Reality and myths of NLP

[Teacher]

Hello, running in the shadows! Hello, random carders. Wandering through the vastness of the ordinary and Dark Internet, I accidentally stumbled upon some left-wing conspiracy forum that discussed NLP. After reading half of the correspondence of the "locals" (my psyche couldn't stand it anymore), I decided to write an article for you - about NLP in short. Moreover, such a valuable area of psychology can and should be used to implement various schemes.

Go:

NLP (Neuro-linguistic Programming)[/B] – this is an applied field of practical psychology, which deals with the study of how a person receives, structures and transmits their experience to other people. NLP techniques are designed to increase the effectiveness of such information exchange.For example, if two people do not hear or understand each other well, the root of the problem often lies in the mismatch of how their brain processes work. And this problem is easily solved by changing the format of communication using NLP techniques.

Despite the many opportunities that NLP training offers, many people still have fears and prejudices about this method. Let's take a look at the most common ones.

Myth 1. NLP is about manipulating people, it's not fair and unethical.

Very often NLP help is perceived by people with horror, because they are afraid of being influenced by someone else and consider NLP methods of influence to be zombification, which deprives them of their will.

Myth refutation: Just like any other tool, NLP can be used for different purposes. And how a person applies their knowledge depends solely on their goals and intentions. If you want to manipulate people, you can use any method of psychotherapy and even without it, but NLP manipulation as an end in itself is unlikely to bring a satisfactory result, since any manipulation is two-sided. NLP techniques are designed to improve understanding between people through the most optimal organization of communication processes, which in the end should benefit both sides of it.

Myth 2: NLP is not recognized as a science.

This myth is quite popular among people who are far from academic circles and serious research.

Refutation of the myth: in fact, the problem of the gap between scientific and practical knowledge in modern psychology is one of the most key, and it is the NLP institute that aims to combine these two areas of knowledge. Currently, there are a huge number of studies confirming the effectiveness of NLP methods. It is important to remember that any tool is applicable in its field, and effectiveness is achieved only when a person deeply understands the basic principles of its work. To gain this understanding, you need NLP courses that will help you understand the possibilities and limitations of working in this area.

Myth 3. NLP is hypnosis.

Behind this myth, there is often a misconception that NLP can be used to program people to do whatever they want.

Refutation of the myth: Despite the fact that NLP can actually use techniques similar to hypnotic ones in their external form, NLP hypnosis is a mild form of influence aimed at establishing productive contact with a person. For example, if a person lives in the visual modality, it will be easier for him to communicate in its language than to re-encode information provided in the auditory one. But this is just a way to adapt to another person, find a common language with them and reveal the potential resources of their psyche when it comes to psychotherapy. And if a person really does not want to do something, it is unlikely to be possible to persuade him to do it by any manipulative methods. NLP facilitates the transfer of information, but decisions are made only by the communication participants themselves. In addition, unlike classical hypnosis, NLP does not practice putting a person into a deep trance. Most of the work is done in a conscious state.

Myth 4. NLP is dangerous.

Some people fear that practicing NLP can negatively affect a person's mental health or even drive them crazy.

Refutation of the myth: like any other psychotherapeutic method, NLP allows you to reveal how a person's mental processes proceed and bring to awareness some of the problems that need to be solved. Practice shows that with the help of NLP, a person can optimize relationships with himself, other people and the world at the information level and overcome those fears and blocks that hinder him. Of course, a reasonable pace and professional approach is important in this matter. And if you apply NLP alone without relying on the basis of theory, there is a risk of too sharply removing psychological defenses and activating those processes that were suppressed and for which a person may not be ready to face. Therefore, it is best to gain skills by attending NLP training sessions where strict safety practices are observed.

Thus, NLP is an extremely promising and interesting direction that allows you to creatively and wisely approach the solution of many practical problems and tasks related both to communication with other people and to the process of processing any information that we deal with in everyday life.

With the help of NLP, you can work through psychological trauma, get working methods of self-help, harmonize the process of communicating with people, and even improve memory. Underestimation of this method is associated with a lack of knowledge about how and why it works.

In short, cyberstalkers, if you go to the NLP Institute to learn this tool professionally, myths and fears will give way to a reasonable understanding of the breadth of opportunities that this invaluable knowledge opens up. However, you can also learn by yourself, the main thing is to find a mentor and the right sources of information.

 

[CarderPlanet]

NLP: Feedback​

Hello everyone. Today I will stay one day for you with Stalilingus. I am sharing with you a useful article on establishing feedback with an interlocutor. Well, let's go!

When communicating, we, one way or another, influence each other. Depending on what our interlocutor said or did, our behavior changes. And of course, we, in turn, influence our environment in the same way. Often we want to get from a person a certain reaction to our words and actions, although we do not always realize this or simply do not want to admit it to ourselves. Feedback is one of the types of communication. That is, a response to our actions, situations, events. Sometimes this reaction can be predictable, sometimes not, but this is not always exactly what we want to hear. Criticism is often negative feedback. That is, in response to our actions, a person tries to give these actions his own assessment. At the same time, his goals may be completely different.

