with our environment and frames human development as a progression through increasingly complex plateaus. Each plateau, or stage, represents a more sophisticated way of constructing reality. These stages integrate cognitive, emotional, and interpersonal growth. Transitioning from one stage to the next requires constructive conflict and disorienting experiences that challenge one’s current viewpoints. The conflict is supported by reflective practices and safe environments for testing one’s assumptions.

Development is clearly far more complex than training, but progressing toward higher levels of mental complexity is directly correlated with increased job performance and leadership effectiveness. True development propels movement from one plateau to the next, unlocking adaptive capacities essential to modern challenges such as rapid technological shifts.

Stages (Orders) of Adult Development

There are five levels of development in constructive development, with most adults operating between the 2^nd and 4^th orders. It is rare to find someone operating at the 5th order; only about 1-2% of the population does so. Each stage sees the world differently and consequently operates in profoundly unique ways.

2^nd Stage: The Instrumental Mind

(13-36% of adults)

The instrumental mind is concrete and rules-based. It views the world primarily through the lens of personal needs and external consequences. Others are seen as either helpers or obstacles, and the individual has limited empathy or abstract reflection.

They excel in straightforward tasks with clear rules and procedures. However, they struggle with nuance or team dynamics and often appear self-centered.

An example of the instrumental mind in action might be a new manager enforcing policies rigidly without considering team morale.

3^rd Stage: The Socialized Mind

(43-46% of adults)

The socialized mind is abstract but externally defined; it internalizes group norms, values, or roles for belonging. Self-esteem is tied to validation by the group, and a sense of belonging is the single greatest need. Conflict arises from clashing loyalties or ideas.

This individual is a strong team player and relationship building in aligned cultures. They are extremely vulnerable to groupthink or indecision when expectations conflict with the group's norms or their ideological alignment. They often cannot tolerate conflicting ideas or values and will filter everything they hear, see, think, feel, and speak through the filter of the group norms. It is not uncommon when dealing with this stage for communication to break down, and you may wonder, “How did they get that from what I told them?”

An example of the socialized mind is a mid-level leader prioritizing organizational harmony over bold innovation.

4^th Stage: The Self-Authoring Mind

(18-34% of adults)

The self-authoring mind focuses on creating its own meaning rather than taking meaning from group norms. They create a personal ideology to integrate external inputs in the pursuit of their own goals. They will consider the group's norms, but their goals take priority, and they are willing to violate those norms in pursuit of them. They are self-directed with clear values and can mediate conflicts while holding multiple perspectives.

They are highly adaptive in complex settings, authoring strategies independently while considering others. They may become rigid if their own system is over-identified with.

An example of the self-authoring mind would be an executive crafting a vision that balances ethics, profits, and diversity.

5^th Stage: The Self-Transforming Mind

(1-2% of adults)

The self-transforming mind is fluid and dialectical. They see all systems (including their own) as partial and evolving. They do not trust any single ideology. They embrace paradox, interdependence, and ongoing transformation. The self-transforming mind understands that every idea, no matter how brilliant, is, at best, incomplete.

The self-transforming mind thrives in volatility and fosters collective evolution. This level is rare and consequently feels alienated, but excels at systemic change.

An example would be a C-suite leader navigating a merger by holding opposing views as complimentary.

Call to Action

These stages are hierarchical—each building upon the prior, with development involving a "subject-object shift" (e.g., from being fused with social expectations in stage 3 to using them as tools in stage 4).  Progression isn't linear or guaranteed; it demands intentional "holding environments" (supportive contexts) that stretch without overwhelming. Many people never evolve past the socialized mind and will need support to manage their development.

It's time for our organizations to become truly developmental, time to upgrade our operating systems. Fortunately, there is a proven method to coach people through the process. If we are to become people who can truly navigate the complexity of our rapidly changing world, we must embrace our capacity for change and become the very best versions of ourselves possible.  

If you’re ready to begin your development journey, Rawe Leadership Solutions is here to help.