Do NLP Trainees Change?
In your eagerness to share NLP with the world, are you with Isocrates or Demosthenes? Do you focus on education or commitment? I believe that both are equally important, and in this article I want to
consider how NLP training can be used to enhance each. I will explore the research on both learning and persuasion; how to get people to remember the metamodel or the four keys to effective
anchoring… and how to get them to actually apply these in their lives outside of the training room. For me as an NLP Trainer, there is a very simple reason
for clarifying these things: I want what I do to work! I’d like to think that, six months after an NLP Practitioner training, people still remember some of what I taught them, and actually use it in their lives.
Does training actually result in change? Some degree of answer to this question is already available. In 1990, a study was made of 54 people attending a 21 day combined NLP Practitioner / Master Practitioner training run by Ed and
Marianne Reese near Amsterdam (Duncan, Konefal and Spechler, 1990). The study involved a
questionnaire called the Personal Orientation Inventory, which assesses a number of variables related to “self-actualisation”. This term was originally used by Kurt Goldstein and Abraham Maslow to refer to the way that healthy human beings continually search for ways to maintain and enhance the sense of “self”. The NLP researchers noted that “self actualisation” is a concept closely linked to the ability to 1) be aware of and 2) make connections between ones internal representations (visual, auditory, kinaesthetic etc), internal state, and physiology (ie Self actualisation is related to:
1. self-awareness and 2. self-control).
Developed by Shostrom and Shostrom, the Personal Orientation Inventory had been administered to a number of other individuals before and after experiences such as encounter groups, Gestalt therapy groups and Assertiveness Training seminars. In other studies, groups which focus on interpersonal issues rather than intra-psychic issues actually have resulted in a lowering of “self-actualisation” on this scale, but most personal growth or training groups lead to an increase in the quality. The 18 NLP Master Practitioners already had high scores on the self-actualisation scale before starting Marianne and Ed Reese’s training. This is consistent with them having already completed a personal growth group experience, and having maintained the changes.
Both Practitioner and Master Practitioner groups increased their scores over the time of the current training.
Qualitative Evidence
A great deal of qualitative evidence suggests that NLP Practitioner training delivers other, more concrete results. As NLP trainers we sustain ourselves with this kind of written feedback from our trainees:
“Immediately after my training I established what has proven to be a successful vocational rehabilitation business with 12 colleagues working for me in 6 different locations. I could not have achieved this success without the outstanding NLP strategies.”
–Stu Macann, Manager, Wellington, New Zealand
“NLP has had an impact on my life both professionally and personally. At school, I have had students go from achieving 0/10 in spelling tests to achieving 10/10 and moving up 2-3 levels in a week. Even more important is the effect this small success has on their overall confidence and attitude towards themselves and school in general. I’m now involved in sharing the skills in training sessions with other teaching staff.”
–Julie McCracken, Secondary Teacher, Christchurch, New Zealand
“As a psychotherapist, my obligation is to help clients change in the ways they request.
Professionally, my work has just taken off.
What a gift it is to be able to remove a person’s phobia, relieve a past trauma, halt an eating disorder, obliterate a sense of abandonment, enhance self esteem, instil a sense of purpose in someone’s life, and much more.”
-Jeff Saunders, Psychotherapist, Christchurch, New Zealand
However, in talking with NLP graduates, we have also come across people who have barely thought about NLP since their certification. These
practitioners lacked one or both of the two essential training outcomes: either they didn’t learn the material, or they weren’t committed to using it.
Related to these missing pieces, they also have not installed useful learning strategies, or usefully altered basic presuppositions about their life. Most of the things we want from NLP training could be considered under these four headings: Memory, Commitment, Learning Strategies, and Self-actualisation.
