Practical EQ

NLP and research

2008-07-16T13:45:50+01:00

There has been hardly any decent research done into NLP - which is a shame, as it could help a lot more people if it was more widely accepted, and it would be helpful to have more to back up the notion that it's more effective and rapid than cognitive-behavioural therapy than just anecdotal evidence and an intuitive feeling!

Now there is an 'NLP and Adult Learning' research project at Surrey University, which should finally start building a research base for the acceptance of NLP as a credible change method. The links between NLP and Cognitive Linguistics that Charles Faulkner is investigating look particularly interesting.

Also, there's an NLP Research and Recognition Project in the US, backed by Judith Delozier and Steve and Connirae Andreas.

Research just in: “Diet sized snack turns off willpower”

2008-07-03T19:06:32+01:00

And here’s a timely bit of research from this week’s New Scientist suggesting one reason why diets don’t work:
“Diet sized snack turns off willpower”

Some quick thoughts about weight loss

2008-07-03T12:14:25+01:00

Many hypnotherapy schools, like the one I did my original (hopelessly crap though very expensive) training with, advertise their shorter introductory courses as giving you the tools to deal with “simple problems like weight loss and smoking”. Which is misleading, as weight loss and smoking can be some of the most layered, complex and intractable problems to resolve.

We know what doesn’t work: diets. In the long term they mostly lead to people gaining more weight than they started with, according to the meta-analysis of diet studies reported here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/apr/10/medicineandhealth.psychology

So it’s not about calories and people making rational decisions about their diet. If it was that easy, everyone would be at their ideal weight.

At a very generalised level, I think we can identify 4 main factors that contribute to the difficulty of maintaining a healthy weight.

It’s easier to eat junk than it is to eat healthily. The food industry makes more profit from processed food than it does from the good stuff, and makes sure we are bombarded with images of the things it wants us to buy, from MacDonalds ads to the ‘food porn’ articles in women’s magazines. Our bodies are designed to crave the sugar, salt and fat that used to be scarce (when we evolved) and now, when we are awash with the stuff, the craving is still there. Additionally, technology has removed a lot of the exercise that used to be integral to daily life - for example, it's usually easier to take the car to the shop than to walk there.

The motives for overeating are usually unconscious. The vast majority of people know roughly what they ‘should’ be eating (although the waters are muddied by the diet and food industries) but the impulse to overeat doesn’t come from the rational mind. It’s as if the mind of the overeater (or under-exerciser) has two ‘parts’ – the ‘elephant’ of automatic processing (to use Jonathan Haidt’s lovely metaphor) and the ‘rider’ of conscious awareness. The rider can make plans and lecture the elephant all he likes – unfortunately it’s the elephant who decides what to do moment to moment.

This is why conscious understanding of ‘why’ we overeat is not sufficient or even necessary to resolve the problem. The person knows that they “shouldn’t” overeat, but they still do it, again and again. Healing the division between the ‘part’ that wants to stay slim and the part that wants to overeat, so the person is not wasting energy on an internal struggle, is an important step towards changing behaviour. This can usually be done quickly and effectively with an intervention like the NLP ‘Parts Integration’ process.

According to the maverick and extremely knowledgeable NLP therapist Andrew Austin (in his excellent book ‘The Rainbow Machine’ and also in one of his videos on Youtube), overeaters often have a faulty decision-making process when they are deciding when and what to eat. If their decision-making strategy involves still pictures, they won’t see the consequences that a bad decision will lead to; a good decision-making strategy will often involve mental ‘movies’ of the choices, so you can see and evaluate the consequences.

Finally, our cultural tendency, encouraged by the diet industry, celebrity mags like Heat, and papers like the Daily Mail, to think and talk about weight and food issues in moral terms: “I’ve been really good today, I didn’t have a slice of cake.”

If someone feels guilty and ashamed when they eat something they enjoy, and the ‘forbidden’ foods that they normally deny themselves become viewed as treats, and their learned response when they feel bad is to look to food as a comfort – well, you can see that this is a great strategy for feeling bad most of the time, but not great for healthy eating.

