Blended Learning for the Quantum Transformation Course


The members of the same work group (whether a department, task force, project group, cross-functional team, or process improvement team) will gain extra benefits from taking any of our online courses AS A GROUP. Rather than members of an organization taking our online courses separately and thus independently, learning key principles and practices with your workplace colleagues will not only enhance what every member learns from our online courses, but will also make it much easier to apply what is learned back on the job—where it counts.

Basically, when all group members (1) learn the same language and the same concepts, (2) review the same assessment tools and their personalized results, (3) analyze and discuss the same business cases, and (4) follow the same guidelines for effective behavior—BECAUSE all these principles are fully shared in the group, they are more likely to be put into practice when challenging problems and conflicts appear in the workplace.  

On this page, I outline how a work group can take full advantage of all the valuable materials in the Quantum Transformation Course. The unnumbered paragraphs describe what members are asked to do on their own, such as watch the course videos, take assessment tools, or complete work sheets in their course manual. Meanwhile, the numbered paragraphs provide the detailed steps for learning the material through face-to-face or virtual group meetings. Depending on the unique circumstances and needs of each group, this process for blended learning can be adjusted or expanded.


Quantum Transformation CourseAll members—on their own—watch the first few video sections in the course, which covers pages 1 to 26 in the Course Manual for Quantum Transformation. In a sixty-minute meeting, members address these numbered paragraphs:

1. As a group, members share their views of conflict: What’s good about conflict, what’s bad about conflict, and can conflict ever be removed from human society? Members should similarly discuss their views of the dialectic and under what conditions it promotes stagnation or transformation—whether in a work group or for society as a whole. Essentially, members should share their understanding of conflict, change, and transformation, and how these fundamental dynamics affect their daily life.

2. Next, members review the Big Picture, also known as the Complex Hologram: How is each element in the diagram related to every other element? Can you change and improve one aspect of an organization without affecting (or being constrained by) all the other aspects? What is the significance of presenting the Complex Hologram in context of the swirling quantum waves and particles that represent spacetime? What is the difference between a formal and informal system? And what flows among all these systems (as represented by all the double arrows on the diagram)? Why does the Complex Hologram define the root cause of all conflicts in any organization? Members should then suggest some of the dialectics that occur inside their own group, since they surely have different perspectives about the various systems and processes in their organization—and how these can be improved for all concerned.

3. How can the sequence of eight tracks address every aspect of the Complex Hologram, including self-aware consciousness? Do members understand the relationships among the first three tracks, the middle two tracks, the last three tracks, and the systems and processes that make up the Big Picture? More specifically, what does each track have the potential to bring to an organization?

4. Members should consider how scheduling the tracks is different from implementing the tracks. Then they should discuss what stages of quantum transformation must precede and follow the stages of scheduling and implementing the tracks, so any concerted effort at quantum transformation will more likely succeed in closing the gap between the two dueling paradigms.

In the next video section, on pages 27 to 33 in the manual, each member completes and scores the twenty-item survey: Assessing Your Paradigm. On their own, group members watch the end of that video section (concluding with page 35 in the manual). In a forty-five to sixty-minute meeting, members address these numbered items:

5. As a group, members calculate an average score for Assessing Your Paradigm and compare it to the three ranges defined on page 33 of the manual: (1) If your score is below 30. (2) If your score is between 30 and 70. (3) If your score is above 70. The first range of scores characterizes a quantum organization, while the third range of scores suggests a Newtonian organization. The middle range reveals a mixture of both quantum and Newtonian attributes. Besides the average score for the group, members should take note of the range of scores (the variation around the mean), since perceptions can vary from person to person.

6. Members then discuss what the average and the range of scores mean in terms of the quantum versus Newtonian aspects of their organization. In the case of a wide range of scores, why do members experience the same organization so differently? Members should share their experiences in terms of how these organizational characteristics affect their performance—short term and long term—as well as their job satisfaction. By going back to some of the individual items on the survey (any of the twenty items on Assessing Your Paradigm), members can recall specific events that blocked their performance or eroded their satisfaction on the job.

7. The meeting concludes with members listing the attributes of an organization that encourage them to do their very best, which naturally means bringing all of their wisdom, talent, and experience into the workplace.

Top of Page

On their own, members watch the next video section in the course, Defining a Paradigm, which covers pages 36 to 49 in the manual. The group then meets for about forty-five to sixty minutes to discuss these numbered paragraphs:

8. As a group, members develop a consensus on the meaning of a paradigm (mental categories and the relationships among these categories) and the impact that old paradigms (and thus old categories) have on changing and transforming an organization.

9. Key question: Do members see that their paradigm (whether it’s old or new, simple or complex, conscious or unconscious) shapes all their perceptions, thoughts, feelings, and behavior? And since language is the primary means by which we are able to label and thus talk about our experiences, how can group members develop new words (along with new categories) to talk about the unwritten cultural rules and subtle attitudes that get in the way of bringing all of themselves into the organization?

10. Members should recall their scores (the average and the range) on that short twenty-item survey, Assessing Your Paradigm, and now develop those additional words for distinguishing a Newtonian and quantum organization. Are there any examples of a quantum organization (other than a self-employed person) that would illuminate the qualities of this kind of new organization?

11. Referring to pages 45 to 49 in the manual, members should discuss their understanding of what is involved in establishing quantum infrastructures throughout their organization, so all subsequent change initiatives (or educational programs) can achieve their objectives.

On their own, group members watch the next video section in the course, Expanding Self-Aware Consciousness, which is covered on pages 50 to 60 in the manual. The group then has a two-hour meeting to discuss these numbered paragraphs:

12. As a group, members share their experiences and knowledge about the Western and Eastern approaches to self-awareness, ego energy (Freud) and spiritual enlightenment (Buddha), respectively. Often, particularly with our increasingly diverse workplaces, if people are willing to share, there is usually a lot of valuable—personal—experiences in the group with different approaches to the mandate: “Know thyself.”

13. On the topic of ego energy, members discuss their answers to the five questions on page 52 in the manual, regarding (1) self-identity, (2) self-competency, (3) self-value, (4) self-worth, and (5) self-responsibility. Ideally, members would also take the time to discuss their answers to the more detailed questions about these five self-concepts, which appear on pages 53 to 57 in the manual (as well the five additional questions on ego energy processes on page 58). As long as a comfortable, safe, and trustworthy environment can be established for discussing these very personal questions, members will significantly (1) expand their self-aware consciousness, (2) augment the quality and quantity of the categories (and words) in their mind/brain, and (3) deepen and secure the interpersonal bonds among group members.

14. Members review the diagram on page 59 in the manual and share stories on how they moved through the seven stages, after one or more change initiatives created LOSS. It would also be helpful if members share specific examples of when they were stuck in the “doom cycle” versus when they were resilient (as supported by the five self-concepts of ego energy) and thus how they were able to move to the “growth cycle” in a “reasonable” period of time, once the normal grieving process had taken place.

15. After reviewing the diagram on page 60 in the manual, members share their experiences with seeing themselves as more than a skin-encapsulated ego: as being connected with every other person, thought, and thing in the universe. Being in a diverse group might make it easy for some members to share their non-Western roots and philosophies about Mother Earth and the cosmos, and our intimate connection with ALL. Perhaps members can then discuss how seeing themselves as interconnected and a part of everything might change how they interact with others, both inside and outside the formal boundaries of their organization.

Top of Page

On their own, group members watch the video on the Organizational Influence Survey, which starts on page 61 in the manual. This video provides the background and instructions for members to complete the survey, score their results, and graph their four scores. Also on their own, members then watch the next video, Defining Four Influence Domains, which covers pages 89 to 92 in the manual. Afterward, members convene for a forty-five to sixty-minute meeting to discuss these numbered items:

16. As a group, members calculate their average four scores from the Organizational Influence Survey and graph these scores on page 77 in the manual. As described in the instructions on page 76, the same can be done for a department and for the entire organization (if members have access to this information). For each influence domain, members should also take note if their scores are noticeably different from the group average, since individual perceptions about needing to have more or less influence on the key aspects of their organization can vary from person to person.

17. Next, members discuss the meaning of their results: Why do members need more or less influence in one or more influence domains in order to improve their performance and satisfaction? Why do some members see that they need more influence, while the average suggests that all is well? In the process, members can share incidents when they couldn’t get access to the resources and information that were needed to successfully complete a job on time, which also frustrated them. Other experiences might be recalled when members were required to do something that could have been handled much more effectively by another department or senior management (as in wanting less influence on that aspect of their organization). As this discussion unfolds, members can also consider what they are learning about the “balance of influence” in their organization, which they hadn’t considered before.

18. Toward the end of the meeting, members discuss: Should we wait for permission to get what we need (given our job responsibilities)? Who or what determines what influence we have? When and how can we exert more influence in our organization in order to improve our performance and satisfaction?  On this topic, members can share stories about when they proceeded to bypass formal systems, group boundaries, or informal rules in order to get something accomplished—and what were the consequences of engaging in such "unauthorized" influence?

On their own, group members watch the video on the Organizational Courage Assessment, which begins on page 93 in the manual. This video provides the background and instructions for members to complete the assessment, score their results, and graph their observe score and fear score. On their own, members then watch the next video, Defining Four Types of Organizations, which covers pages 119 to 125 in the manual. Afterward, members convene for a sixty to ninety-minute meeting to discuss these items:

19. As a group, members calculate their average two scores from the Organizational Courage Assessment and graph these scores on page 107 in the manual. As described in the instructions on page 106, the same can be done for a department and for the entire organization (if members have access to this information). For the resulting type of organization, members should take note if their type is noticeably different from the group average, since individual perceptions about observing possible acts of courage and being afraid of performing those same acts of courage can vary considerably from person to person.

20. Next, members discuss the meaning of their scores: Why have they observed (or not observed) the behavior that leads to long-term organizational success? In particular, what decisions and actions should, ideally, be observed more regularly in order to improve performance and satisfaction? Is fear preventing the work group (or entire organization) from doing what needs to be done? What are the long-term consequences for the organization if members do not engage in those success-oriented behaviors?

21. If it is apparent that fear is getting in the way, members should consider how they could reduce their fear, which will allow them to do the right thing without stress? In order words, what kind of personal transformation will enable members to either reduce their fear (especially if it is not based on reality) or act despite the fear (the defining quality of courage) in order to achieve long-term organizational success and personal satisfaction?

22. Whether or not the members proceed with a personal transformation, what are the opportunities for an organizational transformation? In other words, how can the various systems and processes be revised, so members can do what is needed for success without having to bypass procedures or ignore informal rules? And if group members are given the opportunity to participate in a program to change various systems or processes, will they become actively involved in the improvement program or will they remain skeptical and cling to the past?

Top of Page

On their own, group members can take the optional Final Exam for Quantum Transformation, as explained on the last video section of the course, Congratulations, on page 126 in the manual. Although Kilmann Diagnostics does not award a "certificate of achievement" for this course, receiving a score of 88 or more points (out of 100 possible points on twenty-five, multiple-choice questions) signifies that members have passed the exam and have thus learned the material.  

NOTE: The optional Final Exam for every course can be taken as many as five times, since its purpose is to encourage members to learn the material—not to add stress to their life. However, if someone else purchased these courses for the group, the sponsor (for example, the employer) might require group members to pass each exam as an indication that they've learned the material. But Kilmann Diagnostics will not share any exam results if a member happens to score less than 88 points on any occasion for any course. We'll only inform the sponsor when members pass their exams. Click to see Sample Questions on Each Final Exam.

Top of Page