Recently I received a request, via Facebook, to provide some commentary on the language patterns of Adolf Hitler. This is a little bit tricky because many of the subtleties of language are specific to the language that is being spoken. For example in English there is phonological ambiguity between here and hear (i.e. they sound the same yet have totally different meanings) yet those are totally lost in translation. I’m also not a German speaker so I am relying on the strength of the translation into English. With that said, here is an example speech by Adolf Hitler and my commentary on some of what he is doing…
The speech starts with Hitler looking up and into the distance. Looks remarkably like eye fixation to put himself into a light uptime trance state. You may also notice the initial tension in his neck/jaw that dissolves once he is properly into state.
He starts really slow. A long pause and then begins talking slowly. As he gets into it he gradually picks up pace. At 1:40 following the clapping he really picks up the pace and goes clearly into the visual rep system. This is a great demo of the NLP Charisma Pattern
In fact the first 2:40 is mostly telling them what they already know. Seems to be Pacing the group and getting the group into Group Rapport
Plentiful use of Milton Model patterns. Especially Lost Performatives (e.g. 2:25 phrases such as ‘most valuable elements’), Universal Quantifiers (e.g. 2:30 ‘always been not in the majority’, 3:54 ‘will never relinquish it’, 5:32 ‘all upstanding Germans become Nationalist Socialists’), Modal Operators of Necessity (e.g. 5:32 ‘it must be shown’), Comparative Deletions (e.g. 5:40 ‘only the best’) and Selection Restriction Violations (e.g. 1:26 ‘courageous hearts’). Many of his statements are soooo artfully vague, such as “The German people is happy in the knowledge that a constantly changing vision has been replaced by a fixed pole” at 3:16 or “Once, our enemies worried us and persecuted us and, from time to time removed the lesser elements from the Movement for us” at 6:00.
Uses hand gestures to self to identify with the audience, such as at 2:15, where he thumps his fist on his chest as he talks about ‘WE’. Interestingly we also see use of the Satir Categories, such as at 2:27, where he uses Leveler and 4:53 where he makes use of Blamer. He seems to predominantly favour his right hand, but use both hands in parts. At 3:19 there is a really nice sweeping hand gesture from left (past) to right (future) to reinforce visually his point. At 6:32 a nice flicking gesture to reinforce that they “do not belong with us”.
Also a very nice use of embedded quotes and embedded commands. For example, at 4:26 he says “For them it is not simple enough to make the pledge: ‘I believe.!’ Rather, the affirmation: ‘I fight.!’” – see what he did there?
During the speech Adolf is future pacing the audience THOUSANDS OF YEARS!!! At 6:45 he says, “It is our wish and will that this State and this Reich last for thousands of years.”
Hitler makes use of many anchors (Many of them seem to be pre-existing). It is interesting watching the audience doing the Nazi Salute during particularly emotionally intense parts of the speech – this would be the equivalent of stacking an anchor in each of the participants that did that. Then when they make that gesture again those feelings would come flooding back. A particularly good example of this is at 9:30 when they do the motion combined with chanting “Long live Germany!”
And I can’t help but point out the lovely complex equivilance at 10:34 where it is said “The Party is Hitler.! But Hitler is Germany, as Germany is Hitler.!” – so if you take that all as true then I guess it is also true that the Germany is the Party too!
It is interesting that someone who conducted such evil against the world was such a persuasive communicator. I’m in no way a supporter of what he did, or what he stood for. Writing this post was quite an interesting exercise in analysing how he captivated the minds of the masses so persuasively though.
Would love to hear your comments. Especially if you’ve spotted more in this short video than I’ve mentioned. Look forward to your feedback
It has been said that whenever the will is in conflict with an idea, the idea invariably wins the struggle. Or as Carl Jung says, “What you resist persists”.
If you’re interested then you can prove this to yourself with a little experiment.
Go and buy yourself a nice long strong plank of wood. Say 20m long and about the width of your foot. Then lay that plank of wood out in your driveway. With a little bit of practice you’ll probably be able to walk safely from one end to the other with minimal effort. Now take that same plank of wood. And instead of laying it in your driveway how about you suspend it between two tall structures, such as trees or between two buildings. Now notice how it would be different. Going to walk along the plank up high in the air is a world apart from walking along it in your driveway… Yet, the plank is the same, the task is the same.
