Introduction.

In this essay I will put forward the proposal that NLP is truly a form of systemic therapy. To understand this proposal I will briefly discuss the nature of systems. I then intend to link these ideas to the existing therapies from which NLP has been derived and how these therapies either consciously or not apply a systems approach. Finally I will bring together the evidence from the theoretical basis and the practical application and experience of NLP to show that at the foundation of the ideas behind NLP, and that from my practice of NLP psychotherapy, there is a clear indication of systemic functioning.

Defining a "System".

There are a number of ways of thinking about the problems that surround us in every day life. We are traditionally taught to think in terms of logic in a linear fashion (1). By this I mean we are taught that a force on a subject "A" will exact a reaction on subject "B". Subject "B" may either go on to exert a force on subject "C" or return a force on subject "A". Thus we see life as like a game of tennis. We serve and wait for the ball to be returned or as perhaps many people believe, we simply wait for the balls to be served to us and our job is simply to return them back to the server. Maybe we even see our lives as dodging those balls we believe we cannot hit, but never the less the balls keep on coming.

Systems thinking is about the wider context within which the subject(s) interacts. This thinking takes into account both the internal structure and process as well as the external structures and processes that exert forces on the initial subject(s). As I shall show later when taking in to account both the internal and external issues it can be shown that in systems thinking all the parts are changed by the interactions within the system.

O'Connor and McDermott (1997) define a system as "….an entity that maintains its existence and functions as a whole through the interaction of its parts." Further, they say that a system has the following criteria:

• Its interconnecting parts function as a whole.
• If you take away parts the system breaks down rather than producing smaller systems.
• The arrangement of parts in a system is crucial
• The parts are connected and they work together.
• The behaviour of the whole system is dependent on the structure of the interconnection of the parts.

All this means is that instead of simply looking at individual interactions in isolation it is necessary to examine the patterns that they make. By this I mean one needs to examine not only a number of different interactions but what effects these interactions have on each other. In the NLP therapeutic context I believe that we need to be aware of both the therapist and the client(s). In applying the above criteria to NLP therapy we need to ask if in the practice of the therapy these criteria are met.

NLP history.

The process that was named as NLP developed from studying how specific psychotherapists achieved their results. {Did it? Or is this just PR?} The most familiar system for each of us is the family in which we grew up. Whether its was a good experience or not a group of individuals living together form a system with the criteria as described above. One of the great exponents of psychotherapy for families was Virginia Satir and she was one of the models for NLP.

Satir states that "our self-concepts and self-images are derived from the context of the system we are in at any particular moment in time." (2) Simply the use of the word system does not necessarily mean that a system approach is in use. However, the word she has chosen for her work - conjoint is defined as "joined together, united"(3) and suggests the interconnection of many different parts. In her opening remarks she talks of families as being units and describes how members will work together to establish and maintain balance. Satir also points out the effect that the therapist has on the family. In her statement "….the presence of the therapist adds as many dyads (two-person systems) as there are people in the family…." She is saying that the therapist is a part of that family collective, the therapist can be an observer and teacher but also a member of the system.

This thinking is developed much more by Keeney(4). He states that in a systems approach the therapist has an effect on the therapy, he says that ".. drawing distinctions necessarily leaves us with an altered, expanded universe for subsequent investigation" and that therapy is about the drawing of distinctions. In fact a great deal of Satir's work was about bringing about those distinctions in to awareness. So one of the bases {models} of NLP is grounded in systems thinking if not systems theory.

Another of the building blocks of NLP was the work of Fritz Perls who developed Gestalt therapy. In Gestalt distinctions are drawn that divide up personality and the goal is the integration of these divisions into a unity, a whole system. Clarkson(5) describes the Gestalt process as "the integration of all disparate parts". She also goes on to say that "….it is impossible to engage in a counselling relationship without involving your values are your basic view of human nature".

Again we see the systemic approach coming in where both the client and the therapist create therapy together. This fulfils those criteria as laid out above by O'Connor and McDermott. {I don't see this. You quote Clarkeson rather than Perls and she could equally well be read as saying that therapy works by integrating internal forces, not systemic ones}

In fact in his Gestalt work one of Perls' main techniques was that of confusion. In this process he changes his role in the system and in this change of role he creates a new interaction that the system must incorporate if it is to continue. In dealing with the new role presented by Perls there comes a new thinking which leads to a new behaviour and perhaps a way out of the presenting problem. This is only possible if both Perls and the client are part of the same system - that of therapy.

The third building block of NLP in the early days was that of the work of Milton Erickson. O'Hanlon(6) states the need for the therapist to be an active part of the therapeutic system. Of Erickson's work he states that the rapid development of rapport "paved the way for Erickson's development of brief therapy." He goes on to describe that whereas most therapists perform a diagnostic assessment and then carry out their therapy Erickson "seemed more interested in discovering patients' patterns and styles of responsiveness."

In a systems way of thinking this reflects the belief that the behaviour of a system is dependent on how the parts are put together and the ways in which the parts act together. Erickson also knew that he was a part of that system when he said that in therapy "You create circumstances under which an individual can respond spontaneously and change"(7)

As with Perls' work, above, Erickson also used to create confusion in his clients. {I don't understand how confusion creates systemic change. Doesn't it just interrupt patterns ?}In a system the parts are connected and the behaviour of the system is dependent on these connections. Change the interconnections and the behaviour must change. We know that it is not the behaviour of an observer to influence any part of what is being observed therefore the therapist is an active part of the system.

