@Anthony Smits I agree with you in broad terms. Those six drivers do appear to reflect something fundamentally human. The weighting may shift between individuals and environments, but the underlying needs are recognisable across contexts. Where my reflection becomes more layered is in how I experience culture itself. I have come to understand that many of my decisions and interpretations of the world are influenced by a neurodivergent way of processing information. That affects how I read social cues, how I interpret ambiguity, and how I respond to what is often an unspoken cultural script. Modern culture, particularly in professional environments, can feel to me like a constant stimulus field, fast-moving, emotionally charged, and at times inconsistent in its signals. What others may experience as fluid or intuitive can register for me as unclear or contradictory. That does not make it wrong; it simply means I have to work harder to decode it. As a result, I often anchor myself in principles, clarity, structure, and defined values. They provide stability where cultural norms feel shifting. That has, at times, led to being misunderstood. Directness can be read as rigidity, aggression, or rudeness. Depth of analysis can be perceived as overthinking. A need for clarity can be mistaken for challenge. In reality, it is simply how I create order and operate effectively. So when I reflect on fulfilment, culture and values, I have to account for that lens. My internal drivers may be similar in principle to anyone else’s, but the way they manifest and the effort required to align with prevailing norms, is shaped significantly by how my brain works. That awareness has helped me become more deliberate in my choices. It has also reinforced that understanding oneself is not just about identifying values, but about recognising the cognitive framework through which those values are lived.

@Anthony Smits thank you for articulating this so clearly. There is real value in separating what motivates us from how we are wired to act. Where I would offer a respectful challenge is in the assumption that our motivational framework is primarily culturally derived and gradually adapted. Culture and caregivers undoubtedly shape early conditioning, but they do not determine it. Some individuals assimilate their environment almost entirely. Others recognise, often very early, that what surrounds them is misaligned with their internal compass and they consciously choose a different path. That divergence is not simply a variation in instinctive drive. It reflects agency. It reflects discernment. And, in many cases, it reflects deliberate moral positioning against what one perceives as wrong, harmful, or corrosive. In my experience, motivation is not only inherited or absorbed, it can be engineered. Values can be consciously selected, reinforced, and lived, even when they run counter to family, peer group, or social expectation. That process is neither accidental nor purely instinctive; it requires reflection, discipline, and sustained choice. I do agree that many assessment instruments blur together underlying drivers and behavioural expression. There is merit in developing clearer language around these distinctions. However, I would add a third dimension beyond motivation and instinctive drive: intentional self-authorship, the conscious decision to become something other than one’s conditioning. For some, that decision is the defining act of their lives. Again a thoughtful discussion, thank you for raising it.

@Anthony Smits If I’m honest, Establishing Direction is the one that fits me most naturally. I’m very aware of how uncomfortable prolonged uncertainty feels. I tend to want to resolve the open question, choose a path, and move with intent. Once the direction is clear, everything else seems to organise itself around that decision. That said, I don’t see myself as one-dimensional. While direction-setting feels like my primary instinct, I can strongly relate to several of the others as well. There’s a part of me that wants to verify the ground properly before committing. There’s another part that enjoys understanding things deeply and making sense of them for others. And in the right environment, I can be very action-oriented once the path is set. I suppose what this highlights for me is that we may have a dominant drive, but we’re not confined to it. We’re layered, shaped by experience, context, and growth. The dominant tendency might lead, but the rest still very much live alongside it. Curious which one felt strongest for you?

1. You know me already Mark from various other skools we frequent. 2. I joined The Pattern Lab, to help out with its development. 3. The one that made me think "yes, that's what I do" was, 04 ESTABLISHING DIRECTION

@Lydie Molina @Anthony Smits Hopefully the name change is the first baby step as the evolution starts and things become real and consistent.💪🤩