Why does a person give feedback or criticize?
- Well, firstly, he may want the criticized person to perform certain actions (for example, to work better), often without directly mentioning it. But this may not be the only reason for criticism.
- For example, criticism just needs to throw out emotions, and you can serve as an excuse, although initially you will not be the cause of these emotions. I came to work - problems at home, and then you turned up.
- Another motive can be a demonstration of their competence, strength, status: when a boss criticizes a subordinate, he often simply indicates his position, thereby demonstrating his status. Or, during the defense of the dissertation, the professor may make strong comments only in order to show his competence in this area, and not at all because the report was weak.
- Another goal of criticism can be the reaction itself. Often people deliberately seek to cause a negative reaction, because it can justify some of their actions (aggression, irritation, anger). Imagine a situation when one of the spouses decided to end the relationship and even convinced himself of this. But, in order to finally justify his act and shift responsibility to another, he needs a certain emotional negative reaction from his partner. Then he begins to criticize, point out mistakes and shortcomings, which will cause a certain response. And of course, having emotionally responded to criticism, the partner will also be guilty.
- Criticism can also serve as a tool to put a particularly oversized person in place. Those who like to lean out, just need to point out their shortcomings, weaknesses, and a head with a very long neck will take its place among others.

Responsiveness and protection from criticism
Criticism, as a rule, is perceived negatively by a person. And really, who likes to be criticized and who doesn't like to criticize? It is clear that there is also a share of useful information in the feedback that you cannot get from other sources. The opinion of another person is useful at least because it is a view of your actions from the other side, different from our perception. It is difficult to notice a log in your own eye, and even an eyelash is visible in someone else's. Of course, each person has his own idea of reality. How many people - so many opinions. Therefore, it is worth treating the feedback of others very carefully, trying to filter out only useful information. So how can we do so in order to get that important information, which consists in looking at us from the outside,

First you need to understand what the person's intention is behind his criticism. One of the important beliefs of NLP is that intention is always positive for a given person. Perhaps the person wants to help you and only do better, and the question is how he does it.

One of the options (if possible) is to talk with the person about the form in which I personally would like to receive feedback, and generally make it clear if the feedback is not appropriate at the moment.

Another thing is when a person's intention is to obtain their own positive states or achieve their own goals with the help of Criticism. To respond to such an impact, you need to learn how to manage your internal states and resources. You can prepare in advance for a situation where you could potentially be criticized. To do this, it is enough to think about what state you would like to be in and gain access to it. For example, remember a similar situation where you were in the right state: confidence, calmness, strength. Pay attention to what you saw, heard and felt at that moment. Switch your attention, get distracted. And then do it again so that later at the right moment you can quickly enter it again. Fix this state within yourself, for example, in the form of an inner picture.

If your personal experience did not have the desired state, then imagine a person who could behave the way you would like yourself. Now imagine that he is you. And, being in the shoes of this person, think about what you will say, how you will feel, what you will do. You can even play it in your mind as a movie. And already, proceeding from this state, go to a potential meeting.

Another defense against criticism can be the use of an internal metaphor. There is such a popular expression "Like peas against a wall." Imagine that there is a transparent concrete wall between you and the critic, and his barbs and statements are peas falling into the wall and bouncing in different directions. How will you feel then? In fact, there can be any protective metaphor: a spacesuit that allows only clean air to pass through; knightly shield, beating off blows; or just a transparent dome that protects you from adversity - it all depends solely on our imagination. Finally, you can simply imagine that for a while you seemed to be out of your body, and the scorching glances of your boss, the attacks of your opponent, the outbursts of your spouse's emotions are directed at you to the other,

Another option is possible, in which the transformation will begin to take place with the critic himself. For example, you can make his voice squeaky and like coming from your little finger. Paint his nose red and paint his trendy jacket with flowers. For greater beauty, you can put a clown cap on your head. How do you now listen to criticism from such a character? Make him funny or pathetic - then hearing unpleasant things from such a person becomes fun.

Non-verbal feedback
Feedback can be both verbal and non-verbal. Even before a person has time to express his attitude to your actions, you can already understand this by facial expressions, gestures, body movements. Moreover, it was proved that the bulk of the information expressing the assessment is transmitted precisely non-verbally. And of course, this information should be given special attention. For example, if your partner shows admiration for your performance, and his facial expressions expresses boredom, then it is this non-verbal information that will speak about the true attitude towards your performance. Or vice versa: when the boss is generally satisfied with your work and demonstrates this with his whole body, and criticizes you only in order to keep you in good shape, then, apparently, you should not take his words literally and take them to heart.

In NLP, this non-verbal attitude is called a meta message. Meta-message is a general non-verbal message of a person, conveying his inner state and attitude to what is happening. In order to better recognize a person's meta message, it is enough to think about what a person with such facial expressions would like to tell us, being in such a pose and gesturing in a certain way. And try to say it in direct speech, as if a person were saying it to himself:
- "I am extremely unhappy."
- "I was interested in your proposal."
- "I know very well what I'm talking about."
- "I'm just bored".
Thus, being able to recognize meta-messages, we acquire one very important tool that enables us to receive true information about the attitude towards you.

