Александр Герасимов
NLP Radio. The most efficient NLP tools. Part 2
CHAPTER 1
METAPROGRAMS.
MOTIVATION TOWARDS & FROM
Hello, everyone. And again this is NLP radio on stream. Today
in our studio we are having our usual guest a famous NLP trainer
in Russia, a professional negotiator, Alexander Gerasimov. Hello,
Alexander.
Hello, Olga.
Dear listeners, we have learned a lot by American materials
of Richard Bandler and John Grinder. We have learned and read
lots of books, and now we have prepared something to introduce
you, some products you are going to be interested in. Now
we will treat you with something. And the topic discussed
today is metaprograms. The first question: what actually
are metaprograms?
Metaprograms are so to speak persons habitual ways of thinking, of making a choice, of making a decision. It is what we have had for ages and what is integrated into us rather seriously.
For example. All of us have a certain number of metaprograms. And we can choose how many programs we should have independently.
For example, we have a metaprogram of motivation. It is what we will be talking about today. And a person habitually picks either motivation of striving for something, or motivation of avoiding something. In the form of a metaphor, we can imagine a selector between diametrically-opposed positions either or. For example, a person having a metaprogram of avoiding will be afraid of literally everything. And there is a person having a metaprogram of striving.
As a diametrically-opposed example, for better explanation. A person, who is striving for something in spite of everything I see my target I believe in myself I ignore obstacles. Normally, ordinary people are somewhere between these positions, inclined to a certain metaprogram. And there can be a large amount of such
habits, metaprograms. I can add a couple of such dichotomies.
Ive heard about the book describing 51 metaprograms in NLP
by Michael Hall but I would say that every tool including for negotiations, and for self-improvement the transformation of quantity into quality occurs but not always sometimes, the quantity is so extensive and large that it is not easy to fetch. For example, there is a classification of people comprising 8 personality types, and just imagine a classification comprising 1,000 personality types.
When you learn this classification, you wont want to learn any other classifications. And there is an optimal amount of metaprograms.
For example, about 10 or 15. I believe that there are 51 metaprograms, but I dont believe that it would be a rather rational tool.
Do we count them in pairs? Do we count number of pairs
or all together?
Pairs.
In the beginning I wanted to ask this question at the end of our
conversation, but logically it is going to be put right here. How
are they actually formed and under which circumstances are they
formed? And what actually influences their formation?
All of us are products of our childhood. Those are formed including based on our experience, our family education, our personal experience interaction with other people and on what kind of books a person read in their childhood on in what kind of family a person was brought up Of course, metaprograms are partially influenced by a physiological component I mean, there are people so to speak
actually slow naturally for example, they have such nervous system slow reaction time I will name three main metaprogram forming factors. Number One is physiology, human physiology.
It is an individual characteristic. We are very different. We have different characters. It was the first factor. Number Two is conditions in which children are raised in their family. It refers to parents, scenarios, nutrition, and parenting style Number Three is social interaction.
For example, it not necessarily refers to some people, neighbors, or friends or schoolmates. It can refer to books, which we choose
to read consciously So we have three substantial levels. And a combination of those Well, an earlier level affects a later level, and forms the personality of a person. It doesnt mean that a person will be for example, if it is an avoiding, or, for example, a reflexive
person, you wont be able to help it It is possible to adjust, to correct
and then its the matter of resources you are willing to invest. And it is possible to reformate them, providing that those were formatted.
Okay. I remember: in one of your performances, in one of your
interviews you said that imprints, imprinted experience, play
a role. Do they?
Yes. I just havent named this word, and these childhood experiences, obtained in childhood when our mental health is the most vulnerable, can be called imprints. Depending on imprints, including parenting style For example, a child constantly being hurried by his or her parents or, on the contrary, a baby to whom everyone around, parents, credible people say, Dont hurry. Weigh everything! Check whether youve taken it, Recheck! And an initially high-energy child gradually begins to move slower. Sometimes that child is told to stop doing something, sometimes scolded, sometimes praised. And eventually it gets formed. I mean, it has influence. Maybe it is not a key element, and maybe it is impossible to distinguish a key element, but it surely is a component having a certain share of influence.
Right. Okay. Lets talk detailedly about each aspect of motivation.
Motivation towards and motivation from. Which are pluses and
minuses of each in our life?
This is not to say that FROM motivation is bad, and TOWARDS
motivation is good. It is the matter of applicability. There is a range of peculiarities, or so to speak personality traits. A person having rather FROM motivation is more cautious, attentive such person avoids and doesnt want something to be something to happen
Normally, those people are more observant. And more sensitive. Unlike TOWARDS motivation, where a person is rather result-oriented, and, like they say, an arrow heading towards a target is not distracted by the landscape. So, a person having TOWARDS motivation may
be insensitive to other people and to their reaction. This is not always the case. Theres a certain correlation. For example I would apply it I mean positive or negative if I meet a person rather having FROM motivation I would try to match that persons motivation, and would talk to a greater extent about problems we should avoid