Facilitating Memory
If it’s memory we are after, then we know a great deal, from research, about how to get it. Firstly, memory is unrelated to intelligence test results. At the University of Texas, a study was done where slides were shown to viewers, and then re-shown with some new slides mixed in. Viewers were to press a lever when they recognised a slide from the first set. Human adults and five year old rhesus monkeys both got 86% correct! (Howard, 1996, p 242). When people don’t remember, it is not because they are too “dumb”. It’s because they don’t use their brains the way people who remember do. In every case of a person with exceptional memory, the person’s mental capacity has been shown to be within the normal range. In every instance, the exceptional memorisers have discovered and used some very simple memory techniques.
Joan Minninger (1984) points out that the entire gamut of memory techniques can still be summarised in the 3 points made by the scientist Erasmus in 1512 AD: intend, file and rehearse. As a trainer, these principles translate into:
1) Have students identify what they will be learning and why it’s worth learning.
2) Teach students how to file memories in ways that they will be able to retrieve them.
3) Have students review information repeatedly after first exposure to it.
Having students identify their intention for learning involves getting them to set individual learning goals at the start of any training. It also involves answering what we have termed “the why question” before each teaching segment (Bolstad, 1997). In an overview of 400 separate studies of goalsetting, E. Locke and G. Latham (quoted in Jensen, 1995, p 79) showed that setting specific and slightly challenging goals always led to better success in the task required. Mobilising students’
interest in the subject is not just an intellectual process. It floods their brain with chemicals such as adrenaline and enkephaline, which act as “memory fixatives” (Jensen, 1995, p 85). Even injecting these chemicals into rats before learning studies will increase their memory (though we recommend the motivational route as safer than the intravenous one).
Techniques For Filing
Throughout history, there has been some
development in the techniques of filing, the second of the principles for memory. For example, we now know more fully that our mind’s files are linked to the particular psycho-physiological states we are in when we compile them. If you drink coffee while studying, it helps to drink coffee before sitting the test (Howard, 1996, p 250). In NLP terms, all learning is anchored. We also know from George Miller’s studies that there is a neurological reason why learning is best chunked in sets of seven plus or minus two (7±2) bits (Howard, 1996, p 230).
Short term memory handles only one such set of five to nine information bits at a time. The production of long term memory involves the making of links between different sensory areas in the cerebral cortex, and links to the deeper areas of the brain (Howard, 1996, p 242). Memory techniques are ways to deliberately create such links. Ensuring that memories have significance in relation to other areas of ones life also creates such links. This is why “meaningful” phrases are easier to remember than nonsense ones, and facts about a place you want to go on holiday are easier to remember than general “geography facts” (this last fact also draws on the first memory principle –
“intend”).
Mind maps are a recent addition to the field of memory techniques. Companies like Boeing say that the use of mind maps has enabled them to reduce training time to one tenth or less (Buzan, 1993, p 170). Memory peg systems and
Mnemonics are far older methods, and account for the “super-memory” of people such as the Russian
“S” (Buzan, 1991, p 15). “S”, studied by Dr Alexander Luria, could recall an entire speech, word for word, after a 30 year interval. Mnemonic and memory peg systems take advantage of the fact that a multi-sensory experience is easier to
remember than a word or number. For example, if you wanted to recall the three keys to memory (intend, file, rehearse), using memory pegs, you might first notice that the number one (1) looks like a pen, the number two (2) looks like a swan, and the number three (3) looks like a woman’s breasts.
You could then create the sounds and images of a pen writing intentions, a swan in a filing cabinet, and a woman rehearsing putting on her new bra repeatedly. Later, to recall the three points, simply see the three numbers (123) in your mind, and the pictures/sounds that go with them. If you wanted to use a mnemonic, you might remember memory as a FIR tree (File, Intend, Rehearse).
This memory technology (now called “Accelerated Learning”) is based on the same awareness of sensory systems that is central to NLP. Amongst the things we could change are:
Avoid giving students unchunked lists of 30 points. Chunk these into lists of 7±2.
♦
♦
♦
Avoid teaching by lecturing, with no visual aids and no movement for hours at a time.
Keep wallcharts with key points up on the walls, design experiential demonstrations requiring physical movement for each key point, and provide kinesthetic break states every half an hour.
