Integrated Commentary: Reinterpreting the Executive Coaching Case

Integrated Commentary: Reinterpreting the Executive Coaching Case

 

Sukjae Lee, Ph.D.
Creator of the Effectiveness Coaching Methodology
February 14, 2026

 

The executive coaching case described earlier can be further deepened when interpreted through the philosophical lens of MEWEMIND—the ontological proposition that “Within ME, there is WE.”

In the developmental ecosystem articulated by Dr. Lee Suk-Jae, MEWEMIND is not a slogan. It is an ontological stance:

The individual self (ME) is structurally embedded within relational and collective existence (WE).

When combined with the structural intervention logic of 3S–FORM within the Effectiveness Coaching Methodology, this case becomes more than a leadership adjustment. It becomes an ontological shift.

 

1. The Core Tension: ME Dominating WE

At the beginning of the coaching engagement, the executive operated from a highly developed ME-structure:

• Strong technical expertise
• High decisiveness
• Clear internal standards
• Result orientation

These qualities had driven success. However, when overextended, they generated friction.

His internal equation implicitly resembled:

ME certainty → Organizational correctness

What was underdeveloped was the relational awareness that:

ME exists within WE.

Conflict intensified because the executive’s ME-structure did not sufficiently incorporate WE-perception.

 

2. The Change Demand as Ontological Imbalance

The 360-degree feedback revealed more than communication problems. It revealed imbalance:

• High personal conviction
• Limited relational permeability
• Reduced empathic resonance

From a MEWEMIND perspective, this is not a personality flaw. It is ontological asymmetry.

The coaching challenge, therefore, was:

How can ME expand to consciously include WE?

 

3. Critical Behavior as a MEWEMIND Bridge

The derived critical behavior—
“When perspectives conflict, temporarily set aside certainty and take the other’s position.”

—functioned as a structural bridge between ME and WE.

Taking the other’s position is not merely empathy.
It is ontological expansion.

When the executive lowered his certainty by 20%, he symbolically loosened the boundary of ME.

He allowed WE to enter his perceptual field.

In MEWEMIND terms, this marks the beginning of:

From isolated ME → to relational ME-in-WE.

 

4. 3S Activation as Ontological Expansion

The 3S process activated this shift.

Self-Awareness

Recognizing that certainty impacts collective energy.

Self-Talk

Interrupting the internal dominance narrative.

Self-Reflection

Reintegrating relational data into identity.

This is not just behavioral correction.
It is the reorganization of selfhood.

The executive began transitioning from:

“I produce results.”

to

“We produce results through my leadership.”

 

5. FORM as Relational Structuring

FORM operationalized the philosophy.

Feedback

Made WE visible through perception gaps.

Opportunity

Reframed conflict as collective growth leverage.

Restructure

Remodeled the mental model of leadership:

From:

Leadership = Authority + Accuracy

To:

Leadership = Influence + Containment + Relational Activation

Move Forward

Translated relational insight into observable action.

This sequence prevented MEWEMIND from remaining abstract.
It became enacted philosophy.

 

6. Identity Shift: From Producer to Facilitator

The executive’s formal change goal captured the ontological transition:

Increase the proportion of my role devoted to helping team members produce results.

This is a movement from:

ME-centered performance identity
to
WE-centered enabling identity

In MEWEMIND language, the self did not disappear.
It expanded.

 

7. Quantitative Evidence as Ontological Alignment

The reduction in:

• Self–other perception gap
• Emotional management variance
• Conflict management discrepancy

signals increasing ME–WE alignment.

When self-perception and collective perception converge, relational coherence increases.

In MEWEMIND terms:

Ontological fragmentation decreases.
Collective resonance increases.

 

8. The Deeper Meaning of Perspective-Taking

Perspective-taking is often taught as a communication skill.
Within MEWEMIND, it is an existential practice.

It affirms that:

• My view is partial.
• Your view is meaningful.
• Truth emerges relationally.

Thus, perspective-taking becomes a discipline of shared reality construction.

 

9. Organizational Implications

When leaders operate solely from ME:

• Decision speed increases.
• Relational friction increases.
• Sustainability decreases.

When leaders integrate MEWEMIND:

• Psychological safety expands.
• Strategic coherence strengthens.
• Execution stabilizes.

The executive’s case demonstrates that relational expansion does not weaken authority.
It strengthens systemic effectiveness.

 

10. Final Integration

Through the combined architecture of 3S–FORM and MEWEMIND, the case can be summarized as:

Dimension	Before Coaching	After Integration
Ontology	ME-dominant	ME-within-WE
Awareness	Performance-focused	Relationally inclusive
Identity	Producer	Facilitator
Behavior	Certainty assertion	Perspective modulation
Outcome	Conflict tension	Measured alignment

 

Closing Reflection

MEWEMIND teaches that:

The self is never separate from the collective.

3S–FORM provides the structural pathway to operationalize that truth.

In this case, coaching did not simply reduce conflict.
It expanded being.

The executive did not lose confidence.
He gained relational depth.

And in doing so, ME matured into WE-conscious leadership.