So, giving feedback, you can pay attention to two components: verbal and non-verbal. It is understandable that when such messages diverge, it causes distrust and a state of confusion. But the mismatch can also be between different non-verbal parameters: for example, words spoken in a cheerful voice with a sour face on the face will most likely cause mistrust. For example, a crooked, asymmetrical smile may indicate that it may not be sincere. The mismatch of internal mechanisms is called incongruence and suggests that you should not completely trust the feedback or information received from a person. On the contrary, when criticism is given emotionally, and the words are consistent with the non-verbal, then we can talk about the true attitude of a person.

The process of obtaining feedback can be graphically depicted as follows:

How to give feedback competently?
Yet most of the times when we give a person feedback, it is assumed that our words will help them change their actions for the better. In this case, it is important that we are heard, understood and taken our words into action. So what kind of feedback does it need to be of high quality? In NLP, there are approaches in which feedback will be most effective (see the criteria for high quality feedback (HQF) in NLP, "Guide to the course of NLP practitioners" A. Pligin, A. Gerasimov). Here they are:
- Special attention is paid to Rapport, or the preliminary creation of a state of trust.
- Feedback is given from the 3rd position. That is, in this case, as a rule, a third person is used (he, she), and not the usual "you" or "you".
- The description is maintained from the "Behavior" logical level. It says, not who you are after this or in reality, but how it was done.
- The conversation is built in the past tense.
- First of all, it describes what was done successfully and efficiently.
- Secondly, additions and suggestions are offered in a positive way.
- It is desirable to express each addition as sensually as possible, it is better to demonstrate it.
- The first word is given to the performer of the action in question, and only then the observer speaks.

Let's dwell on each of the points in more detail:
1. It is better to give feedback when you have a personal contact with a specific person who trusts you, and even better if you enjoy his authority and respect. If you walk up to a stranger on the street and say, "They haven't worn such shoes for a long time," the reaction may not be predictable. And it might be appropriate to say this to your friend gently.
2. The easiest way to give an emotionally calm and impartial assessment is to go to the so-called 3rd position in relation to the process in question. In this case, the feedback is not expressed directly in the person's face, but only "to the one who recently completed the task under discussion." In this case, third-person pronouns are used (he, she, they, him, him, her) instead of the first-person pronouns (I, you, you, me, mine, yours). For example: "It seemed to me that Vasya did not quite understand the instructions correctly, and he should have familiarized himself with the task in more detail." Be careful, because speaking to a person and using third-person pronouns may misunderstand you. Although in some psychological centers such treatment is part of the corporate culture.
3. Here we pay attention to the fact that we believe in the ability of the person to change, to whom we give feedback, and even more so we respect his personality. Therefore, everything that is being discussed is specific behaviors implemented by a person, which means that next time he can do something different. This approach helps to maintain a person's faith in himself and his own capabilities. Agree that hearing "You are a bad speaker" as feedback is much less pleasant than: "When you speak, you speak very quietly."
4. This point helps to separate the past and the present, that is, it makes it possible to maintain a person in a resource state in the present, and to consider the performed actions as a completed process in the past. For example, instead of saying, "The report you made is terrible," you could say, "When you did the report, the results were unsatisfactory." Also, giving feedback, we believe in positive changes that will happen to a person in the near future, assuming that next time he will achieve better results.
5. It is very important to shift the focus of attention from the shortcomings of someone's actions to their merits. First you need to talk about what was done well, making it clear to the person that you are able to notice not only weaknesses, but also pay attention to successes. There is no such person who would not like praise, especially if it really is given deservedly. This point is one of the most important in feedback, since a person has a basis for further development and achievement of his own success. By learning to notice strengths, we not only motivate others to take action, but also build a good reputation for ourselves. For example, giving feedback to a child, you can say: "In general, the essay you wrote is very interesting and funny, even your own author's style appears,
6. Finally, at this stage, you can suggest specific behaviors that could help the person to correct their own actions: "The next time you speak, it would be good to speak louder and clearer."
7. If you want the person to be able to quickly take advantage of your recommendations or wishes, then demonstrate them to him. On the one hand, it will allow him to understand what you mean and give him the opportunity to model the skill you are demonstrating. On the other hand, it will confirm that you yourself know how to do what you point out to others. For example, a beginner speaker can be directly shown how to speak louder.
8. In order to reduce the stress of the situation and increase the value of the information received, it is useful to first give the opportunity to speak to the person himself. In order to give feedback on his own actions, a person is forced to "scroll" them again and analyze, thereby developing the skill of self-reflection. The ability to speak openly about one's own merits and successes is also a useful skill in the modern world. And if a person himself discovers the elements that require improvement, and points out the ways to improve them, then this will give at least three positive consequences. First, your task will be easier (why repeat the same thing twice). Secondly, information about the elements that need to be improved will be more easily perceived when a person talks about them himself, rather than when someone else does it. And thirdly.

So, summing up, the whole process of forming feedback will be as follows: we pay special attention to the form of communication on the state of trust (rapport), we speak, proceeding from 3 positions (if appropriate), about actions, behavior in the past tense and sensory.

1. We give the floor to the performer himself.
2. Then we talk about what was done successfully and efficiently.
3. We offer suggestions and additions in a positive way.

