Successful Communication Through NLP

A Trainer's Guide

Sally Dimmick

• Editore: Routledge
• Anno: 2017
• ISBN:
  9781351897013
• Edizione: 1
• Argomento: Commerce
• Categoria: Management

Most professional trainers nowadays have some understanding of Neuro Linguistic Programming. They probably know that people take in information about the world through a 'preferred representational channel' and that we communicate better with people if we use their preferred channel - visual, auditory or kinaesthetic. Sally Dimmick's book goes further. It shows how NLP principles can be applied to every aspect of training and which particular aids and methods are the most suitable for each channel. The first part of the text outlines the main concepts of NLP and explains how to identify a person's preferred channel. It also looks briefly at the significance of learning styles. Part II examines each representational channel in turn and relates it to the corresponding training methods and materials. The final chapter provides ways of combining the channels so as to maximize the transfer of learning. The text is enlivened throughout by anecdotes, examples and illustrations. For teachers, trainers, managers and indeed anyone faced with the need to communicate in a professional way, Sally Dimmick's guide will prove invaluable. It will be particularly welcomed by trainers looking for practical advice on how to use NLP.

PART I
REPRESENTATIONAL
SYSTEMS

1
NEURO LINGUISTIC
PROGRAMMING

Neuro Linguistic Programming (NLP) is a relatively new communication and change science model developed by John Grinder, Richard Bandler and their associates in the late 1970s. It is now used extensively in management, sales, marketing, therapy and education.

They became aware that some people seemed to have the ‘gift of the gab’, the ability to persuade and influence others with their ideas. By studying a cross section of people Grinder and Bandler felt they would be able to determine exactly what enabled these top communicators to bring about such a strong reaction in others and such an ability to communicate their message so clearly.

They studied the behaviour and communication patterns of recognized experts and high achievers in very different and diversified fields, who were recognized by their peers as possessing originality and the ability to influence others with their communication. The original people they chose to study were Dr Frederick Perls, the creator of the Gestalt theory; Virginia Satir, a family therapist and Milton H. Erickson MD, a medical hypnotist.

They wanted the following questions answered:

1. What behaviours, if any, do these experts have in common?
2. Could these behaviours be taught to others so they could become more effective at what they do? (Eicher, Jones and Bearley, Neurolinguistic Communication Profile and Rapport, Trainer Guide, page 2, Organization Design and Development, Inc.)

The answers to these two questions represented the foundation for the development of the NLP communication model and will be discussed in more detail.

Early on they established that we each have a preferred method of processing information which generally falls into one of three categories - Visual, Auditory and Kinaesthetic. (Chapter 2 identifies the preferred system and processes involved.)

These ‘super’ communicators tended to use all three methods equally rather than concentrating on one preferred method when communicating and thinking. They were also equally flexible in their ability to shift from one method to another in order to match or mirror the communication style of the other person. This will be discussed in more detail later.

BACKGROUND

There are, however, many other influences on the development of the NLP theory. Essentially NLP is what psychologists call a cognitive model of behaviour. This is a model of the thought process involved in an action.

Early theorists, especially behaviourists, talked little about the way the mind processed information. They regarded the brain as a box which could be understood by measuring the stimuli that went in and the responses that came out.

This is the concept of communication versus discommunication. The term ‘discommunication’ was coined by an American public relations expert Philip Lesly in 1979. How often have you told someone something and the result you receive does not meet your expectations? How often is the person receiving the communication blamed for failing to understand what was said or written? If this occurs Lesly believes you are in fact discommunicating. He suggests five ways to improve communication and thus avoid discommunication:

• Try to anticipate how your message will be received - will it be open to misinterpretation?
• Keep in mind you’re communicating with people, and show genuine interest in how they feel.
• Communicate to express not to impress. Big words may sound good to you but may be lost on others.
• Know your audience. Relate the message to the specific characteristics, needs and interests of your listeners.
• Take note of the tone of your communication. It’s often not what you say but the way you say it.

So the early theorists were more concerned with the observable or measurable outcome of a communication and not the actual processes involved.

COGNITIVE THEORY

Cognitive theorists took this a step further and believed in more than the measurable outcomes. They believed that the ‘box’, and the way it worked was of more importance; that is, the processes involved in formulating the measurable output.

