Powered by NLP Ebook

Reflections and Future
Developments of NLP
From The NLP Leadership Summit
January 2016
Published in England
by GWiz Publishing
(A division of The GWiz Learning Partnership)
Oakhurst, Mardens Hill, Crowborough, E. Sussex. TN6 1XL
Tel (+44) 1892 309205
[email protected]
www.gwiznlp.com
First published 2016.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
© GWizNLP 2016
All rights reserved.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or
transmitted in any way, without prior permission of the author and
publisher.
ISBN: 978-0-9548800-2-6
ii
Contents
Foreword v
Introduction ix
Reflections: Rachel Hott 1
1 Building a Worldwide NLP Community 7

Community, Collaboration & Connection: Heidi Heron 9
Conflict Resolution for Unprofessional Behavior: L. Michael Hall 13
Reflections: Judith Lowe 17
2 NLP: Today & Tomorrow? 25

How do we decide what is and is not “NLP”?: L. Michael Hall 27
The Elder Columns: Jaap Hollander, Lucas Derks, Bruce Grimley & 29
Lisa de Rijk
Reflections: Luzia Wittman 53
The Leadership of NLP: Laureli Blyth 57
Reflections: Anneke Durlinger 59
Why is NLP so important today?: Karl Nielsen 63
Reflections: Ueli R. Frischknecht 73
3 Credibility: Professional NLP 77

NLP – Profession and Professionalism: L. Michael Hall 79
Modelling Exemplars for the Successful Spread of NLP: Lisa de Rijk 81
& Melody Cheal
The Future of E Learning and Technology in Training NLP: Karen 93
Meager
Reflections: Reb Veale 97
About the Authors 99
iii
iv
Foreword
Joe Cheal
Imagine...
Imagine twenty-nine NLP ‘elders’ from across the world

coming together to talk…
To talk about NLP and its future…
To talk about their hopes and visions as to what NLP can become...
To talk about what happens next.
Imagine no international borders.
Imagine helpfulness instead of hierarchy,
Imagine playfulness instead of posturing
and participation instead of positioning.
Welcome to the 2016 Leadership Summit ‘Colloquium’.
A Quick Background
Back in 2012, a collection of NLP ‘elders’ were invited to gather in

London at the NLP Conference. This was the first meeting of the
‘NLP Leadership Summit’.
An elder, in this case, is defined as somebody who:
 Has 15 years minimum experience in the field of NLP,

 Is recognised as a Leader in NLP (either as a trainer and/or
someone who is leading people to NLP rather than standing
on the apex),
v
Foreword
 Is willing to sign up to the declaration, purpose and values

(published on the website www.nlpleadershipsummit.org).
Soon, more elders were invited and the list from around the world
currently adds up to about 130 people (listed on the website). The
group have met again each year at the NLP Conference.
The meeting in January 2016 was a ‘special’ three day event for folks
to meet and take more time to discuss and work through the things
that mattered. This event became known as a ‘colloquium’ (an
informal meeting for an exchange of views), where all individuals
came to the room as equals.
Folks in attendance were:
Anneke Durlinger Netherlands

Anneke Meijer Netherlands
Brian van der Horst France
Bruce Grimley UK
Caitlin Zaharia Romania
Fabiola Escobar Chile
vi
Powered by NLP!
Frank Pucelik Ukraine

Gilles Roy France
Hedi Roulin Switzerland
Heidi Heron Australia
Jaap Hollander Netherlands
Joe Cheal UK
John McWhirter Scotland
John McLaughlan UK
Judith Lowe UK
Karen Maeger UK
Karl Nielsen Germany
Laureli Blyth Australia
Lisa de Rijk UK
Lucas Derks Netherlands
Luzia Wittmann Portugal
Melody Cheal UK
Michael Hall USA
Nandana Nielsen Germany
Rachel Hott USA
Reb Veale UK
Shelle Rose Charvet Canada
Steven Leeds USA
Ueli R. Frischknecht Switzerland
Why This Book?
From a personal perspective, as I sat listening to the experience,

wisdom and collaboration in the room I thought: “Wow, if you
could only bottle this and let the wider NLP community know the
passion that these folk have for NLP, how powerful that could be.”
vii
Foreword
I loved the fact that although most of these folk had never met
before, and came from vastly different schools of NLP from around
the world, there was no need for ego, division or divisiveness. It
was an honour to be there and to witness what human
communication can truly be. Here I saw the NLP presuppositions in
action.
If we can’t ‘bottle’ it, we could at least record it in some way; even

the essence of it. And hence the book idea was born, Powered by
NLP!
Having been editor of Acuity (the ANLP Journal) for a few years, I
knew a book could be created simply if enough people at the
colloquium wanted to contribute. Seventeen participants (half the
group) liked the idea of a publication and wanted to add something.
‘Powered by NLP!’ is a range of ideas from people in the group.

Whilst all of the articles are inspired by discussions at the
‘colloquium’, you will find that some are more formal in their
approach whilst others are more about personal reflections.
The content of this book is not meant to be the ‘truth’ but simply
perspectives from different people. It is, perhaps, the start of a
discussion: you might even discover different views and opinions
expressed herein! You will also find different styles of writing and
from an editorial perspective I have made the choice to maintain the
authors’ original spelling and grammar wherever possible
(including a mix of English and US English).
This book is not about ‘what the leadership summit says or thinks’.
There is no ‘gospel’ here! The material comes from the individuals
within the group; so let it provoke your own agreements,
disagreements and ideas...
viii
Introduction
L. Michael Hall
Forging a New Future for NLP
A truly historical event occurred January 8, 9 and 10 in the coastal

city of Alicante Spain, on the Mediterranean Sea. It occurred when
33 top leaders in the field of NLP came together representing 13
countries and multiple languages for a conversation of a lifetime.
Another ten were expected, but for family issues and other things at
the last minute they were not able to come. These leaders typically
were key leaders in various National Associations of NLP around
the world— The Association of NLP of the UK, of Germany, of the
Netherlands, Australia, Canada, etc. and we even had one of the
original co-founders of NLP with us, Frank Pucelik from the
Ukraine.
For three full days officially from 10 am to 7 pm, and many more
hours at breakfast and in the pub, we had many of the
conversations that the field has needed to have for the past 40
years. We actually began these four years ago when we began the
half-day (4 hour) Summits in London prior to the NLP London
Conference. We began those Summits to know each other and
become acquainted with each other so that it began to build trust
between us. And what we did there was taken to a much, much
higher level in this three-day intensive. Several commented on the
level of trust and sense of community that has emerged among us.
The Idea of a “Summit”
In the world of politics, when an issue or a problem arises in a

country and it is too big, too overwhelming, too global a problem
for the leaders of one country to solve, often an invitation will go
ix
Introduction
out to the leaders of half a dozen countries or a dozen or two dozen

to come together to talk about it. They call that conversation, a
Summit. The Summit has no power, no organization, no army, no
budget, etc. It is just a meeting of leaders to put their heads together
to talk about a shared problem or a shared challenge. Sometimes,
however, out of such Summits, arise an Alliance that is empowered
by all of the countries.
The NLP Leadership Summit is similar. The Summit, as such, has no

“authority” to prescribe or control. It is a place, or perhaps more
accurately an experience, wherein the top leaders come together to
encounter a shared problem or challenge. That’s what we have
done. And what has emerged, ever so slowly (well, for my tastes) is
a growing sense of collaboration and willingness to take some
effective actions to address the problems of “negative press,”
misrepresentations, lack of an international unifying body, the
“cowboys” giving NLP a bad name, etc.
One problem in the field of NLP has been the divisiveness—the

separating into individualistic camps. This has led to the Elephant-
in-the-room problem that every person new to NLP excitedly and
surprisingly asks, “Do the leaders of NLP talk to each other?” “Do
they get along?” “Why are there these divisions and camps?”
“Why don’t the leaders apply NLP to themselves?” For years, many
of us talked this way primarily with regard to Richard Bandler and
John Grinder. Then we spoke about it regarding those who have
been carrying the mantle of leadership after them.
The good news is that today we can say, “The top leaders of NLP
are talking and attempting to work together.” “And they are also
forging ahead looking for how we can co-create the kind of future
for NLP that we all want— a future wherein the model/s of NLP are
recognized, found credible, and is progressing in the world as it
enables people to change their lives for the better and become their
best selves.”
x
Powered by NLP!
What we did during the Summit was experience co-leadership.

That’s not easy. I think it could be said that everyone of the leaders
present is a person of strong opinions and a person who gets things
done. They are not just talkers. They are there, in part, and self-
funded themselves to come because they are successful in their own
right in using NLP. Many (probably most) are or were trainers,
entrepreneurs who run or had run Training Centers. Others are
therapists, consultants, coaches, or researchers. And as the saying
goes, leading a group of strong-willed people like that is “trying to
herd cats.”
In facilitating the group, Heidi Heron and myself, set up the

processes so that everyone had a opportunity to be in front of the
group and present what one of the three (or more) smaller groups
had deliberated on. We also facilitated conversations within the
larger group— and many times it became very animated. Yet,
amazingly, we truly kept applying the NLP Communication Model
to ourselves so the conversations were respectful and considerate
even when the conversations became intense. I felt proud of the
group and everyone in the group.
xi
Introduction
xii
A Personal Reflection on the Summit
Rachel Hott, PhD
It was my first time attending an NLP Leadership summit. I only

knew five people out of thirty, one being my husband/business
partner, Steven Leeds. As I listened to the participants introduce
themselves, all of whom had been involved in NLP for at least 15
years in the areas of training, research, writing and/or innovation, I
was very impressed. I liked being part of an interesting and exciting
group of NLPers who like me had made NLP their life.
Michael Hall and Heidi Heron, who organized the summit,

seamlessly provided a unifying structure for the three days. Sitting
in a circle we discussed varied topics related to NLP, its past,
present and most importantly, its future. There were three tables for
break out groups of ten. When breaking into these groups we had
four designated roles: facilitator, scribe, timekeeper and speaker. We
were also asked (jokingly?) to make sure each group had its own
designated 'mis-matcher.' The discussions included, "What are the
standards needed in an NLP Practitioner Training?," "What is
happening with NLP research?," "Is NLP a profession?", "Are we
conflict adverse?", "How do we incorporate technology into training
and public relations?", "What are the foundations of NLP?", "What's
new in NLP?", What is our vision for the future of NLP?", and
"What defines an NLP Leader?"
At the get go we reminded ourselves to demonstrate respect for

each other, eliminate bad mouthing, not speak over each other and
keep our comments brief. Everyone in the group remained
respectful when disagreeing. Together we created the safe space we
all wanted. While speaking over each other and going beyond our
allotted time did occur (I was definitely one of the culprits).
1
Powered by NLP!
Fortunately our facilitators respectfully "reeled us in" when this

happened.
What did I learn and what did I take away? I learned about the
Nicaragua University, thanks to Karl and Nandana, that provides a
PhD in psychology with an emphasis in NLP where students do not
have to reside in Nicaragua to attend. I also found out about some
offspring techniques, Mind Sonar, designed by Jaap Hollander and
Social Panorama, designed by Lucas Derks. Each technique uses
aspects of NLP and is being taught separately from a typical
practitioner training. I learned that Catalan from Romania, who is
the leader of the INLPT group has created an association for
training psychotherapists in NLP in thirteen countries.
At times my new learning was on a smaller chunk size, during

informal conversations. One discussion was about modeling and
what modeling is and isn't. There was also considerable
disagreement about the length of an NLP certification training and
what specific curriculum "should," be included. I also found out that
not all NLP trainings have the same curriculum. Some NLP
trainings don't teach Milton Model and some include Meta
Programs in their Practitioner curriculum while others include it in
their Master Practitioner curriculum. I learned that some NLP
trainers only do demonstrations without describing or discussing
the techniques and instead just tell participants to do the exercise.
We did not always arrive at a conclusion, but the interactions were
lively and thought provoking.
The most spontaneous moments were also the most memorable for
me. There are two that stand out for me. One occurred in a small
group when I was the facilitator. Our group members were; myself,
Melody, Shelly, Nadana, Heidi, Anneke M., Fabiola, Jaap, Ueli, and
Judith. Our group was discussing how do we get other people to
come to NLP trainings, or "How do we get people to play with us?"
2
Reflections
Our first innovation was to leave the summit meeting room and go
outside to the delightfully sunny weather and sit by the patio. After
we began discussing how to "get people to play", an idea was
generated that involved using ourselves to describe on a 'YouTube'
style video why we found NLP useful. The excitement in our group
was palpable. We began talking louder and faster, and I must admit
my facilitation was not present as we got caught up in our
creativity. We began to wonder what we would say. "Powered by
NLP," was thrown about, and advice about identifying a problem
and then a solution was suggested for the content, then the wind
became fierce and we were blown back into the training room. Our
timekeeper reminded us that we were getting close to the end. Some
people had practiced a line or two of what would they say if they
were to do this. I felt an impulse and thought, "why not do this
now." I took out my smartphone, pressed the video button, looked
at Melody, and she began the dialogue, and then I filmed the next
person and then the next and ended with myself. At one moment
we were speaking English and then German, then Dutch, Spanish,
Swiss-German, and within 2 minutes and 18 seconds we had shot a
video that we could share with the world to say, "Come play with
us." It was our innovation, and I felt our creativity and proactivity
flowing. We had worked together as a team and had a product to
show. We then shared the video with the larger group. Everyone
clapped and most were ready to get filmed too. Yes that was
creativity. Subsequently I have shown this video to NLP students
and they have liked it and felt like they too are part of something
bigger than just their training program.
Another spontaneous and creative moment occurred in another

group discussing "what is" and "what isn't" NLP. Our group
members were myself, Melody, Catalan, Anneke M., Shelle, Brian,
Joe and Laureli. My role was to be the speaker, the one who reports
to the larger group. As the discussion began, Joe jumped up to get a
flip chart, Melody grabbed her Post-its and within seconds, our
3
Powered by NLP!
group listed most of the NLP concepts, techniques, foundations,

theories and spinoffs. Earlier in the large group Anneke D. used the
metaphor of a tree, so Lucas drew a tree on the flip chart and Joe put
up the Post-its. Our discussion became loud and fast, and I felt
caught up in the excitement. At one point I was excitedly talking
with Shelle, while others were talking and Anneke M. had to get us
to focus, because we were all speaking over each other with ideas. It
was at that moment I realized that in order for me determine
whether something was NLP I had to ask myself, "Do I have to
know NLP to learn this?" This question then led us to several more
questions. I don't remember who contributed, but at this point we
were a group, collectively and collaboratively co-creating. So
forgive me for not identifying who said what. Here are the other
questions that we created to decide if something is or isn't NLP;
"What do I think, (this was from Lucas), and I think it meant that we
each will have our opinion no matter what. "Does the technique
have pattern and distinctions from our foundation?", "Does it
advance/enrich the NLP field?", "Does it in some way create an
application or repurpose?", "Does the person creating this technique
acknowledge NLP as part of its roots?" Our tree flip chart was full.
We did not necessarily have a firm conclusion on what was or
wasn't NLP, but we had a great visual aide, which we shared with
the large group and that led to more collaborative discussion.
In sharing these two examples I am aware of my preference for

proactivity, speed and energy. In both groups we became very
animated and often speaking over each other because of our
enthusiasm. With the help of the facilitators, we did create
something concrete. I had a lot of fun and we were effective.
A pleasant surprise for me was meeting other NLP couples. Steven

