NLP Connections - the ultimate NLP resource on the internet - and the largest NLP forum!

This video is in two parts, 10 and 8 minutes, showing Richard working with a woman who has a fear of flying resulting from her having been on a plane that was hijacked by Peruvian terrorists many years earlier.
We see snippets of Richard trying a number of different interventions.
At the end of the woman's test flight with Richard on the same plane (near the end of the second video) the woman says, in a high-pitched strained voice (verbatim):

"I didn't put my seat back, though; I was too nervous. . . . I think I'm finally conquering the phobia I've had for over 22 years, and the biggest problem is that I have to do it all over again on the way back."

Although she did get on the plane, both her words and her nonverbals clearly indicate that it is certainly not what I would describe as a success. Yet these videos are presented as if this were a successful treatment.
I'd be embarrassed! Not for failing; I have failed many times--but for trying to "spin" it as a success, despite such clear evidence to the contrary.
Steve Andreas

What would you suggest be done differently? I only ask because I don't know.

Hm... from the video I can see two types of interventions:

1. NLP/Hypnosis techniques used in the office.

2. Facing the danger -- a form of flooding. That is when Richard Bandler corners a woman in the office, then in the elevator, then the movie theater and finally the flight. All of this are examples of traditional behavior therapy.


So, the questions is which set of the interventions were more decisive in helping this woman with her phobia?
Not knowing the details of the case, I'm forced to remain open minded about it.


Btw, was there any follow ups to find out if she is still in control of her phobia or did she revert back to her established patterns of panic attacks?

Well one problem is we don't know what was edited out.
Richard might have used other interventions that were off camera?

As the video currently stands i have to say that it does not come across as one of Richard's finest moments? I have the highest respect for Richard's work and was surprised when I saw this for the first time and thought the same as Steve, they could have picked a more convincing demo.

As far as what he could have done, well there are many things , play a new code game to collapse that first anchor eerrrrr maybe not.

Of course It's easy to make suggestions from the other side of a camera lens.

Peter

Hi Steve,

I am not sure where you get that they are 'trying to spin it as a success' the language he uses clearly shows that he is accepting that she has some more work to do on this in relation to that time point in the process.

I transcribe his words verbatim " ... the only thing I want you to pay attention to is how much better you did, you notice how much better it's getting each time, eventually it will just clear.......... You go ' if I can do this then I can do the rest....." He is using language to post hypnotically suggest the future outcomes...... genius at work IMHO

The long term success is that she was able to see her grandaughter and that Richard had given her the tools to use herself to be able to get to the point where she was able to get the flight.

With much respect
Nina

Personally I think he did get a success, she made it through a flight without having a panic attack. Also, Steve, what you are describing as a strained high pitched voice ..... well, I'd describe differently. I don't think she was particularly worried about the return flight. Yes she did say "and the biggest prolem is I have to do it all again etc." yet this wasn't said with trepidation. Was it ?

I haven't seen his finest moments so I've no idea. But isn't there a question of expectation here ? What counts as a genuine success - does she have to beam ecstatically through the entire flight ? or is the problem allowed to diminish with time. I didn't see the work he did with her, regardless however, I think if you can get a phobic on an actual flight without a single panic - it's success, isn't it ?

Edited to add that I only skipped to the last bit Steve referenced.

I'm with you, Nina. The client got everything she said she wanted, so if there's any "spinning" going on, it isn't being done by Richard.

Hi Renee
having seen Richard doing change-work on many live occasions he has had occasions where the calibrate results of change were quite obvious and dramatically different from the start of the session. Even a hardened skeptic would be hard pushed not to be impressed at the result he achieved with the client.

The Bandler effect ( dvds) are also well worth watching for excellent examples of his change work abilities in a brief setting.

Her interview at the end of the flight is clearly marked with some questionable indications of doubt. I agree with Steve that her tone of voice is high pitched for some reason? The direct comparison is two seconds before ( film time - maybe not real time) when she talks to the camera from her seat. Also she says " i think I'm quite proud of myself" ( voice tone up- questioning and not sure?) then "I didn't put my seat back, though; I was too nervous. " ( voice tone down- she seems quite sure of that evaluation?) It's this aspect of the video that I find weak. listening to her language patterns she is still future pacing still and concerned about the flight back which potentially is able to produce another panic attack. The positive side of this is that having only had one day with Richard she is clearly still work in progress to allow this work to generalize which is why he is pushing her to follow up everything without wasting time.
Any good NLPer will have spotted what I have just pointed out as obvious, but how many people from the general public would see it that way?

As i said earlier while she does indeed succeed ( and that's obviously great) as a piece of documentary work/ commercial? ( I don't know for what purpose this was made?) it could have been more convincing in real time, the argument against what I have just said would be that maybe this looks less staged (not suggesting that it was btw).

Those non- verbles at the end would bother me if I had been working with her. At that stage I would have said it was a gamble not to follow up with some more work (but Richard also knows what he is doing and as I said before we do not know what happened off camera?).

Peter

Hi Steve,

I sincerely believe that these videos should be part of any new NLP Practitioner's training (and I said so previously on this forum: http://www.nlpconnections.com/talk-a...titioners.html)

There is often an impression that NLP will cure all ills in a matter of minutes and a whole load of people who leave trainings believing that they can take the techniques that they have just learned and change the world.

This set of videos should be a good dose of reality to counter that impression. This should be fantastic to see for those that have treated such clients because they can nod sagely and say to the newbie practitioners, "welcome to the real world".

