John Grinder Archives - NLP Education Australia

Posts

Outcomes and Competencies for Practitioners of NLP

November 8, 2023/in NLP Articles /by Chris Collingwood

Recommended Syllabus for Practitioner of Neuro-Linguistic Programming courses

At Inspiritive, we create high-quality NLP certification training. Anyone certified by us as a Practitioner of Neuro-Linguistic Programming is more than capable of undertaking advanced training at the level of Part 2 of the Graduate Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming or Practitioner of Ericksonian Hypnosis.

Our recommendations for obtaining a Practitioners Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming. Certificate Course participants are required to show competency as below.

If you have already attended a practitioner of NLP training, have you had presentations, live demonstrations, and supervised exercises in the following?

Outcomes and Competencies at the NLP Practitioner level

Rapport

Prerequisites: none

Learning outcomes:

to be able to establish and maintain rapport with one or more other people,
to be able to attract and hold someone’s attention,
to be able to elicit willing co-operation,
to make a distinction between the above (rapport) and liking

Competency:

matching, mirroring, cross-pacing, pacing and leading, using verbal and non-verbal behaviour,
eliciting and keeping another person’s attention

Perceptual Positions

Prerequisites: rapport

Learning outcomes:

to be able to demonstrate and use first, third and second positions in varied contexts,
to be able to meta comment about any experience from a meta position,
to be able to guide another person through the process,
to understand the benefit of using third position between first and second positions at all times,
to be able to demonstrate and use additional meta positions with first, third and second position to establish a cleanly detached third position and a clean first position,
to be aware of changes in others’ demeanour

Competency:

enter and leave first, third and second positions and describe the differences between them,
describe and demonstrate the function of multiple perceptual positions,
describe the purpose of the order ‘first to third to second to third to first’,
demonstrate guiding another person through the process of establishing and using cleanly differentiated perceptual positions,
adopt a meta position cleanly and comment from it on the experience or interaction just left

NLP Representational Systems

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions

Learning outcomes:

to be aware that all internal processing (thinking, remembering, imagining, emoting) uses sequences of representations of our senses, that is internal pictures, sounds, feelings (sensation, proprioception), tastes and smells,
to be aware that representations in different systems may be used sequentially, simultaneously and in synaesthesia,
to be aware that a prefered representational system is not an identifying category and has a useful life of 30 seconds,
to be aware that different sequences of representations suit different classes of material,
to know the difference between a single representational system, two or more in simultaneous use and two or more in synaesthesia
to be aware that all systems are in use constantly but conscious awareness is limited to the ones being represented identifiably in the moment,
to be aware that a lead system is not an identifying category and is information about the way someone is starting to think on this occasion or about the particular topic,
to be aware that different people use different sequences of representational systems to think about any given topic,
to begin to appreciate that everyone has their own model of the world and makes their own meaning of events and ideas
to be aware that representations of the world are not the world; they are mental pictures, sounds and feelings
to be aware of perceptual filters (those beliefs, expectations, and presuppositions we hold that influence the way we represent our experience) about the world and ourselves
to be aware of changes in others’ demeanour

Competency:

ask others how they are representing their internal processes,
demonstrate understanding of the transient nature of lead and preferred representational systems,
demonstrate understanding that representational systems are not identifying categories or fixed characteristics of people,
demonstrate understanding that all internal processes are sequences of representations,
demonstrate understanding that a sequence can include single representations, simultaneous representations and synaesthesia,
demonstrate understanding that all systems are in use constantly but those which are identifiable in the moment are available consciously,
demonstrate understanding that our internal experience is subject to perceptual filters as well as sensory representations

Sensory specific language – verbal predicates

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems

Learning outcomes:

to be able to hear, recognise and use sensory based predicates,
to be able to respond in the same order and sequence as another person,
to be able to map across from one sense to another using predicates,
to be able to include all main senses in conversation,
to be able to leave all sensory predicates out in favour of non-sensory based terms,
to be able to recognise when someone else is not responding due to use of predicates outside their current thinking

Competency:

demonstrate recognition and use of sensory based predicates in all senses,
demonstrate matching sequences of predicates,
demonstrate mapping across senses verbally,
demonstrate use of non-sensory specific words

Eye-accessing cues

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates

Learning outcomes:

to be able to elicit and read another person’s eye-accessing cues,
to link eye-accessing cues back to representation systems and predicates,
to be able to use others’ eye-accessing cues to prompt further information gathering,
to be aware that the majority of people have a similar eye-accessing pattern, some have the pattern reversed and others have one or two representational systems reversed,
to be aware that some people with split patterns could benefit from consistency within their own direction if they want it,
to observe and listen to the subject for feedback and ensure their well being
to be able to observe changes in others’ demeanour

Competency:

demonstrate eliciting others’ eye-accessing cues using sensory specific questions,
demonstrate eliciting others’ eye-accessing cues in conversation,
respond to another’s spontaneous eye-accessing cues using appropriately sequenced sensory based predicates,
guiding subjects’ eyes to access specific representational systems through gestures and / or words,
recognising the need for ecology in leading eye-accessing

Circle of excellence

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, rep systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues

Learning outcomes:

to be able to elicit and maintain a change in own psycho-physiological state,
to be able to recognise and choose appropriate components for a resource state,
to be able to construct a context specific resource state to fit a particular function using resources from personal history, memory and imagination,
to take another person through the above processes, eliciting that person’s choice of resources,
to have live experience of intentional changes in state, emotion and resourcefulness,
to discover that states and emotional responses can be changed at will,
to have live exposure to evidence that people have different models of the world and different sequences of representation,
to recognise the importance of ecology and clients’ choice,
to be able to future pace resources into appropriate future contexts,
to be able to observe changes in others’ demeanour

Competency:

the ability to change own state,
the ability to construct resource states to fit general and specific situations,
the ability to lead another through these processes,
the ability to discuss the learning outcomes,
the ability to check ecology,
future pacing the work done

Sensory acuity and calibration

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues

Learning outcomes:

to be able to observe and remember others’ present behaviour without attributing meaning to it,
to be able to listen to others’ present behaviour without attributing meaning to it,
to compare others’ present behaviour with their own past examples and identify similarities and differences,
to be aware of the distinctions between observation, calibration and interpretation,
to be able to calibrate an individual’s state by comparison between their present behaviour (verbal and non-verbal) and similar behaviour previously observed in the same individual for which their meaning has already been established,
to be aware that meaning attributed to someone else’s behaviour remains speculation until verified by that person,
to be able to calibrate state changes in others by touch,
to be able to calibrate state changes in others by hearing (changes in voice quality),
to be able to offer sensory based descriptions of observations in all senses

Competency:

observe small changes in state,
hear small changes in state,
feel small changes in state,
compare present state with previous examples in same person,
describe observation, calibration and interpretation,
use sensory based description without interpretation

Anchoring

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, sensory acuity

Learning outcomes:

to be able to elicit one or more states in others,
to be able to anchor each desired state visually, auditorily or by touch,
to be able to re-elicit each desired state by firing its anchor,
to be able to calibrate the changing intensity of an elicited state,
to be aware of the need to set the anchor as the state increases in intensity,
to be aware of the need to cease the anchor before the state peaks,
to be able to collapse anchors, chain anchors, stack anchors, slide anchors,
to be aware that anchoring is an example of first order change,
to be aware that anchoring can prompt second order change to occur,
to be aware of the subjectÐs ecology and choice,
to be aware that anchoring occurs naturally in daily life

Competencies:

elicit subject’s outcome for the exercise,
elicit particular states, one at a time,
anchor each state,
use visual, auditory and kinaesthetic anchors,
set anchors,
fire anchors,
collapse anchors,
chain anchors,
stack anchors,
observe state changes,
describe state changes in sensory based terms,
use sliding anchors

Well-formed outcome

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, sensory acuity, anchoring

Learning outcomes:

to know and be able to apply the well-formedness conditions for outcomes to participants’ own outcomes,
to be able to elicit and describe an outcome with reference to well-formedness conditions for outcomes,
to be able to create nested well-formed outcomes,
to be able to elicit a well-formed outcome from another person,
to be able to use the Grinder Outcome, Intention and Consequence model on well-formed outcomes and ill-formed outcomes,
to have an experience of using different logical levels to increase understanding and integration

Competency:

elicit an outcome in positive terms,
take the outcome through well-formedness conditions,
elicit the intent of the outcome,
take the intent through well-formedness conditions,
elicit a sub-outcome,
take a sub-outcome through well formedness conditions,
take a well formed outcome through the Grinder Outcome, Intention and Consequences model,
take an ill formed outcome through the Grinder Outcome, Intention and Consequences model to find an alternative outcome

The meta model of language – overview

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues

Learning outcomes:

understanding the distinctions between primary experience, deep structure representation and surface structure representation from transformational grammar,
to be aware that people’s language patterns contain information about their thinking processes, beliefs and ideas,
to be aware of the distinctions between semantic ill formedness (distortion), limits to the speaker’s model (generalisations) and information gathering (deletions),
to be aware of the most useful order in which to challenge meta model violations (distortions first, generalisations next and deletions last),
to be aware that distortions include only presuppositions, mind reading, cause effects and complex equivalents,
to be aware that generalisations include only modal operators of possibility and necessity, universal quantifiers, and lost performativesto be aware that deletions include only nominalisations, unspecified verbs, lack of referential indices, comparative and simple deletions,
to be aware that additional categories are included in some circles but these are not additional language patterns and do not belong in the meta model,
to be able to recognise and challenge distortions in one’s own and others’ language,
to be able to recognise and challenge generalisations in one’s own and others’ language,
to be able to recognise and challenge deletions in one’s own and others’ language,
to be aware of the extra need for rapport in maintaining the relationship with others when using the meta model,
to understand that the meta model can be used sparingly, based on a need to know for optimal benefit,
to understand that the meta model can be used to elicit high quality, accurate information, to teach people to think more effectively and to assist people become aware of unconscious parts of their models of the world to provide another demonstration of the uniqueness of individuals’ models of the world,
to be aware that it is more useful to be able to respond to meta model violations than to be able to name them,
to be aware of the potentially confrontational quality of the meta model and treat it with care

Competency:

to be extra careful to maintain rapport when using the meta model,
to hear or read and challenge distortions in others’ language,
to hear or read and challenge generalisations in others’ language,
to hear or read and challenge deletions in others’ language,
to hear or read and challenge the above in own language,
to demonstrate awareness of the need to know principle,
to know when not to challenge meta model violations,
to demonstrate the effective order of challenge for most circumstances