This is what concerns others, but how to give the OS to yourself? In fact, the mechanisms are similar, except that you don't need to install rapport with you (well, who can you really trust if not yourself?). And talking about myself in the third person (I am Nicholas II), apparently, is also not necessary. For the rest, after any work done, it is useful to praise yourself, find what was really done well, and then sensually, at a behavioral level in the past tense, and most importantly, positively think about what could have been done even better ...

And finally, I would like to say that both criticism and OSVK are useful in different contexts. Both that, and another allows you to achieve goals. Only these goals are likely to be different.

Criticism allows
OSVK allows
Make yourself an expert, show your status.
Express your emotions.
Induce aggression, irritation, apathy.
Fight off the desire to take the initiative, stick out.
Slow down the implementation of any business, undertaking.
Motivate to achieve a result.
Set new goals and objectives.
Improve skill and skill better.
Gently point out weaknesses and shortcomings.
Open new ways and ways to solve any problem.
Maintain rapport and friendly interaction.

How to get feedback:
We always have a choice. And what and when we will use it is already our personal task and responsibility. In conclusion, I would like to remind you that the meaning of communication lies in the reaction that it causes !

 

[Brother]

NLP and cockroaches​

Instead of an introduction.

The computer has the advantage over the brain that it is used.

Gabriel Laub

Much knowledge is not taught to the mind.

Aristotle.

NLP originally started out by trying to understand something as strange as mastery. Success. It turned out that all sorts of ancient guys were right - it's in the head. Rather, in its contents. More precisely, in the way that content is organized. In short, the successful think a little differently than the unsuccessful.
- Wow, what a great discovery! - you say. And you will be right. Because enelpers are greedy people (in the good sense of the word). It was not enough for them to philosophically understand this thing, they still wanted to become successful themselves. And start selling the method of success to others. To do this, it was necessary not only to understand, but to build a model acting on itself. That is, really acting. In order not to be an unshaven man in a suit bought for his own father's graduation party, he conducted popular seminars "How to become a millionaire for a reasonable fee." And a completely respectable person could tell this, and based on personal experience.
Well, at first there were some problems with personal experience. But then, after all, someone succeeded. At the same time, there was a product that can really be sold - a working model of how to be successful. True, this was not only about making money. Success, after all, is different for everyone (which was also found out in the process of long study and exhausting research). Success is getting what you want, preferably with minimal cost. True, the minimum cost is already efficiency. So skill, success and efficiency turned out to be harnessed to one cart. It remains to direct them all in one direction, and not as always ...
So, what did these same enelpers find out, dissecting the masters of their craft and revealing those who reached the pinnacle of personal growth? It turned out that people are genetically the same, head and four limbs. But in their head they have a little bit differently. They think they are somehow wrong. Not so that it would be very wrong that others could not. But in a different way. They have everything with a twist. With troubles.
First, they know what they want. Specifically they know. Set clear goals.
There is a story. One American university conducted research among students. Who plans their lives and sets goals how. It turned out that 85% of them seem to have goals, but they do not write them down. Another 10% recorded these goals. And another 5% recorded it in a certain way. Ten years later, we looked at how many of these students are earning (America - they have no other criteria for success, let alone ours). Can you guess? Well, yes, those last 5% were making more than the other 95% combined.
Back to successful people. Second, they were empathetic enough to know that the goal was achieved. Funny, is not it? - Well, will I find out that I'm already happy? - you say. And you will ... I don't know specifically about you, but for some reason the majority of "normal" people cannot find out about this. But about that separately.
And third, they were flexible enough to change what they do to achieve that very goal.
Another story. Another experiment. Classic. There is such a direction in psychology - behiveorism. These people consider themselves (and other people) to be simply very complex animals. And they love to torture rats: they shock them, make them run through labyrants and do other funny things with them. And these behiveorists in the same American university decided to find out how a person differs from a rat. Except for the size and presence of a tail. For this purpose, they built two labyrinths of the same structure. More is for people, less is for rats. The bait for people was a piece of paper of $ 5, for rats - a piece of cheese. It turned out that at the level of learning, there is practically no passage through the maze: both rats and people learned equally well. The differences appeared after the bait was removed. After the second pass,
This I mean that "normal" people are extremely flexible. They try to do everything the same way. Even if it doesn't work. But successful people in this sense are closer to rats - they are able to change.
Summarize. These three skills of successful people:
Target
Sensitivity
Flexibility.
- But they say the same thing when they talk about successful communicators! - you say. And you will be right again. The same is said about successful communicators. And also about successful businessmen, athletes, artists, speakers, politicians and mistresses. It's just that each direction will have its own specifics. But now our specifics is that we will analyze these three skills in the context of changing ourselves.
And the specifics is that we have no other method of influencing the world and achieving our own goals, except for ourselves. We ourselves are our main and only tool. And we need to customize it.

