NLP

by Tom Hoobyar

  To refresh your memory, the following chart highlights some of the key meta-programs. In Chapter 4, when you were initially introduced to these filters, which ones seemed to best describe you?

  Meta-Program

  Answers the Question

  Options/Procedures

  Is it more important for you to do something the “right way” than it is to have alternative ways of doing it?

  Toward/Away-From

  Are you more motivated by moving toward something that has a potentially positive outcome, or away from a potentially negative consequence?

  Proactive/Reactive

  Are you more likely to take the initiative to act, or wait for someone else to do it—or for something else to happen?

  Internal/External

  When you evaluate something, are you more likely to use an internal personal standard, or to ask for someone else’s feedback?

  General/Specific

  Do you most often deal in the “big picture”—or in the details?

  Match/Mismatch

  When making comparisons, do you notice how things are alike, or where there are differences/discrepancies?

  As you think about meta-programs, remember that these behaviors are expressed more as a continuum than as extremes. But when you consider the two extremes, there’s likely to be one in the pair that you can barely understand or have trouble tolerating. If so, the opposite one is your preference. Meta-programs are so much a part of us that when you try them on, you may discover you have strong feelings about the “rightness” of one versus the other.

  Because meta-programs are unconscious and personal, they can be a source of conflict between coworkers, significant others, teammates, and even strangers. Because meta-programs are now on your radar, a part of you will be looking for them and wondering how they’re influencing your interactions.

  If you’re “externally oriented” and like to get feedback from other people before moving forward, you might be really irritated to come back from vacation and find that your coworker put information about a new product on the company website before “testing” it with a sample group. This frustration might be really severe if another of your meta-programs was “reactive.”

  And if your orientation is “away-from” as well as “specific,” you might feel challenged by a spouse who comes home waving two tickets to Paris and saying, “I got a great deal! We leave day after tomorrow, so get packing!”

  A New Aspect of Meta-Programs: “Content” and “Domain”

  Another important meta-program is called “Content.” The “Content” meta-program recognizes the importance we assign to these five basic elements, called “Domains,” of life: People, Information, Things, Activity, and Location. It’s a revealing aspect of our nature. Are we “people-people” or do we collect antiques? Do we remember based on where we were, or what we did, or whom we were with, or what we had or what we learned?

  With a little attention and practice, you’ll notice how someone’s possessions or conversation will reveal how they prioritize these five elements.

  All of us relate to these domains and unconsciously rank them one through five. For instance, my personal “sort” is probably People, Information, Place, Activity, and then Things. Possessions and things like that are pretty low on my list of awareness. Relationships (People) are the first things that occur to me, and next for me is information.

  These content “sorts” are context-based. For example, my wife, Vikki, sorts content this way—People, Activity, Place, Information, and Things. We’re aligned in a lot of ways, but, at home, she’s much more proactive than I am in terms of creating our environment. She watches HGTV and I’ll watch the Discovery Channel. She’s looking at Place and Things and how they may be arranged (Activity), and I’m looking at history and science and stuff like that, because I’m an information junkie. We have these overlaps and we have these interesting differences.

  As you become more aware of your meta-programs and see them in others, you’ll notice how commonalities can be a source of comfort and connection. And how differences can be a source of curiosity or conflict. There’s no right or wrong about this. It’s all just preference. Fortunately, things are just not neatly black-and-white—you’re this and I’m that—and never the twain shall meet.

  A Case in Point: Meta-Program Content

  Here’s how a forty-one-year-old client of mine who was an engineer used his knowledge of meta-programs to increase his versatility and comfort. He was married to a woman whose top three priorities were Things, Activity, and Place. She loved to go to flea markets.

  Because his initial “sort” was Information, Activity, and Relationship, the very thought of going to a flea market and all the stuff there made him a little crazy. Once he realized this, he started researching what the vendors were selling by asking them where the items came from and their history. Just by focusing on information, he was able to amuse himself and make it a more enjoyable experience.

  Consider a person whose top three priorities are Information, Place, and Activity. That person’s not likely to be warm and fuzzy. That person probably lives in his or her head. Their home, the place they actually live, is going to be very important to them, so you don’t want to mess with it. You might not even be welcome there. Quite frequently, they’re really attached to what they do, and relationships aren’t very high on their list. I know some superb teachers who are like this. While we like and respect each other, it’s not like they often call me saying, “Let’s go hang out.” I don’t take it personally—it’s just how they operate. It’s just personal preference.

  The Common Thread: How People Relate to Time

  The element of time touches many aspects of our lives, so the different ways people relate to it always reveals something about their unique world.

  Time Orientation: Through Time and in Time

  A person who’s through time is someone who can see the past, present, and future simultaneously. This perspective is likely to make someone a good observer and excellent planner. In contrast, a person who is in time is very associated, very in the moment. This person has the capability to really enjoy life in the moment. However, they may not excel at planning or keeping commitments. To them, a commitment is something that happened in the past and planning is something that happens in the future. When someone is in time, it makes sense that these behaviors would present a challenge.

  When you understand your orientation to time and recognize that someone else’s is different, it’s easier to stay away from making judgments about it and accept that this is just how they operate.

  Cultural Time Orientation: Monochronic and Polychronic

  Cultural differences in time orientation often create friction. I just moved from Silicon Valley in California, where it’s very diverse. People from all over the world live and work there; so cultural differences about time make communicating challenging.

  Psychologist and author Allen Bluedorn, conducting research about time, found that in communication, especially nonverbal communication, there are really two major divisions for time: monochronic and polychronic.

  Monochronic time is linear. That’s Germany, Canada, Switzerland, Scandinavia, most of Europe, and the United States. We’re very linear. We like schedules. We show up at the agreed-upon time for an appointment because that’s what’s important to us. We say time is money and that you can’t ever get it back, so culturally that’s what we’re about. It makes sense that in the 1300s the first clocks were built in Europe.

  Polychronic time is a system where several things can be done at once; it’s a more fluid approach. Polychronic time is common in southern Europe, Latino cultures, Native American cultures, Arabic cultures, Mexico, and India. Relationships are much more important in these cultures, and there’s much less attention to accounting for every moment.

  If you were at a friend’s house in a polychronic time culture and there was something going on there that was going to make you lat
e for an appointment, you’d just go ahead and be late, because the relationship is what really matters. Since that less formal perception of time is accepted, being late wouldn’t be the same kind of issue or an insult that it would be in a monochronic time culture.

  These are broad generalities, of course. Yet among the people you know, you’ll probably notice that their different approaches to time are based on the culture they’re in or the one they’re from. When we lived in California, a lot of the housekeepers were Hispanic and some of our friends would say, “The housekeepers are late again. They’re just lazy.” That judgment stems from a linear orientation to time, right? These housekeepers weren’t lazy; they were probably taking care of their children or looking in on a friend. They were just operating from a different set of values.

  As I began exploring time and wanting to write about it, I realized how profoundly it affects people’s approaches and beliefs about so many things. And I began to wonder if additional research about time had been done recently.

  Time Orientation: Now and Then

  Phil Zimbardo, a prolific professor at Stanford University, has written a lot about psychology and lately he’s been talking about how time operates differently in people’s lives. (There’s a wonderful animated presentation of his key concepts on TED and YouTube.) Some of what he describes will not surprise you, because these patterns are things you’ve probably noticed in your own life and in your interactions with others.

  He says people are past-oriented, present-oriented, or future-oriented. Interesting, huh? If they’re future-oriented, they’re obviously more focused on the future than on the present or the past. They’re good planners. They’re very goal-oriented. They tend to have higher grade point averages, be health conscious, and save their money. They can delay gratification, so they have pretty good ego control and self-esteem. However, because they are sometimes too far in the future, they may have trouble locating themselves in the present. As a result, they may be less able to enjoy present activities and may be a little less affectionate to people immediately around them.

  People who are past-oriented are actually looking back at the past; they’re relating everything that’s happening to what’s already happened. These people operate primarily from negative past perspectives or positive past perspectives. They base their outlook and decisions on these experiences.

  If, for example, a past-oriented person has had sad, painful, or traumatic experiences they haven’t gotten over, they’re going to be pessimistic. They tend to expect less out of the future and are hesitant to take risks. In contrast, people who have happy pasts are going to be quite optimistic, enthusiastic, and ambitious; they expect to repeat or create a good experience that they feel happy about.

  People who are present-oriented can pretty much be divided into two categories: hedonistic or fatalistic. If they’re fatalistic, they think that fate’s in charge of their life, so they live more passive lives, believing they have little or no personal power. If they’re hedonistic, they like to enjoy life. They’re impulsive, they’re spontaneous, and they’re risk takers. They tend to lose themselves in the excitement of the moment and have passionate relationships. One conclusion: you simply don’t want someone who is present-oriented in a planning capacity.

  There are many more subtle distinctions. But always ask yourself, “Where is this person in relationship to time? Are they thinking about and living in the past, in the present, or in the future?” Someone’s orientation to time impacts what we learn about them, what we choose to say to them, and what might be possible in a relationship with them.

  A New Approach:

  How to Apply Your Understanding of Nonverbal Behavior, Beliefs, and Personal Preferences to Interactions with Others

  Setting your intention on understanding someone else’s world can help you establish rapport, enhance your communication, and deepen your connection. You can also begin to enjoy discovering all the ways people are different instead of being puzzled or even annoyed by the differences.

  Of course, trying to notice and explore all these different pieces of someone’s world can be a little overwhelming, especially when you’re meeting someone new. Here’s something easy you can do to practice and hone your skills.

  Discovery Activity:

  Exploring Someone’s Inner World

  Just for fun, complete the following questions to see what you already know about someone you’re close to. Right now, think of someone you know pretty well.

  Person:______________________

  How are they in relationship to time?

  When they describe something (especially an experience that has emotions associated with it), what does their language tell you about the representational system they’re processing in? Are they more visual, auditory, or kinesthetic?

  What meta-programs do you notice in their behavior? Is their orientation more:

  – Options or Procedures?

  – Toward or Away-From?

  – Proactive or Reactive?

  – Internal or External?

  – General or Specific?

  – Match or Mismatch?

  How would they rank the meta-program content domains—people, place, information, activities, and things?

  How do you imagine they’d complete these sentences?

  I am ____________________.

  People are ________________.

  Life is ___________________.

  What beliefs do you notice that they mention fairly frequently?

  Do these beliefs seem to be empowering or limiting?

  Of course, these answers are just a starting point. As you interact with the person you’ve identified, try to see them with fresh eyes. Be curious and ask questions about missing information that you normally would have just filled in. As you get more information, consider which of your initial observations were on target, and which ones were not. (To get an outside perspective, invite this person to take the quick assessment you did in Chapter 4 to get a brief profile of their meta-programs.)

  During your next several interactions with this person, notice how the communication or feelings may be different from before—simply because you are stepping outside yourself, and focusing on really understanding them.

  This practice experience will help you use these same observation and questioning skills with others you know or are just meeting. Noticing what’s missing in someone’s communication, recovering lost information, discovering what someone really wants, recognizing their preferred representational system for processing, identifying how someone is in relationship to time, and distinguishing their meta-programs will help you understand and appreciate their world. No one’s way is wrong—it’s just different. These differences reflect the richness of human experience.

  Using the information and skills you learned in this chapter can change your life. And because this way of communicating alters the way you touch the lives of others, you can help make the world a better place. In the next chapter, you’ll learn how to put these discoveries to work so you can be even more effective and persuasive.

  Key Ideas

  • Nonverbal behaviors like personal space, body position and posture, gestures, facial expressions, etc., provide important information about another person’s inner world.

  • Naturally (or intentionally) matching someone else’s nonverbal behaviors in a subtle way can create a sense of safety and rapport.

  • “Trying on” a person’s behaviors to see how they feel is a kind of “mind reading” that enables someone else to step into the other person’s world.

  • Because language is linguistic shorthand about someone’s experience, it has gaps in information. The NLP Meta Model provides a process to gather missing details.

  • “Zooming in” helps us focus on another person and understand their world. “Zooming out,” when interactions feel a little tense, enables us to give someone room to exhale and affords us the opportunity to go to third position to objectively asse
ss what’s going on.

  • Noticing incongruities between what someone is saying and how they’re saying it (how their body looks or what their tone sounds like) is like approaching a yellow light; it pays to slow down and evaluate the situation before rushing on.

  • For better or worse, beliefs filter our experience. Most beliefs are formed when we’re young and they still drive our behavior years later.

  • Beliefs can be detected in people’s language.

  • When we uncover beliefs, we have a chance to discover how they influence us.

  • Exploring a person’s goal-behind-the-goal (the meta-outcome) enables to us to have greater insight into what’s most important to them.

  • Paying close attention to someone’s language is one way to identify:

  > that person’s preferred sensory channel

  > the meta-programs that influence them

  > how they are in relationship to time.

  To enhance the skills you learned in this chapter, check out the recommended Bonus Activities at our special “Essential Guide” website: http://eg.nlpco.com/6-1 or use the QR code with your phone.

  Discoveries, Questions, Ideas, and Stuff You Want to Work On

  CHAPTER SEVEN: MAKING YOUR POINT EASILY

  How can I help people understand what I mean?

  Thaw with her gentle persuasion is more powerful than Thor

  with his hammer. The one melts, the other breaks into pieces.

  —Henry David Thoreau

  Much of the previous content has been dedicated to understanding how to thaw things out in ourselves and in others. By learning how we process our experience we thaw out our well-developed, well-intended foundation of patterns. Making these automated and sometimes rigid patterns more fluid readies our internal environment for change and enables us to bring our most comfortable, congruent selves to any interaction. And by being genuinely curious about how others process, we bring a welcome warmth, refreshing honesty, and increased understanding to relationships.