So who is offering a weight loss programme that addresses these factors? I haven’t read the book, but judging by his TV shows, Paul McKenna seems to be on the right lines, despite the misleading book title: “I Can Make You Thin”. Pete Cohen and Judith Verity's Lighten Up is also worth a look.

(note: this article started life as a response to a thread on the EuroCoachList forum)

The NLP S.C.O.R.E. Model (Part 3: Using the S.C.O.R.E. with an Appreciative Focus)

2008-06-25T17:26:00+01:00

In the last posting we looked at how to use the NLP S.C.O.R.E. model in practice. Now we are ready to see how much more powerful it becomes when we use it with an 'Appreciative Frame'.

Using the S.C.O.R.E. with an Appreciative Frame

Viewed through an Appreciative frame, "Symptom" becomes "Situation". We are able to look at the whole of the current situation, not just the 'problem' aspects.

In fact, according to the principles of Appreciative Inquiry and Solution Focus, we will get better results by focusing on what's already working in the current situation so that we can do more of it, rather than focusing on problems.

Research by Richard Boyatzis at Case Western Reserve University suggests that effective change needs to focus on a person's strengths and a vision of the ideal self before attempting to address deficiencies in performance. Why? Because people go into stress when their shortcomings are pointed out, and people under stress can't learn and therefore don't change in any lasting way.

By inquiring into what's currently working and where the seeds of solutions are already beginning to happen, and into what has already been achieved and what the individual (or team) is proud of, both the past and the present become a repository of resources to be drawn on, rather than threats to be defended against or deficiencies to be ashamed of.

When you focus on what's already working, it becomes easier to imagine the desired outcome. It's much easier to decide what you want when your vision is grounded in a rich foundation of memories and reference experiences, rather than starting with a blank canvas and trying to dream something up. Visioning the future would be even harder if you had just been focusing on problems, performance gaps, constraints and mistakes, due to 'State Dependent Memory'.

Scaling

Scaling helps the coachee to get away from "all or nothing" thinking and "catastrophising" - thinking that whatever is wrong in the current situation makes it a complete disaster. The very act of assessing how things are on a scale gets the performer out of viewing any situation as either all good or all bad.

The basic scaling question:
On a scale of 0 to 10 where 0 is the worst it's ever been, and 10 how it's going to be when all the problems are solved, where are you now on that scale?

Supplementary questions to discover more resources in the present, and remind the coachee of past achievements:

You are at n now, how did you get that far?
How do you stop yourself sliding back to n-1?

The NLP S.C.O.R.E. Model (Part 2: Using the S.C.O.R.E. in Practice)

2008-06-18T17:19:00+01:00

Using the S.C.O.R.E. in practice - with individuals

To really get the best from the S.C.O.R.E. it needs to be more than a cerebral paper-and-pen exercise. Instead, lay the timeline on the floor and mark out Causes, Symptoms, Outcomes and Effects as spaces along it. Resources should be somewhere off the timeline.

The model will have more impact if the explorer physically steps into each location as they investigate it. This helps to physically associate the person into the state and frame of mind of each component of the model, making it easier to access all the information at each stage.

By walking through the sequence from Causes, through Symptoms and Outcomes to Effects, the explorer will begin to condition in a metaphorical sequence of moving from 'problem' to 'solution'. They can step off the timeline and gather what they need from the Resource location any time it feels right.

The 'Dancing S.C.O.R.E. Format' developed by Judith DeLozier takes this principle even deeper into the kinaesthetic realm, inviting the client to adopt the posture and movement that feels characteristic of each stage. By moving repeatedly through the sequence of postures from problem to solution, the client begins to internalise the direction of change 'in the muscle'.

A skilled NLP practitioner will be able to make the process more effective by anchoring the 'positive' stages (Resources, Outcomes and Effects) as appropriate. You could also use embedded suggestion and hypnotic tonality in your questions to help the client associate more fully into these stages.