Target.​

So, the first and perhaps the most important skill is how to set goals correctly. A bunch of seminars can be devoted to this. But, in any case, we need to understand what we want to get. And this is not so easy to do. There is such a thing as "Well-formulated result". It spelled out what criteria a "well-formulated goal" meets and how to do it.
But this is if there is something to formulate. Most of the people have nothing to formulate. General condition: - I want something, but I don't know what. For such cases, "Walt Disney's Genius Strategy" is in store. As the name implies, the strategy was read from Walt Disney, who, in addition to being a genius cartoonist, was also a genius businessman. So, this strategy allows you to turn some vague desire, dream, into a specific goal.
True, this strategy does not work with fantasies - that is, with those thoughts that we do not want to carry out. It's just nice for us to think about it, but to embody it in reality!
- It would be great if dinosaurs were running down the street now!
- What, really?
- What an idiot I am! Why do I really need them there ?!
It is also important to understand how to deal with your own animals in your head. I mean cockroaches. Which are there for everyone. And the task of NLP is so that everyone has only those cockroaches that they need. And if not cockroaches, then exactly those insects (or animals) that this particular person likes.
It is clear that something does not suit him. But this is not a dream, it is the other way around. Something inside is interfering. And I want to remove it. What exactly to remove is not yet clear, but you need to remove it for sure. Because it interferes. These things are called problems.
In order to bring this vague, which interferes, to the light, there is a so-called "Meta-model". This is a set of questions, the answers to which help to concretize the above problem. And then turn it into a task.
Another challenge with goals. Especially those associated with change. Have you ever thought that if you do something, even if it does not suit you strongly, then you will benefit from it? Do not think, but in vain. If you didn't get the benefit, you would have done something more pleasant and useful long ago. And here comes a terrible thing called "secondary benefit". These are the dividends that you receive from something. My grandmother has a regular heartache - and this is unpleasant. But heart disease can help her build an entire family and show attention. Smoking often provides the benefits of being able to make acquaintances, relax, break time, etc. And a man walks down the street - he sings songs, rejoices. If you are drunk, everything is fine. And if sober ... This arouses disapproval and suspicion.
That is why it is so hard and tedious to work with obsessions such as smoking, overeating, drunkenness. A very large number of secondary benefits. That is, the dependence itself is simple to remove, but to compensate for all these secondary benefits ...
So the big and important block is how to deal with these secondary benefits. And how to compensate for them, how to teach him to access the necessary states in a different way. And this path should be no less effective and accessible! This is not an easy task.
Although a problem is a task, it is only a matter of attitude to the situation. A problem is when a person concentrates on an obstacle, a task is when he concentrates on a goal that this obstacle obstructs. True concentration on an obstacle leads, in contrast to concentration on a goal, in a bad mood. But that's how it works.
And then the question arises: "How to think about the situation?" It turns out that you can think of it as a problem, you can think of it as a result. Perhaps you can still think somehow. Because depending on how you think, the goal will be defined in different ways.
That is why in NLP there are a bunch of different models (that is, ways to think, principles of description) of the world and of a person. And although to some extent this relates to flexibility, but I will write about it here.
Exams at the stewardess school. The inspector asks:
- Imagine the following situation. The plane crashes in the desert. Only you survived. You immediately find an oasis nearby, in which you are greeted by 50 Bedouins starving for female delights.
The Englishwoman says:
- I will commit suicide!
American after a pause:
- I'll drink whiskey to add courage!
The Frenchwoman looks at the examiner inquiringly and says:
- The situation is clear to me, but I cannot understand what the actual problem is?
One of the most important models is the Logic Levels model. With its help, you can connect with each other: our behavior, our abilities, our beliefs and values, and what is called Personal Uniqueness, Identity. And define your mission, that is, the purpose of the goals. The most important thing to strive for.
For some, the truth is the other way around - they know the mission clearly, but how to achieve it is a very big question for them.
And this model allows us to connect our spirituality and our highest goals with "everyday life": what, when, where, with whom and what to do. It allows us to find ways to implement our ideas in the real world. And to make our small everyday goals have deeper and more important meaning.
There is also the SCORE model, which links the past, present and future. It connects our goals, their causes and consequences of achieving this goal. And also what we need to achieve this goal.
And many more models. Read or created based on how really successful people think. How they define their goals.

Sensitivity.​

But it is clear, I would like to know in time about the achievement of the result. It should be noted that already everything. Good. It's time to end. - And what is there, he will say, - you might think. And you will be right again! But what he says may not correspond at all to what is happening inside him.
The Client comes: shoulders are lowered, his voice is quiet, stooped, breathing heavily. “I'm so not sure of myself,” he says. - I want to change my life.
And I work with him. And after a while he says:
- Everything is great. I have already become a different person.
But his voice is just as quiet, he also slouches and breathes heavily. Have I achieved the result? If I think "Yes", then I am a bad consultant. Because what he shows by his behavior means something completely different: so far nothing has changed. And this is a question of my attentiveness and sensitivity: I noticed that the result was not achieved or I took my word for it.
And now another Client comes: shoulders are lowered, voice is quiet, stooped, breathing heavily.
“I'm so not sure of myself,” he says. - I want to change my life.
And I work with him. And after a while he says:
- What nonsense! We are working, but nothing has changed!
But his voice is loud, his shoulders are raised and he breathes deeply and evenly. Have I achieved the result? Not quite - it remains to convince the Client. But his condition changed. Although he hasn't noticed it yet. And this is also a question of my attentiveness and sensitivity: to notice that the result has already been achieved (at least at the level of behavior).
Naturally, the full result of the work is when the Client says:
- Everything is great! I have become a different person!
And his voice is loud, his shoulders are raised and he breathes deeply and evenly.
After you have set a goal, you need to understand how a person knows that the goal has been achieved, the problem has been resolved. Unfortunately, there is not much to describe here. Just watch and listen. And feel. And on the basis of what he saw, heard and felt, determine in what state a person is, whether he has achieved a result or not. This is what is called calibration. You can of course make a long list of what you can calibrate. And develop. And, if special questions can help in setting a goal and its concretization, then there is one continuous skill in calibration.

