Praxis and reflective practice

“Praxis is the process by which a theory, lesson, or skill is enacted, embodied, realised, applied, or put into practice. “Praxis” may also refer to the act of engaging, applying, exercising, realising, or practising ideas” (Wikipedia). As its title suggests, this post therefore seeks to assist nonprofit leaders to reflectively apply the 6D Moral Imagination (MI) Framework featured in Part 1 of this two-part series.

The header image above reminds us that ‘moral imagination‘ is not the exclusive domain of any one field. It acts as a bridging concept across fields, and is therefore transdisciplinary.

Some may think that means it has no core purpose, but as the following chart highlights, it serves as a reflective governance tool for any nonprofit organisation, regardless of its nature and functions. Primary, secondary, and tertiary purposes are identifiable, along with ways it may be employed.

The reflective practice model adopted for use with the 6D MI Framework is a little different to those previously available (e.g., Argyris/Schon, Rolfe, Gibbs, Kolb, Mezirow/O’Sullivan), however it shares many similar qualities. The 6D Reflective Governance Cycle:

• integrates layered ethical reasoning (from 1D to 6D)
• is recursive: each decision invites revisiting earlier stages, deepening capacity with each iteration
• encourages practice-based foresight, not only reactive evaluation, and
• is designed for boards, committees, and leadership teams, supporting dialogue and co-reflection (not only for individual retrospection)

The importance of integrating ethical and rational thinking modes was discussed in Part 1 of this series. The chart which follows seeks to align the contributions of the Meta-Taxonomy of Foundational Thinking (MTFT) and the 6D MI Framework with the MELD Reflective Governance model. The integrative loop within the MTFT model is the key vector for incorporation of 6D Framework perspectives into the linear/rational decision-making ‘stack’.

Diversity of Thought

An aspect of the diversity of thought in your boardroom concerns variations between the moral frameworks that individual directors bring to the table. While the organisation may well have adopted a shared set of values, these can be subject to quite different interpretation by each board member. Directors may also bring other personal values into their deliberations and discourse.

An illustration of how the 6D MI Framework might differentiate between the ethical frames used by directors is provided in the ‘1 Issue: 6 Lenses’ chart which follows:

Scaffolding your moral imagination

In educational psychology, ‘scaffolding’ theory (Vygotsky) states that starting from what the student currently knows and expanding their knowledge works best when the process happens in small steps.

‘Moral Imagination Scaffolding’ refers to a similar structured process that supports individuals and organisations in engaging empathically and creatively with ethical dilemmas. Evolving from philosophical, psychological, and design-based traditions, it seeks to expand ethical reflection beyond binary choices. This enables decision-makers to envision alternative courses of action that are both innovative and morally responsible.

The Field of Thought (Level 6D) Scaffold illustrated below suggests a six-stage decision-making process leading to principled action and outcomes.

The scaffold uses the 6D structure to:

• Guide reflection (e.g. structured prompts, scenario questions)
• Normalise complexity (e.g. moral ambiguity as developmental, not failure)
• Sequence deliberation (e.g. starting with empathy before justice)
• Stretch thinking (e.g. inviting directors to imagine long-term futures or collective reparations)

The Moral Imagination Scaffold therefore serves as a structured approach to ethical deliberation, promoting the ability to:

• Recognise Ethical Dimensions: Identify the moral aspects inherent in a situation.
• Empathise with Stakeholders: Understand the perspectives and values of all parties affected.
• Envision Alternative Scenarios: Imagine various courses of action and their potential outcomes.
• Evaluate Moral Implications: Assess the ethical consequences of different options.

By combining emotional insight, systemic thinking, and creativity, the 6D Framework enables decision-makers to go beyond compliance or rule-following toward transformative and value-aligned action. The chart which follows compliments the previous one by offering guidance to a board chair aimed at assisting directors to bridge from binary thinking to plural and more nuanced deliberation. This addresses the scenario mentioned in Part 1, where directors are on different wavelengths, and therefore talking at crossed purposes.

Where directors know and are comfortable with various other frameworks and can recognise their alignment with levels within the 6D Framework, this may also help them to bridge from the familiar to the ‘new’. Examples of this alignment are highlighted here.

6D Director Questions

To illustrate the different perspectives operating at each of the levels within the 6D MI Framework, the next chart lists three sample questions at each of the six levels. Directors concerned that deliberations may only be occurring around rules, compliance, or Win: Lose themes, may wish to use questions from other dimensions in the framework to shift attention to a wider perspective.

Another set of framing questions that nonprofit leaders may consider as they seek to blend rational and ethical thinking/decision-making is offered in the 6 X 10 matrix chart below. This uses the 10 stages of the Meta-Taxonomy of Foundational Thinking on one axis and the 6D levels of the Moral Imagination Framework on the other to identify 60 suggested framing questions. Obviously, not all of these questions would be applicable to every decision. Rather, the matrix offers a reference from which questions may be selected or adapted locally.

6D Advocacy

While reflective governance and ethical decision-making are the main focal areas for users of the 6D MI Framework, it will also assist nonprofits in framing their advocacy messages on public policy issues. The reference chart which follows offers an analysis of the kinds of questions and messages associated with each of the six levels, along with steps you can take to develop and deliver your key messages.

Given that your advocacy endeavours will usually relate to public interest matters, it is clearly a worthy area for the exercise of moral imagination.

Both logical and ethical considerations are involved in many aspects of nonprofit governance and administration, only some of which have been touched on in this post. Key questions provided in several of the above charts can readily be applied, or adapted for wider use.

Blockers and Enablers

Another way of thinking about how to operate within the 6D MI Framework is to consider what prevents effective use of higher-level thinking modes, and conversely, what promotes it. The comparison of ‘blockers’ and ‘enablers’ in the chart below provides a few examples of each for your consideration.

Insights, Principles, and Other Resources

The set of three charts below form a resource collection of moral imagination insights, principles, and recommended reading that you may find helpful if you wish to further explore this theme. The reading list includes books by authors referenced in both Parts 1 and 2 of this series, amongst others.

Using the 6D Framework in NFP Leadership

The 6D MI Framework is not just a diagnostic tool — it’s a leadership practice resource, cultivating moral imagination across the dimensions of thought. Using it helps us to integrate:

• Cognitive complexity (how we reason),
• Ethical maturity (what we consider), and
• Systems fluency (how we situate ourselves within broader ecosystems of meaning, power, and relationship).

See also:

The Dimensionality of Thought and Ethical Leadership – Part 1 (Theory)
Foundational Thinking for Nonprofit Leaders
First Principles First
Moral Governance (Part 1)
Moral Governance (Part 2)
Moral Governance (Part 3)