So what causes the change in your reactions? What happens is the changing of the location of the plank has created a suggestion in your Unconscious Mind, a suggestion of falling. The idea of falling is coloured with all the emotion your mind can muster as your Unconscious Mind’s highest purpose is keeping you safe. Without even thinking about it your Unconscious Mind has accepted the suggestion of you falling and is acting as if it is true – it will take control of your body, give you shaky legs, make you want to desperately go back and more. You wanted motivation? This is extreme motivation from the Unconscious Mind!
While Logic tells you that surely it can’t be that hard? You walked over that very same board not so long ago… But the more you think about it logically the more the suggestion of falling is aroused by your Unconscious Mind. Sure, you could stubbornly persist, but it wouldn’t be an easy or pleasant experience for most of us.
The same is true each and every time that we try and force ourselves to do something with Will Power! If you remember just one thing from this post let it be this – making changes by Will Power alone is equivilant to violence against yourself. Think about it…
As the French Autosuggestionist Emil Coué famously said, “We can now see that not only is the will incapable of vanquishing a thought, but that as fast as the will brings up its big guns, thought captures them and turns them against itself.”
Hypnosis and Neuro-Linguistic Programming provide an excellent means for programming and communicating with the Unconscious Mind. They can succeed at avoiding this conflict between our ideas and our will to make lasting changes. These techniques in no way devalue one’s “will power”, it merely relegates it to its proper place.
Personally I love how quickly changes in Values (What drive Unconscious Motivation) can totally turn a client’s behaviour around.
This video recently caught my intention and I thought it worth sharing. Judy Rees is heavily involved in the NLP Community and I was lucky enough to meet her for coffee when I was last in London. What I really like about this video is how Judy links up not only how the unconscious likes to think in metaphor but also how the metaphors that people use in their speech can reveal their unconscious thoughts – fascinating information!
One of the core concepts to Neuro-Linguistic Programming is the idea of modeling. Modeling is based on the presupposition that if it is possible for one human being to achieve something then it is also possible for others to do achieve it.
It is always fun to see people achieving things that at first glance don’t seem possible. You may enjoy this video:
Being Certified as a NLP Master Practitioner is based upon an agreed minimum level of knowledge and training duration. The American Board of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (ABNLP) specifies that for some to be certified as a NLP Master Practitioner they must demonstrate the ability to identify the following basic skills, techniques, patterns and concepts of NLP and to utilise them competently with self and others:
Integration, mastery and elegance of NLP Practitioner skills
Ability to manage one’s own state
Ability to do change work with self and others
Precision and resourcefulness through all representational systems
Conscious and unconscious embodiment of the NLP presuppositions
Ability to track logical levels
Ability to separate process from content about process
Ability to establish and maintain levels of rapport
Sleight of Mouth Patterns
Change and Install Strategies
Multi-level communications
Meta Programs (complex) – elicitation, calibration, utilisation, change, flexibility
Values – elicitation, calibration, clarification, utilisation, change work
Advanced patterns and techniques – such as sliding anchors, reimprinting, contextual marking, etc.
Duration of the Master Practitioner training must be a minimum of 130 hours (over a minimum of 9 days, face-to-face training), of advanced training taught by a certified trainer of NLP from a recognised NLP Training Institute.
These standards were created based on much research of various NLP courses throughout the world. A minimum training standard is applicable due to the numerous courses available and the potential for low standards of NLP being taught. Training taken to this standard, with a Certified ABNLP Trainer, will allow you to gain membership with the ABNLP and various other Boards around the globe.
Last week I was lucky enough to attend an event with Frank Pucelik, one of the founders of Neuro-Linguistic Programming. Frank Pucelik isn’t a name that normally springs to mind when people mention NLP and there are plenty of sources suggesting that the original founders were just John Grinder and Richard Bandler, Frank begs to differ. In this event Frank shed some light on what really happened and along the way he shared some really interesting information about how NLP came to be. What follows are my resulting notes and memories from the event in London.
