5.8 Strategies
The key phrase about human syntax or structure lies in this phrase—”the sequencing of rep systems.”
NLP takes the view that skills arise and function through “the development and sequencing of our rep systems.” The key phrase about human syntax or structure lies in this phrase—”the sequencing of rep systems.”
Consider the fact that every day you get out of bed in the morning. How do you accomplish this task? What enables you to produce this behavior of physically getting out of bed? What do you do inside your head that enables you to put your body in motion and to get yourself out of bed?
Do you first hear the alarm clock (Ae—auditory external)? What happens next? You may have said some words, “Oh no, it is time to get up” (Aid—Auditory digital, internal). What did you do next? Maybe you had the feeling of not feeling like getting up (Ki—kinesthetic internal or “emotion”) and the kinesthetic sensation that you gave that judgment to consisted of feeling stiff in your back (Ki—kinesthetic negative). But then you knew that if you didn’t get up you would get to work late and lose your job (Aid—more words about the job, your future). So, you had an internal dialogue with yourself about the necessity of getting up to go to work (Aid—Auditory digital words). When this knowledge reached a certain threshold it informed your body to move out of bed (Ke—kinesthetic external). Taking all of these sequential pieces as a step-by-step formula for your motivation strategy for getting up in the morning, we have:
Ae → Aid → Ki → Ki → Aid → Aid → Ke
A strategy describes the sequencing of rep systems, which provides a design whereby we can produce a certain outcome. Robert Dilts (1980) wrote, “All of our overt behavior is controlled by internal processing strategies” (p. 26). Your brain has a strategy for generating all such experiences such as learning, teaching, motivation, preaching, spelling, loving, hating, paying attention, and for all observable behaviors.
A strategy refers to any internal and external set (order, syntax) of experiences which consistently produce a specific outcome.
Formally, a strategy refers to any internal and external set (order, syntax) of experiences which consistently produces a specificoutcome. Most of our strategies for living, relating, thinking, interacting, etc., develop at a young age. Unconsciously we learned that a specific sequence of the rep systems would produce a certain result. From then we generalized that strategy to all occasions calling for that result.
Consider the power of a good strategy versus a poor strategy regarding the task/behavior of spelling. A useful and productive spelling strategy goes along the following lines. First, you hear a word (Ae—auditory external), then you make a picture of the word (Vc—visual construct) and looking at it you feel good/right about its correct spelling (Ki+). Then, to rehearse the spelling, you retrieve your picture of that word (Vr—visual recall). Good spellers usually look up or straight ahead as they internally see the word and have a good feeling of rightness about it. Seeing the word, you can now spell out the word verbally (Aid—auditory digital, internal). Then with the feeling of familiarity for spelling it correctly (Ki+—kinesthetic internal), you spell it externally (Ade—auditory digital external). The spelling strategy for champions goes: Ae → Vc → Ki+ → Ade.
Champion spellers visualize the word before they spell it.
O’Connor and Seymour (1990) identify that dyslexics have demonstrated the usefulness of the spelling strategy. Teaching this strategy to dyslexic children often cures many of their dyslexia. Most dyslexics do not visually see or visually recall the words they wish to spell. They attempt to spell the word auditorily or kinesthetically. Spelling a word auditorily (phonetically) means you sound out the word to yourself. This strategy greatly limits how much material you can hold in memory.
Teaching the spelling strategy to dyslexic children often cures many of their dyslexia.
Conversely, attempts to spell out a word kinesthetically makes the task difficult. An example of spelling kinesthetically would consist of memorizing the letters of the word by a certain touch. Spelling phonetically (auditory) does not work much better. Spelling champions never spell auditorily. “Wun wunders why foenick spelling methuds arr stil tort in skools.” (pp. 182-184)
Each internal representation of a strategy also includes submodalities. Thus, the picture of the visual recall of the spelling strategy will have its own submodalities. The kinesthetic internal will have its own kinesthetic submodalities. We will devote an entire chapter to strategies—see Chapter Fifteen.
5.8.0.14 Spelling strategy: exercise for students
Vr Determine the position of visual recall of the student and have the student select their favorite color.
Ve Spell the word in large letters and in the favorite color of the student. Hold the word in the position of the student’s visual recall. The student visualizes, that is, makes a picture of the total word or part of the word. (It may work easier for the beginning student to chunk down and visualize the spelling of only three letters of a word at a time. For example, “believe.” Repeat steps 2 through 4 until the person learns the entire word.)
Vr Remove the word then lead the student to shift their eyes into their Vr position and ask the student to see or recall the word or that part of the word they seek to learn.
Ae Have the student spell the word out loud.