Using the S.C.O.R.E. in practice - with teams

If a management team wants to assess where they are now, and where they want to get to - or indeed if they want to draw a line under past failures and set some new objectives - the S.C.O.R.E. model provides a ready-made format. It's best done with an independent facilitator who can guide the process without having an emotional stake in the content.

In my experience, most managers are not interested in the intricacies of NLP, but just want something that helps them to move forward. The S.C.O.R.E. model is well suited to the task because it is relatively jargon-free.

You don't even have to make the concept of a timeline explicit - just arrange four flip charts in a line to represent Causes, Symptoms, Outcomes and Effects, with another flip off to one side for Resources, and you have an implicit timeline. As the team members move from one flip to another to record the information they get from each stage, they will unconsciously internalise the idea of progress along a timeline even if it's never explicitly mentioned (I picked up this tip from NLP business consultant Colin Reeve).

This being the UK, you may also welcome some ideas on how to prevent a team problem-solving format that starts with examining 'symptoms' from turning into a morale-sapping whinge fest? Your introduction will set the tone for the rest of the session, so emphasise the desired end result of clarifying the desired outcome and identifying the positive consequences. The more you know about the values of the team, the more you can encourage their 'towards' motivation. If it's a particularly 'away from' team, you can emphasise the consequences of not focusing on the desired outcomes and effects.

You can encourage a positive mindset before the session even starts, by asking participants in their invitation to come in with examples of what is already working well in the organisation or team.

More on the NLP SCORE model

2008-06-14T18:25:00+01:00

One of the great things about the NLP SCORE model is that you can improvise with it. Last weekend I was demonstrating how to use the SCORE for coaching in the Advanced Coaching Skills module of my NLP Master Practitioner course with a 'client' who wanted to dispel his nervousness when driving on motorways.

He described the Symptoms, the original event that 'Caused' the problem, and his desired Outcome. When he stepped into the Resource space and improved his state markedly with the many resources he found there, I had a mini-flash of inspiration and asked him to look over at the Cause event from the Resource perspective and tell me what he noticed.

He realised something that he hadn't previously. It wasn't that he remembered anything new, rather that he had an insight for the first time about what was present in the 'cause' event that contributed to the problem.

How did this happen? I believe it was because for the first time he was able to consider the 'cause' event while feeling resourceful, and with a greater detachment (because of the physical distance between Resource and Cause positions) than he had been able to achieve previously. "Strong emotions make us stupid", as neuroscientist Joseph LeDoux says; previously, the client had been somewhat distressed whenever he thought about the incident - enough to stop him getting useful insights about it, anyway.

This kind of effect is why the SCORE is more powerful when you physically walk through the different positions than if you do it as a pen-and-paper exercise.

I've been interviewed on the radio!

2008-06-13T18:19:19+01:00

Well - on Pooja's Business Show on Westside FM, anyway.

I was interviewed about goal-setting for about 5 minutes - I suspect if I'd been able to make it to the studio rather than just phoning it in I would have got longer.

Anyway here it is:

http://www.thebigdream.co.uk/2008/05/24/the-babeecard/

I'm on between 28.00 and about 33.50, so blink and you miss me!

Pooja's show is actually really good and she has interesting guests - a mixture of entrepreneurs and business gurus large and small.

The NLP S.C.O.R.E. Model (Part 1: the basics)

2008-06-11T17:17:23+01:00

If you would like an easy-to-use coaching and problem-solving model that you can also use with teams, read on. The S.C.O.R.E. model is part of the NLP toolkit, but you can still get good results with it even if you don't have any NLP experience.

Even if you are trained in NLP, you may not be familiar with the S.C.O.R.E., as it's not taught in every school, but it's definitely worth knowing about. And if you are already know the S.C.O.R.E. (arf arf), you may be interested in some tips I've picked up for getting the best from it in practice, and you will definitely want to know how it can be transformed into something still more powerful through an appreciative, solution-focused frame.

Origins

Robert Dilts states in the Encyclopedia of Systemic NLP and NLP New Coding that the S.C.O.R.E. model originated in 1987 when he and the late Todd Epstein noticed that they were intuitively using a more effective method than their advanced NLP students for mapping out problems and designing interventions to get to solutions.