Flexibility.​

The plane of the flight New York - Moscow took off when it suddenly stopped and returned back to the parking lot. It took at least an hour until the plane headed for Moscow. One of the passengers asked the flight attendant what was the reason for the delay.
“The pilot was disturbed by the sound coming from the starboard engine,” she replied, “and it took almost an hour until another pilot was found.
And finally, the answer to a torn question from the language:
- I have such a beautiful goal, I clearly imagine how I will know that it has been achieved. But how ?! How do I get there? From where I am at the moment.
There is! There are a lot of ways. And you need a lot of flexibility to choose the best one. Because everyone is good. A few examples.
If you know how this shoulder piece works, you can do a bunch of very cool things. Do you want me to teach you such a thing as insomnia? Well, if you don't want to learn, at least listen to how it works. In order to make insomnia, you need to start talking to yourself (not aloud, but to yourself) in the evening, after going to bed, in a loud, cheerful voice:
-Time to sleep. I won't sleep well tomorrow. Sleep! Spa-a-at, I told who!
To enhance the effect, it is useful to imagine bright, vibrant, exciting pictures. Insomnia is guaranteed.
But if you want to fall asleep on the go in the morning and get up with difficulty, after you start waking up, say to yourself as sleepy as possible:
-It's time to get up ... I'll be late for work ... It's time to get up ...
The more sleepy your voice is, the more likely you are to fall asleep.
True, if you want the opposite, that is, to fall asleep in the evening and be invigorated in the morning, then in the evening you need to talk to yourself in a sleepy voice, and in the morning in a cheerful one.
But you can think about the same situation in different ways. And thinking differently in NLP is encouraged. In NLP, you can use a wide variety of problem / outcome models and no one will tell you a word for that. And on the basis of this very model of the problem / result, you can choose a technique for changing. And there are a lot of them. And most of them are very fast. For example, a phobia can be removed in 10-15 minutes. Unhappy love - for 20. Remove obsession (overeating, smoking, nail biting) - in 40 minutes. But there are long techniques! Harsh. Minutes 50. Or even a whole hour. True, then - as good as new.
But these are the techniques themselves. But the preliminary collection of information, setting a goal can take much more time.
So how can you describe the problem. The situation is typical for many in the morning. You wake up. Eyes slipa-yu-t-Xia. But there is a voice in my head (or you speak to yourself - it depends on the point of view) that says:
- It's time to get up. We need to get to work.
So that's it. If you give in to your voice and stand up, something inside will make your eyes stick together and your mouth yawn. If you stay lying, your voice will become more vile and will talk about all sorts of troubles that will happen if you do not get up quickly. NOW !!!
As you can imagine, this is just a different look at the same situation that was dealt with a little earlier. Other technique. But both work. Just differently.
It can be described as follows: there is one very important part. Which is responsible for comfort. And she calls for more rest. There is a second very important part, which is responsible for success, making money, etc. And they, these parts, interfere with each other at this moment in the morning. Whatever you do, the part that considers itself slighted will take revenge on you. If you get up, the part responsible for comfort will make you sleep on the go. And if you stay lying, then the part responsible for the success will torment you with the idea of terrible troubles. And after all, both parts are very important and necessary! Well, like in life: all are very kind and nice people. But for some reason they squabble like a cat and a dog.
So what's the way out? A simple one is to agree. You do not bother me, I do not bother you. And it works. After such an agreement, a person either gets up calmly and quickly, and cheerfully and in a good mood goes wherever he wants. Or, if he decided that lying is more important than being fifteen minutes late for work, with maximum comfort he lies as long as he needs. And everyone is happy. And rest is more essential, and cheerfulness in the morning. This is such an inner harmony.