Avoid expecting students to recall lists (such as, in NLP training, the metamodel) without teaching them memory peg systems, mind mapping or mnemonics. I believe that memory systems are a fundamental part of any training.
Finally, repetition is the third of the three keys to memory (intend, file, rehearse). The most
successful learning results occur when information is reviewed a short time after initially being presented, and again the next day, after sleep. Sleep itself is an important part of the process of “fixing”
long term memory, and reducing students’ sleep by only two hours reduces recall significantly. Sleep loss has been the key factor in several famous human error accidents such as the 1979 Three Mile nuclear reactor accident and the 1987 Challenger Space Shuttle explosion (Jensen, 1995, p 51). NLP style trainings which promote sleep reduction may do well in increasing commitment; but they do not
increase learning. A certain level of relaxation is essential to short and long term memory.
Facilitating New Learning Strategies
Of course, one of my aims in NLP training is not merely to teach facts, but to enable students to install whole new learning strategies. The most obvious example is the teaching of learning strategies such as the visual recall “spelling”
strategy.
The ability to remember and apply information involves quite a different strategy to the ability to question it or to discover new information.
Remembering and applying information is what is known as a “deductive” process. Questioning and discovering new information requires an
“inductive” process. This difference was at the heart of the renaissance of science in sixteenth century Europe. It may yet prove to be at the heart of a renaissance of education in our twenty first century. To understand the difference between inductive and deductive thought, Bertrand Russell (1996, p 209 and p 527-530) uses the example of human mortality. In Europe up until the 16th century, the fact that a particular person (let’s call him John) would die was very simply proved. In the Bible, God had decreed that humanity would return to the dust from which it came. John is an example of humanity, so John will die. This is deductive reasoning. From the general principle, the specific fact can be deduced. If I tell you that when people look up it assists their visualising, then you as an NLP student can deduce that if you look up, you will be more able to see pictures in your mind.
Inductive Learning Strategies
Sir Francis Bacon was the first European scientist to clearly state that this way of ascertaining facts was limited. He suggested another possible way to determine whether our friend John is mortal. We could check several people who were born 150 years ago. We might then find that they have all died. We could then, from these examples arrive at a general principle: namely that within 150 years of their birth, everyone dies. The resulting principle could be tested in a more deductive way, and applied to John. This process was called by Bacon
“inductive reasoning”. Sadly, the result of
inductive reasoning is never as certain as the result of deduction. After all, we might one day find a person who was 160 years old. And then we would have to alter our theory. But the big advantage of induction is that you can not only check old theories with it, but you can discover totally new truths. I can have students observe for nonverbal cues which occur when visualising is being done,
and thus discover new sensory accessing cues, never written up in the NLP literature before.
“Unfortunately” perhaps, new NLP students do not generally want to discover “new truths”. They want to learn the “rules” we’ve found out already.
Experts in a field (and that includes NLP trainers) are deeply interested in inductive learning in that field; in expanding the frontiers of knowledge.
They are tempted to try and make new students function in this way too. New students, according to the research by Stuart and Hubert Dreyfus (1980) do not have the sensory distinctions to identify new information in this way. In NLP training, this suggests that deductive learning is most effective early in Practitioner training, and inductive learning could become increasingly relevant at the Master Practitioner level. At that level, an exercise could be run with the instruction
“Sit down with another person, and, over the course of a five minute conversation, identify what other non-verbal cues are related to visualisation in this person.” Such exercises not only invite students to create new knowledge; they also install the strategy of inductive reasoning. To maximise learning (without necessarily predicting what will be learned) the uncertainty generated by such inductive exercises is valuable. Research suggests that learner involvement will be at its best when the learner is “confused but not yet frustrated” (Jensen, 1995, p 167). For Practitioners, deductive tasks do that anyway. For Master Practitioners, inductive tasks may be more effective.
Facilitating “Self Actualisation”
One day I was talking with a friend about the immense skill that NLP Practitioners have, and how great it would be to get a group of NLP Practitioners together for a kind of “group therapy”. A friend of ours, also NLP trained, said
“Well; you already do that. It’s called a Master Practitioner course.” Actually, that’s what the study of Ed and Marianne Reese’ training demonstrates.