Six step reframe

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues,

Learning outcomes:

to be able to distinguish between behaviour and intention,
to have an experience of working with different logical levels,
to have an experience of working with conscious and unconscious processes,
to have an experience of working with the metaphor of individual, communicating parts of a person,
to have an introduction to second order change,
to be aware of the story of John Grinder’s developing this process,
to be aware that this process is not used in some circles as they consider it has been superseded and that their reasoning is faulty,
to be able to elicit and use three specific and separate states in the subject,
to be able to change behaviour while holding the intention constant,
to be able to disseminate resources within the system of a person,
to be able to discuss and incorporate objections to any part of the process,
to be able to use the process on oneself and future pace it,
to be able to guide another person through the process and future pace it

Competency:

demonstrate the spatial six step reframe with self,
demonstrate the spatial six step reframe with another person,
demonstrate the six step reframe process in your own words with another person,
describe the difference between behaviour and intention,
describe the importance of the ecology check and future pace,
describe the use and incorporation of objections by any part of the subject

Negotiation between two parts in conflict

Prerequisites: session 1, well-formed outcome, meta model

Learning outcomes:

to be able to elicit responses from each of two parts of the subject using the metaphor of parts with distinct ideas and responses,
to be able to elicit outcomes, intents and purposes from each part,
to be able to elicit a dovetailed outcome for the parts,
to be able to elicit experience of each other’s beliefs and values for each part,
to be able to negotiate agreement and voluntary integration between parts,
to be able to check for ecology and elicit voluntary integration with the subject,
to be able to gather information and incorporate any objections

Competency:

demonstrate the process of negotiating between two parts in conflict with another person,
describe the benefits of taking each part’s outcome to a high enough logical level for the intentions to become compatible,
demonstrate or describe gathering information from any objecting part and incorporating that information and or part into the process,
future pace

Negotiation between more than two parts in conflict

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, well-formed outcome, meta model,

Learning outcomes:

to be able to communicate with more than two parts of a person,
to be able to negotiate permission to work with two parts at a time as above,
to be able to establish an order and sequence which suits all parts and the subject,
to be able to establish a dovetailed outcome working with two parts at a time,
to be able to negotiate appropriate integration between consenting parts with a dovetailed outcome

Competency:

demonstrate the process of negotiating between more than two parts in conflict with another person,
describe the benefits of working with two consenting parts at a time,
demonstrate or describe gathering information from any objecting part and incorporating that information and or part into the process,
future pace

Content reframing

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, well-formed outcome, meta model

Learning outcomes:

to be aware of the distinction between context and meaning reframing,
to be aware that any behaviour would work in an appropriate context,
to be aware that people do the best they can with the resources they have available to them in that situation,
to be aware that any meaning attributed to a comment or action can be reframed to offer a more or less useful one,
to be aware that reframing can be used therapeutically or destructively, to provide credibility,
to be aware that reframing is attributing a different meaning to someone’s words or actions, or placing someone’s words or actions in a different context so that they become either more or less appropriate,
to be aware that reframing was first described by Bandler and Grinder but has now been adopted as a term in psychology and related areas

Competency:

deliver a series of meaning reframes when presented with a complex equivalent until one or more reframes fit the subject’s situation,
deliver a series of context reframes in response to a comparative deletion until one or more reframes fit the subject’s situation

Stalking to Excellence

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, well-formed outcome, meta model, reframing

Learning outcomes:

to put skills together for an outcome,
to elicit and anchor states,
to use different locations for different states,
to gather information,
to experience emergent learning,
to use second order change,
to increase calibration and sensory acuity,
learn and use the process,
to extend resources to additional states and contexts,
to discover that a positive intent underlies any state or behaviour,
to experience people doing the best they can with the resources they have at the time and in the context

Competency:

to guide another person through the process,
to use the process oneself,
to demonstrate keeping another person resourceful,
to demonstrate staying resourceful oneself,
to effect a piece of lasting change with another person,
to effect a piece of lasting change with oneself,
to demonstrate gathering information,
to demonstrate using prerequisite competencies in response to the situation,
to demonstrate recognition of resource and non-resource states,
to elicit and anchor resource states

Submodalities

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, well-formed outcome, meta model, reframing

Learning outcomes:

to discover that subcategories exist within each representational system,
to discover that experience is coded in submodalities,
to discover that the meaning, intensity, desirability, credibility and memorability of an experience can be altered by changing submodality distinctions,
to be aware that different people use different submodality distinctions to make a given change in the quality of their experience,
to discover that some people believe they have limited or no access to one or more representational systems,
to discover that training can enhance people’s access to their internal representations,
to experience changing beliefs with submodalities,
to experience the need for ecology and consequence thinking when changing beliefs or doing other deep change work,
to experience tracking another’s experiences and gathering detailed process information,
to discover that pattern (in this case submodalities) has a lasting impact on subjective experience,
to discover that some submodalities drive others to alter with them and some submodalities only shift alone,
to discover that experiences can be rendered more resourceful through comparing and contrasting submodalities,
to discover additional combinations to add to one’s own repertoire through exposure to others’ descriptions of their submodality distinctions,
to reinforce the idea of different models of the world by exposure to others’ descriptions of their subjective experience

Competency:

to demonstrate eliciting submodalities from others,
to demonstrating eliciting driver submodalities from others,
to demonstrate using submodalities to effect change with ecology,
to demonstrate changing a belief with ecology using submodalities,
to demonstrate comparing and contrasting submodalities of a present state, a desired state and an interim state

Attention training

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, well-formed outcome, meta model, reframing, submodalities

Learning outcomes:

ability to track one’s attention,
ability to shift one’s attention by choice,
ability to split one’s attention between two or more tasks,
ability to mark one’s place and return to it after interruptions,
ability to set and use life lines,
ability to elicit and use strong resource states with life lines,
ability to model another person implicitly by shadowing them,
ability to model oneself,
ability to detect patterns of organisation in others and oneself,
ability to use the unconscious mind as a source of information / inspiration,
experience of the conscious / unconscious interface,
direct experience of unconscious processing,
ability to incorporate personal ecology into all these activities

Competency:

demonstrate shifting attention between internal / external, different rep systems, different elements of one’s context, conscious / unconscious processing,
demonstrate marking one’s place in an activity and returning to it after a diversion,
demonstrate modelling another person implicitly with second position,
demonstrate setting and using lifelines oneself,
demonstrate guiding another person in setting and using life lines,
demonstrate familiarity with three options in life lines (time, task and context),
demonstrate finding a source of information via unconscious processing

Fast Phobia Process

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, well-formed outcome, meta model, reframing, submodalities, attention training

Learning outcomes:

to understand the properties of double dissociation and split attention,
to understand the organisation of a simple phobia,
to understand when to use and when not to use this process,
to be aware of the patterns and sequence of the fast phobia process,
to be able to use the process with another person,
to have an experience of the process,
to be aware that the patterns are essential and to use them in one’s own words,
to be aware of the importance of anchoring a strong resource state for the subject at the start of the process,
to be aware of the importance of keeping the subject dissociated until the end of the process

Competency:

demonstrate the fast phobia process on a simple phobia with another person,
describe suitable situations and states for using the process,
distinguish between suitable and unsuitable material for using the process,
describe what makes complex and systemic phobias require additional work

Personal Editing

Learning outcomes:

to understand that changing state allows access to different resources,
to understand that changing state can be elicited through changing physiology,
to understand that a strong and steady resource state can change our responses to people, events and contexts,
to acquire multiple means of eliciting resource states to facilitate change in oneself and others,
to gain an appreciation of state dependent learning,
to gain an appreciation of targeted generalisation of resources across states,
to be aware that personal editing occurs naturally in daily life

Competency:

demonstrate personal editing with a strong, anchored resource state and repeated short exposure to representations of the choice point,
demonstrate personal editing by noting a choice point and then shifting one’s attention to movement,
describe instances of naturally occurring personal editing

The Milton Model

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, well-formed outcome, meta model, reframing, submodalities, attention training

Learning outcomes:

to be aware that the milton model makes deliberate use of meta model violations,
to be aware that the milton model makes deliberate use of multiple time frames,
to become aware of and recognise embedded questions, commands and suggestions,
to be aware that the intent is to keep one’s words sufficiently general to allow the subject (individual or group) to make their own representations of the matter under discussion,
to be aware of when milton model language is used deliberately and when to use meta model challenges,
to be aware that milton model language is useful for making indirect comments and suggestions
to acquire facility in using milton model language knowingly,
to become aware that trance can be elicited in anyone provided it is tailored to their own thinking processes

Competency:

demonstrate use of the milton model to elicit a given class of experience while allowing the subject to represent their own content,
demonstrate the use of embedded questions, embedded commands and embedded suggestions

Transderivational search and Change Personal History

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye accessing cues, well formed outcome, meta model, reframing, submodalities, attention training, milton model

Learning outcomes:

to become aware of internal sensations as signals to indicate a state,
to be able to use internal signals to track back to earlier examples of a state,
to be able to elicit the imprint experience giving rise to the sensation,
to be able to change state and access resources for the subject of the imprint experience,
to be able to bring resources to the subject in the imprint experience,
to be aware of possible consequences and ecology in bringing resources to the subject of the imprint experience,
to have an experience of regression and time distortion,
to experience guiding someone else in this process

Competency:

demonstrate a transderivational search using a kinaesthetic signal and anchors,
use a transderivational search to find an imprint experience,
observe the imprint experience from 3rd position,
access suitable resources for the younger subject in the imprint experience,
demonstrate bringing resources to the subject in the imprint experience,
describe the difference in the experience of the imprint situation with resources,
demonstrate awareness of consequences and ecology when doing second order change work,
demonstrate bringing the changes to the present in first position,
demonstrate the above process with another person

Reimprinting

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, well-formed outcome, meta model, reframing, submodalities, attention training, milton model, transderivational search and change personal history

Learning outcomes:

to become aware of internal sensations as signals to indicate a state,
to be able to use internal signals to track back to earlier examples of a state,
to be able to elicit the imprint experience giving rise to the sensation,
to be able to change state and access resources for each significant party to the imprint experience,
to be able to bring resources to each significant party in the imprint experience,
to be aware of possible consequences and ecology in bringing resources to the parties to the imprint experience,
to have an experience of regression and time distortion,
to experience guiding someone else in this process,
to distinguish between simple and systemic interventions,
to be aware of the purpose in bringing resources to the least significant party first and progressing through increasing influence to end with the subject of the reimprint,
to understand the purpose of leaving all new resources turned off after editing until all parties have new resources,
to understand that resources are free and care and generosity with resources adds to the quality of the work,
to appreciate that any resource when functioning changes the system, hence the need to turn them off until everyone is resourced,
to appreciate that providing each party with resources creates a systemic change and facilitates deeper learning for the subject,
to appreciate the convincing nature of the experience for the subject when all parties resources are activated together