The evening started with an informal interview of Frank by the event host, Michael Carroll from the NLP Academy. Frank shared his background and how he had gone from school to joining the Navy. This was around the time of the Vietnam war and he was posted to Japan where, aside from his navy medical training, he had the chance to play what sounded like more than his fair share of golf. Unfortunately for Frank he was transferred back to San Diego for infantry training and then transferred to the Marine Corps as a field corpsman/medic, then sent to Vietnam after completing his training. The resulting jungle experiences certainly took their toll. From Frank’s perspective the US Military returned their bodies to America, but it did nothing for their minds (As evidence of this Frank shared the alarming statistic that 57,000 US soldiers died in Vietnam while a further 65,000 US soldiers committed suicide or died of violent circumstances in the 10yrs immediately following the Vietnam war!!!). Frank studied at college before his military service and dropped out. After his military service he returned to the college he dropped out of and focused on many different styles of personal development including Gestalt Therapy. After 2 years in college in San Diego he transferred to UCSC and among his many sports, studying, and therapeutic activities he also worked with students affected by drugs. He had some very interesting stories to share in his role helping people come down off drugs like LSD.
Frank and Richard Bandler met and led training groups for students who were interested in Gestalt Therapy. Due to Frank’s connections at UC Santa Cruz he was able to arrange class rooms on a regular basis. Between Richard and Frank they managed to become extraordinarily good at Gestalt Therapy and the group grew and grew. In Frank’s words they were just really good at copying… errrr modelling… people. And those people included the likes of Fritz Perls and Carl Rodgers and many other super people helpers of the day. One day John Grinder was to start attending these Gestalt Therapy group meetings. For the first couple of weeks he just sat at the back of the room, quietly taking notes of what he observed. But after a few weeks he approached Frank/Richard with a truck load of questions. At this stage Frank/Richard were just doing what seemed to work, but John was interested in the patterns behind their behaviour and started to get really specific on how they were making it work. Essentially, John Grinder brought their conscious awareness to what they were actually doing.
Frank talked about how Frank and Richard had an extraordinary ability to copy people successfully, but it was John Grinder’s involvement that lead to the creation of Neuro-Linguistic Programming. Frank was really clear: NLP would never have happened without John’s input.
So thanks to John Grinder they started developing NLP or, as they called it originally, Meta. They set out to figure out: How do people who are really good at something do it? They found that beliefs played a huge part in what was achievable.
They had a small group of John, Richard, Frank and approximately seven others. The seven others sooner or later split from the group (Approx 1973/1974) leaving just Frank/Richard/John. Frank called them, including the seven, the first generation. While the seven personally gained huge amounts for themselves from their involvement, they did not go on to share the fame that Richard and John were to lay claim to. Around this time Frank/Richard/John all moved onto a property together and this was where the story became slightly comical. Frank shared stories of the living arrangements, that included one of them living in a paper chicken coop! Richard lived in a Japanese style home, with thick paper walls, on the property. Later John moved there as well and for a time, while the big house was being prepared lived in a converted chicken house. Frank never lived at the property but visited often. He also shared a story of Gregory Bateson coming to visit. Gregory didn’t believe in Hypnosis and they (Frank and Leslie Cameron) were given the task by John to introduce him to it. What followed was a session that lasted over an hour. When he came out of trance he noticed the time that had passed on his watch… “Nice trick” he told them, expressing how it would take more than changing the time on his watch to make him think it had worked. What really threw him is that when he had arrived it was light outside, yet when he went outside it was dark!
Following the first generation going their own way a second generation formed in 1974/1975 that included many of the more commonly known names of NLP. Names like Gilligan, Dilts and Gordon (There were many more but I was to slow to write them down). Then it started to get interesting. For reasons that Frank wouldn’t really elaborate on he was asked to leave by Richard Bandler in 1977. He left and he went to Nebraska. What followed was Frank traveling and living through a variety of places including Nebraska, San Diego, Oklahoma and eventually with him moving to Russia in 1990 to continue his business consulting and training company and he also helped create a program to work with drug addicts. His talk about his work with drug addicts was FASCINATING but I will save it for another post as he talked about it at length.
Beyond what I have shared above there were also several other key points that have stuck with me:
Frank, Richard, John and/or members of the study groups spent 30-50 hours a week for SEVEN years while creating NLP – woah!
In Frank’s eyes, “John Grinder is the genius that made NLP possible.”
Frank and Richard both had a need for therapy (although Richard was never explicit about this), and in some ways (especially in the very early years) creating NLP was as much about healing themselves as it was about anything else
Human beings are learning machines, the mistake many humans make is that they stop learning.