Theory and practice of NLP.

Erickson's work confirms the description of therapy given by Montalov(8) who says that therapy is an "interpersonal agreement to abrogate the usual rules that structure reality, in order to reshape reality." This is enforced by Keenay when he says that Erickson's work "indicates that therapists can play an active part in the reconstruction of a client's world of experience." Here, the therapeutic system and it components are being described.

The work that was carried out with Satir, Perls and Erickson was about their behaviour and finding out what worked and then generating that with other people. Thus NLP could be said to be "a generative model, not a theory. It is a pragmatic model rather than one based on theoretical constructs"(9). In fact the originators of what is called Neuro-Linguistic Programming, Bandler and Grinder, state quite explicitly that "this set of tools is not based upon some pre-existing psychological theory or therapeutic approach."(10)

This could well be taken as fact were it not for the other people who were around at the same time as NLP was being developed and who if they didn't influence its development directly they influenced those who were creating NLP. The most prominent of these was Gregory Bateson. Bateson didn't work formally with Bandler and Grinder but did influence them greatly and in fact wrote the introduction to the Structure of Magic. Although Bateson was not a therapist he developed some important theories about mind and its functioning. It was he who developed previous work into the concept that people select and edit reality to produce a personal "map" of the external "territory". He also suggested that the client and therapist form a system together that produces therapy. (11) Bateson also began to think about how people have checks and balances and provide feedback in order to maintain a balance, the beginning of cybernetic thinking.

Further, he said that "Choices are not all at the same level" bringing in the idea of a system internal to the mind. He said that mind develops a pattern about the world, a map, and that therapy is a pattern of the patterns of the mind and so on. A systemic process is built from the links of different patterns and that the choices that are made are a result of the recursive nature of changing patterns. When this is linked to the criteria of a system given above and the pragmatic nature of NLP psychotherapy suggested by Eaton then the systemic nature of NLP becomes apparent.

Modern system thinkers also link the patterns within a system to its behaviour or emergent properties. Senge uses systems to talk about business. But here he states that "Structure influences behaviour"(12) with an eye to external forces.

Although his whole book is about changing the internal maps that people hold about the way business works, he puts forward the idea that a change in internal thinking will change the external process of business. He is quite explicit when he talks of personal mastery and mental models. Here, he makes the concrete link between the personal view and the success of business - patterns of patterns in the same way that NLP psychotherapy would talk about a client's map of their own state of health and their actual physical health. Building on the NLP systemic model, systems thinking has moved into the field of practical business.

Conclusion

Its clear that whereas the particular processes that Bandler and Grinder used to elicit information may not have been based on pre-existing approaches, those people whom they studied had very well thought out ideas, if not formal theories, of a systems nature as to why they were successful. It is these ideas, these maps, that have been incorporated into NLP thinking.

Finally, what the precursors of NLP had noticed is that nothing is isolated. Everything effects everything else. The epistemologist Dancy states that "There are no isolated facts, which is why there cannot be a world similar to ours in every respect except one." (13) By this he meant that change just one part of someone's map and their whole world changes. Add this to O'Connor and McDermott's assertion that feedback allows self-regulation together with the four basic tools of NLP; Outcome Orientation, Sensory Acuity, Rapport and Behavioural Flexibility then this is the final proof of NLP being a systemic therapy.

The last word should be left to a client of mine. After some time line work I asked him to take the new learnings we had created and experience them at all times in his life up to the present day when they would have been of help to him i.e. incorporate them into his map of the world - his system. His response was "That changes my whole life !"

Indeed it does.

MARTIN WEAVER

April 1998

References

1. O'Connor & McDermott, The Art of Systems Thinking. Thorsons. 1997. p96

2. Satir V, Conjoint Family Therapy, Souvenir Press 1994

3. The Chambers Dictionary. 1994 Larousse

4. Keenay B, Aesthetics of Change Guildford 1983.

5. Clarkson P, Gestalt Counselling in Action. Sage 1990

6. O'Hanlon WH, Taproots. Norton 1987

7. Ritterman, M, Family Context, symptom induction and therapeutic counter-induction: Breaking the spell of a dysfunctional rapport. In JK Zeig (Ed) Ericksonian Psychotherapy, Vol2: Clinical Applications. New York: Brunner /Mazel. 1985

8. Montalov B, Observations of Two Natural Amnesias. Family Process, 1976, 15, 333-342.

9. Eaton J, A Sketch for a Theory of NLP Psychotherapy. Personal paper. Status uncertain.

10. Bandler R & Grinder J, The Structure of Magic Vol. 1. Science and Behaviour Books. 1975

11. Bateson G, Steps to an Ecology of Mind. Ballantine 1972

12. Senge P, The Fifth Discipline. Century Business. 1997

13. Dancy J, Introduction to Contemporary Epistemology. Blackwell 1997

{You make a brave attempt to pin down NLP to some (isolated) aspects of work by Perls, Erickson, Satir and also Bateson - but although these people influenced NLP I don't see any evidence in this essay to suggest that the model which was developed by 1980 is systemic. I think that the most you can say on your evidence is that NLP came out of systemic views but lost it on the way. Specifically, on your own definitions, NLP seems to be a linear model in that an NLP technique can alter internal functioning in a causal, "hitting the tennis ball" way.}