and I have been married and running our NLP Center for over 30
years, and we did not know these other couples, living parallel lives
to ours. I met at least four other married couples who are working
4
Reflections
as partners in NLP and that was very affirming. I also learned that
the perception of New Yorkers or perhaps people from the United
States is that we never take time for ourselves. Note to self, "stop
writing and take a break nowwwww."
5
Powered by NLP!
6
Building a Worldwide
NLP Community
7
Powered by NLP!
8
Community, Collaboration
& Connection
Dr. Heidi Heron PsyD
Community, collaboration and connection. These are three words I

would use to explain my experience at the NLP Leaderships
Summit in Spain. As an NLP trainer based in Australia, we
sometimes get isolated in our cocoon of NLP. I am also the current
Chairperson of the Australian Board of NLP – so there is somewhat
of a community – but it really, is more of a group.
I have been attending the NLP Leadership Summit at the London

conference since the group began in 2012. At those meetings we
began to meet each other and form a group of like-minded
individuals. Something that has often struck me as ‘universally
interesting’ is that most of us in the room all have or have had the
same job – teaching and sharing the skills of NLP with others. This
job, as a trainer, educator, leader in a field such as NLP is an
interesting one. We each wear many hats – from marketer,
promoter, trainer, coach, therapist even cleaner; we each believe
what we are doing is the best; we are each passionate about what
we do – and we each have a passion for this thing we know of as
NLP. During the 3 group meetings we had in London, we formed a
group.
I was looking forward to spending 3 whole days with the leaders

within this group – and in this case the ‘leaders’ means every single
person involved. After all, we deemed the term “Leadership
Summit” to simply mean people who are “leading others into
NLP”. So, I was looking forward to continuing to meet this group of
leaders. I actually took an active role inviting NLP leaders who were
9
Powered by NLP!
not yet a part of the group to be a part of the group, and a

coordinating role to get the current members to come along.
The feedback was interesting. Most people thought it was a good

idea, I received some feedback about it ‘being tried before’ and a
couple of people who just wanted nothing to do with it.
In my mind it takes a very special kind of person to put aside their

own mind, ego and personal agenda to attend a meeting like this
one. A meeting of similar and different mindset. A meeting of peers
and colleagues. A meeting without true form, leadership or design.
A common theme that I found throughout the group is a desire to
work together, share together and be a part of a larger collective
whole for the greater good of the future of NLP, and not just for the
individual.
My own passion lies within community. My values and beliefs lean

toward living, working and sharing with others in a meaningful
way. What I found over the three days were community,
collaboration and connection.
Community – in my mind there has always been somewhat of a

divide; and there still is. But the community that was developed
during those three days, that began as a group formed during the
London NLP Conference was outstanding. There was no disconnect
from anyone. Ego and personal agendas were put aside and the
desire to look at NLP as a greater whole was present. Sure – we had
discussions and disagreements about standards, length of courses,
who can and should be invited to the community; but a strong
community can have these discussions without it breaking the
community.
I was tremendously inspired by the work that people do – the

experience people have and how they are using NLP in their own
corners of the world.
10
NLP Community
When I came back to Australia I presented a short webinar to the

Australian Board of NLP members about what happened – what
was discussed and what came out of the three day. One question I
was asked was “did anything happen?” And, I replied “Yes! We
talked! And we talked, and we talked, and we talked!” This is
something new. And we didn’t talk about ourselves personally
within the group. Sure, we got to know each other – especially over
a drink in the evening… but during the day, from 10am to 7pm – we
talked about the next 40 years of NLP. And we talked a lot – in open
discussions with community at mind.
We also collaborated. Working groups were created and are still in

progress – working on actions within standards, research,
promotion of NLP, credibility, - it is an interesting move forward
into the next generations of NLP.
The collaboration didn’t just stop in the group. Teams of people are
getting together outside of Spain to create new developments, work
together on projects, write books, do research and continue the
collaborative effort that was started very elegantly by the way the
program was structured – to be able to share and grow upon the
ideas that were discussed.
There was undoubtedly connection at the Leadership Summit.

Connection of people, of minds, of ideas, of passion, of growth, of
play, of desire. Some of those connections were very professional in
nature and others were connections of kindred spirits that will go
on for a lifetime. To be able to connect with our fellow NLP
colleagues is important to me. It is so easy for any one of us to get
isolated; not just those of us half a world away. It was a wonderful
reminder that I am not alone – we are not alone. We have team. We
have a passion. We have a purpose. We have a mission. And all of
that is bigger than any one person, any one school, any one
country…
11
Powered by NLP!
We have a community spirit, a collaborative effort and a connection

with each other that is like no other. I am honored to see and be
seen.
12
NLP Community
Conflict Resolution for

Unprofessional Behavior
L. Michael Hall, PhD
We have agreed that we will deal with conflicts are they arise and to
do so in a direct way so as to not avoid it, but address it in a calm
and respectful way. We agree to see conflict as simply differences
in perspectives and rather than blame or make the other wrong. We
will seek first to understand and clarify.
Conflict Subjects: When there are behaviors in language and

actions that violate —
1) Ethics: unethical behavior: hurting others, yelling and
cursing at people in a training, criticizing and mocking
someone not present, sexual misbehavior, mis-handling of
money (not giving people products or services as paid for).
2) Professionalism: drunk or high when presenting, constant
cursing, mis-representing self in advertisements.
3) Relationships: Infighting, backbiting, adopting a “holier
than thou” attitude, saying or implying that we do NLP
right, and others do not. Rejecting people simply because
they disagree, acting as if one’s maps are real.
4) Competence: Poor quality of presentation: due to low
level competence, or being in the wrong state.
Process:
1) We will Communicate Directly and Openly.
We will speak first to the person with whom we are in
conflict with and not talk “bad” about someone to others. If
we do so, it will be to get help in how we can be more
resourceful in handling the conflict. We will not repeat
negative or hurtful things about anyone else. If we do, we
13
Powered by NLP!
will stop and apologize as we catch ourselves or as someone

else catches us speaking ill of another. When we
communicate our emotions, especially anger, frustration,
stress, etc., we can make sure that both we and the other
knows that emotions are just emotions and that we can
express them so that the other doesn’t take them as an
attack.
2) We will Manage our States as best we can.

We will take ownership of our own thoughts and emotions
without projecting them onto another. We will use “I”
statements, rather than “You...” statements. We will deal
with conflict or misunderstanding: from states of respect,
calmness, honor, care, and rapport. We will listen to
understand.
3) We will first Gather High Quality Information.

We will use the precision questions of the Meta-Model to ask
good information gathering questions in order to
understand with accuracy and specificity.
4) We will Assume Responsibility for ourselves.

When we see unprofessional behavior, unethical behavior,
poor quality performances, etc., we will take responsibility
to speak up as we can to try to influence in respectful ways.
We will do so as an individual, not a representative of a
group.
5) We will use Mediation when necessary.

When necessary, we will invite one or two others to serve as
mediators in the conflict so that both sides will get a fair
hearing and create a dialogue for understanding.
6) We will use the Wisdom among us to help deal with conflicts.

We will develop a group of “wise people” among us who we
can make available to deal with a problem. “Who is the
14
NLP Community
right or best person to approach this person?” This will be a

group of “blue hats” we can offer as a resource.
7) We will seek to create win/win Resolutions.

We will believe in the positive intention of people and seek
to call that forth and then find ways to either: understand, be
patient with and/or tolerate, each other.
15
Powered by NLP!
16
Reflections
Judith Lowe
Associating with the Welders - Alicante 2016

Building Community and Collective Intelligence in the NLP Field
In the dark November London of 2012 our just-forming Leadership

group voted to go away together for three days ‘somewhere warm
and sunny’ in January 2016.
We wanted to spend more of the right kind of time getting to know

each other better. We wanted to strengthen our connections and do
a bit of loose hanging out. And we thought that this combination of
a business agenda and an open social time could help the process of
our deeper conversations about the status and the future of NLP
which, as it turns out, it did.
In these earlier stages of our meetings there were various proposals

to form our own (yet another!) professional association. However
we decided to go for a more modest and yet more challenging goal
which was to see if we could actually all get along with each other
first. We wondered if we could indeed be role models for effective
communication, as per our own marketing, by sitting together in the
same room in a normal friendly way. So we de-nominalised the idea
of ‘association’ and decided to find out if we could embody the
process of ‘associating’ instead.
In a field driven somewhat by differences of approach, proprietorial

claims around content and certain types of status-mongering it was
a pleasure to introduce ourselves anew, make a fresh start, and
create the possibility for an NLP community of leaders and experts
to form and grow.
17
Powered by NLP!
Although the term ‘wise elders’ was in the air it soon became
apparent that no one was that keen. I think it was John Seymour
who said he heard it as ‘welders’ and then someone else said the
very thought ‘made him’ ill. Others asked key NLP questions like:
“How do we know we’re wise?” “Is there any evidence for this?!”
that were greeted with shared laughter and recognition. I think it is
for the best that we haven’t saddled ourselves with this title and
that there is hopefully no undue seriousness with which we take
ourselves.
There is a serious project we have in hand however which is to find

out if we can restore and positively re-establish the reputation and
credibility of the work we do in NLP so that our unique
contribution can be recognized, valued and supported by others in
related professional fields.
I am making these comments about our process in order to share

something of the essential aspects, in my perspective, of how we’ve
laid the relational groundwork and set the emotional tone for these
difficult conversations.
Long-term commitment to our work and to our colleagues
Leveraging collective intelligence approaches and collaborating

generatively requires special kinds of interaction and preparation.
Building trust and pleasure in each other’s company takes a certain
kind of energy and focus albeit that in Alicante it’s happening rather
easily at the bar or over breakfast or on a sunny walk along the
beach.
I wonder if at least some of the conditions for this new kind of

encounter with each other have been made possible by the
longevity and structure of the annual London NLP conference that
18
Reflections
has for over twenty five years brought together between forty and
fifty speakers from all the different schools of NLP?
These working reunions have allowed us to develop strong

personal and professional bonds. They have enabled a rich cross-
pollination of our work and the dissemination of many new models,
ideas, books and tools into the everyday practice of many trainers
and NLP students. There’s a real depth of connection over several
generations, in NLP terms, that have created a kind of fertile, living
entity of a community in the UK. The conference has provided the
atmosphere for the kind of ‘diversity, independence and de-
centralisation’, as cited elsewhere in this book, which can harness
so-called ‘collective intelligence’ and innovation. It’s not accidental
that the UK conference became the ‘starter home’ for our leadership
group.
Of course there are other biases involved like speaking English as

the original shared language of NLP. However as someone who has
attended and presented over many years I can attest to the warmth
and fun of the occasion and to the genuine interest and curiosity we
have about each other’s work. Seeing colleagues old and new
contribute their latest ideas and models is fundamentally inspiring
and enriching. As are the debriefs and general catch-up chats over
tea and biscuits or more deeply later in the evenings at dinner
together.
I know there are other conferences and international NLP schools

where people can experience this rich encounter with other
practices and developments in the field. I mention the London
conference in order to bring to awareness those aspects of
community, practice and basic friendship that the NLP field, in its
more default commercial mode, does not always sponsor and which
has to some extent led to the issues we are attempting to resolve and
19
Powered by NLP!
transform – uneven standards, examples of unethical practices, poor

reputation etc.
I want to encourage more people in NLP to meet up across the party

lines like this. I believe it would promote more of the kind of depth
and range of work – of research and development - we are hoping
to produce now and in the future. I think there are many ways to
emerge from our silos and encounter each other in a sincere and
productive way. I mention below a few simple ideas for
encouraging these personal relationships at every level that can,
over time, become a culture of interconnectedness that is a
prerequisite to attempt this bigger project. There are some easy
ways of naturally encountering the differences and similarities in
the ‘maps’ of others and of enjoying the experience too.
Developing relationships in the training room
Firstly, although I think many of the online materials and books

people have produced are excellent and a positive resource to the
field, one of the aspects of NLP that I enjoy is that it offers a
fundamentally interactive approach and happens in the ‘live’
encounter between coach and client, teacher and student, manager
and team etc.
Learning in a group with a real live human teacher to demonstrate

NLP processes with people you actually know and can talk to is
essential in my view. You get to appreciate that NLP is not some
abstract cognitive and instrumental process but that best practice
comes from subtle embodied skills, emotional intelligence and
working from first principles and core models. Calibration, rapport,
behavioural flexibility and key types of modelling can be seen,
heard and sensed in the living flesh. Also strong friendships and
relationships are formed. People encounter each other across many
kinds of professional backgrounds and personal circumstances and
20
Reflections
discover for themselves about different ‘maps’ and communication

styles.
This workshop-type learning group is of course part of NLP’s DNA.

The early research at UCSC was done in this highly interactive and
evidence-based way. Ideas and tools were trialed and tested with
volunteers and clients of many kinds. People can see, hear and sense
if a change has ‘worked’. Peer group learning is also effective and
fun and promotes a culture of shared references and trust that can
support and grow NLP as a field.
Promoting and supporting colleagues and the NLP field
So here are a few practical examples of how we can strengthen

connections among us and support each other to grow and thrive as
part of a field together. These are things I have done mainly because
I enjoy meeting people and working with them, but also in my own
small way to counteract positively the somewhat conflicted and
competitive market-driven and ego-driven NLP field we have
created and in its place promote more of a vision of belonging,
community, innovation and service to the wider world.
 Sponsor trainers from other schools to teach as guests on your

programmes.
 Co-train – providing a ‘double description’ of NLP for your
students.
 Invite NLP colleagues as guests to your training events.
 Set up partnerships and co-sponsor events with NLP colleagues
from other schools.
 Negotiate special prices on specific non-compete events to
students from other schools.
 Grow and promote your own trainers with long-term support
and opportunities, including training and publishing with
them.
21
Powered by NLP!
 Record and share some of your materials and events.

 Run a practice group that is open and welcoming to all.
 Recommend and advertise non-compete NLP-based training
from other trainers and companies.
 Recommend and distribute NLP books and materials from
other sources than your own trainers and company.
 Invite and support assistants and coaches trained in other
companies to join your teams.
 Present and contribute at different NLP practice groups in the
country.
 Contribute to research.
 Contribute to applications of NLP that promote more socially
aware and ‘collective intelligence’ type approaches.
 Encourage your students to experience ‘multiple descriptions’
of NLP.
 Avoid setting yourself or your version of NLP up as the only
one true path.
 Promote national and international associations and any project
that furthers our international strength, high standards and
integrity as a field.
Welders all the way down
So these are a few of my personal thoughts for creating more of the

‘collective intelligence’ type, personal relationship-based conditions
in which NLP can further thrive and develop; more conferences,
more trainers working together, more practice groups, more hands-
on, long-term sponsorship of new trainers, more modelling, more
embodied skills. Plus of course more research and academically
approved papers, clarity on standards, ethics, integrity etc.
I hope more welders will associate with us. Though most of the
elements of NLP are now backed up by mainstream neuroscience,
cognitive linguistics and applied psychology and are widely known
22
Reflections
and used, we continue to have approaches for effective

communication, learning and change that are precious and unique
to offer. I believe we have some skills and tools and ways of
thinking about problems that are essential to a liveable human
future in a time of massive change, instability and injustice.
I enjoyed my little holiday in Spain with my lovely colleagues. It

was heartening to be grouping and friending together and generally
hanging out as planned. The sun shone and all was good. It would
be a wonderful thing to restore the achievements and the potential
of our field so that something of value can be passed on in a living
heritage to future generations.
23
Powered by NLP!
24
NLP: Today & Tomorrow?
25
Powered by NLP!
26
How do we decide what is
and is not “NLP”?
L. Michael Hall, PhD
Categories for thinking about what is and is not NLP, where

something fits into the NLP field. When someone develops
something new — First, we ask into which category does it fit. Then
we ask: Does it advance the field? Does it fill a hole (a missing
piece)?
NLP Core NLP Based NLP Incorporated

Content, Distinctions Patterns Assumed and built
Process of Processes into the models.
discovering the Attitude How related?
structure of Techniques
experience
Methodology
Meta-Model Swish TOTE
Representation Circle of Excellence “Parts”
Systems Phobia Cure
Sub-Modal. Change Hist.
Meta-Programs Core Trans.
Strategies Well Formed
Outcomes
Neuro-logical Levels
Meta-States
Social Panorama
27
Powered by NLP!
NLP Related NLP Spin-off Not NLP

Existed before Uses some aspect of
1970& continues NLP; doesn’t
after NLP acknowledge
Clean-Language EMDR, Shapiro Huna
(David Grove) Graves Values
Hero’s Journey
28
The Elder Columns
Using Expert Validation to Define the Boundaries of NLP
Jaap Hollander, Lucas Derks,

Bruce Grimley and Lisa de Rijk
Is it part of the Torah or merely a commentary?

