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!
On Saturday I was lucky enough to spend an afternoon with Dr Srikumar Rao at the London Business School. It was at an event organised by Chris Morris and I turned up to explore Dr Srikumar’s ideas in relation to authentic happiness. Below are a couple of the pertinent points that I was mindful enough to write down at the time and some I didn’t write down but have stuck with me.
The event opened with the interesting idea: If you are not finding moments to be grateful constantly throughout your days then you are wasting your life!
Dr Srikumar Rao opened by sharing a lot of his background. He has had a really varied set of experiences that have brought him in contact with many high level executives and he has witnessed first hand how few of them are really happy. He currently runs a highly successful course called Creativity and Personal Mastery (CPM) as part of a MBA program.
Then he started sharing several of the core concepts to his approach. He believes that our lives are made up of Mental Chatter and Mental Models. Srikumar suggests that Mental Chatter is there all of the time for each of us and that the chatter that goes on inside our heads is responsible for dictating our lives. Mental Models are the constructs we have in our mind for everything, all of the processes and associations that go on without us thinking about it. The problem with Mental Models is that people don’t realise that they have models – this seemed very similar to the NLP idea that the map is not the territory. And why is all of this important? Because it is a combination of your Mental Chatter and your Mental Models that create your reality.
One thought that really stuck with me was: Anytime you are in a situation and you find it unpleasant AND it persists you are using a bad Mental Model.
One of the key themes of Dr Rao’s presentation was that happiness is found through changing the focus from yourself and placing it onto others. He calls our natural desire to focus on ourselves a ‘Me Centered Universe’ and, to use his words, “A Me Centered Universe guarantees a mediocre existence of depression and unhappiness”. That is a pretty powerful thought… In way of expansion Srikumar made the point that every modest move away from living in a Me Centered Universe will have a huge impact on your happiness. He goes on to say that the path to happiness is to find a way to be part of a cause that is greater than yourself, for the greater good of the greater community. A pretty straight forward idea really. Lot’s of what he said seemed to draw quite heavily on eastern philosophies, including placing the focus onto the journey rather than trying to see happiness as a destination.
Then we had a chance to do an exercise in small groups. Our group had three people in it and the task was quite simple. We had to share a situation in our life that is of concern to us. Then, with the help of the group, we had to construct a different reality, or a new Mental Model, that is both better AND plausibly believable. This took about 10~15 minutes of discussion per group member. Then our homework was to start living as if my new reality were the reality. We had to ignore any evidence that disproved it while also writing down the evidence that proves it and to continue to do that for 7-10 weeks. Dr Rao suggested you should only work on one alternate reality at a time.
Quite simply, this exercise has been amazing for me. The problem I discussed with the group came up with some great ideas but the problem we worked on isn’t a huge deal for me right now. So instead I’ve ended up using a generic Alternate Reality he threw out during his presentation of: “Today I am going to experience amazing moments of wonder and joy”. So yes, stuff that isn’t ‘amazing’ has happened but I have been ignoring it and focusing on the amazing moments. It has been a great experience hunting them out and what I’ve found is that so far (Only 6 days in) I’m yet to have a day without multiple of these moments… The funny thing is that the more I look for them, the more I am finding them. This whole idea is just another approach to “You get what you focus on” from NLP, but once again I am reminded of the power of implementing the concepts in my day to day behavior.
From this point forward the discussion seemed to get a bit more interesting and Dr Rao was responding to our questions, rather than sharing the generic info about what he does. An idea that rang true for me is that people are inherently happy. He had us remember a time when we saw something so beautiful that the whole world sort of stopped still (Such as looking at a beautiful scene in nature, or a new born child) – he suggested that this will come every time we accept the world totally and completely, exactly as it is.
He talked about how so many people are running the If, Then Mental Model. The “I have to get something so I can do something so I can be happy” Mental Model, aka conditional happiness. Dr Rao’s approach is that we are always in the perfect place for what you need right now, a pretty cool Mental Model. Instead of focusing on this If, Then model he talked about investing in the process, not the goal. By investing in the process the probability of you doing it will go up and the journey will bless you. Ultimately the mindset we need to adopt to be happy is “If you reach your goal… then life is wonderful” along with “If you don’t reach your goal… then life is wonderful”. By detaching ourselves from an emotional investment in the outcome, and fully investing in the journey, happiness can result.
From this point on the afternoon turned into more of a discussion so I will share the main points of note:
The only place you can ever start from is where you are now
Nobody can judge whether you are in a Me Centered Universe or Others Centered Universe from the outside
All of man’s problems are caused because Man cannot be left in a room by himself
All Mental Models crumble under enough scrutiny – the question is will it serve you better than your current Mental Model?
An exercise for moving towards an Others Centered Universe: Stop using I, me and why in your conversation. This leads to you starting to genuinely listening. Having tried this it is easier said than done!