Competency:

use a transderivational search to find an imprint experience,
observe the imprint experience from 3rd position,
take second position with each of the parties to the experience commencing with the least significant and progressing in ascending order of influence,
return to third position between each visit to second position with a party and note the resources that would assist the party,
access plentiful resources for each of the parties in the imprint experience one at a time, starting with the least significant and progressing through to the subject,
demonstrate bringing resources to each party in the imprint experience, one at a time,
demonstrate switching off each party’s new resources after editing them, before moving on to the next party,
describe the difference in each party’s experience of the imprint situation when that party has resources functioning,
demonstrate consideration of consequences for the subject and ecology for the system,
demonstrate turning on all resources for all parties and reexperiencing the imprint situation,
demonstrate awareness of consequences and ecology when doing second order change work,
demonstrate bringing the changes to the present in first position,
demonstrate the above process with another person

Timeline elicitation and use

Learning outcomes:

to be aware that Steve and Connirae Andreas discovered and developed timelines,
to be aware that Robert Dilts and John Grinder developed the spatial use of timelines,
to be aware that it is ecological for someone’s timeline direction to conform to their eye-accessing cue direction (if the future is right with eye-accessing cues then the future time line should move to the right or ahead),
to be aware that timeline comprehension and use is an integral part of NLP,
to be aware that different people use different timelines from each other,
to be aware that many people use different timelines in different contexts,
to be aware that we can try on different timelines,
to be aware of different cultural timelines and concomitant time use,
to be aware that we can place resources in our past for present familiarity,
to be aware that we can place resources in our present and future to assist us,
to be aware that we can use timelines spatially or internally,
to be aware that we can reimprint on timelines,
to be aware that we can track the history of any state using timelines,
to be aware that we can change responses in the present by adding resources to the past

Competency:

demonstrate reimprinting on a spatial timeline with another person,
demonstrate time line elicitation with another person,
demonstrate planning a future event and placing it on timeline,
model several different timelines from others and try them on,
demonstrate incorporating perceptual positions into reimprint,
demonstrate incorporating structure of emotions into reimprint

New Behaviour Generator with Timeline

Learning outcomes:

to be aware of the structure of affirmations and visualisations,
to be able to use association and dissociation for editing internal movies,
to be able to make internal pictures to order,
to be able to use perceptual positions in gathering information and designing future actions,
to be able to develop and use internal representations to construct new capabilities,
to be able to construct and use submodality distinctions to enhance new capabilities,
to be familiar with the process and the structure of the process of creating and installing new capabilities,
to be able to place the finished product at a suitable time on the timeline and future pace it,
to be aware of the rest of the system in which the subject lives and to incorporate it,
to ensure that foreseeable consequences are acceptable and ecological

Competency:

demonstrate association and dissociation,
demonstrate the use of perceptual positions in the process,
demonstrate eliciting and associating into resource states,
demonstrate eliciting and associating into the chosen new capability,
demonstrate editing the new capability,
demonstrate awareness of the need for ecology and consideration of the system in different time frames,
demonstrate placing the finished product in the subject’s history on their time line,
demonstrate future pacing

Swish Patterns – Standard and Distance

Learning outcomes:

to be able to make internal pictures to order,
to be able to change internal pictures to order,
to be aware if there is a preference for distance or standard swish,
to be able to distinguish between associated and dissociated representations,
to be aware of the need for an unique and always present element in the first picture,
to be able to swish a pair of pictures at speed,
to be aware of the function of a swish,
to have an experience of the changing response in a swish pattern,
to be aware that some schools find the swish comparable and better than a six step reframe,
to be aware of the difference in pattern and application between a swish and a six step reframe,
to be aware of similarities between the pattern of a swish, a personal edit and a fast phobia process

Competency:

demonstrate establishing a preference for a distance or standard swish,
demonstrate a swish pattern with another person,
describe the function of a swish and suitable material for using it

Swish Patterns – Designer

Learning outcomes:

to be aware that a swish can operate in any representational system or combination,
to be able to elicit a preference in representational systems from another person,
to be aware of own preferences of representational systems,
to be able to use the designer swish pattern with any representational systems

Competency:

demonstrate designer swishes with different combinations of representational systems

Swish Patterns – Visual Kinaesthetic

Learning outcomes:

to be able to use the swish pattern spatially,
to be able to experience the swish pattern in real time,
to be able to elicit and send resources in metaphoric visual form,
to be able to receive and respond to metaphoric visual resources from self,
to be able to elicit suitable states for using this process in others

Competency:

demonstrate guiding others through this process,
demonstrate experiencing this process,
describe the function of this process

Logical Levels and Chunking

Prerequisites: rapport, perceptual positions, representational systems, predicates, eye-accessing cues, well-formed outcome

Learning outcomes:

to understand the distinction between logical levels and logical types,
to be aware that logical levels is a classification system (started by the ancient Greeks),
to be aware that chunking up moves to greater abstraction,
to be aware that chunking down moves to greater specificity,
to be aware that chunking sideways produces comparable members of the same class,
to be aware that chunking sideways is also known as lateral thinking,
to be aware that a simple way to chunk sideways is to chunk up one level and then find a list of examples of its members,
to be aware that change work done at a higher logical level than that of the problem is more effective than using the same logical level

Competency:

demonstrate chunking up, down and sideways,
describe some uses of seeking the intention of peopleÐs outcomes,
describe some uses of seeking specificity,
describe some uses of lateral thinking,
demonstrate the use of chunking in establishing and maintaining rapport

Grinder and DeLozier’s Genius State

Prerequisites: circles of excellence, attention training, life lines, logical levels

Learning outcomes:

to be aware that changing state changes one’s perception of the world,
to be able to track and change peripheral vision,
to be able to silence internal dialogue,
to be able to apply well-formedness conditions to outcomes,
to be conversant with logical levels and chunking,
to have an experience of a genius state with life lines

Competency:

demonstrate eliciting a genius state using circles of excellence,
demonstrate wearing a genius state during an active dreaming walk,
demonstrate acting as guardian or guide to someone in a genius state,
demonstrate using life lines for those times where there is no guardian

Strategies

Learning outcomes:

to be aware of the existence of strategies for thinking,
to be aware of the well-formedness conditions for strategies,
to be aware that all representational systems are in use continuously,
to be aware that those representation sequences which show in eye-accessing cues are the strongest,
to be aware that strategies use the strongest representations,
to be aware of the seven basic strategies (learning, decision, reality, convincer, memory, creativity, motivation),
to be able to elicit strategies,
to be able to design effective and well-formed strategies,
to be able to check for effectiveness and well-formedness conditions,
to be able to streamline strategies,
to be able to install strategies by metaphor, rehearsal, demonstration and anchoring,
to experience conscious awareness of own strategies,
to observe the difference in people’s subjective experience of different strategies for doing a given function,
to have an experience of how others do their strategies by modelling them,
to have an experience of how we code reality and how others do it

Competency:

describe the well-formedness conditions for strategies,
list the seven generic strategies,
elicit a strategy,
check an elicited strategy for well-formedness and effectiveness,
streamline or redesign a strategy,
install the changes to a strategy,
try on others’ strategies

Metaphor

Learning outcomes:

to use Milton model language while telling a story or series of stories,
to be able to use metaphor,
to be aware that in NLP metaphor includes simile and allegory,
to be able to use universals from the culture, sub-culture or organisation of the audience,
to be able to construct and deliver an isomorphic metaphor,
to be able to tell a string of short metaphors for a purpose,
to be able to use metaphor as a vehicle for change,
to be able to tell metaphor to transfer a useful pattern hidden in interesting content,
to be aware of the distinction between deep and shallow metaphor,
to be able to describe a multiple embedded metaphor,
to be aware that people, organisations and cultures have deep metaphors they live by,
to be aware that deep metaphor is unconscious unless deliberately elicited,
to be aware that deep metaphor comes out in people’s language and expressions

Competency:

demonstrate eliciting a particular state through metaphor,
demonstrate offering a useful pattern through metaphor,
demonstrate a series of metaphors to make a change,
demonstrate an isomorphic metaphor,
describe a deep metaphor (eg business as war / sport)

Dilts’ Disney Creativity Strategy

Learning outcomes:

to be able to enter task specific resource states cleanly,
to be able to construct specific resource states for specific functions,
to be able to associate and dissociate cleanly at will,
to be able to shift between perceptual positions cleanly at will,
to be able to plan, develop and create a project from first principles,
to discover which of Disney’s dreamer, realist and critic states are more familiar,
to enhance, practice and redesign components of those less familiar,
to be aware that spatial sorting is a pattern while the Disney categories are content,
to be able to use multiple elements of NLP as appropriate,
to have an experience of Walt Disney’s method for creating

Competency:

demonstrate the Disney Creativity Strategy,
describe the point of keeping each state clean and separated,
describe the point of going in one direction and doing a complete round each time,
describe the point of planning the dream and criticising the plan,
describe the point of associating fully into each state

Separating Unwanted Synaesthesias

Learning outcomes:

to be aware of the importance of establishing the individual subject’s eye-accessing cues,
to be aware of the quadrant of each representation,
to be aware that the process can start at any point on the circle,
to be aware that replacing each representation in its place removes the intensity of the experience,
to be aware that some synaesthesias are viewed with defocused eyes in front,
to be aware that this process can be used regularly for daily experiences,
to have the experience of dismantling an unwanted synaesthesia,
to be aware of the relationship between this process and the fast phobia process,
to be aware that synaesthesias can be constructed by reversing this process

Competency:

demonstrate dismantling a synaesthesia with another person,
demonstrate dismantling a synaesthesia of one’s own,
describe suitable experiences for use with this process,
describe how the process could be reversed to create a synaesthesia with defocused vision straight ahead

The NLP Negotiation Model

Learning outcomes:

to achieve congruence within each member of negotiation team,
to achieve congruence between members of negotiation team,
to establish and maintain rapport within and between negotiation teams,
to establish well-formed outcome within negotiation team,
to chunk up high enough to provide multiple options for negotiation team,
to be aware of own negotiation teamÐs bottom line and best alternative to negotiated agreement,
to be aware that other interested parties’ higher logical level outcomes can be elicited,
to be aware that dovetailed outcomes lead to agreement,
to be aware that shared outcomes enhance rapport between negotiation teams,
to be aware that rapport between teams promotes an atmosphere of shared solution finding,
to be aware that negotiating with own side is never done in front of other interests,
to be aware of outframing, back tracking, relevancy, framing questions

Competency:

demonstrate parts negotiation with any internal conflict in each member of the team,
demonstrate establishing a well formed outcome,
use the outcome, intention and consequence model to chunk up,
establish a bottom line and alternative to negotiated agreement,
demonstrate eliciting outcomes and complex equivalents from other parties to the negotiation,
demonstrate dovetailing outcomes between parties to the negotiation, establishing and maintaining rapport,
demonstrate finding an acceptable excuse to talk to own team in private,
demonstrate out framing, back tracking and preparing other side for questions