What is NLP and what is not? Not a simple discussion
There has been no central authority regulating NLP since 1980,

when John Grinder and Richard Bandler broke up their partnership
(Time, 1988). This has left NLP practitioners free to develop NLP in
whatever direction they liked. In our day and age, about 35 years
later, there are hundreds of different models, formats and
techniques that are claimed to be NLP. Which ones of them belong
to NLP? And which ones don't? And does it matter? These
questions often results in lengthy discussions, hardly ever reaching
a shared conclusion. Charvet has called it ‘A discussion of biblical
proportions', likening it to ‘… trying to determine which texts are
part of the Torah and which ones are merely commentaries’ (2016).
What is NLP and what is not?’ Many answers have been proposed.
Bandler, for instance, has defined NLP as: ‘What I f***ing say it is!’
(Bandler, 2011). Grinder has stressed that to be NLP, a format
requires to be modelled in the appropriate manner (Bostic StClair &
Grinder, 2001, Grinder, Pucelik & Bostic StClair, 2013). Dilts and
DeLozier catalogued an impressive number of NLP formats in their
1662 page Encyclopedia of NLP (2000).
Several authors have commented on these attempts to define NLP’s

contours (Andreas, 2006, Hall, 2013, Derks, 2006 and 2013, Wake,
Gray and Bourke, 2013, Grimley, 2015). Their comments
29
Powered by NLP!
demonstrate that in the last 30 years, NLP has expanded beyond a

single expert’s definition, no matter how revered the expert or how
extensive the definition.
A pragmatic position holds that ’When it works it is NLP’ or that

‘NLP … explores how people … attain what they want’ (Janes, 2013). But
definitions like these won’t get us out of the woods. If we accepted
them, we would need to include even a five year long
psychoanalysis as NLP, because sometimes it works. And we would
have to wait for the effect after every single NLP-intervention to see
if it works and therefore really was NLP…
‘A key example of pseudoscience’

NLP has severe recognition problems
Why is defining the boundaries of NLP important in the first place?

As we see it, there are five interests at stake here:
1. Recognition of NLP
2. Development of new NLP formats and models
3. Scientific research into NLP
4. Teaching standards for NLP
5. Branding of NLP services
Scientific criticism of NLP has been harsh. Wikipedia sums much of

it up: 'Failed to show evidence of … effectiveness as a therapeutic
method’, 'Has been used … in education … as a key example of
pseudoscience’, 'New age psycho-religion’ and ‘Narcissistic, self-
centered and divorced from notions of moral responsibility' (about
the presupposition that there is no failure, only feedback). Looking
at evaluations like these, it is safe to say that NLP has severe
recognition problems. Although these problems may be mitigated
to some extent by the studies into VKD (Visual-Kinesthetic
Dissociation, a.k.a. the Rewind Technique) being done at this
moment (2016) by the NLP Research and Recognition Project. There
has been a dramatically effective pilot study (Gray and Bourke,
2015) and a sizeable grant has been awarded for a larger study.
30
More generalised psychotherapy studies are being done by the

European Association for NLPt. These controlled trials may result in
the beginning of an evidence base for some clinical methods in NLP.
If we want recognition for the possibilities and effectiveness of NLP,

we will need to define what it is precisely, that we want recognition
for. If anybody can keep calling anything NLP, it is unlikely that the
scientific opinion - and as an indirect effect, the opinion of much of
society - will ever change. The same goes for further development,
research, teaching and branding. If we want to develop new NLP
formats, it is useful to describe their relationship to existing formats,
so we need to know what the existing formats are. If we want to do
research, we will have to define what it is that we are studying.
Tosey and Mathison (2007) proposed, for instance, that NLP
'emerge from its self-referencing closet and position itself
alongside’…. neuroscience and cognitive linguistics … ‘and
embrace the fact that it can be evidenced through … neuroscience’.
If we want to evidence NLP', we will need to define what it is
exactly, that we want to evidence. And in teaching NLP, we need
standards as to what we are teaching. Different contents being
taught under the NLP flag, result in confusion amongst trainees and
potential trainees. And last but not least, when the public hires an
NLP-practitioner, we need some consistency in what is being
delivered. When consistency is lacking, NLP is weakened as a
brand. Brands of soap, for instance, are cautious to always use the
same formula. If different soap factories would use different
ingredients and package them in the same wrapper, the public
would no longer buy that brand of soap. They would never know
what they would find inside the wrapper.
We conclude that, given these five interests, it is crucial for the

future of NLP to clearly delineate what it is. The next question is:
how do we do that?
31
Powered by NLP!
Is a three wheeled car a motorcycle?

Defining criteria can be complicated, even for physical objects
The first solution that comes to mind, is to define criteria. If only we

had a clear set of criteria, we could then look at any proposed NLP
element and confidently determine whether or not it was NLP.
This is the way the law sets boundaries. In the Netherlands for
instance, the law defines a car as a vehicle that has four wheels and
an engine. If it has four wheels but no engine, it is not a car but a
cart. If the vehicle has two wheels and an engine, it is not a car but a
motorcycle. Clever manufacturers have produced three wheeled
cars, which count as motorcycles and can be driven by people who
have no license to drive a car but who do have a license to drive a
motorcycle. This example shows that even in the area of tangible
objects it can be difficult to formulate criteria for what something is.
If, however, we would consult a hundred automobile mechanics

who have been in the car business for at least 15 years, the
overwhelming majority of them would define the three wheeled
vehicle as a car rather than a motorcycle. By the way, this is in fact
our proposed solution for the boundary problem, but we will get to
that later.
Is it accelerated learning or helping people get what they want?’

Couldn’t we use the definitions of NLP as criteria?
Can definitions of NLP provide us with boundary criteria? Let’s

have a look at four frequently cited NLP definitions:
1. NLP is the study of the structure of subjective experience (Dilts,

1980)
2. NLP is an accelerated learning strategy for the detection and
utilisation of patterns in the world (Grinder in O’Çonnor, 2001)
3. NLP is an attitude and a methodology that leaves behind it a
trail of techniques (Bandler in O’Çonnor, 2001).
32
4. NLP is a field that explores how people effectively attain what

they want, … attain … the resources they need, and keep
enhancing their ability to achieve their desired goals. (Jane,
2013).
When we look at these four definitions, it becomes apparent that, by

themselves, each one is too general to define the boundaries of NLP.
Let's take Dilts' definition for instance. We can say that NLP is the
study of the structure of subjective experience, but to be NLP,
something needs to be several other things as well. Advertising
professionals for example, focus just as much on subjective
experience as NLP-ers do. When they repeatedly show us a
beautiful person in a certain car, they hope to anchor a physiological
response to the image of that car. And this is something they did
long before NLP existed. But this advertising tactic, even though it
may be consistent with NLP, obviously is not part of NLP. We can
say that NLP is the study of the structure of subjective experience,
but we cannot turn that around. We cannot say that anything that
studies the structure of subjective experience is NLP. An orange is a
fruit, but not all fruits are oranges.
Something similar can be said about Bandler's definition that NLP is

'an attitude and methodology that leaves behind a trail of
techniques'. If this were our only criterion, then something like book
printing would be NLP par excellence. When it first started, book
printing was a new attitude towards producing books. As a field it
has been developing new techniques for centuries, ranging all the
way from wooden block letters to digital imaging.
So how about combining different definitions?

Unfortunately, this does not solve the problem
What if we combined these four definitions? What if we said that

element X was NLP when - and only when - all the criteria we can
derive from those four definitions were met?
33
Powered by NLP!
1. Model X uses the study of the structure of somebody’s

subjective experience in a specified manner, by changing a
specific element of that structure (criterion derived from Dilts’
definition).
2. It utilises a successful pattern that has been detected in the
world (derived from Grinders definition).
3. It was developed from an attitude that produces techniques
(from Bandlers definition).
4. It helps people attain what they want (from Jane’s definition).
Using these four criteria in addition to each other certainly narrows

it down. The number of phenomena that can be called NLP, now
becomes much smaller. But even this combination is nowhere near
water tight. Advertising is still a good candidate, according to this
set of criteria. Or we could take improvised jazz music for instance;
it fits all four criteria.
1. Improvised jazz music is based on the study of relationships

between auditory impressions on the one hand and subjective
kinaesthetic and visual experiences on the other hand. It aims to
change people’s subjective experiences by changing their
auditory external input.
2. It utilises successful patterns (melodies and musical
collaboration sequences) that can be detected in many places
and times in the world.
3. It is characterised by a specific attitude towards music, that has
produced many new instrumental and composition techniques.
4. It helps both the musicians and the audience to attain the
musical enjoyment that they want.
And yet, most people would agree that improvised jazz music is not
NLP.
34
Narrower categories
Can we solve the problem with categories like ‘Core NLP’ and
‘Incorporated into NLP’?
So if we can’t determine the boundaries of NLP with the authority

argument (‘It is NLP because I say it is’), if simple generalisations
fall short (’When it works it is NLP’), if single definitions are not
sufficient ('NLP is the study of the structure of subjective
experience’) and if even a combination of definitions doesn’t hold
water, how are we going to define the boundaries of NLP? One
solution is to break up the single nominalisation ‘NLP' into several
sub-categories (Hall and Charvet, 2011). Rather than using ‘NLP' as
one broad category, we could define several narrower categories:
• NLP Core
This category contains elements like the meta model, reframing
and parts.
• Incorporated in NLP
This would be a category with elements like the TOTE model,
anchoring and goal orientation. These elements existed prior to
the beginning of NLP and have been incorporated in NLP.
• NLP Application
This group would harbour combinations of core NLP elements.
Change personal history would fit here, because it combines time
lines, anchoring and resources. Other examples would be the
circle of excellence (combining anchoring and resources) and six
step reframing (combining parts and reframing).
• NLP Related
This category contains models and techniques that have some
relationship with NLP but are not considered to be - or no longer
considered to be - NLP, like symbolic modelling, EMDR and
success factor modelling’. There are enough similarities to call
35
Powered by NLP!
them related, and enough differences to distinguish them from

direct NLP applications.
This subdivision makes it easier to give certain elements a place. On

the other hand, it also poses new complications. Let us contrast, for
instance, the parts model, modelled by Bandler and Grinder (1983)
from Fritz Perls in the 1970’s with the clean language model,
modelled by Lawley and Tompkins (2003) from David Grove in the
1990’s. The parts model is considered core NLP and the clean
language model is considered NLP related. Why? Is it because one
was modelled by Bandler and Grinder and the other by Lawley and
Tompkins? If we limited NLP to patterns modelled by Bandler and
Grinder, we would need to throw out hundreds of valued NLP
elements developed by people like Dilts, Hall, or Bolstad. Or is it
because the parts model was modelled in the 1970’s and the clean
language model in the 1990’s? If we would recognise only models
and techniques from before 1980, NLP could never develop beyond
its first origins.
If we look at the distinction between core NLP and NLP

applications, we run into similar classification problems. For
instance, the parts model is considered core NLP and anchoring is
‘incorporated in NLP’. But most elements in the core NLP list have a
history that begins before NLP. The concept of parts existed long
before NLP began, so shouldn’t that be in the ‘incorporated’
category? Or take goal orientation. That existed long before NLP
and is therefore in the 'incorporated’ category. But on the other
hand, in NLP goal orientation is combined with the structure of
subjective experience and the well-formedness conditions. Does that
not transform it into something new? When we combine eggs with
butter and flour to bake a cake, we call it ‘cake’, not ‘eggs plus some
other things’. Shouldn’t this combined structure of goal orientation
plus the structure of subjective experience plus the well-formedness
conditions therefore be in the core NLP list? Questions like ‘Related
how, precisely?’ show that the subcategories are not as easy to
define as we had hoped. We conclude that the subdivision,
36
although it somewhat mitigates our boundary problem, doesn’t

really solve it.
Enter the NLP Leadership Summit

Finally we have a group we can use as an expert panel to delineate NLP
We hope we have demonstrated that it is a daunting task to

formulate criteria for what NLP is and what it is not. Derks (2016)
has proposed a creative solution for this delineation impasse. What
if, he wondered, we would vote on what is NLP? He proposed this
novel solution in a meeting of the NLP Leadership Summit (2016).
The Summit is a group that has over a hundred members, each of
whom is an NLP trainer or author with a minimum of 15 years of
experience. This means that - for the first time in the history of NLP
- a group exists that consists of a large number of NLP-ers who are
highly experienced. Also, they have been trained by a wide variety
of NLP trainers and they work in many different countries,
applying NLP in a broad range of different contexts. With a group
like that, voting to delineate NLP becomes a viable solution, which
it would not be for other NLP groups, for instance a national NLP
association or an international group with fewer members, less
rigorous membership criteria or less diverse training background.
The Elder Columns Program

A plan for delineating NLP through voting
Derks’ proposal will hopefully result in what we have named the

‘Elder Columns’. This is a listing of potential NLP elements that
have been placed by the ‘Elders’ (NLP Leadership Summit
members) through a simple voting process into one of three
‘Columns’ ('This is NLP’, 'I don’t know / I’m not sure' and 'This is
not NLP’).
37
Powered by NLP!
Having been endorsed for this task by the Summit, Hollander,

Derks, Grimley and de Rijk proceeded to undertake the following
program:
1. Formulate a broad list of potential NLP elements

2. Formulate a set of NLP categories these elements can be placed
in.
3. Devise an on line registration system for voting on which
elements belong in which category.
4. Invite and stimulate Summit members to vote.
Which may sometimes entail explaining what a certain
proposed NLP element is.
5. Calculate the resulting ‘score’ for each element.
6. Publish the scores in a list called ‘The Elder Columns’.
7. Devise an on line system for both adding and evaluating - by
voting - new potential NLP elements.
More than 1500 years of NLP experience

