Pragmatic ideas for leaders
Pragmatic ideas for leaders.
As part of our NLP leadership masterclass we start off by brainstorming the key aspects of leadership and suggestions as to what a newly appointed leader could focus on during their first 30 days in office in order to survive and thrive. - (This gives then gives us the content to establish the 'how to' over for the next three days of the course.)
The audience are typically individuals with a leadership role in largish companies. We had a couple of Directors of £1B+ companies at the last one.
I thought it would be interesting to share the results of the last brain storm to see if anyone wanted to add to, build on or argue with our very top line thoughts.
Definition of leadership
As far as we could tell the only definition of a leader is that he or she has followers.
Top line Responsibilities
Develop and enthuse about the vision
Develop and reinvent the business model to achieve results
Create the rules
Take risks
Wrestle with ambiguity
Take action and re-motivate when things go wrong
30 Day focus
Create a simple vision
Identify your ideal team and how they compare with your current team
Identify customers
Identify stakeholders
Identify resources
Identify barriers
Test and understand the status quo
Understand the difficult decisions that need to be made and decide when you're going to make them
Establish potential key alliances
Establish your own network
Understand how you're going to make your mark and create momentum
Understand how you're going to 'light THE fire'
Build your communications plan and implement
Establish your dashboard or key measures
And as a sanity check
From time to time check in to see that you're being true to yourself!
Michael
01908 506563
PPI Business NLP
As part of our NLP leadership masterclass we start off by brainstorming the key aspects of leadership and suggestions as to what a newly appointed leader could focus on during their first 30 days in office in order to survive and thrive. - (This gives then gives us the content to establish the 'how to' over for the next three days of the course.)
The audience are typically individuals with a leadership role in largish companies. We had a couple of Directors of £1B+ companies at the last one.
I thought it would be interesting to share the results of the last brain storm to see if anyone wanted to add to, build on or argue with our very top line thoughts.
Definition of leadership
As far as we could tell the only definition of a leader is that he or she has followers.
Top line Responsibilities
Develop and enthuse about the vision
Develop and reinvent the business model to achieve results
Create the rules
Take risks
Wrestle with ambiguity
Take action and re-motivate when things go wrong
30 Day focus
Create a simple vision
Identify your ideal team and how they compare with your current team
Identify customers
Identify stakeholders
Identify resources
Identify barriers
Test and understand the status quo
Understand the difficult decisions that need to be made and decide when you're going to make them
Establish potential key alliances
Establish your own network
Understand how you're going to make your mark and create momentum
Understand how you're going to 'light THE fire'
Build your communications plan and implement
Establish your dashboard or key measures
And as a sanity check
From time to time check in to see that you're being true to yourself!
Michael
01908 506563
PPI Business NLP
posted by Michael at
10:57 AM
13 Comments:
Hello Mr. Beale
I'm interested in the core concepts of NLP. Could you direct me to the research explaining representational systems (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) sense concepts? Regards D. Ralen
By
D. Ralen, at 5:01 AM
Hi, I think the concept of representational systems comes from simple observation. When I'm coaching and ask someone to visualise something I'll watch their eyes. This will give me information as to whether they're accessing internal information or not and an indication as to which sense their using. I'll test this by asking them.
Michael
By
Michael, at 6:06 AM
Thank you Michael.
In Dilts,Grinder,Bandler (1980), NLP the Study of structure.... it says the representational systems are core to NLP and can be universally applied throughout to determine the form of a client's experience. Has this had any proper testing in controlled studies? Regards D.Ralen
By
D. Ralen, at 4:06 AM
Not that I'm aware of, of course that doesn't mean it hasn't been done!
However I'm not totally sure how one would set such a test up and what it's purpose would be - and I'm curious as to definitions of 'proper' and 'control'.
Representational systems are a complicated way of describing our senses ie seeing, hearing, touch, smell and taste.
To say that our expererience is built up with information from our senses seems fairly self evident. Our senses are our contact with the outside world.
What NLP explores is some basic models of how people structure sensory information - and how this effects their experience, and how this can be used to help them.
Michael
By
Michael, at 1:44 PM
Hello Michael
Actually I found the research this morning. According to the review it says the representational systems were tested thoroughly during the 1980s and the results were negative. Thanks anyway. DRalen
By
D. Ralen, at 1:27 AM
Thanks,
Interested if you had a link to the detail of the research - I'd be interested (and maybe others would to)in what specifically was found to be negative and the scope and methodology of the research.
Michael
By
Michael, at 7:00 AM
Sure Michael
Its covered pretty thoroughly in Devilly (2005) Power Therapies - in Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry Vol.39 p.437
Its described as in Drenth, P. (1999) Prometheus chained: Social and ethical constraints on psychology. Vol. 4.4 pp.233-239 European psychologist
and ^ a b Pieter J.D. Drenth (2003) Growing anti-intellectualism in Europe; a menace to science in ALLEA Annual Report pp.60-72'
Its also covered as a chapter in Singer (Singer, Margaret & Janja Lalich (1997). Crazy Therapies: What Are They? Do They Work?. Jossey Bass, p168-176. ISBN 0787902780.).
They all refer to the array of controlled empirical studies that have shown NLP to be ineffective for the purpose of influence, modeling, and as a therapy, and erroneous in conceptualization of internal senses (Rep systems), linguistics, neuroscience, and eye movements. They all then go on to highlight the pseudoscientific behaviour of the group, as they consider that to be more relevant and productive than testing NLP's changeable claims. Regards Daniel.
By
D. Ralen, at 1:05 PM
Thanks,
I has a quick google search and read some of the findings - its useful that you've noted them so anyone else can look.
Its good to have a slightly sceptical mind about all these things.
For myself I've had too much experience of many of the concepts of NLP being of genuine value to me in influence, modelling and coaching today to take these findings too seriously. (and I have a scientific background)
A simple dismissal of NLP (which appears to be the conclusion you you quote) is no or more less scientific that accepting everything people have written about it.
My advice to anyone who is interested is to be aware there are a lot of different view to its validity either way. (I can quote company agreed case studies where people have found it exceptionally useful in getting their job done).
Find out what it actually NLP is and make your own mind up.
Michael
By
Michael, at 2:21 PM
Sure Michael
One of the pseudoscientific behaviours is to talk in relativistic terms (eg, knowledge is all relative). The pseudoscientific recommendation is to "try it out for yourself" and there is a general presentation of testimonials. This is contrasted with the normal non-pseudoscientific approach: knowledge is not all relative - everyone has their view but the most independent and reliable information is paramount.
So sure, outright dismissal is an ignorant approach. But according to the research, quoting testimonials and urging to "try it for yourself" is the norm in pseudoscientific followings. In contrast, finding independent science research is essential for making an informed decision. Concerning what NLP actually is, the more recent independent research says NLP is actually a pseudoscientific new age/quasi-spiritual development. From that we can all draw our own conclusions. Daniel.
By
D. Ralen, at 4:15 PM
What conclusions are those?
Michael
By
Michael, at 4:32 PM
Well like most people I believe in finding the most reliable information from independent non-financially interested parties. I'd conclude that NLP has no validity. I can only imagine that most people will conclude the same as myself after having read the research. Daniel.
By
D. Ralen, at 6:50 PM
Some will, some won't. You've concluded that NLP has no validity and expressed your views and reasons. And I respect your right to do so.
I do have a financial interest in NLP, however I've also taken the time to explore it - and while I don't by any means believe all claims made for NLP overal I've come to a very positive view about a number of NLP approaches.
As a very simple example I've developed a relaxation MP3 for myself using NLP and hypnotic approaches. It helps me relax and sleep when I want to.
Someone does some reaearch saying 'NLP has no validity'. The MP3 still helps me relax and sleep.
Which is of more interest to me in this context the research or the MP3 that gets me the results I want?
For myself I'm backing my experience over the research you refer to.
Take care and thanks for posting your views,
Michael
By
Michael, at 8:07 PM
Sure, I'll continue my research on my own blog. Daniel
By
D. Ralen, at 2:20 AM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home