Resources.​

Another way to think about the situation. Well, for example, what is the problem? This is when you are at point A and want to get to point B, but something interferes. Suppose I feel insecure when I see my boss, but I want to feel calm. But this transition has somehow failed. Something I am missing.
This is what is missing (or what needs to be added to achieve the goal) in NLP called resources. And then the entire solution to the problem / task can be reduced to the formula:
Actual State + Resource = Desired State.
Relevant is the one that we want to change. It's not necessarily a problem. Maybe it's okay, but I want something better. For example: I communicate quite well, but I want to do even better.
And since AC and JS are kind of like constants, we can only change this thing called Resource. It needs to be picked up. And a resource can be a bunch of different things: our states, thoughts, feelings, abilities, skills, memories, beliefs, values, etc. etc.
And the funny thing is that usually a person already has all this. True, in the wrong place. If it were that, it wouldn't be a problem. And this is somewhere lying. For example, he is very confident in himself. Lying on the couch at home. But when he sees the boss, it passes. Then the only question is how to take this confidence off the couch and transfer it to the situation with the boss.
The funny thing is that what is a resource in one situation can be quite harmful in another. Well, for example, cheerfulness is a very valuable resource in the morning when you wake up. And an extremely disturbing thing in the evening when you go to bed.
And then the solution to the problem is simply to drag this very resource from the place where it is, to the place where it does not exist, but it is very necessary.
But the resource is a delicate plant. Sometimes you can drag and drop, but you need to make a lot of effort for it to take root in a new place.
Yes, of course, the resource does not disappear in the old place. Resource transfer is such a vegetative process - you take a branch and grow it in a new place.
And resource resource strife. To understand what a particular person needs in order to correct something there is a rather complicated and time-consuming process.
In general, the main approach in NLP is to increase the number of choices. If something does not go the way a person wants, it means that he simply does not have enough options, choices of states, abilities, thoughts, beliefs, etc. And almost all NLP techniques simply increase the number of choices - they add these very resources. And if earlier a person had, for example, a choice to be scared, offended or angry, then after adding resources, he can still choose a feeling of self-confidence, calmness or aggressiveness. But the choice remained! And a man is a rather stupid creature, and for a variety of reasons can continue to choose the same offense. Because it is beneficial to him for some reason. Because he has such beliefs. Well, here they are new states, here they are - at hand. Not far away, close by. No, he pulls out his worn out grudge.

The story about Masha and Petya.​

Let's imagine the situation: Petya and Masha. Between them is what is colloquially called the word LYUBOV. That is, they meet, walk, communicate and so on. But regularly Masha arranges demonstrative tantrums, and Petya is no less regularly puffed up like a bullfrog.
They found each other, found!
And it seems that this way of behavior only spoils their relationship. At first sight. But maybe one of the most important things that they test on each other: will you be the same attached to me if I behave badly? In short, love me bad. This is their common deep goal - to check if I am needed on my own? Even the bad one.
Well, here may be greetings from Freud's grandfather, at the expense of whose mother treated whom. But our task is not so much to find out the reasons as to understand the mechanism. And fix something there. To make it work.
And it seems that we can simply add peace and love by integrating the anchors of the same Masha. A resource, however. But this will not be enough. Because she needs confirmation that she is appreciated and loved. And she can have only one criterion: I am hysterical, and they console me. Despite the fact that at the same time I look so disgusting.
Greetings from Freud's grandfather. Masha can do this since childhood. She drew attention there as a child - if she was hysterical, her mother, who was "always busy with her own affairs," would come running and pay attention to her.
And the resource worth adding here is not just peace and love, it is also the ability to find another confirmation of love. And for this, it may be worth going back there, in that situation and taking the position of a mother, Understand that you need to do a bunch of things for the same daughter. And in general, and for yourself, you also need to do something.
Or maybe you should go over to re-evaluate the whole bunch of situations where this very hysteria is, to figure out which resource you need to add to each of them in order to get something more interesting than hysteria.
Or maybe you just need to remove this strange attachment - I can only feel love from this person. Our feelings are only ours. We call them ourselves, launch them. And attachment is a rope that can be tied to a sore spot of another person and pulled on it so that in return he gives out what we need. And we would think that this is the only way we can get our feeling. Such everyday sadism.
And we take this rope and tie it to ourselves. And it seems like you don't need to pull anyone, you give everything to yourself as needed. And you stop torturing the other. And the relationship becomes more open and less hysterical.
All this can really be done. And pretty quick to do. And maybe Masha and Petya will then abandon their painful games for each other, and will really be able to receive human warmth and pleasure from communicating with each other.
But for now, they are playing other games.
These are different approaches, different techniques. Different ways to add what can be called a resourceful word. And the resource here can be a state (love, calmness), and a different view of the situation (the position of the mother), and the ability to find another way to confirm one's own significance, and the belief that "my feelings are my feelings. "These are all resources. They are different and work in different ways. The only question is how to choose the one that actually works. Will change a person in the direction that the person himself wants to change.

Eventually.​

Well, here's a little overview of NLP approaches to what might be called change. In short:

1. Each person himself decides what he needs to change.
2. Successful people can be stimulated by their way of successful thinking and learn it yourself. And teach others.
3. Our head is an absolutely cool tool. You just need to configure it correctly.
4. There are a lot of configuration methods and they work quite quickly. You just need to choose the most suitable one.
5. If you don't like the world you live in and want to change it, start with yourself.

 

[Father]

Myths about rapport​

Rapport
I had absolutely no idea that I would have to write about rapport. It would seem that the topic is old, y of all the classics described a hundred times, it is given at most seminars and trainings, but ... More and more often I have to deal with a distorted understanding of this issue. With myths about a certain "manipulativeness" of rapport. It's hard for me to say where these myths came from, but I hear them quite often lately. Therefore, I will try once again to retell in my own words what is scattered throughout the books and articles of various authors on this topic. This post reflects my understanding of rapport (although I don't see anything new in it).