Business Meeting Procedure

Learning outcomes:

be able to set agenda with quick items first,
be able to set and circulate time frame, date, time, location and agenda to all participants in advance,
be able to welcome participants and start on time,
establish procedure for questioning relevance (agenda on whiteboard),
establish ground rules, courtesy and local cultural requirements,
establish intent to finish on time regardless and to set another date if necessary,
proceed from quickest items to slowest,
if meeting runs effectively, it can finish inside the time frame allowing a period for social interaction at the end,
use principles of Disney Creativity Strategy (not criticising people, discussing problems and outcomes and plans),
allocate action to specific people and get their agreement to function, performance and time frames

Competency:

demonstrate setting up a meeting,
demonstrate chairing a meeting,
demonstrate keeping parties relevant,
demonstrate using the meta model to keep matters specific

Ecology

awareness of the presuppositions of NLP,
understanding the ‘as if’ frame with reference to the presuppositions of NLP,
recognising that the subject has choice at all times,
recognising that the subject’s values are the yardstick,
recognising that violating your own values is not useful,
recognising that process, not content will serve you and the subject effectively,
recognising that ‘why’ questions only lead to justification,
recognising that ‘what for’ questions provide high quality information on intent,
recognising that the subject’s model of the world is your starting point,
recognising that some interventions will not work and this is OK,
recognising that the present state has elements that may be worth keeping,
considering the costs and consequences of making and having every intervention,
considering the intervention from a systemic viewpoint,
establishing strong resource anchor for the subject before intervening,
establishing and maintaining rapport first, last and all the way through,
recognising the wisdom of using; multiple perceptual positions, multiple logical levels, multiple time frames,
recognising the accuracy of a clear congruency signal,
recognising that an incongruent response denotes a lack of information in the system

Assessment

Prerequisites: participation in all training sessions

Learning outcomes:

to discover one knows more than one thought,
to integrate the program into participants’ own thinking,
to revise any areas where participants are uncertain,
to change participants’ experience of assessment,
to introduce code congruency in assessment (same participants, same place, same media, same material, same time frames, same access to trainers, coaches, manual, notes etc),
to experience a complete piece of change work using any NLP processes that fit,
to experience working with different people as subject and guide,
to deepen the awareness of the presuppositions of NLP,
to gain additional practical exposure to NLP,
to gain greater appreciation of the conscious / unconscious interface,
to begin to use own expression of the NLP patterns,
to become familiar with the process of gathering information in depth as the basis for change work,
to become familiar with the routine concept of ecological checks and future pacing

Competency:

demonstrate rapport in interactions as a prerequisite for all other activity,
demonstrate any NLP concepts, processes, training exercises and language patterns from this program,
discuss the structure of any NLP processes from this program and reasoning for choices,
demonstrate mixing and matching NLP processes to fit the client and situation,
discuss the presuppositions of NLP and one’s understanding of them,
give a five to ten minute presentation on a topic from this program with minimal preparation

Learn more

Check our 10970NAT Graduate Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming program.

(Note: If you would like to learn more about the New Code of NLP you can get a copy of our latest Kindle book ‘AEGIS: Patterns for extending your reach in life, work & leisure’ by Jules Collingwood, NLP Trainer. For only $4.99 here).

Learn more about NLP, read our Ultimate NLP Compendium of NLP

If you found this article useful, please share it!

A Proposed Distinction for Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP)

November 1, 2023/in NLP Articles /by Chris Collingwood

The development of any discipline, and especially one still organizing its initial patterning requires a certain attentiveness to precision in its fundamental vocabulary. Older disciplines have either clarified their fundamental terms (once or repetitively) and have established an apparent relatively stable platform on which further investigations and professional dialogue may be based.or they have fallen upon the sharp points that often protrude from their ill-defined terms, suffering debilitating and sometimes even fatal wounds that have precluded significant further development. Such ill-defined distinctions sway in the wind, impaled on these sticking points.

Some care must be given in making determinations with respect to a standardized vocabulary. In general, distinctions in experiences are awarded distinct descriptive terms while notional variants are assigned to equivalence classes. This is the normal business of a discipline during its formative stages: to achieve a richness of distinctions, a descriptive precision and simultaneously an economy of expression; in an ideal world, at any rate.

The distinction in question in this note is the term modeling as used in the field of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP). In particular, the distinction between modeling as practiced in the field of NLP and modeling as practiced more generally.

NLP Modeling, in the creation of the initial models that founded the field of NLP, at present and in the future of NLP, references an appreciation of and respect for two criteria that apply to modeling in NLP:

the suspension of any taxonomic and/or analytic attempt (all f2 transforms as described in Whispering in the Wind) to understand consciously the patterning of the genius or model of excellence during the assimilation stage of patterning and until the following criterion is met
the modeler must demonstrate the ability to reproduce the patterning of the model in parallel contexts and in such contexts, elicit roughly the same responses from client with roughly the same quality and time commitment as the original genius or model of excellence prior to beginning the challenging and rewarding activity of codification of the patterning demonstrated by the modeler

We further note that all modeling work products failing to meet these criteria are to be classified as some other logical type of model – we suggest Analytic Modeling as a general term for such work products; employing the patterning and the distinctions available in the technology of NLP applications but failing to respect the definition of NLP modeling.

It is also quite clear that there are applications (e.g. modeling a story teller) or contexts (e.g. the model is not available, deceased) in which the rather more extended and demanding commitment implied by NLP modeling may not be either applicable or the most efficacious or efficient strategy for explicating the patterning of a genius or extraordinary individual whose patterning is of interest. We intend this statement to be a recognition that there are other forms of modeling perfectly legitimate as strategies for learning which, nevertheless fail to meet the criteria that we are proposing defines NLP modeling.

The essential difference of consequence between the process of NLP modeling and Analytic modeling is the relative contributions of the model and modeler to the final work product. This difference resides principally in the degree of imposition of the perceptual and analytic categories of the modeler during the modeling process. In the case of NLP modeling, the imposition is minimal; in the case of Analytic modeling, the imposition is maximal. These two extremes define a continuum of possibilities and it may well be that other practitioners of other forms of modeling may wish to propose further distinctions. We would welcome such refinements but at present will content ourselves with the one proposed here.

The requirements that the development of all cognitive representations be systematically suspended during the unconscious assimilation phase and the requirement that the modeler demonstrate the ability to perform as does the origin model or genius prior to beginning any cognitive coding describes the source of these profound differences.

The intention behind this description is to ensure that this distinction – arguable the most revolutionary contribution of NLP – is preserved and that by the systematic use of this distinction, the public may appreciate the differences between the two logical classes of models and the distinctive processes of modeling thereby implied: NLP modeling and Analytic modeling. We invite well-intentioned practitioners of NLP to join us in preserving the distinction herein proposed or to offer commentary about how such an essential distinction can be preserved in the field of Neuro-Linguistic Programming..

We further invite members of the NLP community who are considering participating in courses presenting modeling to request clarification of the type of modeling being presented. Such activity will ensure that the distinction is maintained in the field and that participants in courses will be able to determine whether the type of modeling is what they wish to master.

Carmen Bostic St. Clair John Grinder

Bonny Doon, California October, 2005

Learn more

Check our 10970NAT Graduate Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming program.

Learn more about NLP, read our Ultimate NLP Compendium of NLP

If you found this article useful, please share it!

Introduction to: A Proposed Distinction for Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP)

October 22, 2023/in NLP Articles /by Chris Collingwood

Anyone who claims to know or care about NLP is aware that the process of modeling is the life blood of the field. The origin of NLP and its continued evolution come from the ability of NLP practitioners to model the verbal, cognitive and behavioral patterns (the “neuro-linguistic programs”) of exceptional people. It is frequently pointed out that the basis of NLP is modeling and not the “trail of techniques” that have been left in its wake.

For all of the acknowledgment and emphasis on modeling, however, there has not been a clear and shared perspective on exactly what NLP modeling is, nor an awareness that there are different varieties of modeling.

For some, modeling is essentially strategy elicitation. For others it simply means using NLP distinctions when describing some phenomenon. Others perceive modeling as the imitation of key behaviors.

The most powerful and generative models are those which capture something of the deep structure of the individual or individuals being observed. This is quite different than describing or imitating surface level behaviors. Reaching this deep structure has been one of the crowning achievements of NLP and requires a special methodology.

In the following article, John Grinder and Carmen Bostic St. Clair lay out a set of criteria for distinguishing between the unique form of modeling from which the initial techniques and distinctions of NLP were derived (“NLP modeling”) from other forms of modeling that apply NLP distinctions but use other means of information gathering and pattern fining.

The distinction presented in this article is a result of several ongoing discussions we have been having about the system of knowledge (or “epistemology”) of NLP. While different forms of modeling may be useful and even necessary in order address particular contexts or to reach particular outcomes, the distinction and criteria John and Carmen are proposing feel to me to be essential in order to more clearly establish and honor what is unique to NLP as a field as well as to respect its intellectual history.

I admit that my own modeling work frequently falls into the category that John and Carmen refer to as Analytic Modeling, and at other times applies a combination of Analytic and more pure NLP Modeling. I fully support John and Carmen in making this differentiation and believe it is vital that practitioners of NLP learn the unique form of NLP Modeling and understand its difference from Analytic Modeling.

As John and Carmen state, the distinction presented in this article are intended to be the beginning of a conversation for those committed to the field of NLP, an ongoing and hopefully fruitful conversation, to bring greater clarity, precision and understanding about the truly unique contributions of NLP.

As Gregory Bateson used to say, “Let it be heard.”

Robert Dilts

Learn more

Check our 10970NAT Graduate Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming program.

Learn more about NLP, read our Ultimate NLP Compendium of NLP

If you found this article useful, please share it!

An Introduction Time Lines in Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP)

October 13, 2023/in NLP Articles /by Chris Collingwood

Time line work is an essential component of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP). Originating from the pioneering efforts of Steve and Connirae Andreas, as well as John Grinder and Robert Dilts, time lines have evolved into powerful tools for introspection and personal growth. These NLP practitioners developed two main forms of time lines – internally represented and externally laid out.

Steve and Connirae Andreas initiated their approach through submodality distinctions, inviting individuals to visualize an internal line symbolising their life journey. Various colors and textures could be employed to represent different periods, and people could engage with these lines in multiple ways, such as floating above or looking out at them. Like other submodality exercises, time lines are most effective when they are vivid and easily navigable.

Concurrently, in 1987, John Grinder and Robert Dilts adopted a different methodology. They encouraged individuals to visualise a line on the ground, symbolising the person’s life from birth to the present and beyond. This external representation enabled people to physically engage with different periods, immerse themselves into specific experiences, or take a detached, meta perspective.