Why voting is a good mechanism for delineating NLP
Why would this be a good idea? How can we justify voting as a

mechanism for defining the boundaries of NLP? There are three
justifications for the Elder Columns Program:
1. Obstacles in criteria formulation
2. Expert validation (psychological testing)
3. Collective intelligence
Obstacles
The first justification for our plan lies in the obstacles described thus
far, which are by no means trivial. If we could easily define criteria
for what NLP is, we would not need this discussion. Unfortunately,
as we have indicated above, this looks like a dead end. It feels like
defining the exact boundaries of a cloud of smoke. This justifies
considering some other process of delineating NLP.
38
Expert validation
A procedure psychologist use to evaluate psychological tests
If we should adopt the voting mechanism, we would connect to

what in psychological testing is called ‘expert validation’ or 'expert
panel review’. This is one of the simplest methods in psychological
test construction. It means that potential questions for a new test are
discussed by a panel of experts. Do they believe that a given
question adequately represents the concept it is supposed to
measure? A set percentage of the experts, 75% for instance, needs to
agree for the question to be included in the test. It is interesting to
note that there are no strict criteria for the selection of the experts.
The expert validation process is seen as a first step, presuming that
the resulting psychological test will be evaluated later with other
validation methods.
We propose that the membership of the NLP Leadership Summit is

qualified - both in numbers (more than a hundred) and in
experience (more than 15 years) - as an expert panel for the
validation of NLP elements. Together they have more than 1500
years of experience teaching and/or writing about NLP. We
understand that no expert panel, however carefully composed, will
meet with the approval of every single person involved in NLP. But,
strange as this may sound, this need not be an obstacle. At this
juncture in the development of NLP it seems more important to
have any expert panel at all than to eventually, after decades of
discussion, have the perfect panel. The NLP Leadership Summit
group is - as of 2016 - the largest, most experienced and most
diverse group of experts available. And should other groups of
comparable size and diversity and with comparable experience
become available, they may be incorporated easily into the voting
procedure we are about to describe.
The question that experts in a panel evaluating a psychological test

ask themselves is: "Is this question an adequate expression of the
39
Powered by NLP!
concept we want to measure?" Please note, that these experts use

their understanding of the concept as a criterion. For the NLP expert
panel, the question can be quite similar: "Is this element (skill,
technique, format, model) an adequate expression of NLP as I
understand it?"
Collective intelligence
Using the wisdom of crowds
Another phenomenon our voting procedure is linked to, is

‘collective’ or ‘aggregate’ intelligence. You may have heard of ‘the
wisdom of crowds’ (Surowiecki, 2005). This refers to the fact that
groups of people often arrive at decisions - and estimations - that
are better than those that individuals would make.
A famous example is described by Francis Galton, titled ‘Vox

Populi’ (the Voice of the People, 1907). ‘In these democratic days’,
Galton says, ‘any investigation in the trustworthiness and
peculiarities of popular judgments is of interest. … A weight-
judging competition was carried out at the annual show of the West
of England Fat Stock and Poultry Exhibition recently held at
Plymouth. A fat ox having been selected, competitors bought
stamped and numbered cards … on which to inscribe … estimates
of what the ox would weigh after it had been slaughtered and
dressed… Those who guessed most successfully received prizes.
About 800 tickets were issued … The middle most estimate was
1207 lb, and the weight of the dressed ox proved to be 1198 lb.’
Conditions
When are crowds wise, and when are they not?
Crowds are not always wiser than individuals. Surowiecki (2005)

describes three conditions that are necessary to harness collective
wisdom:
1. Diversity
2. Independence
40
3. Decentralisation
And then of course some mechanism is needed by which the
judgements are aggregated, like the cards in Galtons example or a
computer form in our times.
Diversity
Entertaining many different perspectives and having many different
sources of information and background knowledge, contributes to
the wisdom of a collective. Each voter should have their own special
information, no matter how inaccurate or eccentric it may seem to
others in the group.
Independence
Voters’ opinions should not be determined directly by the group
members around them. If individuals can make their decisions at
the same time and blind to everyone else’s votes, phenomena like
group think and peer pressure are avoided. In fact, failures of crowd
intelligence - like the failure of the US intelligence community to
predict 9-11, might be attributed to a lack of this independence.
When members of a crowd imitate each other or conform, the
wisdom of the crowd is lost. Too much communication can make
the group as a whole less intelligent.
Decentralisation
People are able to specialise and draw on local knowledge.
Opinions are not dictated by a central authority.
If we look at the NLP Leadership Summit group through the filter

of these three conditions, the group seems well poised for collective
wisdom.
• The group is quite diverse in terms of professional background,
location and NLP training.
• Eccentric points of view abound.
• NLP has been decentralised since 1980 when Grinder and Bandler
broke up their partnership.
41
Powered by NLP!
• Web technology offers methods for independent voting that can be

implemented relatively easily (by a proficient Word Press
developer, for instance).
We conclude that the practice of expert validation in psychological

testing as well as the information on collective intelligence, support
the value of voting as a mechanism for defining the boundaries of
NLP.
How precisely?
So what are we going to do, exactly, to erect the Elder columns?
Next question: voting, how precisely? We intend to implement the

following procedure:
1. First list
We will start with an available list, like the one offered by the
International Association for Neuro Linguistic Programming,
and combine those elements with elements from other lists
provided by NLP organisations NLP training institutes and
national NLP associations. This way, we will produce a ‘first’
list of possible - and often quite likely - NLP elements.
2. Second (extended) list

We will then distribute this list amongst Summit members and
anyone else who has ideas about what to include. This way we
will produce the ‘extended’ list. We thought about annotating
this list with links to web sites with information on the
particular element. For now, we decided against this, given the
idea that we want to gather independent opinions and the fact
that anyone can look up a technique through Google. Before the
voting starts, we will check this. When someone wants to add
an element to the first list, we will ask them for a link to more
information in English.
42
3. Questionnaire
We will then transform the extended list in a simple
questionnaire, adding three categories (or ‘columns’, as the title
of this article suggests).
A. This is NLP
B. I don’t know / I’m not sure
C. This is not NLP
In the discussion above, we described several narrower

categories: ‘NLP Core’, ‘Incorporated in NLP’, ‘NLP
Application’ and ‘NLP Related’. Why don’t we use these
distinctions in our questionnaire? We believe that these
categories will complicate the matter. Questions like
‘Incorporated how precisely?’ and ‘Related how precisely?’, have
not been answered yet. We have described our own difficulties
deciding for instance what is ‘core’ and what is ‘incorporated’.
We believe many voters would have similar difficulties if we
used these categories.
4. Voting
The next step - and probably the most challenging one - will be
to stimulate as many as possible of the Summit members to vote
on the list. We don’t expect everybody to fill it out after we
simply mail it to them once. We will employ any relational and
marketing tactics at our disposal to get as many questionnaires
filled out as we possibly can.
5. Counting
Finally we will count the votes, decide on a cut off percentage,
and publish the ‘Elder Columns’, describing what is and what is
not NLP. When we reach this stage, we will invite all Summit
members to help distribute the Elder Columns as widely as
possible.
43
Powered by NLP!
6. Later additions and new experts

New additions to NLP may be added to the list and voted on
separately. New experts, or groups of experts, fulfilling the NLP
Leadership Summit criteria, may vote on the list later adding
their votes to the count. The criteria for the selection of new
experts are simple:
1. Having taught NLP practitioner trainings for at least 15
years, or alternatively, having written at least three books on
NLP.
2. Being endorsed by at least two members of the expert
group.
The first list

The list of NLP elements that we will start with
For the ‘first list’ we started with the International Association for
Neuro Linguistic Programming standards, as displayed on their
website. To this we added any other NLP elements we found on
other websites and in our own practitioners and masters programs
(IEP, 1984-2016). We looked at any lists we could find in the web.
We noticed,that after the first three or four, the next lists didn’t add
many new elements. Finally we added any elements from the
Encyclopaedia of NLP (Dilts and Delozier, 2000) that we thought
relevant.
We left out any elements that we found either

• Highly specific, like the ‘Threshold reversal pattern’
• Internationally unfamiliar, like the ‘I wonder how strategy’
• Explicitly attributed to something else than NLP, like Bandler’s
‘Design human engineering’ patterns.
This resulted in a list of 78 elements. Our aim was to provide

experts with a list they might add elements to, in order to arrive at
the second (extended) list that would then be voted on. We wanted
the extended list to be as complete as possible. On the one hand
there was no need to remove too many elements a priori, since any
44
element could, in a next phase, be ‘voted out’. On the other hand we

expected the list to be evaluated more thoroughly if it had fewer
items.
The First List of NLP elements
Building rapport through pacing, then using it for leading

through verbal and non-verbal pacing
Recognising, matching and translating representational

systems
through predicates and non-verbal accessing cues like eye
movements
Maintaining an outcome orientation

(Setting and maintaining focus on a goal)
Checking well-formedness conditions for outcomes

and helping to rephrase outcomes until they fulfil the
conditions
Working from a sponsoring attitude

(Accepting the other person's model of the world and
visualising their potential)
Working from a COACH state

(Centered, Open, Attentive, Connected and Holding)
Using the SCORE model to define problems and design

interventions
(Symptoms, Causes, Outcomes, Resources, Effects)
Calibrating internal states and processes

(Focussing on sensory experience and recognising patterns)
Using meta-model questions

to specify information and stimulate change
45
Powered by NLP!
Using Milton-model language patterns

to suggest beneficial processes
Using verbal reframing

to give new meaning to experiences
Using verbal sleight-of-mouth patterns

to give new meaning to experiences
Determining the structure of subjective experience

(Context, external behaviour, internal processes, internal
state, criteria and beliefs)
Anchoring
with V, A and K anchors
Shifting consciousness between external and internal focus
Giving instructions for dissociation and association
Registering and responding to incongruence
Using perceptual positions

(1st, 2nd, 3rd and - sometimes - 4th position)
Working with submodalities
Identifying logical levels of communication and change
Eliciting resources in general
Eliciting a resource through reference

experience
Eliciting a resource through communicating

with the older self
Eliciting a resource through a role model
Eliciting a resource through physiology
46
Working with inner strategies

(Detecting, eliciting, utilising and installing of strategies)
Using spatial sorting

(Placing states, beliefs, processes or parts in separate
locations)
Working with timelines

as a spatial sorting format
Working with personal timelines

to identify and change the subjective experience time
Being aware of the TOTE model for goal directed change

(Test - Operate - Test - Exit)
Working from the presuppositions of NLP
The map is not the territory
People have the resources for the change

they desire
There is no failure, only feedback
Resistance is a signal of insufficient rapport (pacing).
The meaning of your communication is the

response you get
All behaviour has a positive intention, was

once the best available choice
If one can do it, others can learn to do it
Body and mind are an interconnected

system
The element with the greatest flexibility
47
Powered by NLP!
determines the direction of the

system
Using the circle of excellence technique

to build a multiple resource
Using the change personal history technique

to change a recurring problematic emotional state
Using the six step reframing technique

to change unwanted behavior
Using the collapse anchors technique

to change a problematic emotional state
Using the swish pattern

to change unproductive representations
Using the negotiating between parts technique

to solve an inner conflict
Using the Disney strategy format

for creative thinking and developing new behaviours
Using the Bateson strategy format

to map over a strategy from one context to the other
Using the trauma process

to overcome post-traumatic stress (a.k.a. the ‘Rewind
technique')
Using the compulsion blow out format

to help overcome compulsions
Using metaphor
to induce solution oriented unconscious processes
Modelling exceptional abilities

with the intent to teach the abilities to others
48
Working with meta programs

(Identifying, matching and changing meta programs)
Using the core finding engine

to identify important limiting beliefs
Using the belief audit to identify limiting beliefs

(Is it possible, is impossible for me, do I deserve it)
Using the lifeline reframing format

to change limiting beliefs
Using the belief outframing format

Using the reimprinting format

Using the integrating conflicting beliefs format

to overcome conflicting beliefs
Using the forgiveness model

to help someone forgive
Using the allergy process

to help someone overcome a physical allergy
Using the aligning logical levels format

to foster congruence
Using the aligning perceptual positions format

to help someone take congruent perceptual positions
Using the generative NLP format

to enrich, strengthen and elaborate resources
Using the identity matrix

to sponsor and integrate different aspects of identity
49
Powered by NLP!
Using the resonance pattern

to activate and integrate inner mentors
Using the meta mirror format

to handle challenging relationships
Using symbolic modelling

to promote change through developing spontaneous
metaphors
Using the core transformation technique

to help with change on an identity and spiritual level
Detecting and utilising meta-states

to solve emotional issues
Working with the social panorama

to solve social issues
Working with enneagram distinctions

to understand personality
Working with Graves drives (spiral dynamics)

to understand criteria
Working with family constellations

to transform systemic problems
Working with the wholeness process

to stimulate enlightenment
Using mBIT
(Multiple Brain Integration Techniques)
Using provocative coaching

(A combination of humor, warmth and challenges)
50
References
• Andreas, S. 2006. Modeling Modeling. The Model Magazine, Spring, 2006

• Bandler, R. 2011. Statement during training seminar Best of Richard
Bandler. May 13-15. Krasnapolsky Hotel, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
• Bostic St. Clair C. and Grinder, J. 2001. Whispering In The Wind. J & C
Enterprises, Scotts Valley, Ca.
• Charvet, Shelle Rose. 2016. Personal communication. NLP Leadership
Summit. Alicante, Spain.
• Derks, L. A.C. 2006. Modeling as an misleading ideology in NLP.
www.socialpanorama.com/articles
• Derks, L. A.C. 2013. It is NLP because I say so.
www.socialpanorama.com/articles
• Derks, L. A.C. 2016. Personal communication. NLP Leadership Summit,
Alicante, Spain.
• Dilts, R.; Grinder, J.; Bandler, R.; Bandler, L. C. & DeLozier, J. 1980
Neuro-Linguistic Programming: Volume I The Study of the Structure of
Subjective Experience. California: Meta Publications.
• Dilts, R. and J. DeLozier. 2000. Encyclopedia of Systemic Neuro-Linguistic
Programming and NLP New Coding. NLP University Press, Santa Cruz, Ca.
• Galton, F. 1907. Vox populi. Nature 1949, Vol 75
• Gray, R.M. and Bourke, F., Remediation of intrusive symptoms of PTSD
in fewer than five sessions: a 30-person pre-pilot study in the RTM
Protocol, Journal of Military, Veteran and Family Health, Vol 1, No. 2,
2015
• Grimley, B. 2015. What is Neurolinguistic Programming? Doctoral thesis.
University of Central Nicaragua. http://ow.ly/XQqcA
• Grinder, John and Richard Bandler (1983). Reframing: Neurolinguistic
programming and the transformation of meaning. Moab, UT: Real
People Press
• Grinder, J., Bostic StClair, C. and Pucelik, F. The Origins of Neuro-
Linguistic Programming. Crown House Publishers, 2013
• Hall, L. M. and S.R. Charvet, editors. 2011. Innovations in NLP for
Challenging Times. Crown House Publishing, Carmarthen, England
51
Powered by NLP!
• Hall, L. M. 2013. Book review of the Origins of NLP, Edited by John Grinder
and R. Frank Pucelik. http://www.neurosemantics.com/neurons-
blog/book-review-of-the-origins-of-nlp-2013-meta-reflections-23
• Janes, B. How we define NLP, Website of the NLP Leadership Summit,
http://nlpleadershipsummit.org/category/nlp/, 2013
• Times Wire Services, January 29, 1988. Psychotherapist Not Guilty in
Prostitute's Murder, Jury Finds.
• O’Çonnor, J. NLP Workbook: A Practical Guide To Achieving The Results You
Want, 2001
• Surowiecki, James. 2005. The Wisdom of Crowds. Anchor Books.
• Lawley, J. and Tompkins, P., Metaphors in Mind: Transformation through
Symbolic Modelling, 2003, Crown House Publishing, England.
• Tosey P. & Mathison, J., Fabulous Creatures Of HRD: A Critical Natural
History Of Neuro-Linguistic Programming, University of Surrey Paper
presented at the 8th International Conference on Human Resource
Development Research & Practice across Europe, Oxford Brookes
Business School, 26–28 June 2007
• Wake, L., R. Gray and F. Bourke, eds. 2012. The Clinical Effectiveness of
Neurolinguistic Programming: A Critical Appraisal. Advances in Mental
Health Research. London, Routledge.
52
Luzia Wittmann
Luzia Wittmann
We are probably living one of the most important moments in the