There is a “hidden curriculum” of the NLP Certification trainings which installs the presuppositions of NLP in the actual lives of the trainees. The new vocabulary of NLP (phrases such as “at cause”, “intention”, “chunk up”) supports and validates this change.
A number of comparable trainings achieve this same result. As an example, consider another fast growing, international, personal development technology; the “Forum”. Landmark Forum (which evolved in 1985 from Erhard Seminar Training or EST) delivers a series of seminars averaging 4 days in length. The content of the Forum training is a series of 150 reframes, which Landmark refers to as “distinctions”. Steve Zaffron, Vice President of
Development in the Landmark Education
Corporation, defines a distinction as an idea which,
“opens a new way of relating to reality because reality is experienced differently for the person realising the distinction.” (Wruck and Eastley, 1997, p 8). For example, just as in NLP a core
“distinction” is between Map and Territory, a core distinction in Landmark is between “what
happened” and “what it means”. A survey of Forum graduates 3-6 months after their initial training found that seven out of ten rated it “one of life’s most rewarding experiences”. Nine out of ten considered it “likely to have enduring value for me.” B.J. Holmes, Landmark’s Director of Marketing and Communications emphasises “We are in the business of selling a product of Transformation.”
The NLP Practitioner Results
We in NLP could say the same. To check the comparable impact of NLP training, our organisation followed up people who had
completed Practitioner training with us 6-9 months previously and asked them the same questions, in the same format, as Landmark. In our graduates, 8 out of 10 rated the NLP Practitioner Training as one of their life’s most rewarding experiences. 95%
said it had improved their ability to reach career goals. Nine out of ten said it had helped them clarify goals, values and strategies, and the same amount said it had helped them cope with a particular challenge or problem. 100% rated it as well worth the cost and 100% said it had specific practical value for many aspects of their life.
Studies on groups in a variety of settings (W.
Reddy and K. Lippert, “Studies of the Processes and Dynamics within Experiential Groups”, in Smith, 1980, p 56-84) reveal a number of factors which contribute to the development of self-actualisation in such trainings. We know that persons who have a high drive for goal
achievement and greater energy tend to do better in such situations than those who are seeking support or “learning about themselves”. Regardless of the type of group, the skills of the person in charge also largely determine whether participants will have a positive outcome. In training that extends longer than a weekend, carefully directed and structured trainings deliver better results, and are described more favourably by participants than less
structured trainings. Trainers who are able to make closer emotional contact with participants achieve more success near the end of longer trainings, but less near the beginning. This is related to the research supporting Schutz’ theory of group development (Bolstad and Hamblett, 1998 C), which holds that groups go through a life cycle where the appropriate focus shifts from creating a
sense of inclusion, to creating a sense of equal control, to creating a sense of intimacy.
Summarising the implications for trainers, we could say that trainers enhance self actualisation by:
1. Encouraging people to focus on goals and achievement.
2. Structuring the training carefully.
3. Shifting from an initial focus on creating a sense of inclusion, to a focus on creating a sense of participation, and finally to a sense of closeness in the group.
Facilitating Commitment
A significant part of the achievement of enhanced self-actualisation in the training setting results from what has come to be termed in training
“commitment”. Success Magazine’s Dan
Greenberg (1998, p 71-2) describes his experience of a Tony Robbins seminar, and notes that Robbin’s demands for what he calls commitment are continuous. “Robbins often ends his statements with “If you agree with that, say “Aye!” and the crowd echoes back, “Aye!”…. Before the break we’re told to stand, face our partners, and make a
Greenberg (1998, p 71-2) describes his experience of a Tony Robbins seminar, and notes that Robbin’s demands for what he calls commitment are continuous. “Robbins often ends his statements with “If you agree with that, say “Aye!” and the crowd echoes back, “Aye!”…. Before the break we’re told to stand, face our partners, and make a