Contrary to some promotional efforts, time line work is not a separate entity but a versatile tool within NLP. A common misconception is the idea that revisiting a point on our time line prior to a traumatic event is enough for lasting change. This is far from the truth. While revisiting can serve as a good starting point, it’s crucial to also apply resources to the traumatic event itself, which allows us to modify our emotional response. This will be elaborated on in a future article titled “Reimprinting with Time Lines.”

What Exactly Is a Time Line?

A time line is a metaphorical framework that depicts how we perceive time, organize our memories, and plan for the future. This perception varies from person to person. Some may visualise the past as behind them, while others place it to one side. Time lines also differ in their levels of association or dissociation with our current experience.

Common features do exist across time lines. For example, they usually align with our eye accessing cues, and adjustments to this alignment can often bring about emotional relief. Additionally, we can adapt our time lines to suit various life contexts, whether it’s work, family, or personal interests. Understanding your unique representation of time can empower you to make more effective decisions, plan and live a more fulfilling life.

Learn more

Check our 10970NAT Graduate Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming program.

Learn more about NLP, read our Ultimate NLP Compendium of NLP

If you found this article useful, please share it!

NLP Associations and Credentials

September 30, 2023/in NLP Articles /by Jules Collingwood

In the world of NLP training, there is no regulation of standards, syllabus content, duration of training nor levels of competency. At the same time, there are plenty of groups of people purporting to be professional or other NLP associations representing the interests of their members and offering cut price insurance. This has become possible because John Grinder and Richard Bandler, in the best tradition of revolutionary activity, failed to identify and define the parameters for standards and training practice in NLP when they were in a position to do so. At that time, the Society of NLP could have become the “official” organ and developed in due course into a statutory body. How bourgeois then, but how much better for the field in the long run.

Instead, we have, for example, the ABNLP, BBNLP, INLPTA, NLPTRB, ANLP, AINLP, Society of NLP, Professional Guild of NLP and others from time to time, all of which are non-official, non-accredited bodies with the authority of a puff of hot air. These bodies endorse NLP trainers and the certification of so-called “Practitioners” and “Master Practitioners” and in some cases “Trainers” and “Master Trainers”.

American Pacific University, which is associated with an NLP training organisation and an NLP association, has no charter, no Act of Congress, and is not accredited as a university (see www.ossc.state.or.us/oda/unaccredited.html), nor is it recognised in the Academic world. This kind of organisation is known as a “Degree Mill” and is illegal in much of the developed world. As a counter example, NLP University, to its credit, does not claim to be a university and states in its literature that it does not offer educational qualifications.

Many NLP organisations claim “international recognition or accreditation”. The Australian government describes this kind of program as a “hobby course” and requires GST to be paid on their fees. Here are some definitions:

Accreditation, Endorsed and Internationally accredited

“Accreditation” means that a government has approved the program and training organization and has included them in its list of qualifications and approved institutions. Universities are accredited under Royal Charter or Act of Parliament or Congress. Registered training organisations in Australia are accredited nationally, through state training bodies, to offer nationally accredited training.

“Endorsed” means that a non-official, non-government organisation or person approves of a trainer and or their program. Endorsement may be worth more or less according to the expertise and standing of the endorsing entity and the subject of the endorsement. It has no official standing. “Internationally recognised” as used in NLP promotional literature, means that the proponent is trying to make a non-accredited program or organisation look accredited. What they mean is that some non-official person or body has endorsed it.

“Internationally accredited” means the same as “internationally recognised” and neither carries any authority.

You, reader, have the right to designate yourself a master practitioner right now, if you so choose, and no one can stop you. On the other hand, if anyone claims to have a degree when they do not, the full process of law is available to stop them. To have that privilege in NLP, we need worthwhile standards, accredited qualifications and a statutory body.

Twenty years ago, the associations were doing their best to keep NLP training in the hands of experts and to restrict membership to those who had completed 21 days of live training as practitioners and a total of 40 days to become master practitioners and been assessed as competent by association approved assessors. For a while, self-regulation seemed to work. Then the duration of practitioner training started to slip until the lowest was seven days with a distance learning component and scripted formats instead of patterns. The purveyors of short training programs marketed them aggressively, and from 1990 on, the seven day practitioners sought full membership of the associations, which needed members to stay in business. As these people acquired voting rights, the standards fell.

At Inspiritive, before we became a Registered Training Organisation (RTO) and chose the route of government accreditation, we had involvement with three associations. Each one was taken over subsequently by a majority of people who wanted lower standards. In the first case, it was to boost membership, in the second, it was to allow members to compete in the now debased market place and in the third case, it was ignorance of the distinction between patterns and content that prompted the change. One or more of these interests has reduced the capacity of any non-official body we have encountered, not just the above three, to promote accurate, comprehensive NLP that conforms to the descriptions in Grinder and Bostic’s “Whispering in the Wind“. Until there is one that does, we shall not be seeking their endorsement.

Instead, Inspiritive has become a Registered Training Organisation and has had a 450 hour Graduate Certificate in NLP accredited by the Australian government. We also have the honour to be endorsed by Dr. John Grinder, the co-originator of the field. Our course is all NLP, taught in a New Code framework to facilitate unconscious uptake of the patterns and natural, spontaneous behaviour with NLP thereafter. We distinguish between patterns and content, teach patterns and only identify content models that have been placed, erroneously in our opinions, in the field of NLP so that our students can learn to place learning materials in their proper context.

Learn more

Check our 10970NAT Graduate Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming program.

Learn more about NLP, read our Ultimate NLP Compendium of NLP

If you found this article useful, please share it!

The Myth in NLP of the Visual, Auditory and Kinaesthetic Person

September 3, 2023/in NLP Articles /by Jules Collingwood

Today, one of the hallmarks of a lack of appreciation of NLP is the notion that we “are” a representational system, as in “you are a visual, he is an auditory and I am a kinaesthetic”. A variation is “you are an auditory to visual to kinaesthetic and he is a visual to kinaesthetic to auditory” but this is just as benighted, only the box is bigger and if the very idea confuses you, that is how its user gets people to believe it. People do not have single, fixed sequences of thinking, however much they try to box ideas. How facile to attempt to identify a person on a single or small sample of expression, but this class of identification does make an excellent criterion to include in seeking a possible source of NLP training or practice.

Representational System Model

Representational systems is the name of a model of the way we code and order our thinking, memory and imagination. The model proposes that people think in combinations and sequences of images, sounds and sensations, tastes and scents. These internal representations match our external senses and when elicited in an associated form, like the sensory experience of being there, use the same neurological circuits as sensory experience. We distinguish linguistically between live sensory experience and internal representation by referring to sensory or representational vision, sound, feeling etc.

Everyone can use all internal representational systems simultaneously when attending internally, just as we can attend externally with all our senses, but often, only one system is in conscious awareness at any given moment. The supporting observations for this rely on personal reporting, choice of sensory specific words, known as “predicates” and the external evidence of eye accessing cues.

Eye Accessing Model

The eye accessing model proposes that people use location to gain access to the content of memory and imagination (this includes patterns). Material in different representations is accessed from particular locations by a flick of the eyes in the appropriate direction. The majority of people access visual representations by flicking their eyes above the eye line. Auditory or sound representations are sourced horizontally and feeling, both sensation and proprioception are found below eye level.

The distinction between accessing memory or constructed ideas is less clear cut. While there is a majority that keeps memory to the left of the body and imagination to the right, there is a sizable minority that does the reverse. Contrary to speculation in some NLP literature, the idea of a “normally organised right handed person” is not reliable. Ideally, to use eye accessing to assist someone retrieve information, we need to know exactly where each class of information resides for that person. We do this by asking questions to elicit deliberate accessing in each representational system and with reference to the past or the future. Questioning for future accessing needs to seek completely fresh ideas to ensure they have not been transferred to memory.

When information is accessed, it can be reviewed with the eyes on its location or it can be brought into our visual and/or auditory field and/or felt, smelled, tasted in the body. We can detect sequences of representation in someone else’s thinking through the sensory predicates they use and the directions of their eye movements.

Using Representational Systems

There is a choice, usually exercised unconsciously, of being aware of one or more representations simultaneously. When a memory or proposed situation is activated, we can become totally engrossed in it as if we were present in real time. Then we can experience all representational systems at once. If we represent the information as if from a distance, we might only see it or hear it, but in both these possibilities, use of more than one representational system is simultaneous.

Synaesthesia is another option. This occurs when we experience a representation, usually in a different system, in response to a sensory input or representation. Examples include, see favourite pet – feel warm glow; hear scratch on blackboard – feel teeth stand to attention; hear piece of music – see selection of colours. Synaesthesia is also the structure of phobias; see or hear phobic stimulus – experience disproportionately nasty feeling. The eye accessing evidence can be a fast flick of the eyes from one system to another, but this is seen with rapid multi-representational thought as well. If the eyes are defocused and facing front, this usually indicates a synaesthesia is happening. Synaesthesia can include more than two representational systems, though most reporting refers to two.

Outside NLP, most people are unaware of the way they use their internal representations or even that they have them. Synaesthesia is commonly defined as a condition a few people exhibit, not a choice. Some people are convinced they do not visualise and cannot learn to do it. In NLP, it is presupposed that we can learn to track our current uses of internal representations and learn to use the parts we have not known before. We can separate unwanted synaesthesias, create new and desirable ones, expand our repertoire of thinking by including habitually ignored representations and facilitate our capacity to learn with deliberate mental photographs and sound recordings. We can change the meaning we attribute to any content we think about by altering the size, volume, bandwidth, clarity, shape, brightness, temperature, distance, speed etc: of our representations of it. This uses a related model called Submodalities, which considers the packaging in which an image, sound or sensation is presented to us.

The myth of the visual, auditory or kinaesthetic person

When Grinder and Bandler first became aware of representational systems and eye accessing cues, it was through observation and listening. Grinder describes in “Whispering in the Wind”, hearing a conversation between two people in a petrol service station and becoming aware that they were using sensory specific words to each other, but from different senses. This did not produce smooth communication and it drew Grinder’s attention.

Grinder and Bandler conducted experiments with training groups, creating sub-groups based on sensory specific language. When they put strangers together according to the representational system used in their greeting, conversations were freer and more spontaneous in the group than when people were placed with others who greeted in different sensory predicates.

Initially, the idea of a preferred representational system was postulated, not to identify or label people, but as the basis for further research, which has been taking place ever since, with excellent results. But, the tendency of most people to take a single example of something, or an open proposal and over generalise from it occurred and the NLP community of the day welcomed the idea with open arms. Regardless of further observation and more discovery in the last 35 years, including evidence that we shift between representations when thinking and use all of them in different sequences or strategies, the original postulate has become an icon.