recent history of NLP. This group, the NLP Leadership Summit,
composed by more than a hundred experienced NLP leaders, was
created with the simple idea of sitting together and talking about
NLP with respect to all different maps. As a consequence, new and
helpful ideas are coming up and shaping a new reality for the NLP
environment. It means a shift in the NLP peers’ attitude and
behaviour towards each other and towards the NLP field that will
certainly influence the shape of the NLP development in the future.
The 2016 meeting in Alicante was my first experience with the

group. It felt somehow as a relief, a healing sensation. Like in a big
family, some secrets, behaviours, decisions and conflicts from the
past generations pass through and can influence many generations,
it seems that our NLP family has been carrying some beliefs and
assumptions inherited from the past. Since 1980, when John Grinder
and Richard Bandler decided to follow different paths the natural,
consistent and central leadership of NLP was disrupted. Somehow a
feeling of a certain incongruence seems to remain as an annoying
little stone in the shoes of many professional NLP Trainers and
developers. This incongruence was not reframed until now, and has
influenced the whole community.
53
Powered by NLP!
Nevertheless, it is amazing that despite the lack of a central

organization and the fact that “NLP practitioners were free to
develop NLP in whatever direction they like” (Jaap Hollander et all,
in The Elder Columns) during about 35 years, NLP survived an
expanded geographically, as well as in content. It diversified
approaches and has influenced many other fields of knowledge. It
seems clear to me that Practitioners from all over the world
recognize each other’s NLP skill and identify a common practice,
share the same presuppositions and attitude, know/apply at least
the same core techniques or classical code.
So, why is the NLP leadership Summit so important for the NLP
worldwide community?
From what I have lived, understood and felt in the Alicante

meeting, I could list many benefits, beginning with (1) the exemplar
attitude of many experienced NLP leaders with different
approaches working together and actually using NLP to make it
work; (2) to open this huge meta discussion on the state of art of
NLP and its future; (3) to think about all NLP Practitioners, trainers,
developers, researchers, coaches/therapists as a community in a
positive way; (4) to actively co-operate to build it as an inclusive
community; (5) to create and offer standards as guidelines for the
minimum quality expected and agreed for an NLP course -
Practitioner, Master Practitioner and Trainer Training: this
standards should include content, length in days and hours, the
trainer’s experience, number of participants, minimal age of
participants, assessment methods and the skills the participants are
expected to have integrated after each level; (6) to be a reference to
the NLP community, mainly to new NLP trainers and Institutes and
(7) to create an ethic code for NLPers.
After all, what really matters is the fact that NLP continues to
spread very quickly all over the world and the same amazing
results. I train mainly in Portugal, Brazil and some African
54
countries. The feedback from the participants of the Practitioner

courses now is the same as when I did my Practitioner course for
the first time. Going through a Practitioner training is a hallmark in
my life. One thing was my life before NLP and another thing is it
now that I have this knowledge and skills.
Many of them also want to embrace the NLP path professionally, as

a coach, therapist or trainer. Very often, I hear comments like this:
everybody should learn this. It should be part of the school
programmes.
Besides all the benefits that NLP offers to overcome suffering and to
create a meaningful and happier lives, NLP train people into a
structure to think and understand phenomena in a functional,
peaceful and loving way. It enables participants to go meta, amplify
awareness, reframe, change emotions and act accordingly. It is a
whole new paradigm in the individual’s life management. By
enabling one individual at a time to change from inside out, we, as
trainers, feel that we are contributing to change humanity into a
more understanding and peaceful community.
55
Powered by NLP!
56
The Leadership of NLP
Laureli Blyth
When I began using and practicing NLP techniques it helped me to

structure my thinking and behaviours and enhanced my life. It
opened my awareness to possibilities of what I wanted my life to be.
It gave me the skills to be the ‘creator of my future.’
I see the use of NLP in so many places, yet it is not always apparent
nor given the credit it is due. Many use some of the applications or
techniques in management, leadership training, negotiations, self -
development, parenting, and more. But not everyone is aware of
what they are using or doing is NLP, and in some cases it is even
mis-represented.
One of the first questions I asked in my early days of NLP was:

who holds this all together? Is there a worldwide organization
somewhere? I was surprised that there was not one main body but
hundreds of associations and societies. Many were private and
could only be joined if you trained with a certain school or person. I
believe most were set up as a way to formalize the structure of NLP
and to have it as a recognized field with standards.
One of the reasons I was interested in being involved with the NLP
Leadership Summit was to help build a sense of world-community.
To be a part of a group where people cared about what it is, where it
is going, how and what is taught and shared in the world.
Coming together as a group of NLP leaders we have the ability to

bring a sense of unity to a far reaching field. We all agree that it is
dynamic, powerful and life changing. As leaders we have the
accumulated knowledge and resources to cultivate and nurture the
field for the next generations of NLP students and recipients’. My
dream is when people ask, who is at the helm, we can collectively
57
Powered by NLP!
say, “a team of elders (or as some say welders) who care and are
together steering NLP into the future.”
58
Reflections
Anneke Durlinger
Embracing diversity.
Certifying NLP practitioners, master practitioners and NLP trainers

requires criteria/standards/curricula.
Many NLP-trainers in the world are involved and dedicated to

setting standards for NLP training (practitioner, master
practitioners and trainers). In the past, in different countries,
independent NLP-associations were formed to develop curricula.
Individual NLP-institutes could connect and commit themselves to
the curricula by joining the NLP-association.
Over the years this has resulted in various associations in different

countries and different set of standards/curricula in different
languages (although mostly English).
An important dimension of the NLP leadership summit was and

still is: instead of forming an association, we are here to associate, to
connect and thus discovering commonalities as well as differences.
One point I feel we all had/have in common is our dedication to
NLP, because it enriched and enriches our lives and we are
dedicated to facilitate others to this end.
One of the practical outcomes of the NLP leadership summit is that,

over the coming year, we are going to generate an overview of all
the standards/curricula set by the different associations.
Why is this important to me?
59
Powered by NLP!
 It is important because this overview in and of itself will

reflect our willingness to respect differences and also learn
from them and be inspired by them.
 It will provide an overview to the next generation of NLP
trainers, who want to engage themselves with an
association, to check which standard complies with their
own criteria and values.
 This overview will also offer transparency to all persons
who want to follow a NLP training to get information about
the different standards.
I feel with this step we honor Bateson who once said:

“Wisdom comes from sitting together discussing differences
without the intent to change them.”
The Tree
Trusting the potential of another person doesn’t seem to be an easy

thing in daily practice. However, it does fit the NLP presuppositions
such as ‘people have resources for change’ and ‘what another
person can do, I can learn’ (a time frame is not included ).
So I suggest to my NLP practitioners to imagine winter, a tree

without leaves. And I ask them “How obvious is it to you that in
spring this tree will carry leaves and even in summer may provide
fruit?” Or “how obvious is it to you that the seed of a sunflower,
when put in the ground will produce a sunflower?”
I call this ‘instant trust’, an attitude we can easily elicit or have
available in nature. So why not use it in relationship to the
development of people? And look upon each other with ‘instant
trust’ in one’s own and others’ potential, not knowing precisely
what this potential might be. This fits the pragmatic usefulness,
which to me is one of the key values and functions of NLP.
Nature provides us with great metaphors that can be used in NLP.

And to me the tree is a great metaphor for NLP itself.
60
Reflections
The roots of a tree are hidden under the ground. Whilst not visible,
they are essential for the growth and the development of the tree.
Those roots (to me) represent Frits Perls, Virginia Satir, Erickson
and others whose expertise is modelled and thus made the tree
grow.
The stem represents the core of NLP and allows us to model the
excellence of human beings; the different applications are
represented by the various branches of the tree and its leaves.
And then there is off spring, where through cross fertilization new
life/new approaches are generated in a different form.
The richness of the tree, its systemic way of growing can be found in
NLP.
Instead of distinguishing NLP and classifying it as first, second,

third generation, old code, new code. I like to see it as a tree that
grows and renews and feeds the world with e.g. oxygen, food and
shelter which we need as human beings to live and develop
ourselves and the world into an ecologically sound system.
All the people involved in NLP, the modellers in the first place, to
me are the caretakers of that tree: they are the air, the sun, the rain,
the soil, and so much more: the facilitators that open the gateway to
grow.
61
Powered by NLP!
62
Why is NLP so important today?
The power and potential of NLP
Karl Nielsen
The human development of the last 200 years has now reached a
point of risks and chances that we never had before in history.
Today we have the ability to manipulate the genes of food, animals
and humans (Human Genetic Engineering) and a development of
Nuclear Weapons that can erase the whole life on earth (in 2016 the
Doomsday Clock is 3 Minutes to Midnight). We are in the middle of
the Second Machine Age Revolution (Erik Brynjolfsson & Andrew
McAfee, 2014) where Machines are replacing Humans more and
more (Industry 4.0 & Work 4.0).
Therefore communication about how more than 7 billion people can
live together in peace on this planet, sharing all the resources fair
and ethical, is crucial. Visions and values are crucial. Successful
communication to understand each other and to find sustainable
solutions is crucial.
Successful Communication has to do with emotional inner states of

awareness and mindfulness. To manage such states and to
communicate successfully can be learned through Neuro Linguistic
Programming (NLP).
The “Wheel of NLP” shows in the following illustration how

emotional inner states, as a basis for all kind of communication, are
connected with thoughts, feelings, and perceptional filters.
63
Powered by NLP!
Successful Communication depends on the accompanying

thoughts, emotions, and perceptional filters. In order to
communicate successfully you need to be aware and in control of
your thoughts, emotions, and perceptional filters.
The development of our huge technical progress in the last 200
years has focused our attention strongly on outside factors. This was
very helpful for all the benefits that technique brought us in the
areas of health and survival. It allowed us to rise from under 1
billion people to more than 7 billion people. Never in history before
lived more than 1 billion people. So the benefits are tremendous.
And now we need to develop the inner side of how to deal with
thoughts, emotions, and perceptional filters as well, in order to
manage the challenges and risks that technical progress has brought
to humanity. This is crucial in order to live peacefully together on
this planet, sharing all the resources fair and ethical. Planet earth
has become a small village for us. Whatever happens anywhere on
this planet has consequences anywhere else on this planet. So we
need to communicate mindfully with each other to find peaceful,
fair, and ethical solutions.
64
To manage the technical revolutions of the last 200 years took a lot
of learning and best practice. To manage the inner states of the way
we think, feel, and use perceptional filters needs a similar kind of
attention, learning and best practice.
NLP has brought together the knowledge about best practice for
successful communication from N: Neuro Science, L: Linguistic and
P: Psychology (how our inner states are programmable). It can be
used to learn how to manage negative inner belief systems
(thoughts), destructive feelings (emotions) and misleading
perceptional filters and how to develop healthful, caring, mindful
thoughts, emotions and perceptual filters.
To manage such inner states successfully are the prerequisites for
successful communication. And successful communication is the
prerequisite for managing the challenges and risks the world faces
today. That’s why NLP is so important today for the future of
humanity and for a peaceful, caring, mindful future world for our
children.
The power and potential of NLP comes from modelling the

communication competency of highly successful people and from
effective knowledge of Neuro Science, Linguistic and Psychology.
The above “TEPA Wheel of NLP” shows exemplary for each of
these 4 areas a few typical NLP interventions that can easily be used
for working with problems in this area. You can for example use the
NLP interventions from the “Meta Model” to detect and change
limiting beliefs (Thoughts), the “Circle of Excellence” to stabilize
your emotional state (Emotions), the “1.2.3. Position” to change
your point of view (Perception) and the “New Behavior Generator”
to mentally practice future wanted performance (Action). The 12
NLP interventions in this graphic (marked with a smiley face) are
part of the normal basic NLP training: “NLP Practitioner, IN”.
TEPA means: Thoughts (beliefs) produce Emotions (feelings) that
determine Perceptional filters that lead to Action that confirm
Thoughts… This is a kind of wheel that can establish a success loop
of joyful inner communication as well as a negative vicious circle
65
Powered by NLP!
with tremendous consequences for all the actions taken on these

grounds.
NLP is founded on communication Axioms. Here are 5 Axioms to

illustrate the fundamental change of perspectives and successes in
communication that are possible with using NLP. These 5 Axioms
are from my point of view just the most basic ones. Different NLP
Master Trainers use many more Axioms for successful
communication. Most of these Axioms are well known in the areas
of Psychology and Psychotherapy. NLP has the advantage that it
uses these principles of communication as foundation for successful
easy to use step by step NLP interventions.
The here chosen 5 NLP Axioms are:
1. “The meaning of communication is the response you get.”
When you communicate you have the intention to have an
effect with your communication. If someone does not
understand your language it makes sense to try another
language. This includes the fundamental systemic NLP
view, that you only know what you said when you see the
response and that the other person defines what you said.
2. “The Map is not the Territory.” Everyone has his very
individual subjective own way how he experiences his life in
general and the sensory data that reaches his brain. There is
no map that is objectively correct. People respond according
to their subjective map of reality – not to the “objective”
reality (whatever this could be). This includes that people
generally operate more out of their “maps” than out of
sensory experience.
3. “There is no failure, only feedback (and responsibility).” It
is much easier to learn from the state of “feedback” than to
learn from the emotional state of “failure”. NLP
recommends to experiment with flexibility until you reach
the feedback you are after. NLP does not claim with this
axiom that there is no need for taking responsibility for
66
failures that harm others. This axiom only means to help

people to look at failures in a way that helps them to
overcome the challenge and to take responsible action.
4. “Behind every behaviour there is a positive intention.”
This is not regarded as the ultimate truth. It is the
recommendation to handle behaviour in this way in order to
reach goals successfully and to support effective
communication. This includes that people make the best
choice available to them at any given time and that every
behaviour has a context.
5. “Everything is connected to everything.” If you change
something somewhere it can have effects somewhere else.
This is part of systemic thinking.
These axioms are not truths - just recommendations for successful
communication. This is often misunderstood. Sophisticated NLP
does e.g. not claim that there is in reality “no failure only feedback.”
NLP only claims, that if you look at failure as feedback, then it is
much easier to learn from your failure. NLP does insist that
everybody is responsible for his failure, especially when they harm
other persons. But instead of wasting time with feeling bad, NLP
recommends to take action to solve problems.
So far NLP developed, in my view, in the following 5 waves:

1. NLPure is the 1st wave, the original NLP. I call it “NLPure”. It
started 1972 with the main topic of “Success & Enthusiasm” through
Richard Bandler and John Grinder. In the next step of NLPure Leslie
Cameron-Bandler, Judith Delozier and Robert Dilts joint as co-
developers. Anthony Robins developed a variation of motivation
seminars all over the world with really very large groups.
2. NLPt is the 2nd wave, the application of NLP in the area of
psychotherapy. It is in its mature form called Neuro Linguistic
Psychotherapy: NLPt. NLP & Psychotherapy started in 1989 with
the main topic of “Health & Joy of Living” through Robert Dilts
67
Powered by NLP!
(“Beliefs – Pathway to Health & Well-Being”). The European