Frank discussed the Grinder/Bandler court case where Bandler tried to claim NLP as his creation. According to Frank, Bandler was very surprised to see Frank in the court on John’s side as Frank was the only other one who knew the truth about NLP’s origins. What effect that had on the proceedings Frank never knew but hoped it helped John case. Frank knows that Richard being the only creator of NLP is completely absurd.
All three (Frank, Richard and John) have an interesting life habit of having one close man friend at a time. While initially Frank and Richard were very close he felt Richard drift closer to John and the dynamics changed as a result.
One of the really pertinent questions asked was about why more didn’t make its way into NLP. Frank shared about how everything they considered was evaluated against three core criteria: (1) There needed to be real evidence of the model or persons effectiveness in the world, (2) It had to be measurable or behavior specific enough to be copied or codified, ;and (3) It had to simple enough to be learnable,testable, and verifiable. It was thanks to these criteria that things like Myer-Briggs did not make their way into the field of NLP.
Note: Huge thank you to Frank Pucelik for sharing this information. Since publishing this blog article Frank has contacted me and he has offered clarity around the article. As of June 2011 those corrections have been included into this information. Thanks Frank!
A “yes set” is an agreement frame that is used in many contexts, including Hypnotherapy, sales and even parenting. It is useful for leading the other person towards agreeing with you on something by getting their agreement on small, reasonable questions first. The principle is really straight forward: the likelihood of someone agreeing with your suggestion will rise significantly if they have immediately previously agreed with you on multiple other points.
Sales
A common example in Sales could be something like this:
“Are you looking for a car today? (yes) You’ve probably decided on whether you want a small car or a large car? (yes) And you probably want to see a car that is good value for money? (yes) Would you like to see this new BMW we just got in?”
Or if you were selling a service, such as Business Consulting:
“Is quality important to you? (yes) Is your time important to you? (yes) If you could be making more profit would you listen to someones suggestions? (yes) Great, then could we make an appointment to discuss what we could help you with?”
Hypnotherapy
In a Hypnotherapy setting is extensively used in trance inductions and the setup of suggestibility tests. For example a Hypnotherapist may say:
“To begin with I want you to stand up (yes), stand with your feet apart (yes), take a big deep breath (yes) and then close your eyes and go into a deep, deep trance (suggestions).”
The client is much more likely to accept the suggestion to close their eyes and go into a deep, deep trance if the Hypnotherapist has first installed compliance using a Yes Set.
Parenting
You’ve probably already started to get the idea, but here is an example for a parent who wanted their children to go swimming:
“The sun is shining, it’s warm, it is such a beautiful day, let’s go swimming.”
As you can see with this example it is not strictly necessary to have the other person say “Yes” in response to each part of the sentence, just for them to end up agreeing with the final suggestion.
In addition to saying the questions that form a Yes Set you are also likely to find that nodding your head while waiting for their answers will increase the effectiveness of this pattern, and the speed at which they answer.
What next?
Yes Set’s occur naturally in conversation and, now that you are aware of them, you’ll probably notice them in your conversations with others and maybe even on TV. As with all linguistic patterns the key is to begin to use them. The more than you use them the easier they will become and the more you will find yourself using them in suitable situations. Enjoy!
Being Certified as a NLP Practitioner is based upon an agreed upon minimum level of knowledge and training duration. The American Board of Neuro-Linguistic Programming (ABNLP) specifies that for some to be certified as a NLP Practitioner they must demonstrate the ability to identify the following basic skills, techniques, patterns and concepts of NLP and to utilise them competently with self and others:
Presuppositions of NLP
Present state to desired state
Well Formed Outcomes
State Management
Rapport
Sensory acuity & calibration
Representational systems (primary and lead)
Association, dissociation, perceptual positions
Accessing & building resources
Meta Model
Milton Model
Meta Programs (Basic – based on Jungarian sychology) – elicitation and utilisation
Metaphors
Submodalities
VK Dissociation
Swish Pattern
Standard Belief Change
Changing drivers
Eliciting Strategies
TOTE
Reframing
Parts
Spotting and utilising incongruity
Basic timeline work
Logical levels
Process versus content
Perceptual Positions
Well Formed Outcome
Duration of the Practitioner training must be a minimum of 130 hours (over a minimum of 7 days, face-to-face training), in the basics of NLP patterns led by a Certified Trainer of NLP from a recognised training institute.