Learn more

Check our 10970NAT Graduate Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming program.

Learn more about NLP, read our Ultimate NLP Compendium of NLP

If you found this article useful, please share it!

What is NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming)?

October 31, 2022/in NLP Articles /by Jules Collingwood

NLP explores the relationship between how we think (neuro), how we communicate both verbally and non-verbally (linguistic) and our patterns of behaviour and emotion (programmes) (Collingwood & Collingwood; 2001).

It is both an epistemology, in that it studies how we know what we know and a methodology for creating practical descriptions of how we function as human beings. The purpose of NLP is to study, describe and transfer models of human excellence. (Modelling).

There are a number of other descriptions of what is NLP. The founders of NLP Dr. John Grinder and Richard Bandler defined NLP as “the study of the structure of subjective experience” (Dilts et al; 1980). Judith DeLozier and John Grinder (1987) define NLP as “an accelerated learning strategy for the detection and utilisation of patterns in the world“. We think of NLP as a field that explores “the patterns of organisation of effective human intuition” (Collingwood & Collingwood; 2001). Through modelling an expert’s intuitive application of their skill, we can as Neuro-Linguistic Programmers, have those patterns of organisation for ourselves and / or make them available to others. Modelling is the core function of NLP, learning to model (self and others) the core activity of well designed NLP practitioner and NLP master practitioner certification trainings. It is certainly at the core of our postgraduate qualification in NLP – 10970NAT Graduate Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming.

The most precise definition is made by John Grinder and is found on the back cover page of our book The NLP Field Guide part 1 (2001). Grinder states “NLP is a meta-discipline which focuses on the discovery and coding of patterns which distinguish the most capable of the practitioners of some particular discipline (managerial practice, medical practice, sports, therapy…) from the average practitioner. These distinguishing patterns are the substance of NLP”.

For practical purposes, learning NLP thoroughly will give you an edge when it comes to self management, creative and abstract thinking, communicating with other people in multiple contexts and increasing your skill levels at work and in private life. Specifically, you will sharpen your observation and listening ability and identify patterns in people’s behaviour and language so you can respond to the subtext of their communication. You will learn to communicate more effectively, create descriptions others can understand quickly and ask apposite and penetrating questions that lead their thinking in useful directions. Cut through distractions or make conversation that is well received. Your own thinking will benefit from these skills as you learn to identify the direction you want to take in action and interaction. These benefits only happen to their full extent with live training and class room practice of the full syllabus. If you settle for a short “practitioner” course, the chances are you will be given a sheaf of scripts which limit your ability to use the material creatively and naturally in real life.

References:

Collingwood, Jules., Collingwood, Chris. (2001) The NLP Field Guide; Part 1. A reference manual of Practitioner level patterns. Sydney, Australia: Emergent Publications.

Collingwood, Jules. (2016) Aegis; Patterns for extending your reach in life, work and leisure. Sydney, Australia: Emergent Publications.

DeLozier, Judith., Grinder, John. (1987) Turtles all the Way Down; Prerequisites to Personal Genius. Bonny Doon CA: Grinder, DeLozier and Associates.

Dilts, Robert., Grinder, John., Bandler, Richard., Cameron-Bandler, Leslie., DeLozier, Judith. (1980) Neuro-Linguistic Programming Volume 1; The study of the structure of subjective experience. Cupertino, CA: Meta Publications

Learn more about NLP, read our Ultimate NLP Compendium of NLP

By Jules Collingwood, NLP Trainer at INSPIRITIVE

If you found this piece useful share it with your network!

The origins of NLP

February 8, 2016/in NLP Articles /by Chris Collingwood

The origins of NLP

The originators of NLP are Dr John Grinder, Richard Bandler and Frank Pucelik. NLP began with the modelling of a genius: Fritz Perls, the father of Gestalt therapy. When they began the project that led to the birth of NLP, Grinder was an assistant professor of linguistics at the University of California, Santa Cruz, and Bandler was an undergraduate psychology student. In the beginning, Bandler approached Grinder with a request to assist him in building an explicit model of the intuitive skills he had in doing Gestalt therapy. Bandler’s ability with Gestalt therapy was unconscious. He could get results with Gestalt but did not have an explicit model of how he did it. Therefore he could not pass on the skills of using Gestalt to others, with any guarantee of the quality of the skill transfer. Bandler had modelled Perls implicitly; that is, he acquired the ability to do Gestalt through an unconscious uptake of Perls’ patterns. Bandler had acquired his considerable skills in doing Gestalt while working for a publishing company. He reviewed hours of audio recordings of Fritz Perls working his psychotherapy magic with clients, to select appropriate material for transcribing for the last of Perls’ books.

The originators of NLP are Dr John Grinder, Richard Bandler and Frank Pucelik.”

Grinder’s background made him ideal for the task of modelling Bandler. Once he was unconsciously competent in Gestalt, he was able to achieve a similar result for clients with the same types of presenting problems in the same time frame as Bandler. He could then build an explicit model. As well as being fluent in a number of languages, Grinder’s academic specialty was an aspect of linguistics developed by Noam Chomsky called Transformational Grammar.

Grinder was successful. He was able get similar results to Bandler, and then he made explicit a number of language patterns of particular responses to particular forms in the speech of clients. These patterns were being used systematically and unconsciously by Bandler. Grinder, having modelled them, recognised these patterns as belonging to a particular class of language patterns in linguistics, and was able to extend the collection of patterns to include others from the same class. Bandler and Grinder then tested the patterns and formulated what became the first model of NLP: the Meta Model of Language.

“Bandler and Grinder then tested the patterns and formulated what became the first model of NLP: the Meta Model.”

The Meta Model, Representational Systems and the Milton Model

The Meta Model provides a method for obtaining high quality information from clients through responding to the form of the client’s language. The Meta Model has proven invaluable in other contexts too. These include such areas as business consulting, management and any other context where obtaining high quality information in human communication is critical. Bandler and Grinder then conducted other modelling projects and produced new models, including the representational system model, the eye accessing cue model, and the Milton model.

Briefly, the representational system model, another model of human communication, states that, as human beings, we represent our experience in the world with visual images, auditory representations and sensations (or kinaesthetic representations). In other words, we think in images, sounds and sensations, and these representations are often expressed in the choice of adjectives and verbs that we use. A person might say, ‘… my future looks unclear to me.’ This statement presupposes that the person has a visual representation of their future that lacks clarity. One way to work with this person would be to evoke resources in the visual system that may lead to clarity, e.g. ‘What resources would you need to develop possible futures clearly?’ A comment may have a predominance of auditory predicates: ‘I have a matter that I need to talk about.’ One possible response may be, ‘Tell me what you want to say.’ A person may use kinaesthetic predicates in a sentence: ‘I feel a need to shape the situation in a better way.’ A possible response could be, ‘Can you get in touch with what it would be like if you had the situation feeling just right?’

It is our representations of the world that provide our ‘maps’ for how we live our lives. With a working knowledge of representational systems and the processes of how people use their representations, we can assist others (and ourselves) in creating change. The specific sequences of representations or thought processes can be the difference between success and failure in some particular context of endeavour. It is useful to engage the unconscious mind in changing a pattern of thinking, or finding and developing a state of resourcefulness with useful patterns of representations.

“It is our representations of the world that provide our ‘maps’ for how we live our lives.”

The Milton model is a linguistic model of the language patterns used by the legendary psychiatrist, Milton H. Erickson MD, to do therapeutic hypnosis. Even though the Milton model comes from, and has application to, the world of therapy, many of the linguistic patterns of this model can be found in everyday communication. The advantage of the Milton model of NLP is that it provides a method for communicating with the unconscious mind.

Learn more about NLP, read our Ultimate NLP Compendium of NLP

By Chris Collingwood, NLP Trainer at INSPIRITIVE

If you found this piece useful share it with your network!

The Who’s who of NLP

August 28, 2014/0 Comments/in NLP Articles /by [email protected]

John Grinder

Dr. John Grinder is the co-creator of Neuro-linguistic Programming. He was an assistant professor of linguistics at the University of California, Santa Cruz when Bandler first approached him for assistance in modelling the skills of Fritz Perls. Since co-creating the original models of NLP (the Meta model, representational systems, eye accessing cues and the Milton model) John has continued to model new patterns. First he co-created the NLP new code with Judith DeLozier. Then, more recently he has created NLP models and applications for cultural and organisational change in corporations with his partner Carmen Bostic St Clair. John and Carmen’s latest book ‘Whispering in the Wind‘ is a seminal work. It defines the scope of the field of NLP and specifies the necessary and sufficient conditions for effective NLP modelling. At the same time it identifies the intellectual antecedents of NLP and places the field in its historical context.

Richard Bandler

Richard Bandler is the other co-creator of NLP. Having co-created the original models of NLP with Grinder, Bandler produced a series of applications of NLP based on an elaboration of the sub modalities model. In recent years Richard has developed his new NLP model, Design Human Engineering.

Frank Pucelik

Frank Pucelik was the third person involved in the beginning of NLP. He worked with Richard Bandler in the first attempt to model the patterns used by Fritz Perls to achieve reliable success with Gestalt therapy. He remained in the original research group as a participating member when Bandler and Grinder teamed up. Frank is best known for co-writing ‘Magic Demystified’ with Byron Lewis. “Magic” remains an excellent introduction to NLP.

Contributing Developers to NLP

Leslie Cameron-Bandler

Leslie Cameron-Bandler was in the original Bandler and Grinder research group in Santa Cruz. Leslie is best known as the developer of Meta Programs, a content model in NLP. According to Leslie Cameron-Bandler,

“….for ten years I’d been looking for what’s the patterns that tell me about the person and for a long time I thought it was Meta Programmes and then it turned out not to be cause[sic.] they change by context too, so always I’d been looking for what’s the essence, what’s the core, because that’s what I want to be able to touch…”
From tape 6 side A of ‘Empowerment: The power that produces success’.

She also developed an NLP model for exploring patterns of organisation of emotions (with Michael Lebeau) and a system for modelling personality called the Imperative Self. Her model of the structure of emotions is published in the book ‘The Emotional Hostage’. She co-developed a description of modelling called ‘The Emprint Method’ with Michael LeBeau and David Gordon which is published in a book of the same name. Leslie’s model of the structure of emotions is an excellent application of NLP for creating emotional choice.

Judith DeLozier

Judith DeLozier was also in the original NLP research group. She co-developed the new code of NLP with John Grinder and together they wrote ‘Turtles All the Way Down; Prerequisites to personal genius’. Currently she works with Robert Dilts at Dynamic Learning Center in Santa Cruz, California. DeLozier and Grinder’s new code of NLP is one of the most significant contributions to establishing the field of NLP.