As they examined their own problem-solving process to find how it differed from that of their students, they found that they were viewing any problem situation as having these five components:

Symptoms:	these are the immediate signs that tell you there is a problem
Causes:	which may be the antecedent conditions that gave rise to the symptoms, the intentions behind behaviours giving rise to the problem, or current constraints
Outcomes:	your desired result or goal, where you want to get to
Resources:	the qualities, capabilities, reserves and help that you can bring to bear on solving the problem. These can be past, present or future.
Effects:	the longer term, systemic and higher level results of the outcome

You can arrange these elements on a time line like this:

Sample questions to clarify each component

Symptoms:

What's not working?
What do you want to change?

Causes:

What are the underlying causes?
What's stopping you from fixing this?
Who or what is benefiting from not fixing this?

Outcomes:

What do you want instead of the problem?
Where do you want to get to?

Effects:

What will it do for you/your team/your organisation/society for you to attain your goal?
How will reaching your outcome change things?
What will you learn from it?

Resources

What skills/money/equipment/contacts do you have that will help you to solve your problem?
Have you faced a problem like this before? How did you solve it?

Generally you would start with the Symptoms. After that you can go in any direction. There is no set order or prescribed length of time to be spent in each component - let your interest and intuition, and your calibration of the client, guide you as to when to move to another component, and which one to move to.

Next: Part 2 - how to use the NLP S.C.O.R.E. model in practice when coaching teams or individuals.

If you would like to book a S.C.O.R.E. facilitation session for your team, call me on 0845 83 855 83 or email at andy@practicaleq.com.

EQ Tip - preparing for interviews and other stressful events

2008-05-29T14:09:00+01:00

A while ago one of my friends was preparing for an important interview and asked me for help as she felt a bit nervous. This is what I came up with:

Imagine that you are surrounded by an 'inner circle' of the people who love you. See them - hear their voices - they are close enough to reach out and touch.

Around them is an 'outer circle' of people who value, like and respect you - friends, colleagues, whatever. Again, see them, hear their voices, and they are close enough to reach through or over the inner circle and give you a reassuring pat on the back or shoulder.

Now, how do you feel about that interview or presentation? If you've got the right people in your circles, it should be a lot better. The more vividly you imagine the people around you (through all the senses - seeing, hearing, feeling) the better it will work. Do this again just before you go in to the interview.

My friend got the job!

You could use this technique to get yourself into the right frame of mind for any 'scary' upcoming event - presentations, speeches, appraisals....

If you liked this tip, you may want to sign up for my free emotional intelligence, coaching and NLP newsletter.

This is another archive tip rescued from my ancient and now-deceased first stab at a blog.

7%, 38%, 55% - the facts

2008-05-28T14:02:59+01:00

Ever heard that statistic that only 7% of information in communication is conveyed by the words, 38% by voice tone, and 55% by body language? Well, it's not strictly true.

The original experiments by a psychologist called Mehrabian have been taken wildly out of context. These web pages set the record straight:

http://www.neurosemantics.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=375&Itemid=199
http://www.linguistlist.org/issues/12/12-1332.html

And from Mehrabian's own web page at http://www.kaaj.com/psych/smorder.html, he makes the point that his original experiments were about feelings and attitudes:
---------------

"Total Liking = 7% Verbal Liking + 38% Vocal Liking + 55% Facial Liking

Please note that this and other equations regarding relative importance of verbal and nonverbal messages were derived from experiments dealing with communications of feelings and attitudes (i.e., like-dislike). Unless a communicator is talking about their feelings or attitudes, these equations are not applicable.
--------------

I could have sworn that there was also an article on the Fast Company web site debunking the use of these statistics out of context, but apparently not. I must have been thinking of the "Yale goal-setting study" (quoted by Anthony Robbins among many others) which seems to have never actually happened.

This post originally appeared in my first primitive attempt at a self-hosted blog way back in 2004. The original blog has vanished like the lost continent of Atlantis, but I'll salvage anything I think is worthwhile and repost it here.