As demonstrated, the process of a rite of passage resembles the basic structure of the U form. This opens up some potentially advantageous perspectives. First of all, an important cultural archetype is lifted from a context of religious belief and magic into the light of the scientific paradigm of the twenty-first century. Throughout the entire book Theory U the author describes the creation of a unified theory and practice concerning first, second, and third person processes. Secondly, this means that people and cultures already have many resources within this area. In short, we know much more about what and how such events and processes unfold than our practice would suggest. Thirdly, elements of a future global mythology can be found in this process.

Scharmer’s ambition to create an integrated social science theory and practice is important and laudable. In the field of leadership there are many diverse experiences with second and third person perspectives, but precious few experiences stem from the first person perspective. In this context a first person perspective should be understood as a differentiated description of internal processes and a practice of consolidating a center in the mind of the individual human being.

Many people who work with the U theory immediately respond to the theory as a new technology and a new model that can be implemented in the same way as the classical, rational leadership models of old. However, the opportunity for profound change on individual as well as on organizational levels suggested by the U, could encourage us to develop a more nuanced language describing these internal processes, including an awareness of the possible vulgarization, which might slip in, when negotiating partially uncharted territory. “Language helps to create my world and, as Wittgenstein would put it, the limits of my language are the limits of my world”, says Ken Wilber. Hence it is important that we during the first phase of the testing of the U, consistently discuss and qualify what is actually happening and not happening. Linguistic expressions and concepts must be created to enable us to describe these processes adequately. Simple and clear internal disciplines must be constructed, since they are the necessary precondition for accessing the deeper levels you reach, when descending the left side of the U. Experiences from the spiritual traditions show that in order to maneuver in the deeper structures of the mind, you need a solid comprehension of this internal landscape.

 In On Becoming Aware Francisco Varela states: “Regarding the suspension and its follow-ups ... you tell yourself to suspend your prejudice. However, it will take a lot of training before you’re able to stabilize the suspensive attitude on your own”.

The individual aspects of the U model as a whole are associated with and describe the feedback mechanism we define as sustainability. On a practical level this happens when we listen to various aspects of one or more living systems of which we are a part at a given time. In the U model in Figure 4 “Downloading” is not listening to feedback. “Suspension” – to suspend – is to ask candid questions in your surroundings, for instance among your colleagues and co-workers, and listen to what they say. “Redirection” – to redirect – is to contain the resulting information truthfully and to see the situation from the other person’s perspective. “Letting go” is to release your hold and let go of the individual control and regulation, to sink into a collective sincerity – to open up to the highest future potential, which carries the embryo to issues that are needed by, for instance, the organization, the company or the family. This awareness should be active on all levels and listen to the surroundings (colleagues, co-workers, the totality that needs the system to listen to its own signals), in short, know the feedback structure of your own system.

Concerning the start of the learning journey of the U, it is important to be realistic with regard to how slowly the individual and the collective adapt to new ideas and opportunities. The act of opening the mind, the heart, and the will, and embracing the attending qualitative opportunities for introspection, also involve resistance and less attractive aspects. Moreover, it is important to know that the first counterbalancing move is to be aware of this issue. Above and beyond being extremely creative, human beings are also creatures of habit, and it is the nature of habits to resist change. The nervous system, the memory, and the routines are based on assumptions. On the threshold to new and unexplored states of mind, various types of resistance occur. The first phase “Open mind” concerns the resistance associated with prejudices against the unfamiliar or the unknown. The second phase “Open heart” is the resistance associated with being unprotected and vulnerable, and the third phase “Open will” concerns the fear of disappearing or being overwhelmed. In the context of changes there is likewise a basic inertia which conditions the slow construction of new habits and routines. This situation requires consistent, disciplined repetitions.

The opportunity to become conscious of habits and experiences, and to prioritize this prospect, is associated with the will to possess awareness. The freedom to choose alternative actions creates intentional latitude, an abundant source for the creation of plans, projects, and actions. This scope is intimately linked with the ability to be aware. Scharmer describes the blind spot as the principal source of all our actions.