Cognitive psychologists hold these basic beliefs:

1 Scientists should study mental processes such as thought, perception, memory, attention, problem solving and language.

2 They should aim at acquiring precise knowledge of how these processes operate and how they are applied in everyday life.

3 Informal introspection should be used, particularly to develop hunches, whereas objective methods are preferred to confirm these impressions.

If we study all three points we will have a better understanding of how the brain functions and works to process the information it receives.

Cognitive psychologists are concerned more with the process within the brain - the thinking process - than with the outcome - the observable communication.

SPLIT BRAIN

Grinder and Bandler were also influenced by the ‘split brain’ research and model developed by neurological researcher, Roger Sperry.

Sperry and his colleagues worked with severe epileptics who had had the bridge between the two hemispheres of their brains severed to reduce the incidence of fits. They determined a model which highlights the functionality of each hemisphere.

Once the two hemispheres were separated they could be studied in isolation to model their functionality. He and his colleagues designed a series of tests to isolate and reveal whether the two brain halves serve different purposes and have different functions.

Severing the bridge between the left and right brains means you are unable to communicate between the two halves of the brain (simply shown in Figure 1.1).

Sperry and his colleagues concluded that each hemisphere serves a particular purpose.

FIGURE 1.1 WHOLE BRAIN COMMUNICATION

The left brain is verbal. Its activities include: sequential processing of information, logic, analysis, rational thinking, language - speaking, writing and reading, and mathematics - thinking with numbers. A left brain approach to problem solving would be fact based, analytical, step by step, favouring words and number facts and in a logical sequence.

The right brain on the other hand is more viseospatial and emotional. Its activities include: simultaneous processing, holistic thinking, intuition, feelings, imagination and socialization. The right brain approach to problem solving involves insights, images, concepts, patterns and moments. All of these would be synthesized into an intuitive sense of the whole.

An interesting discovery was that patients with a split brain could not recall songs. They could either recall the tune or the words but were unable to put the two together.

Sperry’s conclusions were:

1. (i) Sensing and motor control are distributed to one hemisphere or the other.
2. (ii) The hemispheres are specialised in function.
3. (iii) The corpus callosum (bridge) exists largely to unify attention and awareness and to allow the two hemispheres to share learning and memory. (Ned Herrmann, The Creative Brain, Brain Books, 1989)

While Sperry’s studies were useful in identifying brain functionality, they were drawing conclusions from ‘non-normal’ functioning brains. How the ‘normal’ brain functions is very difficult to assess. Sperry’s model is just that - a model. Originally it was described as a theory, but a theory must be scientifically proven. A conclusion based on the functioning of severed and non-severed brains cannot be proven, and so it is now described as a model.

LINGUISTICS

The other great influence on Bandler and Grinder’s work was linguistics - the study of language; its structure, etymology (meaning and origin) and usage within a culture. In particular they were influenced by the theory of language development.

BASIC PRINCIPLES

There are three underlying principles that can be related to NLP

The first is that ‘the map is not the territory’. This phrase was borrowed from the philosopher Korzybski. He believed that the words we use to express ourselves do not necessarily have the same meaning for the person receiving the communication. Past experience, and to some extent culture, determines their meaning. Where the people do not share a similar background, the chances of perfect communication are diminished. NLP as a communication tool is concerned with processes rather than with content. Being aware of the processes used and the representational systems engaged by learners will help us, as trainers, to structure the learning experience to maximize the learning potential.

As Richard Bandler says: ‘NLP is an attitude of curiosity’, it is not a group of techniques.

The second underlying principle of NLP is that the meaning of any communication can only be derived from the observable response it receives. So unless the observable outcome is what you required from the communication then you are in fact dis-communicating. As yet we are unable to measure whether the input of information was completely understood. The only method we have of determining understanding is to measure the outcome.

This process becomes more complicated if people receive the information through their non-preferred representational system, then have to convert it into their preferred system for storage and then convert again for recall. If they could receive and store the information using their preferred representational system, the recall and understanding would be greater. This process will be discussed in detail later.

Lastly Grinder and Bandler believe that no matter how you are communicating or discommunicating, you are using the best resources and skills available to you, taking into account your knowledge and skill le...