Association of NLPt, the EANLPt, was founded 1995.
3. NLPeace is the 3rd wave, the application of NLP in the area of
spirituality. It started in 1992 with the main topic of “Spirituality”
through Robert Dilts. In the next step Richard Bolstad and Connirae
Andreas made their contributions. And in 2014 the name NLPeace
was used by the International Association of NLP Institutes IN. It is
the main topic of on of the next NLP & Coaching World Congress of
IN & ICI: www.in-ici.net/congress
4. NLPsy (NLPsych) is the 4th wave, with “Science & Research” of
NLP. It is in its mature form called Neuro Linguistic Psychology:
NLPsy (NLPsych). It started in 2006 with the Research &
Recognition Project. In 2012 the name NLPsy was created on the 3 rd
NLP & Coaching World Congress of IN & ICI in Croatia by the
International Association of NLP Institutes: www.NLP-
Institutes.net
NLPsy has the highest qualification standard. A “NLPsy Master
Trainer, IN” needs an academic Masters degree in Psychology, a
qualification in Psychotherapy on the level of the World Council for
Psychotherapy and in NLP a “NLP Master Trainer, IN”
qualification. The effectiveness of NLPsy trainings is scientifically
evaluated before and after each training.
5. NLPhil (NLPhil) could be the 5th wave. It was always there, but so
far never a wave. Maybe it is just starting as the 5th wave of NLP.
You can find my ideas about NLPhil on facebook:
www.facebook.com/NLPhil
68
NLP has the power and potential to support successful

communication, if it is used with appropriate knowledge and
ethics. The only solution for a peaceful world with wise decisions
about how we all can live together happily lies in understanding
how the human brain works and in communicating successfully
with each other.
The chances for a peaceful beautiful world are gigantic if we
manage to communicate meaningfully, understand each other and
work together on the grounds of fair global mutual visions and
values.
Regarding successful communication NLP has to offer so much.
NLP has collected everything that works in the area of
communication. This starts with how the abilities of highly
successful people can be used by others (modelling), touches how to
achieve freedom of thinking, feeling, perceiving and acting, and
goes even right up to insights about how to create a happy and
meaningful life.
69
Powered by NLP!
In this sense the 3 letters of NLP mean:

Neuro has to do with the brain activities and how people structure
their inner Map of Reality, what their dominant conscious and
unconscious thoughts are, how they construct their beliefs, how
their thoughts trigger much more their feelings (emotions) than the
outside reality, how their thoughts determine what they perceive in
the outside world and how their thoughts determine their behavior.
In NLP seminars you can learn “Using Your Brain FOR A
CHANGE” in the meaning of using it a) at all, b) consciously goal
orientated for a change instead of just reacting, c) for thinking and
living from the heart, and d) for knowing on a very deep level.
Linguistic has to do with all the conscious and unconscious details
people express with every sentence they say and how they express
their inner “Map of Reality” in the way they structure
unconsciously their sentences. This reveals as well how they limit
their flexibility to cope with challenging situations. Here you learn
that in communication the structure of the chosen combination of
words and the way how people say them contains the main
message – not the content. Other people react stronger to how
someone says things than to the content he says. In NLP seminars
you can learn a) how to use language consciously in order to delete
or change old and to establish new beliefs, b) how to use the way
you say things so that this supports the content, and c) to use
deliberately the area beyond words.
Programming has to do with habits and typical individual
stimulus-response patterns. The brain is a huge collection of mainly
unconscious stimulus-response patterns that have been built up
through cultural influence, upbringing, advertising and individual
learning processes. This individual collection is called “Map of
Reality” in NLP. It means that what we think about the world
around us and what we perceive in our outer world is mainly
determined through our programmed thoughts. This includes that
our emotions and reactions are far more determined through our
programmed inner world (Map of Reality) than through the world
70
surrounding us. In NLP seminars you can learn a) how to program

wanted future reactions for challenging situations, b) how to behave
calm, conscious and centered instead of just reacting where this is
better for you and others, and c) how to transform programming.
In this sense this article invites you to see the human development,
our culture as world citizens and NLP as work in progress. It is an
invitation to your rich inner world where you can learn to think and
live from the heart, to know on a very deep level, to use deliberately
the area beyond words, and to learn how to transform limiting
programming. This all can contribute to: “Be the change you wish to
see in the world.” (Ghandi).
This can help you to:
Be a present for other people,

be present in your life (mindful awareness),
be a present for yourself,
and represent all this in your communication.
In this sense one of the next steps and waves of NLP could be Neuro
Linguistic Philosophy. Therefore I invite you to discuss this on
facebook: www.facebook.com/NLPhil
All for the future of humanity and for a peaceful, caring, mindful
future world for today and for our children. NLP has focused on the
methods for successful communication. Therefore it is so important
today.
71
Powered by NLP!
72
Ueli R. Frischknecht
Mapping Diversity
Leaders from across the globe meeting for a three day colloquium.
Coming from faraway places. Representing the world from Chile to
Ukraine and from UK to Australia. Women and Men. Some (few)
younger amongst the lot of us elders. A shared vision of bringing
NLP to the world. Many common values. A great variety of beliefs
of what is good and what not. A whole lot of amazing
competencies. So many different models of how to bring NLP into
the world. Big differences in the ways NLP is brought to the market
in our day-today actions.
And every single one of us going strong with incredible passion and
personal mission for the cause.
NLP is such a great model to deal with diversity. Whereas the

gender model taught us to be aware that there are two kind of
humans, men and women, diversity seems to fit much more with
today’s needs in communication. Not only has our understanding of
gender/sex widened (transgender, bi-gender, pan-gender...), but
diversity seems to cover NLP presuppositions such as "Every
human being is unique and special" and/or "Behind every behavior
is a positive intent." (or many others more) to a much finer degree
too.
As you will know the diversity model does not teach us to

compromise. It teaches us to accept diversity, looking for the
positive intent behind behavior we do not understand. Finding
ways to respectfully communicate our disagreement and listening
to others doing so to us. Keeping the field open, exploring the map.
73
Powered by NLP!
Living the four aspects of healthy systems dynamics that are (1) An
attitude of respect and curiosity towards one’s own identity, role
and values as well as towards those of others; (2) Awareness of
reciprocity of discrepancies and similarities; (3) Focusing collective
tasks and outcomes; (4) Resonance: awareness, respect and
acceptance of similarities and discrepancies to empower collective
performance.
Being leaders in the field of NLP, it seems obvious that in order to

bring NLP into the world each and every one of us has been
following a model that works. Acknowledging diversity means
acknowledging the fact that most probably each and anyone of us
leaders is happy with his/her ways of pursuing the path of nlp. No
need for anybody telling her or him how it should be done
differently, better or right.
Will we self-appointed NLP leaders be able to live up to our own

promise? Will we be able to use the excellent 'how to do' tools of our
own trade in action? Particularly when we meet with colleagues
who might have shown behavior we might have thought of as
'arrogant', 'unqualified', 'unfair', 'cheap', 'just going for the money',
'penny pinching', 'excluding' or even disrespectful towards us or
others or 'the nlp'?
I am writing this text after having engaged myself in three full days
of discussions, meetings, sharings at the January 2016 colloquium in
Spain. Listening to each other, giving room to express different
views and standpoints and experiences.
Yesterday, on the third day of our colloquium, walking back

towards Melia hotel after having had lunch in the sun at the beach
coffee-shop of Alicante, it occurred to me that I was really eager to
get back in time to the group. To use as much time as possible to be
with this special gang of outgoing people: this group of really
individual NLP leaders. Some of them close to 'my' NLP, some of
74
Reflections
them doing 'another' nlp. How much I enjoyed to share, to

understand, to comprehend.
I think we can be really proud. We managed to share without

wanting to change or judge before listening. We succeeded in
creating an atmosphere where we have seen and heard and felt each
other respectfully. What a great no-network of people who share in
common this no-method NLP.
75
Powered by NLP!
76
Credibility:
Professional NLP
77
Powered by NLP!
78
NLP — Profession and Professionalism
L. Michael Hall PhD
NLP Credibility means that NLP is perceived as credible, that it works,

that it is useful, that there’s a “solidness” to it, it is reliable, it can be
trusted.
What is a Profession? What characterizes a Profession?
“Yes / No” depends on the Association of NLP.
1) A Profession involves a possible career path for No

people.
2) There’s a career path to the profession. No
3) It has a shared body of specialized knowledge. Yes
4) Is there specialized terminology (jargon) in the field? Yes
5) The shared knowledge is independent and not Yes
proprietary material.
6) It is taught and/or trained by Universities and/or Not
Vocational Schools. yet
7) There are significant barriers to entry. No
8) There is screening and screening to get in - No
Prerequisites.
9) There is supervision of the skills and assessment for Yes/
licensing. No
10) There is regulation by Certifying Bodies who admit, Yes /
qualify, sanction, etc. No
11) There is a code of ethics. Yes /
No
12) There is a single-focus or a clear-focus of No
concentration.
79
Powered by NLP!
What NLP is not a Profession.
o NLP itself does not provide a career path— no one is hired

as a “NLP Practitioner.”
o To be a Profession, NLP would need an International
Association recognized by most governments so the
Association can admit, qualify, sanction, revoke Licenses.
Why NLP is a Meta-Profession, that is, a Field.
o NLP informs many Professions— Training, Coaching,

Therapy, Managing, Medicine, Sports, etc.
o NLP could create “professional development tracks” that
would apply the NLP Models to various professions and
professionals.
As a Meta-Profession Professional, NLP people can be

Professionals.
What does it mean to be professional in one’s profession.

Definition: “acting like, behaving like a professional.”
o One seeks to develop one’s capabilities to reach a level of
competence in a field
o One uses the competencies to make a living in a career.
o One follows a code of ethics so one’s practice is considered
ethical.
o One receives payment for services of one’s competence.
o One lives up to the standards of the profession.
o One stays up-to-date with current developments in a field.
o One maintains professional status within the Profession.
80
Modelling Exemplars for the Successful
Spread of NLP
Lisa de Rijk & Melody Cheal
Introduction
NLP is now over 40 years old and remains on the ‘substitutes bench’
when it comes to mainstream psychology, change management and
personal development methodologies. This lack of recognition is
compounded by the poor and inaccurate representation of NLP in
Wikipedia. Additionally psychologists frequently repeat Sharpley’s
(1984) critical review of the field when serious attempts are made to
seek grant funding to investigate the effectiveness of NLP.
Organisations such as EANLPt (European Association for NL

Psychotherapy), the NLP Research and Recognition Project, and
ANLP (Association for NLP) through its Research conference, have
all contributed to emerging research in the field. Additionally there
is increasing scholarship in the field with a number of students
completing PhDs at Surrey University through the sterling work of
Dr Paul Tosey, and MAs in Coaching through the work of Dr Sally
Vanson and The Performance Solution.
NLP has earned its place in modern day psychotherapy as a

recognised psychotherapy modality in the UK and across Europe.
Yet NLP continues to be viewed as pop psychology, a cult and a fad

that will eventually disappear.
It is with this in mind that Melody Cheal and Lisa de Rijk have
mapped the progression and professionalisation of two close
‘cousins’: CBT (cognitive behavioural therapy) and TA
(transactional analysis), with a view to using these exemplars to
81
Powered by NLP!
make recommendations for the field of NLP in gaining greater

recognition
The challenge
The early work of the founders of NLP was truly extraordinary and
we are standing on the shoulders of giants as a consequence. The
experiential nature of the field’s development was responsible for
the creation of a framework and structure that still has relevance
today. The next step in evolving the field to the mainstream
prominence it deserves is to provide an evidence trail to match the
trail of techniques we are all familiar with. It is our responsibility to
make this happen by working together building on the work of the
giants that led the way.
This challenge perhaps runs counter to why most people come into
the field and want to learn NLP. Many people are drawn to NLP are
attracted by the sense of freedom and options it offers. This is a key
aspect of the character of NLP and in creating a more main stream
recognition and respect it will be vitally important that we ensure
this sense of freedom is maintained.
Both Bandler and Grinder considered that NLP was not a therapy,
neither was it to be researched or investigated in any scientific way.
Yet for any methodology to be adopted as main stream practice that
attracts public sector funding, providing an evidence base is
essential.
Many of the field may profess that they are not using NLP as a
therapy, and are applying it in business setting, education or the
sports arena. The business world is very familiar with evidence
based approaches hence part of the reason why personality
profiling is so common place. An employer can predict how a
significant investment i.e. an employee, may perform over time.
Education is more familiar with using evidence based approaches
and Churches et al have been successful at driving forward the
82
Credibility: Professional NLP
evidence base for NLP in education through the CfBT Education

Trust.
Irrespective of what NLPers believe about the effectiveness of their

work, the psychology, social work, health and education professions
will only adopt something as mainstream if it can provide an
evidence base, proven through the gold standard of clinical trials.
One major challenge facing NLP is the variety of criteria used across
the globe to qualify as either an NLP Practitioner, NLP Master
Practitioner or NLP Trainer. Although the content is broadly similar
particularly at the Practitioner level the number of hours of face to
face training and the methods of assessment vary vastly.
Programmes are provided from vocational level through to Masters
level, including some gaining industry standards such as ILM
qualifications. This is one area where joined up thinking will be
needed in order for the field to move forward in any meaningful
way on the mainstream stage.
Currently the “big” three in the coaching world, AC (Association for

Coaching), ICF (International Coach Federation) and EMCC
(European Mentoring and Coaching Council) are working together
to present a united front as far as ethics and standards are
concerned. In NLP we have a similar potential with many of the
leading associations and training companies creating their own sets
of standards and codes of ethics. When examining the content of
these different versions it is heartening to discover that there is a
great deal of common ground.
Additionally the coaching world is clear about scope of practice of

coaches. This remains a concern for the NLP community and we
don’t aim to address scope of practice here, we aim to present two
exemplars and their process bringing a modality of psychological
intervention into very successful mainstream practice and expertise.
83
Powered by NLP!
Cognitive Behavioural Therapy
Cognitive Behaviour Therapy (CBT) is a close cousin to NLP and as

such would be an exemplar from which to model successful
adoption and spread both within the therapy field and beyond into
coaching, education and business.
CBT emerged out of the crisis that occurred in the psychoanalytic

movement in the 1950’s, offering an alternative model. The model
came out of behaviourism (Watson and Rayner, 1920) which by its
very nature sets the groundwork for a model that is open to change
through research and evidence. CBT is not a static field and is now
thought to be in its third generation of followers and developers,
similar to that in NLP, although NLP could be thought by some to
be static, staying close to the original modelled patterns by Bandler,
Grinder et al.
The first generation were the early developers, the work of Eysenk
(1952), Skinner (1953), and Wolpe (1958). The model was
predominantly based on learning principles and behaviour
modification through learning, including the use of classic and
operant conditioning (the basis for Anchoring in NLP!).
At the end of the 1960’s through to the 1990’s the second generation
focussed more on the use of language and cognition and the impact
that these can have on psychopathology, both causative and
reparative. Ellis led the field for rational emotive behaviour therapy
and Beck et al for cognitive therapy. Although Ellis and Beck are
second generation if anyone was asked who developed CBT the
most likely answer would be Ellis and Beck. This second generation
embraced the findings emerging through research and commenced
clinical trials to evaluate the model’s effectiveness, particularly in
the treatment of anxiety disorders.
As the field moved through the 1990’s the third generation emerged
and alongside it the development of more recognition of subjectivity
of experience and how this influences perceptions of wellbeing. This
84
opened up the opportunity to bring in models such as mindfulness

and acceptance. There has created a divergence of opinion in the
field with some scholars believing they are new developments
(Leahy, 2008; Arch and Craske, 2008), and others considering the
development of mindfulness and acceptance as an evolution with
these techniques being a development derived from existing theory
(Hofmann, 2010; Martel 2008). A useful analogy to consider in NLP
is the use of metaprogrammes, developed by Jung who no doubt
was informed through Greek mythology, through to Dilts and
Cameron-Bandler’s development as core NLP, into the 1990s and
the development of the LAB profile by Charvet.
During this time the British Association of Cognitive Behavioural

Psychotherapy (BABCP) was formed in 1972 as a special interest
group with just 195 members. Over time the membership has grown
to over 10,000 many of whom have formed their own special
interest groups. The BABCP consider that CBT is a merging of
therapies as a unifying model of psychotherapy that works on the
principal that if you change your beliefs, you will change your
behaviour. CBT is a responsive form of therapy that is not
oppositional and can be integrated with other approaches. The
successful adoption of CBT can be directly linked to its evidence
base, which was led by Beck in the 1960s. Beck has published more
than 580 scholarly articles on CBT, much of them providing research
evidence for the approach.
CBT practitioners are responsive to the evidence base and new

findings that emerge in the field. The field is collaborative with a
desire and drive for joint learning using an inquisitive enquiring
approach. Good practitioners are able to hold the balance between
the structure and focus of the CBT approach and the flexibility and
personalisation that emerged in the 1990s. This approach has been
supported by Beck as seen in his presentation with the Dalai Lama
in 2012.
85
Powered by NLP!
The BABCP provides the unifying voice for CBT and aims to
promote the development and practice of the field, as well as
providing a training and ethical framework for practitioners.
Transactional Analysis
Transactional Analysis (TA) provides a second exemplar to consider

as a model demonstrating an international framework. TA
developed around 1949 by Eric Berne in California and by 1958 he
had conceptualised most of the basic TA models and ideas.
Although Berne was clearly the originator he maintained that the
field emerged from a community and he always acknowledged that
TA was more than just him.
This community began in 1958 as a series of regular Tuesday

evening meetings known as the San Francisco Social Psychiatry
Seminar. Many of the members of this group went on to become
well known in the field in their own right.
In common with many other psychological fields there was an

autobiographical aspect to the development of TA so the leaders
“script” flavours the field. Initially the script could be described as
rebellious to Psychoanalysis reflecting Berne’s own rebellion away
from the Freudian approach. In the USA TA didn’t apply for
university status instead developing an independent qualification
route after Berne’s death.
Berne died relatively early aged 60 in 1970. Up until this time Berne
personally decided when people had developed enough expertise to
become a Transactional Analyst. The decision was subjective and
personal.
A number of schools of TA emerged in the early days lead by

students of Berne. At this time there were still no formal
qualifications. The three schools of TA generally recognised are:
86
Classical Berne analyse, decontaminate Adult ego state,

share TA theory with client
Cathexis Schiff use regression to create a healthy symbiosis,

create a re-parenting relationship.
Redecision Gouldings the power is in the patient, we can redecide

in the Child ego state.
The ITAA (International Transactional Analysis Association) was

formed in 1964 and once formed created a Board of Certification
(BOC). The BOC is now part of the Training and Certification
Council of Transactional Analysis Inc (T&C Council). This was
necessary because in California the legal system required examining
bodies to be separate from membership organisations. ITAA has a
global direct membership, which at one time reached 14,000 but is
now smaller and the ITAA has recently initiated a project to
consider partnerships with other TA bodies.
In 1974 in Europe a similar process to set up examinations began led

by EATA (European Association of Transactional Analysis). The
EATA is made up of a number of associations based in various
European countries. EATA established the EATA Commission of
Certification (COC). An agreement of mutual recognition between
the major TA bodies created a congruent framework to present to
the rest of the world. This was take one step further in 1997 with the
formation of Transactional Analysis Certification Council (TACC)
composed of members from the relevant International and
European Committees. Much effort has been put into ensuring that
there is international agreement between these two associations so
that the certification processes are run consistently. Indeed, those
involved as examiners are often the same people, who will have
travelled to various national and international conferences.
Although in this way consistent standards have been applied
87
Powered by NLP!
worldwide, a major exception has been South America where the

various national associations have formed themselves into the
Asociación Latinoamericana de Análisis Transaccional (ALAT).
This might be seen as the equivalent of the European Association of
TA; the distinction has arisen largely because of language with
English having been chosen as the official language of EATA
whereas that language is of course less commonly used in South
America.
In TA students study for international accreditation to become a

Certified Transactional Analyst (CTA) and in order to do this they
must go through the examinations that are currently through either
EATA or ITAA. Training for this takes about four years. Students
wishing to go further join a PTSTA (Provisional TSTA) pathway
(likely to be another six years) before finally qualifying through
three more examinations as a TSTA (Teaching and Supervising
Analyst). All TA examinations are competence-based, requiring
candidates to present examples of their professional practice as well
as demonstrating their theoretical knowledge and that they are
exhibiting high standards of professionalism and ethical practice.
Unlike NLP, in TA trainers do not qualify their own students.

Instead the trainer decides when a student is ready and the student
can then attend an international examination board. The
examination boards are run independently of any national
associations, and of any training institutes, to avoid any conflict of
interest. Those serving as examiners must be qualified at least to
the level for which the examination is being conducted, and are
expected to have attended examiner training. All P/TSTAs who
wish to have their own candidates examined are required to serve
as examiners for a minimum number of times. There is no payment
for being an examiner and they are expected to cover their own
travel costs to exam sites, which are often run alongside national
and international conferences.
Another major difference from NLP is that all P/TSTAs will accept
the hours of training and supervision provided by other P/TSTAs;
88
hence a student may start with one trainer or supervisor for perhaps
the first year and can then switch elsewhere for the next year, and so
on. There are some constraints on this in terms of their being
different fields of TA application – psychotherapy, organisational,
educational and counselling (which comes closer to a coaching
application in many areas of the world), so that students to receive
the bulk of their training in supervision from those who hold their
own qualifications in the appropriate field.
Outside the USA there has been more interest in aligning to

universities and other awarding bodies. Several University-
accredited Masters Degrees have developed over the years in
various countries. In addition, there have been links such as those in
the UK where the therapy and counselling fields have been aligned
with major bodies such as the UK Council for Psychotherapy and
the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy.
In more recent years there has been some fragmentation with some
courses receiving recognition in the USA that appear to undermine
the existing hierarchy of qualifications. Despite this apparent
fragmentation the TA community continues to foster positive
working relationships across the globe. Hence, in Europe the need
to add qualifications that students could achieve before the CTA
resulted in the creation of additional levels that fit within the agreed
structure. This was introduced when it was recognised that
students who did not complete the several years of training to
become CTA were being left without any qualifications. These
arrangements might be contrasted with those within NLP, where
candidates can undertake to get accreditation as Practitioner, then
Master Practitioner, and then Trainer, although the requirements for
the TA qualifications are much more stringent and might be
considered as postgraduate Certificate, postgraduate Diploma and
masters level in order to reach the CTA standard.
Finally, one significant decision made by the European TA

community was to offer access to an online journal free of charge for
89
Powered by NLP!
anyone interested in TA research. This journal is published in

English but abstracts are also provided in German, French, Italian
and Spanish, and there is an accompanying website established so
that researchers can share their ideas and reach out for potential
subjects for research studies. The idea was to make the research
widely accessible to all and so raise the profile of the field. The
initial issue of the journal included a list of all known TA research to
date that had been conducted to competent research standards; with
this and the papers that have since been published since the journal
was launched in 2010, much effort has gone into rebutting the
common myths about TA being too simplistic and having no
reliable research base.
Implications for NLP
While maintaining the independent character of those attracted to

NLP it becomes clear that in order to evolve there is a need for a
united front to present to the rest of the world. Both CBT and TA
have worked to manage internal conflict with the goal of serving the
higher purpose of advancing their respective fields.
The NLP community is poised to create this united front and the
Leadership Summit potentially provides the platform for global
discussions and agreements. There are obstacles to be overcome and
most importantly there is a need to involve as many key players in
the field as possible. Some key players from the early days may not
wish to be actively involved, however their opinions are valid, and
if this evolution is to continue, will need to be sought.
Finding a way to agree standards internationally is likely to be our

biggest challenge. The variety of standards as described in The Elder
Columns is an indicator of the numerous opinions that exist in the
field today.
There are isolated pockets of research taking place around the

world, some with financial support but more without. Accessing
grants to fund additional research will only become easier if we as a
90
community step up and demonstrate that NLP has a place on centre

stage and that it is more than the cult it has been accused of being.
This could be an issue of “chicken and egg”, grants only becoming
available as research emerges and research only happening when
there is funding.
Additional sources of research funding may need to be explored or

the development of a mentoring scheme to help people undertake
research on a budget with support.
Perhaps it is time for the NLP Community to take a leaf out of the
TA community book and produce a regular journal that can be
distributed widely. There are already a number of websites making
research available however by publishing a quarterly, bi-annual or
even an annual journal we will be lifting our game substantially. In
the past the ANLP has sponsored the production of a Research
journal however the distribution was fairly small and there was a
fee for the pdf to anyone not a member.
The Leadership Summit website may be the appropriate place for a

new journal to sit. This journal can then be distributed throughout
the world and by offering it free, the readership has a chance of
being more widespread.
References
Arch, J.J. & Craske, M.G. (2008). Acceptance and Commitment Therapy
and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for anxiety disorders: Different
treatments, similar mechanisms? Clinical Psychology: Science and
Practice, 15(4), 263-279.[
Eysenck, H. J (1952) The Effects of Psychotherapy: An Evaluation

Institute of Psychiatry, Maudsley Hospital, University of London.
First published in Journal of Consulting Psychology, 16, 319-324.
91
Powered by NLP!
Hofmann, S.G., Sawyer, A.T, Fang A. (2010) The empirical status of the
"new wave" of cognitive behavioral therapy. Psychiatr Clin North Am.
2010 Sep;33(3):701-10. doi: 10.1016/j.psc.2010.04.006.
Leahy, R. (2008) The therapeutic relationship in cognitive-

behavioral therapy. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy. 36,
6, 769-777.
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=onl
ine&aid=2751656&fulltextType=RA&fileId=S1352465808004852
Martell, C.R.(2008) Lesbian, gay, and bisexual women and men. In:
Whisman MA, editor. Adapting cognitive therapy for depression.
New York: Guilford Press; pp. 373–393.
Sharpley, C. F. (1984) Predicate matching in NLP: A review of research

on the preferred representational system. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, Vol 31(2), Apr 1984, 238-248.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.31.2.238
Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior.

SimonandSchuster.com.
Wolpe J. 1958) Psychotherapy by reciprocal inhibition. Stanford, CA:

Stanford University
Press
Information about the TA qualification process provided in interview by

Julie Hay, who is a Teaching & Supervising Transactional Analyst in the
Organisational, Psychotherapy and Educational fields of application, a past
president of both the European and International TA Associations, and a
Licensed NLP Trainer.
92
The Future of E Learning and
Technology in training NLP
Karen Meager
It’s a hot topic in the NLP community right now: does technology
have a place in deliver quality NLP training? If so, what is its place?
In the session at the Leadership Summit, we wanted to get a sense

of what approaches were being used, what worked, what didn’t and
how could technology impact training standards. Many of the
group felt that as NLP is a people thing, the most appropriate form
of training it is face to face. This way the trainer can support and
give feedback and the delegates can get face to face feedback from
each other. In today’s world where delegates are less willing or able
to travel far for trainings, everyone seems to be time poor and some
trainers are training in countries with many time zones, is this now
an outdated view?
There is also a perception that anything other the face to face

training lacks quality and we wanted to explore whether this is a
true reflection or whether there is a place in high quality trainings
for technology.
Concerns
It’s fair to say that views on this topic varied widely amongst the
group, some trainers were already using a lot of technology in their
trainings, some hated it and some (like me) were just technophobes!
The groups highlighted a number of concerns with using

technology and e learning practices in NLP training:
93
Powered by NLP!
How to evaluate whether delegates have actually learned anything,

it’s hard to judge integration of learning remotely. Statistics indicate
that only roughly a third of people actually complete online tasks or
modules
Some delegates will not attend the webinars or do the e learning

tasks, how do we manage that?
How do you assess and give feedback on behaviour in a non face to

face environment, particularly assessing whether or how delegates
are integrating the presuppositions of NLP for example
How can you witness delegates interacting with other delegates and
give feedback. As we know a lot of learning takes place outside of
the formal teaching.
Opportunities
We also recognised that there were opportunities to support face to

face training or even enhance the learning experience with
technology:
Online drills could be very useful for integrating and practising

some of the skills elements of an NLP training, sensory acuity and
language patterns were cited as particularly useful for this medium
and teaching these in the classroom may not be best use of face to
face time.
Webinars could help delegates to layer in material, therefore

deepening integration of learning
Webinar Q&As with trainers could help support delegates between

face to face session
Skype or other video call technology could be used to conduct one

to one catch ups with delegates
94
Online tools could be used to assess content knowledge
Personal Style
It was also appreciated there is an element of personal style for the

trainer here. For some trainers the connection of being with their
delegates is the joy of the job. Some are a bit self conscious with a
camera - perhaps they need to get over this! Some of us recognised
that we needed to learn more about this medium to fully
understand its potential.
Will technology ever fully take over face to face training?
A lot of the group hoped not! From a human to human perspective

it was important for a lot of people to be with their groups, partly
because as the world gets more and more drawn into technology so
the need for face to face, real human contact becomes ever more
important.
There was a recognition though of a place for technology in NLP

Trainings alongside the face to face element and a number of the
members took away actions to explore this further with their
training companies and with their awarding bodies.
95
Powered by NLP!
96
Reb Veale
The first thing for me to say is that I was greatly relieved that, as a
group, we discussed and agreed that our primary purpose was to
associate and not to create a ‘supergroup’…Cream or Coldplay, we are
not! Colloquium apparently means ‘an informal meeting for the
exchange of views, to talk together’, which the three day gathering in
January 2016 indeed turned out to be.
Around me were the names from books reaching back forty years
that I had read, learned from and recommended as texts to my own
students and yet, one of my overriding joys was the lack of egos in
the room. The carefully crafted structure was signalled from the
opening, with collaborative, mixed informal groups and plenary
sharing. Many nationalities were present and the opportunity and
challenge was to balance our desire to step up and take
responsibility, with the fact that no one had died and made us
emperors ;)
So, wishing to start off as we meant to go on; we ploughed into

group work to identify our ambitious scope. Ah, the ‘S’
word….Standards! Even if we did not intend resolving this topic
during the three days available, we started scoping out that the only
way to begin seeking commonality was to at least be open to share
and discuss NLP programme content, length of courses and
methods of competence assessment. One of the most common
questions asked by students of NLP is ‘if this is about
communication excellence; how come people in the NLP
community don’t agree?’. We think this is a valid question and one
we care enough about to seek to explore and potentially change, for
97
Powered by NLP!
the overall credibility of NLP, if for no other reason.
There was a great debate about the difference between being an

NLP Professional (see Karen Moxom’s great book of the same title)
and NLP being defined as a profession. At this early stage, there was
much consensus around the need for professional standards of
ethics and competence, whilst the existing definitions of a
profession (as cited from Grant & Cavanagh, 2004 in Bruce
Grimley’s PhD thesis on ‘What is NLP’) were deemed either too
onerous or inappropriate.
Possibly the most significant impact on me personally was the

openness and generosity with which those present shared their
research, experience and resources, tips for business-building and
use of technology. I had not previously been aware of the complex
additional distinctions John McWhirter had distilled from the Meta
Model or the sizeable portfolio of behavioural modelling projects he
has created. The community projects initiated by Frank Pucelik and
his trainers in Ukraine and Russia. The academic rigour Karl
Nielsen had brought, enabling NLP to be studied to PhD level. To
name but a few – what a privilege to have these innovative
collaborators who care so deeply about the state and future of NLP.
So, I went to the first colloquium with many hopes and not a few
concerns and was humbled to leave with new friends all over the
world and renewed hope that we are all working proactively and
transparently for the benefit of our field and for generations of
NLPers to come.
98
The Authors
(In alphabetical order)
99
Powered by NLP!
100
Laureli Blyth
Laureli is Founder and Director of

Research and Training at the
Australasian Institute of Neuro
Linguistic Programming in Sydney
Australia. With 30 years in the field of
NLP she is well- known and respected
International Trainer of NLP,
Psychotherapist and Clinical
Hypnotherapist. Laureli has several
published books her latest co-authored with Dr Heidi Heron ’30
Days to NLP’. Originally from Colorado in the USA, Laureli now
resides in Sydney Australia.
101
Powered by NLP!
Joe Cheal
Joe is an NLP Master Trainer who enjoys

learning new things… by exploring
diverse fields of science, linguistics,
philosophy and psychology and then
integrating these ‘learnings’. He is author
of “Solving Impossible Problems”, “Who
Stole My Pie?” and co-author of “The
Model Presenter” and “The Little Book of
Persuasion”. He is also the creator and
editor of the ANLP Journal: Acuity.
Through his consultancy, Imaginarium Learning & Development,

he has focused his training, coaching and consultancy experience
into the business environment, inspiring others to achieve
outstanding results. Since 1993, he has worked with a broad range
of organisational cultures, helping 1000s of people revolutionise the
way they work with others.
He also holds an MSc in Organisational Development and Neuro

Linguistic Technologies and a degree in Philosophy and
Psychology.
102
Authors
Melody Cheal
Melody is an NLP Master Trainer,

Hypnosis Trainer and has a Masters
Degree in Applied Positive Psychology, a
degree in Psychology and a diploma in
Psychotherapy. She is also a qualified as
both a Myers Briggs practitioner and EI
practitioner.
She also runs Association for Coaching

accredited courses from Award through to
Diploma and is currently involved in
running one day Master Classes for the AC in Positive Psychology
with NLP.
Her personal focus is humanistic and she enjoys helping students

and clients find their authentic self. Her new book, Becoming
Happy is designed to provide simple easy to follow steps to enable
even more people to become the best version of themselves.
103
Powered by NLP!
Lisa de Rijk
Lisa de Rijk is Managing Director of Awaken

Consulting & Training Services Ltd, and also
of Awaken School, a United Kingdom Council
for Psychotherapy (UKCP) accredited NLPt
psychotherapy training organisation.
Author of Neurolinguistic Psychotherapy: A
Postmodern Perspective; The Role of Brief
Therapies in Attachment Disorder; and NLP
Principles in Practice, and lead editor for The
Clinical Effectiveness of Neurolinguistic Programming.
As a former nurse and NHS manager in the UK, Lisa has a MSc in
Advanced Clinical Practice exploring NLPt and is currently
completing her PhD in Psychology at Surrey University. Consultant
to a diverse range of organisations, Lisa has a track record of
working in the public, private and third sector as a Trainer, Coach,
Change Management Consultant and Supervisor.
Lisa has served as Chair and Vice Chair of UKCP and is advisor to
Association of NLP.
104
Authors
Lucas Derks
Lucas is a social psychologist, scientific

member of the board of SOMPS since
2012, fellow member of The
International Laboratory for Mental
Space Research since 2003, member of
the NVNLP, UN and IANLP, and a
certified NLP trainer.
He was born 1950 in Oosterbeek, the

Netherlands. He studied art school and psychology. He was
researching visitor behaviour in museums and the practical use of
imagination techniques. He is mainly working as a trainer for
psychotherapist, trainers, mediators, conflict coaches, managers and
dentists. He developed the `social panorama model' as a tool to
analyse and improve human relations.
105
Powered by NLP!
Anneke Durlinger
She started her own business Tjoys training,

coaching and consulting in 1995, Trust,
Connect, Enrich.
She is a Fellow Member Trainer IA-NLP and

conducts the IA-NLP trainers training in the
Netherlands (20 days, 10 evenings)
Works as a NLP-trainer from 1995 a.o. for the IEP-institute in the

Netherlands: practitioners, masters (partially), metaprogramms, nlp
for trainers (3 days), beliefs in teams, introduction NLP, roles in
facilitation in light of the logical levels.
Has trained in Bulgaria (practitioners), Uganda (peace promotors),

Malaysia (EMR, on metaprogramms) and Santa Cruz as a guest
faculty member at NLPU.
Co-author of the book Voorbij je eigen wijze (Dutch), which is

translated in English Mastering communication with
metaprogramms as well as in Chinese Mandarin.
Author of the Manual for trainers, steps for enrichment (only

available in Dutch).
I am Fascinated on how to apply NLP on group dynamics: taking

care of the bigger whole by attending to the smallest detail.
I am dedicated to improving the world, by improving myself and

facilitating others to do so.
106
Authors
R. Frischknecht
Study of Accounting and Organization. 1980

Foundation of own company in the field of
Controlling, Organization, Auditing,
Supervision and Coaching.
Extensive personal studies in Humanistic

Psychology, Meditation, Spirituality, Bioenergetics, Neuro-
Linguistic Programming.
Since 1989 Co-Owner and Teaching trainer of NLP-Academy

Switzerland (www.nlp.ch).
1998 - 2007 Board-member of CHNLP Swiss Association for

Neuro-Linguistic Programming (today: www.swissnlp.ch). 1997
- 2001 Member of Standard Committee DVNLP German
Association for NLP (www.dvnlp.de). Since 2000 Secretary
General IANLP International Association for NLP (www.ia-
nlp.org).
Swiss diploma in adult education; Swiss diploma in Supervision,

Coaching and Organisational Consulting (Member www.bso.ch);
NLP-Teaching-trainer MBR NLP-Academy Switzerland; Fellow
Member Trainer IANLP, USA; Associate Trainer International
NLP und Society of NLP, USA; Teaching-trainer DVNLP.
107
Powered by NLP!
Bruce Grimley
Bruce is a chartered, (BPS) and registered,

(HCPC) psychologist who has had an
interest in NLP since the early 1990’s. His
PhD research, (UCN), explored the
question, “What is NLP?” and is one of the
few doctoral dissertations naming Neuro-
Linguistic Programming in both the title
and abstract. Bruce is retired, however has an interest in seeing a
greater presence of NLP within influential academic journals. He
can be found at www.achieving-lives.co.uk.
108
Authors
L. Michael Hall
L. Michael Hall, Ph.D. began working to

model human potentials and excellence and
since 1990 has engaged in more than 17
Modeling Projects: Resilience (1994), Wealth
Creation (1996), Sales (1997), Women in
Leadership (1997), Business Acumen (1997),
Coaching (2001), Self-Actualization (2003),
Benchmarking (2005), Collaborative
Leadership (2013), etc. These projects have
sought to identify the structure, then create
patterns for transferring and replicating the
prescribed expertise.
With the explorations into Self-Actualization within the field of

Coaching, Dr. Hall became an expert in Maslow’s original works, in
the structure of Self-Actualization Psychology, and the role of this
psychology as the Psychology of Coaching. Discovering the death
of the first Human Potential Movement and the reasons for its
demise in 1985, Michael launched a new Human Potential
Movement in 2007 within the Neuro-Semantics Community. To
date, Dr. Hall has published three books on Self-Actualization:
Unleashed, Self-Actualization Psychology, and Unleashing Leadership.
Michael earned a masters degree in biblical language and literature,

a second masters in Clinical Counseling, and a Ph.D. in Cognitive
Psychology. He has studied many psychologies, and took training
in NLP with Richard Bandler, writing several books for him, and
then publishing over 40 books in the field of NLP. Michael is a
visionary leader, he co-founded Neuro-Semantics (1996) and the
Meta-Coaching System (with Michelle Duval, 2001). Michael began
writing the curriculum for Meta-Coaching in a series of books, there
are 9 books in the series.
109
Powered by NLP!
Heidi Heron
Heidi has been involved with the technology of

NLP for most of her life and is a Master Trainer
of NLP and Doctor of Psychology. She has
obtained her Doctorate in Psychology; Masters
in Adult Education and Bachelor Degrees in
Psychology and Communication. Heidi has a
background in Corporate Human Resources
Management and Personal Development. Heidi
has been working in the field of Human
Development since 1992. Currently, Heidi holds the role of
Chairperson for the Australian Board of NLP. Heidi is the co-author
of the book 30 Days to NLP.
110
Authors
Jaap Hollander
Psychologist, NLP Trainer,

Provocative Trainer, MindSonar
founder
Jaap is co-owner of the Institute for

Eclectic Psychology, IEP, together
with Anneke Meijer. The IEP is
Holland’s oldest NLP institute
(12.000+ people trained).
He authored eleven books, like ‘Essentials of NLP’ (with Lucas

Derks), ‘Provocative Coaching' (English) and 'Trance and Magic'
(modelling trance rituals in Brazil). He was on the Dutch Quote top
500 business advisors list for as long as it existed.
Jaap studied with the founder of provocative therapy, Frank

Farrelly, for more than 25 years. He developed a system (the
'Farrelly Factors’) for teaching provocative coaching thoroughly and
systematically.
He co-created the ‘Nano Tech Power Deck’ a card game that claims
to be ‘NLP in a box’. Try it.
He founded ‘MindSonar’, an online system measuring meta

programs and Graves drives, being used world wide.
111
Powered by NLP!
Rachel Hott
Dr. Rachel B. Hott, who holds a

Ph. D. in clinical psychology is
a certified master practitioner
and trainer of Neuro-Linguistic
Programming and co-director
and co-founder of The NLP
Center of New York. She is a
NYS licensed clinical
psychologist and holds a master degree in Dance/Movement
Therapy. She is also a hypnotherapist certified by the National
Board of Certified Clinical Hypnotherapists (NBCCH). Rachel has
been a course leader for American Management Association and a
private consultant for executives. She has been trained by Jack
Canfield to facilitate self-esteem trainings. Her specialization areas
include: Performance anxiety, Sexuality, Life Transitions,
Addictions and Healthy Lifestyles including weight control, sleep
and exercise. Rachel is also authorized and endorsed by NLP
Comprehensive to conduct Core Transformation© workshops.
Rachel had written numerous articles for Anchor Point magazine.
Rachel is sought after as a presenter on NLP and Communication.
She and Steven Leeds, are co-authors of the book, NLP: A Changing
Perspective.
112
Authors
Judith Lowe
Judith Lowe is an NLP trainer based in

London with PPD Learning. She is currently
focussing her work on innovations in post-
practitioner development and in more
advanced and applied levels of NLP training.
Her Masterclasses, CPD, Leadership

Development, Trainer Training, Coaching and
Modelling with NLP courses are all aimed at helping people who
are already using NLP professionally and personally to deepen and
expand their NLP skills and approaches.
‘Passion in Action - Social Change with NLP’ is an ongoing

international programme created with NLP co-developer Judith
DeLozier to support people who want to make a positive difference
in the world through community leadership and contribution.
Website; www.judithlowe.com
Publications; The PPD Learning NLP Practice Group Book - with

forewords by Robert Dilts and Judith DeLozier
113
Powered by NLP!
Karen Meager
Karen Meager is an INLPTA Master Trainer

of NLP and Cofounder of Monkey Puzzle
Training & Consultancy in the UK. She has
been working in the field of NLP for over 15
years, both in organisations and with
individuals, is a UKCP registered
Psychotherapist and author.
114
Authors
Karl Nielsen
Prof. Dr. Karl Nielsen from Germany is the

President of the International Association of
NLP Institutes (IN) and Professor at the
Universidad Central de Nicaragua (UCN) for
the international Master and PhD distance
learning programs in Psychology with focuses
in NLP, Coaching, Business and Health. He is
cofounder of NLPsych (Neuro Linguistic
Psychology) and NLPhil (Neuro Linguistic
Philosophy).
115
Powered by NLP!
Reb Veale
Reb Veale is a member of ANLP and an

INLPTA NLP Trainer, an mBIT Trainer and
one of the first mBIT Master Coaches to be
certified. As a business psychologist, Reb
works in leadership development, the impact
of coaching on individuals and organisational
culture and also runs public NLP and mBIT
trainings globally. She has also co-authored a
range of coaching and development products that are currently
supporting customers in 37 countries.
Most likely to say: “so what?!” Least likely to say: “whatever!”
116
Authors
Luzia Wittmann
Luzia Wittmann is a Master Trainer in

Neuro-Linguistic Programming and a
Systemic Coach. Her mission is to offer
strategies to help people to overcome
suffering by inner transformation and by
building a fulfilling life for themselves. With
this intention Luzia runs In-NLP – The
International Institute of NeuroLinguistic
Programming, based in Lisbon. So far she has been responsible and
participated as a trainer for about 85 certification trainings,
including Practitioners, Master Practitioners and Trainers Trainings,
and in numerous in-company trainings in Portugal, Brazil, Angola,
Mozambique and USA.
Luzia likes to keep updated with the recent developments of NLP,
as well as to keep contact with peers in the NLP world. She has been
exploring Neurolinguistc Psychotherapy as well as NLP related
areas such as Systemic Constellation, Coaching, Jungian
psychology, Ericksonian hypnosis, among others.
In the past, Luzia led a group of researchers in Computational
Linguistics at INESC for 6 years, having been responsible for several
European projects at this institution. She holds a Master’s Degree in
Portuguese Literature from the University of Lisbon. She taught at
the University of Nantes in France and collaborated with various
newspapers and magazines in the field of critical and literary
review in Portugal and in Brazil.
117

Powered by NLP Ebook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Powered by NLP Ebook

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Powered by NLP Ebook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Reflections and Future

First published 2016.

All rights reserved.

Reflections: Rachel Hott 1

1 Building a Worldwide NLP Community 7

2 NLP: Today & Tomorrow? 25

3 Credibility: Professional NLP 77

About the Authors 99

Imagine twenty-nine NLP ‘elders’ from across the world

Welcome to the 2016 Leadership Summit ‘Colloquium’.

Back in 2012, a collection of NLP ‘elders’ were invited to gather in

An elder, in this case, is defined as somebody who:

 Has 15 years minimum experience in the field of NLP,

 Is willing to sign up to the declaration, purpose and values

Folks in attendance were:

Anneke Durlinger Netherlands

Frank Pucelik Ukraine

Why This Book?

From a personal perspective, as I sat listening to the experience,

If we can’t ‘bottle’ it, we could at least record it in some way; even

‘Powered by NLP!’ is a range of ideas from people in the group.

Forging a New Future for NLP

A truly historical event occurred January 8, 9 and 10 in the coastal

The Idea of a “Summit”

In the world of politics, when an issue or a problem arises in a

out to the leaders of half a dozen countries or a dozen or two dozen

The NLP Leadership Summit is similar. The Summit, as such, has no

One problem in the field of NLP has been the divisiveness—the

What we did during the Summit was experience co-leadership.

In facilitating the group, Heidi Heron and myself, set up the

Rachel Hott, PhD

It was my first time attending an NLP Leadership summit. I only

Michael Hall and Heidi Heron, who organized the summit,

At the get go we reminded ourselves to demonstrate respect for

Fortunately our facilitators respectfully "reeled us in" when this

At times my new learning was on a smaller chunk size, during

Another spontaneous and creative moment occurred in another

group listed most of the NLP concepts, techniques, foundations,

In sharing these two examples I am aware of my preference for

A pleasant surprise for me was meeting other NLP couples. Steven

Community, collaboration and connection. These are three words I

I have been attending the NLP Leadership Summit at the London

I was looking forward to spending 3 whole days with the leaders

not yet a part of the group to be a part of the group, and a

The feedback was interesting. Most people thought it was a good

In my mind it takes a very special kind of person to put aside their

My own passion lies within community. My values and beliefs lean

Community – in my mind there has always been somewhat of a

I was tremendously inspired by the work that people do – the

When I came back to Australia I presented a short webinar to the

We also collaborated. Working groups were created and are still in

There was undoubtedly connection at the Leadership Summit.

We have a community spirit, a collaborative effort and a connection

Conflict Resolution for

L. Michael Hall, PhD

Conflict Subjects: When there are behaviors in language and

will stop and apologize as we catch ourselves or as someone

2) We will Manage our States as best we can.

3) We will first Gather High Quality Information.