These standards were created based on much research of various NLP courses throughout the world. A minimum training standard is applicable due to the numerous courses available and the potential for low standards of NLP being taught. Training taken to this standard, with a Certified ABNLP Trainer, will allow you to gain membership with the ABNLP and various other Boards around the globe.
The Meta Model is a very important tool for recovering information about a person’s map of the world. The Meta Model relates to the way that our minds filter information and subsequently how it generalises, distorts and deletes information that doesn’t fit with our beliefs, expectations, values and previous experiences. What Richard Bandler and John Grinder found when modelling Virginia Satir is that when people are generalising, distorting or deleting information they will often have a problem or problems. By asking a question that forces them to recover their generalisation, distortion or deletion often problems can just disappear!
It is important to note that none of the Meta Model responses use the question ‘why’. It is very rare in Neuro-Linguistic Programming to hear anybody use ‘why’ as that question will take people into the content and story behind the problem. While traditional therapy likes to dwell in this area, NLP normally steers well clear of it. A good rule of thumb when using the Meta Model is to ask questions that begin with ‘how’, ‘what’, ‘when’ and ‘who’. These questions will put the focus onto the structure of the problem, and by discovering the structure of the problem it is much easier to allow the problem to dissolve.
What follows is a list of language patterns, responses and predictions. Normally you will use the Meta Model by listening to another person. When you hear them using any of the patterns you can respond with the appropriate response. The prediction is what you can expect to be the result of asking that question.
Distortions
Mind Reading
Pattern: Mind Reading is when someone claims to know what is going on within someone else’s head, without having any way of knowing that information. Common examples of this would be statements such as “He hates me” or in a business environment if someone hadn’t let you tell them about your product and they said “It won’t be any good for me”.
Response: The response is to ask a question that recovers how they know that information. So the response to the two above examples could be: “How do you know he hates you?” and “How do you know it won’t be any good for you?
Prediction: The normal result of your question is that the person will pause, think about it for a moment, and tell you what makes them think that. It is not uncommon for them to have an answer that requires another Meta Model response, but you will be one step closer to unravelling their Distortions that allow them to have their problem.
Lost Performative
Pattern: A Lost Performative is where a value judgement is made, but the person who made the judgement is left out. Common examples of this would be statements such as “It is good to go to the gym” or “It is bad to drive slowly”.
Response: The response to a Lost Performative is to ask a question that gathers additional information about the source of the judgement. So the response to the two above examples could be: “Who says it is good to go to the gym?” and for the second one, “How do you know it is bad to drive slowly?”. There is lots of flexibility in the potential responses, it would be just as valid to ask “How do you know it is good to go to the gym?” and “Who says it is bad to drive slowly?”. A more generic question that works well with most Lost Performatives is “According to whom?”.
Prediction: The normal result of your question is that the person will pause, think about it for a moment, and tell you the source of the belief behind what they said. It is not uncommon for them to have an answer that requires another Meta Model response, but you will be one step closer to unravelling their Distortions that allow them to have their problem.
Cause and Effect
Pattern: Cause and Effect is where the reason behind something is wrongly equated to being something else. This is often used by people who want to put the reason for their actions onto someone or something else, instead of taking personal responsibility. Common examples this would be statements such as “She made me do it” or “He doesn’t know anything because he doesn’t work here”.
Response: The response to a Cause and Effect style statement is to ask a question that recovers the true reason, or choice, behind their thinking. So the response to the two examples could be: “How does what she did mean that you had to do it?” and for the second one, “How does not working here mean that he doesn’t know anything?”. Your response to a Cause and Effect style statement will normally begin with How.
Prediction: The normal result of your question is that the person will pause, think about it for a moment, and tell you the reason or choice behind what they said. It is not uncommon for them to have an answer that requires another Meta Model response, but you will be one step closer to unravelling their Distortions that allow them to have their problem.
Complex Equivalence
Pattern: Complex Equivalence is where two experiences are interpreted as being the same, when they probably aren’t. Common examples of this would be statements such as “He never hugs me, he doesn’t love me” or “He didn’t ask me any questions after the sales presentation, he is going to buy from a competitor”.