Stephen Gilligan

Dr. Stephen Gilligan was a member of the original research group with Dr. John Grinder and Richard Bandler when they were developing NLP at U.C.S.C. Santa Cruz. He was introduced to Dr. Milton H. Erickson at that time and has the distinction of being the only person to be invited to train with Erickson while still an undergraduate.

Over the next five years he spent a substantial amount of time with Erickson and has become a world leader in Erickson’s therapeutic methods. Today, Gilligan has a Ph.D. in psychology and is an influential member of the Erickson Foundation, an organisation of health professionals dedicated to the furtherance of Erickson’s work.

He also teaches Ericksonian hypnosis around the world, sponsored by members of the Ericksonian Foundation and some NLP training institutes. Gilligan is the author of ‘Therapeutic Trances; the Co-operation Principle in Ericksonian Psychotherapy’, ‘Therapeutic Conversations’, ‘The Courage to Love; Principles and Practices of Self-Relations Psychotherapy’. He edited ‘Brief Therapy; Myths, Methods and Metaphors’ with Dr. Jeffrey K. Zeig and co-presented two volumes of ‘The Syntax of Behavior’ tape series with Dr. John Grinder.

David Gordon

David Gordon was another member of the original NLP research group. His most notable area of contribution to NLP is the use of metaphors to effect change. He wrote ‘Therapeutic Metaphors’, co-wrote ‘Phoenix’ with Meribeth Meyers-Anderson and later co-wrote ‘Know How‘ and ‘The Emprint Method’ with Leslie Cameron-Bandler and Michael LeBeau. In recent years he has developed a model for modelling called the Experiential Array.

Robert Dilts

Robert has been involved with NLP since meeting John Grinder while a student at the University of California, Santa Cruz. He co-authored ‘Neuro-Linguistic Programming Volume 1’ along with John Grinder, Richard Bandler, Judith DeLozier and Leslie Cameron-Bandler in 1981. Since then he has written numerous books on NLP and its applications to health, creativity, education, leadership, business and NLP modelling. He is well known in the NLP community for his Re-Imprinting technique as well as other NLP formats and models. Over the last 20 years Robert has evolved a description of NLP which he calls Systemic NLP. Currently he works with Judith DeLozier and Teresa Epstein at NLP University in Santa Cruz.

Steve and Connirae Andreas

With over 20 years of experience in the discipline of NLP, Steve and his wife Connirae founded NLP Comprehensive, one of the first major NLP training institutes in the USA.

Steve Andreas was previously known as John O. Stevens when he was a significant figure in the Gestalt therapy and personal development movement. His publishing company, Real People Press published ‘Gestalt Therapy Verbatim’ by the creator of Gestalt Therapy, Fritz Perls and Perls’ autobiography, ‘In and Out the Garbage Pail’. Steve himself wrote ‘Awareness: Exploring, Experiencing and Experimenting’, a book of group exercise based on Gestalt Therapy.

Steve and Connirae edited and published many classic NLP books written by the originators, Richard Bandler and John Grinder. These include: ‘Frogs into Princes’, ‘Trance-formations’, ‘Reframing’ and ‘Using your Brain for a Change‘. Later they wrote many other books on NLP including ‘Virginia Satir, The patterns of her Magic’, ‘Core Transformation’, ‘Heart of the Mind’ and ‘Change your Mind and keep the Change’.

Steve and Connirae have developed a number of NLP processes based on their extensive work with sub modalities. These include the grief and forgiveness patterns and the original modelling and development of mental timelines in NLP.

Christina Hall

Chris is a well-known and respected international trainer and major contributor to the development of NLP. She began her NLP training with the Co-developers close to 25 years ago during the pioneering days (1977), and became a Certified NLP Trainer in 1980. Having spent five years (1981-1986) in apprenticeship training with NLP co-creator Richard Bandler. She has incorporated into her teachings and applications a unique and singular insider’s perspective.

Chris collaborated in producing some of the most outstanding developments of that time, including sub-modalities, the swish pattern, the compulsion blowout, temporal language patterns and verbal swishes, and many of the Sleight of Mouth Patterns. Focusing on a systems and holistic orientation, she has become best known for her work with the structure of time and her mastery and innovations in the area of language patterning an approach which she refers to as Neuro-Systemic linguistics’.

Learn more about NLP, read our Ultimate NLP Compendium of NLP

If you found this article useful hit the share button!

An interview with John Grinder and Carmen Bostic St Clair 1997

August 28, 2014/0 Comments/in interviews /by [email protected]

This is a second interview with Dr John Grinder (co-originator of Neuro-Linguistic Programming and co-developer of New Code NLP) and Carmen Bostic St Clair by Chris and Jules Collingwood of Inspiritive.

1. John what is your definition of “Personal Evolution”?

JG:

In the world of biology, evolution is a predicate which typically refers to the logical level of taxonomy – the biological unit – referred to as species. For, while it is individual organisms – the fundamental unit of survival – which exhibit individual differences which are associated with differential individual reproduction rates, we say that it is the species which evolves. These differential reproductive rates associated with the individual genetic differences followed over time form an image of what we usually see as evolution.

The term Personal Evolution, then, is intended as a challenge to this image. It is sometimes proposed that Darwin’s system proven appropriate and useful even illuminating for biological, genetically driven change while Lamarck’s proposal serves well for cultural change. Personal evolution is the art of living impeccably, pursuing change as a way of life – learning as its focus. The focus then is what are the patterns at the individual level which promote change – especially a sensitivity to redundancy at the personal level and its defeat. Imagine the game of chess with the ability of the pawns to learn from their experiences and thereby move beyond the rules of movement which presently bind them.

CB:

Personal evolution to be effective for the individual and the context within which the individual moves must give equal emphasis to co-operation as a principle of the same rank as competition in transmitting Darwin’s theory of the survival of the fittest, thereby achieving a balance between personal power and the larger ecological issues of the larger system. Constancy occurs in such systems only at the higher logical levels where one finds constancy in learning and the ability to wonder.

2. How did you come to choose Personal Evolution as an area of exploration? and what is its relationship to NLP as a field of endeavour?

JG:

What other game is there in town? The heart of the endeavour of living impeccably is sensitivity to patterning and a commitment to continuously shift the stability points around – to preserve the distinction between the hunter and the hunted.

The field of NLP was from its first moment for me in the way in which I perceived it originally the study and capturing of excellence in its many splendoured forms. Excellence can be interpreted as living at the extremes. Like surprises, exceptional experiences are the substance of such living.

CB:

Learning to identify the edges of all aspects of our lives – recognizing them and having the choice to travel to the edge as well as comfortably find the middle when the context suggests it is appropriate.

3. What is the context you perceive for creating the Personal Evolution seminar?

JG:

I will offer three responses to this question and leave it to you to select the one most useful for your purposes. They are:

Schizophrenia
I have no idea what you are talking about
The twinkle in Gregory Bateson’s eye.

CB:

A group of individuals who have the flexibility to dance with a cyclone as well as a gentle breeze.

4. The fact that you will be teaching a seminar called “Personal Evolution” suggests that:

a) we as individuals can evolve,

b) that this is in some way desirable,

c) that there are patterns involved.

Could you please elucidate?

JG:

Yes, to all three. When Europeans first began to explore the great Amazon basin, it wasn’t because the Amazon was in some sense better. Rather it was different. Or as Marcel Proust says the purpose of exploration is not to see new lands but to see those lands with new eyes. The practice of impeccable personal change as a way of life implies a personal discipline to ferret out the repetitive portions of our own behaviour and through the ecological patterns such as holding intention constant and varying behaviour or wanton capricious variation to move the assemblage point – the focusing of our attention on other aspects of the world around us. Thus it is not that any particular change we make in this practice is better than what we had previously but that the change itself at the higher logical level is desirable to avoid complacency or the falling into a routine which robs us of our appreciation of the unknown which surrounds us.

Of course, there are patterns involved – this is precisely the point. Such patterns are the web of redundancy through which we must pass. The mastery of personal patterning is the prerequisite to escaping its tyranny.

CB:

Different is not necessarily better but better is always different. The evolution of the person provides that person with choice not before available.

5. You draw on ideas from Gregory Bateson in your seminar Personal Evolution. How are Bateson’s ideas relevant to someone who wants to evolve themselves personally and professionally?

Bateson has made the opening move in a game which will continue as long as there are representatives of the species. Through his insistence that the laws which govern the short term and local interactions of biological systems are fundamentally different than the laws which govern non-organic physical systems, through his exploration and application of logical levels to the patterning of communication and learning and through his precise pointing at many of the phenomena which must be incorporated into a theory of mind, he lights some of the paths which we must travel to leave the valley of the blind.

6. I understand that Bateson was a mentor of yours. Would you like to talk about your experience of Bateson and his impact on your life and work?

JG:

I shall never succeed in appreciating the deep and inspiring ways in which he influenced me and my work in NLP. These experiences range from the time he borrowed a pair of socks from me on the occasion of finding himself without socks on his way to a University of California Regents’ meeting (he was a Jerry Brown appointee) – thereby teaching me the pitfalls of being a narrow band genius as opposed to a broad band genius – one who is a genius in all those areas of experience which impinge on his or her well-being. He demonstrated an utter lack of competency and willingness to learn group theory on the occasion of a disagreement we had over his use of the word formal, thereby pushing me to make a commitment to seek out my own monumental areas of incompetence and ignorance to face them squarely. But mostly, he continued to astonish me with the clear and swift shifts in perception in his ability to focus on the synthesis of ideas in very large systems driven by years of detailed and focused study of any number of fields ranging from classic evolutionary theory in biology through anthropology and animal studies to the balanced relationships in the plant communities in the redwood forests which surrounded us at the time of our connections. Perhaps most importantly, he paid me the ultimate compliment of presenting along with any number of awesome puzzles to which he had worked out answers, the puzzles to which he had no answers.

7. What is your definition of a pattern?

JG:

Imagine a description of some sequence of events, whether internal to you (intake of glucose with a subsequent shift in heart rate) or external to you (the shift in the type and frequency of the marine wildlife associated with the change in the temperature of the water in the ocean off Santa Cruz as a consequence of the seasonal up welling from the deep submarine canyon off Moss Landing in the center of Monterey Bay and connected with the Davis current) to all the astonishing mixtures of internal and external events.

Consider this description as a series of snapshots over time. Now, if you can place a slash mark “/” anywhere in that sequence of events such that you are able with better than random chance to predict what is on one side of the slash based solely on what is on the other side of the slash mark, you have a pattern. In this technical sense, pattern and redundancy are names for the same thing.

If I provide you with the sequence of consonants str… and tell you that they are part of a well formed word in English and then ask you what kind of creature will follow, you will after a moment’s reflection correctly tell me that the creature is a vowel.

I have done professional patterning in linguistics, mathematics and NLP. Each discipline has its own requirements for presentation and proof. In this latter field, I would propose that the author of a pattern has the responsibility to be explicit about certain aspects or is, in fact, doing something other than professional patterning. In NLP, I would propose that the author of a pattern must descriptively specify:

The internal structure of the pattern – what are the elements which define the pattern and in which specific order do they occur.
The consequences which will occur if the pattern is employed in a disciplined and congruent manner.
a set of contextual markers which indicate under which conditions its use is appropriate.
Please note I said descriptively specify – by this I am placing a gate through which would be patterns must pass – for example, more years ago than I care to count, on the occasion of spoofing patterns and to amuse myself and Richard, I created a set of pseudo-patterns now known as Meta Patterns. These are, in fact, not patterns at all but non-descriptive chunks of content which apparently people are unable to distinguish from actual patterns or forms. This exercise backfired on me in that people reverently go on teaching these strange things passing them off to the next generation as patterns when in fact I designed them to distinguish between actual patterns and content. Ask someone who fails to make this distinction what the difference is descriptively between moving in time and through time. Or to describe the difference between moving away from pain and towards pleasure in the case of a masochist or sadist. The third criterion – the specification of appropriate context is easily the most difficult requirement for patterning and the one which typically receives the least amount of attention – this was true in the original work classic NLP patterning as well as in more recent endeavours.

CB:

Patterns are a series of arcs. These arcs when linked in a series over time and in certain contexts create loops. Loops when linked in a series over time and in certain contexts become predictable segments of behavior.

8. How is enhancing one’s ability to detect patterns useful to an individual?

JG:

If you are unaware that you are in a box which you call your life, how will you ever liberate yourself?

CB:

Hamsters in a cage run in circles within a squeaky wheel.

9. How do you know when to look for a pattern?

JG:

Only before breakfast on odd days of the months which begin with the letter J. The art of living impeccably is in part the art of continuously extending your competency to detect patterns. The ones you don’t detect are the ones that will get you. Sensitize yourself to surprise, differences between what you are unconsciously anticipating and what happens and all auto pilot sequences. Seek the unpredictable. Is it possible to tickle yourself?

CB:

It is only important to ‘know’ when you haven’t been looking.

10. How do you know what to look for when seeking patterns?

JG:

You never do if you are actually in pursuit of a serious pattern. That’s what makes it an art form rather than a science, the pursuit of heuristics rather than algorithms.

Take any significant, let’s say, physical endeavour – any sport or dance form… How can you determine by observing a group of people engaging in this form who are ones who are experienced and adept and who are amateurs who have little experience. The rock climber who is hanging out over a 1500 foot exposure but who shows only tension in the fingers of the hand which is locked into a crack and nowhere else in her or his body is a pro. The accomplished and experienced sports person is the one who does less – the one who uses less effort and who is clearly ignoring large portions of the situation in which they are performing and focusing on only those portions of the situation they need access to perform.

The art of patterning is the art of ignoring most of what is happening and attending to only those few leverage points which allow the manipulation of the situation. In this sense, patterning is an exercise in the fixing of attention.

11. How do you know where to look for a pattern?

JG:

Since this is a continuation of the last questions I will continue with the answer …only before breakfast on odd days of the months which begin with the letter J and under rocks of a size larger than the ambition you have to become a patterner.

12. What are 2/3/4/n point patterns?

JG:

The numerals indicated simply refer to the number of points of attention described by the patterner in presenting the pattern. A 2 point pattern is one in which there are two events described, one on each side of the slash mark, a 3 point pattern is one in which there are three events described and distributed on different sides of the slash marks. Please note that the number of attention points will vary for the same pattern depending on the rigor of the description by the patterner. In other words, the chunking – how many points you fix in the pattern – is relatively arbitrary.

13. When dealing with nested patterns at different logical levels, how do you find out;

a. How many there are

b. Which ones are relevant

c. Which is the controlling pattern

d. If there is a controlling pattern

JG:

Well now, there’s one hell of a question! Let’s unpack it a bit. First of all you are going to want to distinguish between properly nested and improperly nested dependencies – the difference between

The house owned by the man who drove a car built by a woman who said that her son was hired by Alan Ginsberg to carry the suitcase which contained the manuscript that…

The horse the cow the dog the cat chased bit saw ran away

Both of these are technically grammatically well formed fragments of American English – the first one is an improperly nested dependency as well as being intelligible and the second one is a properly nested dependency which while technically well formed exceeds all short term memory processing abilities. I offer a build up to it more gently in the sequence below:

The horse ran away
The horse that the cow saw ran away
The horse that the cow that the dog bit saw ran away

and finally

The horse that the cow that the dog that the cat chased bit saw ran away

or deleting the relative clause markers (normally an option) we have

The horse the cow the dog the cat chased bit saw ran away

The terms properly nested and improperly nested, while a classification based entirely on the structure of the phrase has powerful consequences for processing.

I have already commented on the question of how many there are – how many depends on how you decide to count and in particular, what descriptive vocabulary you allow yourself. Every technical field is a demonstration that with finer and finer distinctions we invent a denser and denser vocabulary to create the shorthand we need to overcome some of the limitations of short term memory and facilitate our thinking and communication. The code system in a well organized Emergency Room (Casualty Department) or the pixel or superconductor are dense signals unique to a specific context and fully grounded in the sense defined in Precision. Clearly such terms embody a number of components which under normal circumstances we would distinguish as separate elements but which are rolled up into a single term by definition. Similarly with patterning, the development of an explicit well defined vocabulary will change the count.

I confess that I am at a loss as to what a controlling pattern would be in such a system.

14. What are the necessary and sufficient conditions which must be present to enable people to develop the ability to recognise previously unexperienced and unnoticed patterns?

JG:

OK, what are they?

CB:

The study of your successes and failures.

15. How does a working ability to detect patterns in our environment facilitate learning?

JG:

It doesn’t facilitate learning – it is learning.

CB:

I learned French in the university. I learned Spanish in the streets of Mexico. I speak Spanish a hell of a lot better at present than I speak French.

16. Is it necessary for pattern detection and utilisation skills to be available consciously, or is it sufficient to have these skills well developed at an unconscious level

JG:

The goal of all learning is to master the skill sets to the point that they become unconscious competencies. This clearing of conscious by pushing competencies down into the unconscious has a cost however and specifically in the art of pattern detection, one of the most useful tools is the ability to perceive context and its contents from multiple perceptual positions, including a conscious one as well.

17. What qualities and attributes would you recommend be present in a state that is designed specifically for detecting ‘new’ patterns?

JG:

Please review questions and answers 1 through 16.

CB:

Breathing is good.

18. What contextual markers would you use to attract the interest and application of people in a content oriented society to learning to detect and use patterns in their lives?

JG:

As always the most powerful contextual marker to attract the interest (if that is in fact what you want to do) of content oriented people is your personal competency. People are attracted to people who are remarkable. So be remarkable!

CB:

Go to university, read books and explore. Or explore, read books and go to university. Or…

19. How do you ensure that people in a content oriented society learn to make and keep the distinction between patterns, illustrative content examples of patterns and content?

JG:

Personally, I don’t. I just keep on discovering patterns and presenting some small portion of them to the interested world. I wish the rest of the world a good day.

CB:

A horse can be shown the location of water; the drinking has to be the horse’s choice.

20. When you detect a pattern at a given logical level, can you assume there will be a related pattern at a higher logical level?

JG:

No, please assume nothing and check everything of importance. Like the 2 cent ‘O’ ring at the connection between the air hose and the pressurized SCUBA tank, it’s a little thing and critical to your health and well being.

More sympathetically, the present of a pattern at one logical level is an invitation to search for an associated pattern at the logical levels above and below but no guarantee. The presence of a track of a large cat on the ground just outside of the window in front of me as I write this sentence here in Bonny Doon does not guarantee that the cat is still in the neighbourhood – he may have already faded into the mists surrounding us.

CB:

If you are successful today, can you ‘assume’? that you will be successful in 10 years?

Interested in comprehensive training in NLP find out about our postgraduate qualification – 10970NAT Graduate Certificate in Neuro-Linguistic Programming.

If you found this article useful hit the share button!

Learn more about NLP, read our Ultimate NLP Compendium of NLP

Posts

Recommended Syllabus for Practitioner of Neuro-Linguistic Programming courses

Outcomes and Competencies at the NLP Practitioner level

Rapport

Perceptual Positions

NLP Representational Systems

Sensory specific language – verbal predicates

Eye-accessing cues

Circle of excellence

Sensory acuity and calibration

Anchoring

Well-formed outcome

The meta model of language – overview

Six step reframe

Negotiation between two parts in conflict

Negotiation between more than two parts in conflict

Content reframing

Stalking to Excellence

Submodalities

Attention training

Fast Phobia Process

Personal Editing

The Milton Model

Transderivational search and Change Personal History

Reimprinting

Timeline elicitation and use

New Behaviour Generator with Timeline

Swish Patterns – Standard and Distance

Swish Patterns – Designer

Swish Patterns – Visual Kinaesthetic

Logical Levels and Chunking

Grinder and DeLozier’s Genius State

Strategies

Metaphor

Dilts’ Disney Creativity Strategy

Separating Unwanted Synaesthesias

The NLP Negotiation Model

Business Meeting Procedure

Ecology

Assessment

Learn more

Learn more

Learn more

Learn more

Learn more

Representational System Model

Eye Accessing Model

Using Representational Systems

The myth of the visual, auditory or kinaesthetic person

Learn more

References:

Related articles

The origins of NLP

The Meta Model, Representational Systems and the Milton Model

Related articles

John Grinder

Richard Bandler

Frank Pucelik

Contributing Developers to NLP

Leslie Cameron-Bandler

Judith DeLozier

Stephen Gilligan

David Gordon

Robert Dilts

Steve and Connirae Andreas

Christina Hall

Related articles

1. John what is your definition of “Personal Evolution”?

2. How did you come to choose Personal Evolution as an area of exploration? and what is its relationship to NLP as a field of endeavour?

3. What is the context you perceive for creating the Personal Evolution seminar?

4. The fact that you will be teaching a seminar called “Personal Evolution” suggests that:

5. You draw on ideas from Gregory Bateson in your seminar Personal Evolution. How are Bateson’s ideas relevant to someone who wants to evolve themselves personally and professionally?

6. I understand that Bateson was a mentor of yours. Would you like to talk about your experience of Bateson and his impact on your life and work?

7. What is your definition of a pattern?

8. How is enhancing one’s ability to detect patterns useful to an individual?

9. How do you know when to look for a pattern?

10. How do you know what to look for when seeking patterns?

11. How do you know where to look for a pattern?

12. What are 2/3/4/n point patterns?

13. When dealing with nested patterns at different logical levels, how do you find out;