I knew “I needed to move house,I went there, I saw the place, it was gorgeous and then I told myself I just had to have it and bam I did it, I bought it right then and there”
Any really good NLP Practitioner, has a tuned ear not only what “what” their client is saying, but for “how” they are saying it.
Content is very important, especially and in so far as how to relates to the structure of what is being communicated.
Eliciting strategies (how a person gets the results they do) is one of my favourite “practice past times”
I could be talking to someone I’ve never met and while chatting I’ll take on the challenge of watching while they tell me their strategy. I rarely install a new strategy without them first asking for some help because I have a really big rule about “playing with peoples stuff” when they haven’t asked.
All the same I just love listening to the strategy.The thing about Strategies is that they have several components. Not only do they include VAK – often starting on K and a good strategy always exists on positive K. They have other elements including “internal/external” elements of the VAK. As well they will usually include some Meta Programs and always a few Modal Operators.
If you haven’t brushed up on your Meta Programs and Modal Operators lately you might want to give them another look and then you can actively notice them in action.
Decision strategies can be very fascinating…
Recently I worked with a lady and when I elicited a good decision strategy she told me a time when she bought a house in another country.
She told me she had to move to another country (nothing illegal lol it had to do with her husbands work). “ I needed to move house, I went there I saw the place, it was gorgeous and then I told myself I just had to have it and bam I did it, I bought it right then and there”
This woman has been living happily ever after in that house since then.
I identified her strategy based on what she said…
Can you see the strategy in her words above, it’s all there, VAK, Meta Programs, Modal Operators?.
She then said to me ( about the decision strategy)
“yeah well this doesn’t always work” I said “what doesn’t always work?” she explained that she felt that the strategy I identified for her wasn’t 100%.
I responded simply that the above strategy was exceptionally well formed and is 100% successful strategy in identifying which house to buy, because she lives happily int his house. If she could learn to identify the elements that made it successful, it would work again.
She explained further…
Apparently she buys homes each time she moves to a new country (her husband is usually stationed in each country for 4 -5 years and buying homes has overall been working well for investment purposes).
She told me that sometimes she buys the place and she makes really good money and sometimes she doesn’t. She insisted that sometimes market factors and other external elements play a role in whether it was a good decision or not.
I agreed. If the decision was “where to live” vs “what to invest in” a different approach would be required. All the same, however the wellformedness of a successful strategy would stay consistent. When she learns to identify what makes hers successful she can always cross check that the elements are there in future decisions.
She then told me the details (the conversation she had with her husband about the purchase that wasn’t profitable).
It was very interesting for me to notice the differences, it went something like this…
“We went there and saw the place, it seemed like a good price, we really wanted to buy something, so I said “let’s just do it,” but my husband was hesitant he didn’t have a good feeling about the place. But it just didn’t make sense to me to rent, and I was tired of looking, it was a really nice place after all, so we bought it”
The above strategy includes full VAK, does not exit of positive K, does not have the same active meta program as the resourceful strategy (have you identified it yet?) and the modal operators aren’t at all the same as in the decision strategy that worked.
In addition she was comparing apples with oranges. The first strategy was on making a decision on where to live, and the second one although she was also looking for somewhere to live she added the criteria of making a good investment choice.
Regardless the strategies are not at all the same…
So the fact that she was unhappy living in the second one and it was a bad investment comes as no surprise to me.
If she knew back then what she was learning in the conversation she was having with me chances are she would have kept looking until she found a place that “she just had to have”.
Once I pointed out some of the fundamental differences , her eyes literally opened wide and she did a slight head shake, threw out a “but….” which trailed off while she processed.
Ponder that Practitioners….remember I’m just saying….
P.s. Our next NLP Training in Europe is only 5 months away get register today!