Ke The student copies down the word.
Vr Hold the word in the student’s visual recall position and ask them to again see the word and make an internal picture of the word. Then, remove the word and ask them to go to visual recall and see the word.
Ke Ask them to write the word down backwards. Repeat steps 6 and 7 until they can write the words down backwards. This will insure that they “lock” the word in their visual memory.
Ve The student examines a list of words.
Examples: a) bilieve
b) believe
c) beleive
d) bealeave
e) beleev
f) beleave
Vr The student shifts their eyes in their visual recall position and recognizes the correct spelling of the word from the list.
Ke The student writes down the correct word.
Ve The student examines a sentence containing the spelling word. Example: “How do you spell believe?”
Vr The student shifts his eyes to his visual recall position and recalls the color-coded word.
Ke The student corrects the spelling word if they see it incorrectly spelled, or they write “C” next to the sentence if spelled correctly.
The ability to recall words improves by practicing the above strategy rather than by just rereading the spelling words. As the student’s recall ability improves, they will become more able to more accurately recall under the stress of an exam.
5.8.0.15 6. We respect each person’s model of the world
If “the ‘map’ is not the ‘territory’,” and if everybody operates from their own “map”, then everybody processes information in their own unique way. One will code experiences associated (in your body), another dissociated (outside your body seeing yourself). One will create their “map” comprised mainly of pictures, another with sounds. Recognizing the map/territory difference, we also recognize that people will map reality out in different ways. This enables us to respect their right and responsibility for dealing with the world. When we respect their model of the world, we respect them as persons and that enables them to trust whatever assistance we can offer.
An occupational hazard for any professional communicator arises at this very point. If we don’t respect their “map”even with all the errors and distortions we believe it contains, we create unnecessary conflict and prevent ourselves from getting heard at all! If we disrespect another and their model of the world, we won’t spend the necessary time in listening, supporting, and validating. We will jump right into the fray “preaching” at them, at the errors in their “maps”, and evoke in them strong defensiveness.
During my first twenty years as a pastor, I (BB) found myself unable to help some people. I really desired to help them, but after the first session, they did not want to see me again! What evoked that response? I did not respect their model of the world—or at least they felt that I didn’t. Why not? Because I immediately started “preaching” to them. They would share some problem they had that involved some sinful behavior and I would immediately apply scriptures to show them the error of their ways! I took a most confrontational approach in counseling.
I now have completely changed my style. Today I begin by listening sympathetically to needs and problems. I do not necessarily agree with what I hear, but I do begin from a position of respect for them and their “map.” Only after I discover their positive intent behind behavior do I resort to scripture. Incredibly, the first intent behind the behavior hardly ever violates scriptures. By accepting their model of the world, I establish rapport and get their permission to help.
5.9 Presuppositions About Human Behavior/Responses
5.9.0.16 7. Person & behavior describe different phenomena
We “are” more than our behavior.
If “the meaning of our communication lies in the response we get”, then some of the most important information we can pay attention to involves a person’s behavior. To say this, implies that one’s behavior does not define them. It may express them—their values, style, etc. But it does not identify them.
By realizing that when a person performs a particular behavior and that this differs from their ultimate identity, then we can expect and hope that in another situation or another time that person may behave differently. That makes behavior contextual. Provide another context, and the person may behave in a drastically different way. We make a major mistake in our relationships whenever we equate a person’s worth or identity with a particular behavior. That “people behave…” identifies people at a higher level than behavior. The opposite does not hold true: “behaviors people…” does not make sense because people are far more than any particular behaviour in any particular context. Although, if you identify a person with a behavior, you essentially have used the second formula!
5.9.0.17 8. Every behavior has utility and usefulness—in some context
All behavior functions from positive intentions.
This statement does not mean that we can conclude that any given behavior comprises “the correct behavior.” Of course not. Rather, this statement asserts that within the context of a person performing a behavior, the behavior fulfills some need for them. Furthermore, that behavior—in other contexts (time, space, person)—has value and use.
The NLP model starts from the assumption that all behavior has a positive intent driving it.
The NLP model starts from the assumption that all behavior has a positive intent driving it. Thus, every behavior has a useful value in some context. Again, this does not approve of immoral, unethical or damaging behavior. It rather separates person from behavior and recognizes that, as “behavior”, there probably exists some context in which a behavior has value. When we engage in inappropriate behavior, we seek to accomplish something, something of value, something important—and so we do the best we can with the resources we have. Our intent, at the time, involves a positive intent, but gets filtered through limited understandings and erroneous ideas—precisely the reason for “renewing the mind” in order to become transformed.
Even when we find a person doing something in order to “do evil” (that is, hurt someone, take revenge, etc.) if we asked again and again, “In doing this, what positive value does it serve in you?” we will always find some Meta-level outcome of value.
In working with people, we seek first to discover the positive intent behind the behavior. We assume it exists and go pursuing it. And here shows the wonder of this approach—even if it did not exist previously, by asking about it, pursuing it in the life of a person—they have to create that internal representation to make sense of our words and thereby internally create it within themselves! Having worked with the Department of Corrections for several years in the State of Colorado, I (MH) have found that even (worst case scenario!) in those who have suffered from “a criminal mind”, that this approach offered hope. For many, this approach gave them the chance to believe in themselves, to believe that they have a God-given “image and likeness” at their core—and that they do not exist as genetically flawed persons somehow created without dignity and values.
5.9.0.18 9. We evaluate behavior & change in terms of context & ecology
As we act, behave, and respond to people and events, this presupposition challenges us to develop awareness of the impact of our actions and to check the ecology of our responses. In other words, our behaviors do not occur in a vacuum, but in a system of other actions, ideas, feelings, etc. Accordingly we should take into account the total system (individual, family, co-workers, etc.) and evaluate our behavior in terms of that context and its usefulness therein. Seeking to make changes in ourselves and others will have systemic implications. Let us evaluate the desired change in such a manner so as to make the change congruent within the person and the system.
When we work with many of the parts within human “personality,” each part must also take into account the ecological question about the whole person. “Will this have any negative consequences that I need to consider?”
We can also extend ecology to the person’s larger relational systems: “Would this change in a congruent way with the other people in this person’s life?” Considering the larger frames of reference helps us to make sure that our communication, behavior and change works for us rather than against us. Rooney (1986) wrote:
“The concept of ecology refers to the concern that any changes made at one point in a human system must be compatible with and adaptable to the other parts of the system.”
“The concept of ecology refers to the concern that any changes made at one point in a human system must be compatible with and adaptable to the other parts of the system.”
Gene Rooney
NLP tools for rapid change work enable us to easily bring about changes in one partner that, ecologically, will have various effects upon others. To prevent doing more harm, the ecology check enables us to take care in anticipating the effect of change upon the other persons in the system.
5.10 Communicative Presuppositions
5.10.0.19 10. We cannot not communicate
Since communication involves the sending of signals to another—even when we attempt not to send a message to another—that comprises “a message” and the indicators or signals of that message will leak out. Even when we don’t put our thoughts, feelings, ideas, beliefs, understandings, decisions into words and express them to another—such internal phenomena get communicated non-verbally in a multitude of ways.
5.10.0.20 11. The way we communicate affects perception & reception
How you say what you say often has more importance to the communication than what you say.
A great portion of communication occurs via non-verbal channels. This means that we always and inevitably not only communicate by what we say (verbally) but also by how we say things (the non-verbal facets: tone, volume, facial expressions, breathing, posture, etc.). These messages exist as para-messages. Sometimes, however, one of our messages may refer to (reference) another message.
Saying, “I love you!” carries one meaning. Saying it sarcastically another. Saying it with fingers crossed another. Saying it in tears—yet another. The way that we use our para-message signals can tremendously affect the way people hear, perceive, and receive us. Many people give more weight to tonality or physiology or eye contact or some other non-verbal facet than to the linguistic content. Others reverse that. This suggests the importance (and power) of congruency—aligning all of our communication channels so that they communicate the same message and don’t conflict or contradict each other. Congruence makes our communicating believable.
5.10.0.21 12. The
meaning of your communication lies in the response you get
Communication refers to the exchange of information. It operates as dialogue in a system of feedback responses from sender and receiver, not a monologue. The response of the person with whom we communicate reflects the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of our communication. If they respond to our communication in the manner we desire, we have succeeded. If their response differs from our desired outcome, we can simply send other signals. This model leads to a non-blaming style.
When you measure the effectiveness of your communication with the response you get, you take 100% responsibility for the communication.
Regardless of your intent in communication, the response you get indicates what you communicated to the other person—in spite of what you intended. Take it as feedback and use it. I (BB) view this as “taking one-hundred percent responsibility for my communication.” Responsible communication means that I always have the option to make changes in my communicating until I get my outcome. If I only take partial responsibility for my communication, I will more likely give up trying.
What do you want from another when you communicate? Identify your desired outcome for conversing. Taking full responsibility for your communication helps you to order your communication signals until you get the response you desire. Sales people sometimes say that they make eighty percent of their sales after the fifth call. That sounds as if such persistent salespersons have taken full responsibility for the communication exchange.
The User's Manual for the Brain Volume I Page 11