It is worth noting that the video mentions that the client took a further trip just two weeks later.

So, she didn't do it sitting in a cloud of serenity - she just did it. Then she did it again. Then she did it again and again.

Job done.


Regards,


Stephen

Hi Peter,

I watched the second clip through. I played it through a laptop, so sound quality is not great. Your calibration is probably beter than mine, but I'm happy to play devils advocate and argue the point anyway Calibrating against the voice qualities 2 secs (film time) earlier is probably not ideal, she was seated and in flight. No doubt you've noticed what happens to your own voice when in flight, the cabin pressure changes have a distinct impact. Everything clears when the plane lands and cabin pressures normalise.

Clearly the lady had a problem in the lift and the cinema - more of a problem than on the flight I would say. And Bandler states that the process he is guiding her through is one which will gradually generalise. I don't believe the flight was supposed to be a flagship for the fastest most effortless change work he does ? If so wouldn't it have made sense to have at least a faultless trip in an elevator before embarking on a flight ?

I appreciate your point and the fact that you've been specific in terms of what you've calibrated. I'm not especially a fan of Bandler, but I guess I'm just seeing something different in this clip. Or more likely, not seeing/hearing something

Stephen
we are talking one day's intervention work here

I think you can safely say that was brief by anyones standards?
Quote SR
"There is often an impression that NLP will cure all ills in a matter of minutes and a whole load of people who leave training's believing that they can take the techniques that they have just learned and change the world."
Yep, I felt like that after Richard's practitioner course. He built an attitude of belief that things are possible. Is that realistic? it's true that it does set you up with enough confidence to have a go. The downside of that is it can be creating practitioners who are completely delusional in regards to ability and have a total lack of conscious competence /unconscious competence.

So would this be helpful to be shown to Richard's practitioners?
It's a difficult position. Confidence in having a go as opposed to the information remaining more theoretical than practical?

I get what your saying, but this is still comparatively fast change work, what will this really prove to NLP students in context of speed of change?

It would be better to demonstrate how Richard hardly ever uses the nlp interventions that are taught on practitioner classes! What's going on in the other things that he is doing is certainly worth watching again and again.

Peter


Btw, did she do it again and again?

Peter,

You are right - but it is 1 day of pretty intensive one-on-one that a client wouldn't normally give. It is still very brief, but nothing like the "15 minutes" that is often touted.

I think that there is a balance between giving a "get up and go" attitude and a fear of doing something wrong and I also feel that there needs to be some reality check given that not everybody will hop on a plane when you get them to spin their feelings.

On the "BTW", she flew out - then she flew back (sometimes people forget about the fact that their flying phobic client has to come back!). Two weeks later, we are told, she flew out again and, I presume, flew back - again, and again and again.


Namasté


Stephen

Hi Stephen
do people really tout 15mins? I'm curious as to where that on comes from?
I never got that impression from either Richard or John in their training's?
Both of them take considerably longer in practice. What is evident is that very often they get a calibrated shift in the client but carry on working with uc signals and when the client is convinced they stop. The work was all done way before the client ever realized.

That's what i love about the elegance that they both employ in their change work.

Peter

Hi Peter,

The "15 minutes" is an exageration but I have heard RB in interview say (paraphrasing here), "I have developed a phobia cure that works in 15 minutes and am working to do it faster" (a very loose paraphrase).

So, I guess you could say that it comes from the top.

Richard Bandler and John LaValle are both gifter communicators with many years of experience of doing what they do. Their skills and abilities are not in question - not by me.

Please don't take me wrong and believe that my siggestion that these videos need to be seen by trainees is a slur on Richard Bandler's abilities. I know that he is a great operator and, like him, I share an interest in the treatment of phobias. This needs to be shown to people, I think, for the very reasons that someone (although not, I suspect, Steve's reasons) might question them. Here is a master of his art and a client that is clearly not skipping onto the plane. Sometimes treating phobics is easy - sometimes it is a 5 mintute job. However, in the real world there are people who won't be fixed that quick. Students need to know this and know what to do if it happens to them.


Regards,



Stephen

Stetphen
we are both singing from the same hymn book

Halleluja brother!

Peter and Stephen,

Back in the 80's Richard Bandler talked for the first time (that I am aware of) about two types of changework:
Quickfixes and overhauls
The second one as it might be suspected requieres a lot more time.

Back in the 80's and 90's NLP Comprehensive offered the tapes of Richard Bandler working with Andy the schizophrenic (the one that people came out of the TV set and followed him around). It went on for three sessions and several hours.
In the end Andy looks better than he did at the starting point but anyone who ran into him would know he was not "normal" or well adjusted. He did learn to hallucinate how to erease Mary's head among other things. So he was still hallucinating.... yet it was shown at NLP Comprehensive workshops as a great success.
Was it much better than psychiatric treatment? Absolutelly!

The video sessions of Magic in Action are cool to watch quickfixes and yet if you ask me a couple fo them could still use more work.
Again I think it was great work and much better than what most professional could do.... but I would not ask out the girl from anticipatory loss without doing a lot more work on her first.

Success is relative!
I know Bandler clients usually are very happy with the "success" of the intervention.... does that make them perfect or dateable? Depends on your own standards.

Gabe

Hi Gabe
Are the DVDs still available of magic in action?

Thanks

Peter

Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but aren't those 'Magic In Action' sessions the Marshall Univerity Tapes, which are currently available from purenlp.com?

Cheers

Thanks Stephen
I will check it out.

Peter