1. The symmetry of the rapport.
What is rapport from my point of view? - I see him as a way to explain to the unconscious of another person that we are together with him, that I understand him, that we are at the same time. Something like Kipling's phrase from "Mowgli": "You and I are of the same blood." Moreover, this is a repeatedly said phrase, but a constantly maintained state. I really "walk next to" the unconscious of another person, I really try to understand it and we are really at the same time ... in our every action and at every step. The unconscious catches any falsity in this at once. This is a joint walk and a joint conversation of the deep structures of the psyche of two people.
Therefore, any talk about the "manipulativeness" of rapport as such seems to me, to say the least, strange - since rapport is a completely symmetrical and equal interaction.
And here it does not matter at all who was the first to establish rapport and how he did it. As well as walking in the park, listening to the rustle of leaves, and having a calm conversation, it does not matter to you who first came up with the idea of this walk. This is a dialogue, an exchange of thoughts and knowledge ...
And what, then, is the notorious "knowledge"? In my opinion - an invitation, no more. Moreover, this invitation is not even explicit, you just start doing something, and if you really act together, they keep you company. Imagine that while walking with a friend, you are having an interesting lively conversation, and at this time you meet a puddle on the road ... The friend, continuing to tell, turns, bypassing it on the right ... Will you stop and choose another route, or just go close, so as not to interrupt the conversation?
Or at a fork in the park alleys, your companion turned towards one of them, and you also like it (as well as everyone else), do you need to specifically focus on where to turn, or is it better to listen to the rustle of leaves under your feet and think about what was said in a conversation?
So which of the two is leading? Who chooses the road? Who was the first to suggest this walk? “Not at all necessary. At one moment it can be one, at another - another. Often - the one who is more attentive, who notices puddles first, who chooses more comfortable paths ... the one who spends part of his attention on keeping an eye on the road (while maintaining a conversation and taking care of the interlocutor's convenience) ...
And here the boundaries of the possibilities of "leading" are immediately visible. For example, if you started to go around a puddle on the right, and this path is wet (although you like it better), and your interlocutor is wearing light slippers, then most likely he will interrupt the conversation in order to bypass the puddle from the other side and express his bewilderment at that you chose this path. In short, rapport is lost.
That is, the limitation of "doing" is ecology, the acceptability of the proposed solutions for another person. If the proposed action is unpleasant for him, the coherence of the rapport is violated and "leading" becomes impossible.

2. You are already familiar with this ...
I have heard opinions that "rapport" is a purely professional psychological device (in particular, NLPersky). However, in every person's life there have been times when he has established rapport with others at a very good level ... without even knowing what it is.
I remember a case from a student construction brigade. A car arrived with sacks of cement, and one friend and I went to the driver's cab to arrange for him to give us a lift to the city. Then some guy in the back apparently decided that we came to unload and with the words "- Hey, catch the bag" shoves us the bag. My acquaintance and I simultaneously catch the bag, bending down, extinguish the inertia and look into each other's eyes, then absolutely synchronously lower the bag to the ground, unbend and shout in chorus "- Fuck! l? " There was complete synchronicity in movements, words, breathing rhythms ... There was a rapport.
Maybe there was something like that in your life, or maybe you remember a dance with a girl, when your movements were much more coordinated than the music required, made up a general pattern ... and sometimes you could guess the words that she will say the next moment ...
These are all examples of deep rapport. Sometimes it is less pronounced, but any pleasant and easy communication has a rapport at its core, since communication is not only the meaning of the words spoken, but also the feeling of understanding.

3.Who are we friends with?
A popular proverb says that "there is no smoke without fire." If a myth has arisen that rapport is associated with "manipulating another person", then it is worth understanding what the roots of this myth are.
Considering rapport as an equal interaction based on mutual understanding, we see that within it there are no grounds for such fears. What then is the matter? Here the key question will be - "with whom is the rapport established?" For all its strangeness, this question makes sense.
Above, speaking of two talking friends, I spoke of them as a single, whole person, but how many of us can say this about ourselves? Whether we use the NLPer metaphor of "parts of the personality" here, Jung's concept of "complexes" or something else - it is important that rapport may not be established with "the whole person as a whole."
And if "there is no agreement in parts," then such a rapport can become something like an alliance. Which can be compared, for example, with a situation in a family when a wife unites with her mother against her husband ... It is clear that such a situation turns out to be fertile ground for all kinds of manipulations. But just, what does rapport have to do with it? If we use the same analogy with the family, do we not demand that the wife or her mother be deprived of the language so that they cannot speak? (And if anyone demands, then he himself understands that this is only a "hot hand" ...)
So why, then, does the myth shift its emphasis from inner disunity to rapport? In general, it is understandable why - a standard shift of responsibility. For our inner disconnection from ourselves, we usually still feel responsible, and the other person who has established rapport (with whom? With a part of us) is a very convenient opportunity for "shifting the arrows".

Does this approach help us?
Quite understandably, no. Even if there is no one around who knows how to establish rapport professionally.
We have already said that the element of rapport is present in any comfortable communication, be it communication with friends, acquaintances or loved ones. We can even remember times when a friend, in his own words, supported one of several conflicting motives in us, and we followed it. There is no clear line between all these cases ...
I think that the only acceptable option that will allow us to reliably observe our interests and at the same time treat people with ease and trust is our inner integrity. Concluding this note, this is what I would like to wish you.

[