Each day set out to make somebodies day. Do it consciously and deliberately.
Happiness is the by-product of living for others.
Behavioral change by a method of will is doing violence to yourself (I really liked that one).
That’s it. Then some of us headed down the nearest pub and that conversation is best saved for somewhere more private. I hope these notes have been of some interest – if you have any questions then feel free to comment or drop me an email.
Many people are surprised to hear that Trance is not a binary state (i.e. in trance or not in trance) but more of an analogue scale from very light trance all the way through to a very deep trance. Milton Erickson defined trance as the process of learning to go into trance. He went on to suggest that there are three experiential stages of hypnosis that you can learn to go into:
Light Trance: Critical faculties are put on hold.
Simple Trance: The client manifests the appearance of a deep trance but internally is merely compliant with suggestions.
Deep Trance: The client actually experiences the suggestions as reality.
Both Light and Simple trances can be induced in a relatively short time. On the other hand, Erickson recommended an initial period of three to eight hours for training a subject to into a deep trance! Results will vary depending on your client, it is the time that it takes them to learn to go into trance that will decide on the time involved as much as it will rely on your skill as a Hypnotherapist.
So how do the levels of trance differ?
In Light Trance it is normal to comfortably experience:
Lethargy
Relaxation
Eye Catalepsy
Arm Catalepsy
Catalepsy of isolated Muscle Groups
Heavy or Floating Feelings
In Simple Trance it is normal to comfortably experience:
Smell and Taste Changes
Number Blocks (Where the client forgets numbers)
Amnesia
Analgesia (No Pain)
Automatic Movement
In Deep Trance it is normal to comfortably experience:
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.
When discussing a problem with clients it isn’t uncommon for me to hear about all the things that they ’should’ be doing. And normally the things that they ’should’ be doing aren’t the things that they are actually doing (Surprise, surprise). They should be exercising more, they should be saving more, they should be getting to bed earlier…
But if you think about it… there is actually very little that we ’should’ do.
Linguistically, ’should’ is a modal operator of necessity. If you ever hear terms like ’should’, ‘must’ or ‘have to’ in your speech, or that of your friends/family, you could legitimately ask, “According to who?”. Or, “What would happen if you didn’t?”. Because there is so little that we ’should’ be doing this word is often used to make us feel guilty or bad about what we’re not doing. Instead of feeling guilty maybe it is more constructive to consider to real reason why it is important… because maybe, just maybe, you’ll find that it isn’t quite as important as you at first thought.
If you are going to use the word ’should’, keep it to yourself. It is one thing to talk about what you should be doing without imposing your ’shoulds’ onto others.
Contrary to popular belief the words that we use to communicate are a mere 7% of what we use to receive communication from another person. When deciding whether we like someone body language makes up 55% of the communication with voice tonality accounting for the remaining 38% of the communication. This is according to research that has been freely available since 1971 (Thanks to Albert Mehrabian).
What this means is that how you say it, is WAAAAAY more important that what you say. And how you stand/sit/move when you say it are even more important again. What is it saying that you’ve got your arms crossed? How does the gruff tone of voice change the meaning of what you just said? Are you coming across as congruent – or maybe your words don’t quite match the rest of your communication?
To become a true master of communication you must have control and flexibility over your body language and tone of voice.
This video is a really interesting talk at TED in 2008 by Martin Seligman, an American Psychologist. It provides an interesting insight into how Psychology has evolved over the last several decades and discusses the change on focus from finding problems with people, and their past, towards finding ways to make the lives of people happier.
How could we tackle the topic of communication without delving into the art of listening? As an effective communicator you are going to spend a lot of your time simply listening, probably most of your time in fact! The joy of communicating is being understood. Through your listening ability you can share this joy with the people in your life.
As a listener you need to make sure that you properly understand what is communicated. As an active listener you can do this by asking questions, mirroring back what they say and using non-verbal cues to show understanding. Does what they’re saying make sense? Nod your head! Do you need clarification? Repeat back to them part of what they’ve said with a questioning tone and they’ll happily expand upon that point.
Remember: You are 100% responsible for the communication. Your role as a listener is just as important as that of the talker! Take the steps to actively listen and notice the difference in the results from your communication.
People like to be heard. Actively listening too them is a powerful act.
When dealing with communication it is common to focus on the way that you are communicating, what words you chose and possibly even your body language. This weeks motivator focuses on how even when you’re not actively communicating, you are still communicating.
As important as focusing on the way you communicate is to focus on the way you are communicating when you’re not actively interacting with others. This may take a little bit of thinking to get your head around, but what does it communicate when you don’t pickup the phone and it goes to voicemail? What does it communicate when you ignore someones email or text message? What does it communicate when you reply to an important message only after being reminded about it by them several times?
So if the meaning of the communication is the response that you get, what does your delayed or lack of interaction communicate? Think about it.
It is impossible to stop communicating.
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:
