https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_of_hierarchical_complexity It's one of the few Neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development. It seems useful framework for understanding how big-picture thinking relates to ordinary ways of thinking (holistic vs analytic thinking), concepts like construct awareness, context awareness. It's a spiraling model like SD ("transcend-include", integration). When people say things like "why don't actual scientists see the links between mysticism and quantum mechanics?", you can clearly see here that it's sufficient for a scientist to operate from the lower stages most of the time (1-10). One the other hand, taking one field (Quantum Mechanics) and seeing the connections to another field (mysticism) initiates cross-paradigmatic operations (stage 14). When that is said, just because an operation is at a lower hierarchical complexity doesn't mean it's not complicated or difficult work. It's precisely why they don't have time to think about the big picture, because it might cost them their job. That's why most scientists are technicians and not innovators. Being a career scientist (staying within your paradigm) is not the same as being a revolutionary scientist (initiating paradigm shifts). The physicist Lawrence Krauss once said "physicists feel sorry for the social scientists, because physics is simple and social systems are complex". What more do I have to say?