Response: The response to Complex Equivalence is to ask a question that provides a counter example and presupposes it is possible that the two experiences are not the same. So the response to the two examples could be: “Are there people or things that you love but you don’t hug?” and for the second one, “Have you ever bought from someone you didn’t ask questions of?”. The success of the response will rely, to a certain extent, on the questions having the other person reassessing whether their Complex Equivalence is true. If they have never bought from someone without asking questions then that question would be likely to reinforce their negative thinking around the chances of him not buying from a competitor.
Prediction: The normal result of your question is that the person will pause, think about it for a moment, and open up to the possibility that maybe that isn’t how it is. It is not uncommon for them to have an answer that requires another Meta Model response, but you will be one step closer to unravelling their Distortions that allow them to have their problem.
Presuppositions
Pattern: Presuppositions are present in all of our language to a certain extent. A presupposition is essentially a linguistic assumption, something you need to assume is true for a sentence to make sense. An example of a statement with presuppositions is “If my boss knew how hard I worked he would give me a pay rise.” This statement has many presuppositions: (1) The person has a boss (2) The boss is male (3) The person is currently paid something (4) It is possible for the person to be given a pay rise (5) The person works hard (6) The boss doesn’t know how hard the person works.
Response: Given that a simple sentence like that has so many presuppositions it is possible to challenge any of the presuppositions with a question to create a shift in their thinking. While challenging presuppositions that are likely to be true, like #1, #2 and #3, is possible – it is unlikely to result in any major shift in thinking. For the maximum result you are best questioning presuppositions that are less likely to be true, like #4, #5 and #6. The response to those could be: (4) “How do you know the boss wouldn’t have already given you a pay rise if he could?” (5) “How do you know that how hard you work is enough for your boss?” (6) “How do you know that he doesn’t know?”.
Prediction: The normal result of your question is that the person will pause, think about it for a moment, and open up to the possibility that maybe that isn’t how it is. It is not uncommon for them to have an answer that requires another Meta Model response, but you will be one step closer to unravelling their Distortions that allow them to have their problem.
What’s next?
Keep posted for Part 2 and Part 3 in the Meta Model series for Generalisations and Deleteions.
One of the key parts of Neuro-Linguistic Programming is the ability to model people with successful behaviour. This post is an introduction to modeling and shares the basics for creating a model.
Steps in Modeling
The basic steps in modelling are:
Find someone or someone’s behaviour that is worth modelling, ideally a model of real excellence. It is really important that the person you are modelling is better than just ‘okay’ and is getting truly excellent results – it isn’t worth bothering with people only getting average results as you’ll get the results of the person you model!
Find their:
Beliefs and Values. These are important to obtain their Model of the World. Use standard Value Elicitation techniques and then discover the beliefs around each value as appropriate. Find both enabling and disenabling beliefs and values – this area is often the most neglected in the modeling process.
Strategy (Mental Syntax). Their strategy is vital to re-create their results. The less you presuppose the more you will learn. It is important to leave your preconceived ideas at home so that you get each and every part of their strategy – if you miss anything then you’re unlikely to get the same results that the person you’re modelling gets!
Physiology. This relates to their body. Depending on what you are modeling the key is often to find out about their breathing and the next most important is their posture.
Install this in yourself. Try on the model and see how it feels. Use the model and make sure you get the same results as the person you modeled – if you don’t then find out what was missing and install it again until you get their results.
Design a universal training. Once you have a reliable model that generates results for you then you can install it in others who also want the results. By designing a training this will enable you to share it with others.
Train others. This is where you get to put your universal training to the test and share your model with others.
Train trainers. If your model is in high demand then it may even be worth training other people in how to share your model.
There are two main ways to do modeling, Imitation and Cognitive Approach. Imitation is where you do it yourself and then model yourself to see how you did it. While the Cognitive Approach is much more analytical and based on talking to someone who is already getting the desired results. The Cognitive Approach is useful in more complex results where it isn’t possible to just imitate the other person.
Outputs of Successful Modeling
Successful modeling creates four outputs:
A training on how to do it more effectively
Selection criteria (This beats training every time!)
Man-Machine Interface
Man-Man Interface
What next?
What could you successfully model? Is there a behaviour that someone you know has, that you would like to share. This would be a great opportunity to try your hand at modeling – give it a go and see what happens!
Want to learn more? Then get in touch! We regularly teach NLP, Hypnosis and Time Line TherapyTM Techniques around the world. The best way to learn more is to get in touch with us by email:
