Metaprogram examples. Promagik - Metaprograms in NLP. An example of using knowledge of a metaprogram portrait when making a decision on hiring a person

Meta-programs are information classification patterns, mostly unconscious, that have a huge impact because it depends on what you notice, how you form your internal representations, how you organize your experience and extract information from it. They are extremely powerful because through them you organize your experience. Meta-Programs can be likened to filters: they allow you to filter out what doesn't matter to you and devote your attention to what matters. Without them, we would be overwhelmed with a flood of information, with no way to distinguish between the significant and the unimportant. Below we will describe a number of key Meta-Programs that, when addressed purposefully, will allow you to achieve much greater efficiency in your professional career, relationships, even in the ability to experience happiness and health.

They provide ways to automatically classify and organize experiences, thoughts, and behaviors. Though not

which of your meta-programs you have are the same as those of other people, the combination of them is unique for each person.

Each metaprogram is associated with a whole axis of behavioral possibilities, on which there are many possible positions. The opposite ends of the metaprogram scale contrast sharply with each other, but there are all sorts of intermediate options between them.

There are no "right" and "wrong" ways of processing experience, just as there are no "right" and "wrong" ways of implementing a particular metaprogram. NLP focuses your attention rather on the fact that each option has its own specific strengths and weaknesses in each specific circumstance.

The art of self-management in relation to the use of Meta-Programs lies in knowing how you are functioning and being able to relate your functioning to the desired outcome.

The art of engaging and influencing others from the standpoint of meta-programs is to know which meta-programs a given person is responding to, and to use them in interaction with him.

Understanding people. Some people, for example, come across as generally more optimistic than others—they tend to respond to opportunities and take pleasure in the little things in life. By recognizing the corresponding Meta-Programs, you can identify patterns that contribute to life satisfaction in such people.

The ability to organize your time more efficiently: You will be able to find ways to fit your tasks into your schedule, instead of opening your calendar at the beginning of the week, horrified by how much you need to cram into it.

Choice professional career based on the strengths of your metaprograms.

Recruiting employees based on a clear knowledge of what meta-programs will make a person the best candidate for a vacant position.

Common Metaprograms

Avoiding the unpleasant - striving for the pleasant

You may be stimulated to action by the need to avoid unpleasant experiences or consequences - in this case, we are talking about "avoidance of the unpleasant." If you are motivated by something attractive to you, you "strive for the pleasant." Knowing your dominant meta-program in a given context will allow you to motivate yourself in an effective way. Likewise, there is no point in motivating people with strong emphasis on the opposite end of the metaprogram axis, avoidance of the unpleasant, with stimuli such as career advancement or status advancement. But these people will be perfectly activated to action when you explain to them the unpleasant consequences that will come if they do not change, such as, for example, loss of status. What is a driving stimulus for one person may not necessarily be so for another.

If a person tells you about what he does not want, what he is going to get rid of, or what he wants to stay away from, you can be sure that he is "avoiding the unpleasant." And the other, speaking about what he wants, what he strives to achieve or achieve, "strives for the pleasant."

Necessity - opportunity

If the consciousness that something must be done or should be done is significant to you, then the idea of ​​necessity is at the forefront of your mind. If your attention is turned to what could be, to the new and unknown, then opportunity is above all for you.

The power of necessity often makes itself felt in an expressed love of procedure: "That's the way it should be done." When a person says that he should

raise his debt or do what is required of him, he speaks the language of necessity. Apparently, he does not feel much choice: there is a procedure, and it must be followed. On the other hand, the opportunity mindset is reflected in the fact that the person likes to have a lot of choice or many alternatives. In this case, it is fundamentally important to have a choice; you hear talk about desires, hopes, the potential.

Focus of attention: I - others

You can focus on yourself, and this does not mean that you are selfish. It only means that you evaluate events and thoughts primarily in relation to yourself. However, this can lead to the fact that a significant part of the time you are “inside” yourself, and sometimes it may seem to others that you are not paying attention to the outside world. If, on the other hand, you are predominantly focused on others and in connection with events you are primarily concerned with how they will affect others, then, without a doubt, your attention is focused on others. You are likely to be perceived as an outward oriented person and attentive to the world around you. Both options in their extreme forms are problematic: focusing solely on oneself in the extreme case leads not just to egoism, but to narcissism; at the same time, looking exclusively "through" others translates into an effort to please everyone at their own expense, to be pleasant and necessary for everyone.

Search for similarities - search for differences

One friend of Jan's is notorious for his habit of saying, "You know, that's exactly the same..." He looks for similarities between anything and everything so explicitly and unconditionally that it has become a constant butt of jokes. People who think in this way tend to put things in line with each other: they see what is common between people, phenomena, objects, and how the present is similar to the past. For them, these connections are both pleasant and important.

Therefore, if you want to involve such a person in something, you should not tell him: the new path is great, because it is new and different. This would make sense to someone who tends to look for differences - he notices exceptions and what is missing.

Both trends are equally valuable, and ideally we should be flexible enough to follow both. But often we tend to stubbornly stick to one of them. In such a case, trying another is one of the fastest and most effective ways get out of the dead end. It is very important for a team that both styles are represented in it.

Preferred category scale: small - large

We are all familiar with people who “do not see the forest for the trees” or, conversely, are so busy with “global vision” and seeing the whole picture that they do not notice the details. Each of us, to some extent, gravitates towards one of these two extremes.

If you're usually good at remembering and using details, but lack a general context to relate them to, then you're probably processing a lot of material in small categories. If, on the other hand, you are great at seeing the big picture and making plans, but lack the patience to deal with the details to the extent necessary to implement your great plans, or if you tend to ignore things that don’t fit into the big picture, then you , you probably process material primarily in large categories.

Imagine that two people come together, embodying these two different styles. They can simply drive each other crazy: the abundance of details, natural for one, will act overwhelmingly on the other, and at the same time, the lack of details, characteristic of the second, will cause the first to have an unsettling sense of uncertainty. Every good leader will want both styles on their team. If you want versatility, a balanced outlook, and a well-integrated team, this is essential.

Orientation in time: living within time or above time

Unlike many Meta-Programs, which can feel familiar, the idea that different people experience time differently can be quite bizarre.

But NLP explains that our relationship with time is individual. Each person's experience in this area has its own characteristics, but it is located on an axis between two opposite options.

Inside time

You can truly live "in the moment". You live full life, you very vividly feel your presence in it. At the same time, it may be difficult for you to keep track of time - you are so immersed in what is happening. Planning may seem beyond your abilities: the farther into the future, the more difficult it is to manage. You often think of the past as being behind you, and the future as being in front of you or in front of you.

NLP shows that we actually perceive time in a very spatial way. If you ask someone who lives "inside time" to indicate the direction "yesterday" or "tomorrow", then with a high probability he will point back over his shoulder in the first case, and forward in the second. This experience of time may mean that the past is literally inaccessible because it is behind, and that the only clearly visible particle of the future is that which is very close ahead. As if the line of time stretches from the past to the future.

Over time

Most people who perceive time in the manner described below place it on an axis from left to right directly in front of them. This is their time line. In this case, the past is usually, although not always, located on the left, the future on the right. A glance at any

board, like a diary, allows you to see the length of time. This type The spatial organization of time means that a person is easily able to review and plan - people who live "above time" have good organization and planning abilities.

In NLP, the way we relate different times to ourselves and to our experience is called a "timeline". People who live "inside time" are usually directly on their timeline, while those who tend to live "above time" are predominantly at some distance from it. Therefore, if you belong to the second group, then it is easier for you than for a representative of the first group not to be overwhelmed by an avalanche of momentary details, but it is more difficult to feel “inside the situation”.

Reference system: internal or external

If you decide what is right for you and don't like others to tell you that, then your frame of reference is internal. With a person who has internal system counting, it is easy to find a contact, if only not to put pressure on him by talking about what everyone around thinks. For him, this is not only unimportant - talking about it can act on him like a red rag on a bull, since he relies mainly on his own judgment: "I need to decide for myself."

If you want to know what others are saying and thinking, then your frame of reference is external to an appropriate degree. People with dominance of the external frame of reference usually take into account the opinions of others to a very large extent when making decisions. "People say... Yes, the facts clearly show that this is the case." A person who speaks in this way is undoubtedly referring to someone or something as an authoritative source.

As always, neither option is good or bad, and either alone can lead to problems.

These are some of the Meta-Programs; much more has been identified and described, and if you want to know about them, please refer to the NLP course information. We have talked specifically about the above meta-programs because they allow you to understand a lot about what drives you and influences your choices. They also help you understand the pitfalls you tend to fall into when communicating with others. And finally, they can help you find a professional area where your talents will be most useful and effective.

The art of using metaprograms is to:

Know your natural inclinations;

Know the strengths and weaknesses of each of your metaprograms;

Find ways to expand your range of choices and behaviors.

When you want to play to your strengths.

When looking for a job or considering other people for a particular position.

When you want to understand your communication problems.

To understand why you do what you do, make a list of your preferred ways of thinking, i.e. Meta Programs. Then make a list of the preferred meta-programs of other people - your loved ones or work partners. Think about what you have with them and what you don't. How can these things help or hinder you in your relationship? Attune to the Meta-Programs of others to connect with and influence them.

Metaprograms are certain "patterns" (unconscious automatisms) of human thinking. That is, a kind of “rails” along which the mind moves and, as a result, any communication, search for solutions, reflection and even enjoyment.

There are more than 51 meta-programs in NLP, and you will begin to study some of them already in the course of NLP practitioners.

But why do we need to know metaprograms and how do people think in general? What opportunities does this open up for us?

In short, it is a) freedom and b) control.

Freedom from our own "rails" that limit our thinking, and which we do not see until we know about what other "rails" are?

And of course, if someone has a habit to which he has become attached, it is quite easy to control him. In order to help him, motivate and direct, or vice versa, make this person do what you need, considering this own desire- this is your personal choice. Metaprograms are just a tool.

Let's get acquainted with some of the most interesting meta-programs.

Polar transponders

Surely you have met people who are always arguing with you. Even when they agree, they begin with the words "No, of course ...".

They just don't have the guts to say otherwise, because that's how their brains are wired. Or rather, the "operating system" of their brain. Despite their habit of arguing, they are quite easy to control because of this very habit. Just start telling them the opposite of what you want them to do and stop when they say what you want ;)

If you want to tease such a person in public, then at the moment when he once again begins his answer with the phrase "No, but ..." just tell him that he always begins with a denial. What do you think he will do right away? Yes, he will begin to deny it! The laughter of the audience will sound as many times as he tries to deny that he denies everything)))

Among the polar defendants there are more flexible ones. Their favorite speech pattern is "Yes, but."

They seem to agree with you, but in reality it is only an appearance. You can circle them around your finger in the same way as the first ones, by starting to prove to them the opposite of your goal, though you won’t be able to play them anymore. Apparently, they have already passed this joke in their lives;)

Processors and results

Quite a lot has already been written about these comrades, since the metaprograms “process” and “result” very much determine both motivation and, in general, the fate of a person.

Result workers make excellent leaders due to their ability to plan and control in a results format. They don't care how, they are goal oriented and will be quite flexible and resourceful in their choice of ways.

But processors really know how to enjoy life. Unlike the results, they do not put "flags" and "pluses" in their lists of achievements. They don’t understand at all how it is possible to motivate with a “plus” - the intensity of experiences, the range of sensations are important to them, to be in the flow and allow the amazing to happen ...

True, they don’t know what kind of amazing thing will happen)) so in business they need to be controlled and directed.

Naturally, each of these meta-programs has its own system of motivation - the first need results, the second - what the path to the result will be like. ...however, what exactly the path will be to is no longer important to them))

Global and detailed

There are people who love details, nuances, details exactly to the smallest detail.

I hate them!!!))) They will drown you in these damn details and you will never see the whole picture! Normal people think globally, perceive the world as a whole ... and they don’t care that someone starts to fall asleep at this moment))

In general, as you correctly understood, global ones find a common language with detailed ones with great difficulty. And as you might guess, there is a professional inclination here, and features of motivation, and a way to find an approach to a person.

Sorting Gate

And finally, for today, let me show you another type of metaprogram. Let's do an experiment.

Try to remember some bright but not regular event in your life, like a friend's wedding. What is the first question you ask yourself in order to get this memory out of the bins of your memory?

Where was it?

Who was there?

What were you doing there?

When it was?

What did you give the newlyweds?

What ended?

Or maybe you are listing the chain of events to arrive at this in sequence?

The "sort gate" is a kind of "grid" according to which we structure the contents of our memory and operate on them. There are seven types of “coordinates” in total, and some of each person are leading, and 3-4 maximum are close. Thinking in other coordinates is extremely unusual, and it is difficult to find a common language with people living in them. These "grids" are:

Place

People

Actions

Time

Things (objects)

Results (meanings)

Procedures

Can you change your metaprograms?

Above, I have listed only some of the Meta-Programs, but this is enough to start noticing how different people are from each other. …Although, it will be interesting for someone to see who you have something in common with ;)))

The question arises. If metaprograms limit our thinking so much (or rather, if we have a lot of new opportunities to think differently)))) then how can we master other metaprograms? And is there a chance to completely change one's character, or will the existing metaprogram profile determine a person's nature all his life?

The good news is that we can develop habits of thinking in other Meta-Programs that we didn't have before. This is the same skill as the ability to count, write and speak in another language. He is training.

The bad news (although, I'm sure, employees of the operational services do not think so))) is that the basic meta-programs that have developed in a person from birth and become what we call his "character" will always be closer to him. And in a normal situation (when a person does not need to look for non-standard solutions or adapt to someone's style of thinking), he will think in his usual way.

Solution for James Bond

The difference in metaprograms, by the way, is the reason why we like to consult or resort to the help of coaches when we cannot find a solution ourselves. If some decision is in the “blind spot” zone, then the reason is not necessarily “fear to admit it” or some other diagnosis - it may simply be a limitation of metaprograms, which is solved by the alternative “point of view” of another person. The more unlike you, the better.

Well, if you don’t want to ask for advice all the time, but on the contrary, you prefer to sell your advice for money))) ... Well, or you just want to develop the flexibility of your thinking, learn to speak with each person in the language of “his brain”, causing him to feel that you understand him like no one else (which is true), then develop new meta-programs. You can do this in NLP courses.

P.S. The NLP Practitioner Course for Leaders by Tatyana Muzhitskaya starts this Saturday - November 15th. There are more than 80 people in the group, !

21.11.2013

(Usage NLP technologies(Neuro-Linguistic Programming)

Introduction.

Probably, there is no need to reiterate how important the right selection of personnel is for the effective operation of the company. Not without reason, when a company is assessed, the cost of personnel ranges from 20% (in the production sector) to 99% (in the service sector) of the company's value.

It often takes years to create an efficient, well-coordinated team of employees. Nevertheless, leading HR managers manage to form a successfully working team quickly enough. Perhaps the secret of their success lies in the great attention they pay to the selection of each new employee. And here the key element is the technology that they rely on when deciding whether to hire a particular person for a job.

This article will describe one of the most effective toolkits for personnel assessment offered by NLP (Neuro-Linguistic Programming - the most successful and dynamically developing direction in psychology over the past 20 years). The proposed method is based on the compilation and analysis of a metaprogram portrait of a person and allows you to identify the most important characteristics of a person's thinking style, which provides information about how successfully a person will cope with a particular type of activity.

In NLP, metaprograms are understood as the thinking processes familiar to a person, which he uses to perceive incoming information, internally process it and make a decision. Depending on which ways of thinking are preferred for a person, conclusions are drawn about how successfully he will cope with a particular activity.

The first part of this article is devoted to the description of metaprograms, on the basis of which a metaprogram portrait of a person is compiled.

In the second part of the article, examples are given of how optimal metaprogram portraits can be compiled for various positions and this information can be used to analyze how much a person’s thinking style corresponds to the position he is applying for.

The third part of the article describes methods that allow you to make metaprogram portraits of various people based on written testing or during an interview.

The summary summarizes all the new information and gives an idea of ​​how the model used in this article can be enriched with finer details.

Part I. Description of metaprograms.

Metaprograms describe the habitual style of thinking of a person - how he perceives and processes information. We are surrounded by a huge amount of details that we could pay attention to, but in the process of perception, most of them are eliminated. The meta-programs preferred by a person just determine what information will be admitted to consciousness in the first place and how it will be processed.

To perform a certain type of task, a certain type of thinking, a certain way of perceiving the world around us, a certain style of organizing and processing information may be more suitable. A person usually copes more successfully with one type of task and less successfully with some other issues. The success and efficiency of work largely depend on what style of thinking (what set of metaprograms) is characteristic of a person.

One cannot say that one of the meta-programs is in itself “better” or “worse” than another. It all depends on the context and on the goal you are aiming for (want to hire an accountant or a marketer or someone else). Therefore, already at the stage of acquaintance with metaprograms, one can begin to outline for oneself those tasks and those questions for the solution of which the considered metaprogram is well suited.

Metaprograms are usually considered in pairs, which are two opposite approaches to solving a particular problem. For example, in a pair of Internal reference - External reference in a person, as a rule, one of these two metaprograms predominates (predominance in the sense that he uses one of them more often, preferring it to another, alternative metaprogram).

Sometimes it can be difficult to figure out which meta-program in a pair is more preferable. Nevertheless, with a detailed analysis, it is always possible to identify, albeit insignificant, but an advantage in one direction or another. In such cases, one can designate this metaprogram as weakly expressed, in contrast to those cases when it is pronounced.

This meta-program describes the criteria people rely on when comparing different options for action and when deciding what to do. People with an internal reference will refer to their own criteria and beliefs. They collect information from the outside world, evaluate it, but insist on an independent decision based on their own criteria. Such people are difficult to manage, often perceive instructions or orders only as Additional information. They don't need outside control. A person with a strong internal reference will resist any other decision, even if the decision is in his favor.

People with an external reference will turn to other people to find out what norms and criteria to rely on. They often make decisions only when someone else confirms their correctness. They constantly need advice from other people, otherwise they are never sure that they are doing the right thing. It looks like they have a hard time making decisions. People with an external reference need to be directed and gratefully pass on the responsibility for making decisions to other people. This meta-program can be defined by asking the question, "How do you know if you've done a job well or poorly?" A person with an internal reference will answer that he himself decided so. A person with an external reference may answer: "The authorities praise (scold)", referring to the opinions of other people.

Approach - Evasion.

This metaprogram explains how people motivate themselves to perform certain actions, i.e. how they force themselves to do what they don't want to do. People with the Approach Meta-Program focus on their goals. They care about what they can win, acquire, achieve. They imagine a picture of future success, and this is the best motivation for them to act.

People with the Evasion Meta-Program easily recognize problems and know what to avoid. They, first of all, pay attention to what they do not like. Often they imagine how bad it will be for them if they do not do a certain job, and this is their motivation for action.

You can motivate with the help of a "stick" or "carrot". For approach people, the best motivation is knowing the goal and the reward. People with the Evasion Meta-Program are motivated by the understanding of what problems and punishments can be avoided if they take certain actions. Depending on this metaprogram, a person may be better motivated either when he is offered a reward or when he is threatened with punishment.

This meta-program can be identified by asking the question: "Why do you want to change jobs?" A person with the Evasion metaprogram will rather say that he is tired, that the work is uninteresting and unpromising, that there are difficulties and problems, so he wants to "get away with old work". A person with the Approach metaprogram, first of all, will say that his new job seems promising and interesting to him, that he hopes for success and a good career, so he decided to “come to new job". In one case, a person talks more about what he wants, achieves, receives. In another case, he describes those situations and problems that he would like to avoid.

People of the "approach" type are better at doing things where the ability to relentlessly strive for a specific goal is needed. Evasive people are excellent at spotting errors, such as when checking reports.

Active - Expectant.

This Meta-Program describes a person's work style. The active person himself takes the initiative and quickly starts the business, moving it forward. He doesn't wait for other people to take action. It is not necessary that this person quickly performs the work. He is proactive in the sense that he does not need external influence to start the movement, he can start the movement himself. The response style is active (often without waiting for a question to arise, already looking for an answer to a possible situation).

The expectant person waits for others to act, or waits for an opportunity to start. He can spend a lot of time in indecision or take no action at all, motivated by external influences. It is rather a reaction to what is happening than an initiative. This does not mean that he works slowly, just to start moving, he needs an influence from the outside, some kind of impulse that will push him to start doing work. The response style is expectant (begins to look for an answer only when a problem situation has already arisen).

General - Private.

This metaprogram describes how much information a person prefers to work with. "General" people prefer to work with large chunks of information. They think globally and like to generalize. They try to see everything as a whole, but for a short moment they can turn to details. May skip steps in a sequence, making it difficult to play. They will see the sequence as a whole, as one piece, and not as a series of consecutive steps. The “general” person misses out on a lot of information. “They don’t see the trees behind the forest.”

A "private" person prefers small pieces of information from which he can build large pieces. Pays more attention to details. Prefers sequences, step by step. loves to give accurate descriptions. Has a penchant for detail. "He can't see the forest for the trees."

"General" people are good at developing strategic plans. "Private" people successfully cope with tasks that require attention to detail and consist of a small number of sequential steps.

Similarity - Similarity with difference - Difference.

This meta-program describes what people pay more attention to: the search for similarities or differences. Similarity-oriented people are interested in how this fits in with their previous experience. They are conservative. They buy the same things (those that they bought before). In a conversation, they are looking, first of all, for something with which they can agree. They will often be content with the same job for many years, and they will do well in those tasks that are essentially similar to each other. From several options for action, they choose the one that they have already tested, with which they are already familiar.

People of "difference" notice and are interested in the new, different. In a conversation, they look for something with which they do not agree, often argue. Strive for change. They change jobs often. They are attracted to innovation. Looking for new behaviors. They don't like to repeat themselves.

People with the Similarity with Difference metaprogram pay attention equally to the similarities with what they have done before and to the differences. In a conversation, they find both statements with which they agree, and those with which they are ready to argue. Focused on smooth development. They prefer "the same as before, but improved." Looking for ways to improve on old ways of working without abandoning them entirely.

This metaprogram describes what a person's attention is focused on - events in the past, present or future.

A person with the Future metaprogram is primarily focused on the future - on what can happen. Usually says in the future tense, but not necessarily. He can talk about his plans - about how and what will happen tomorrow, in a year, in a month. He is more interested in what will happen after a while, sometimes even to the detriment of the present. To the question: "Tell us about your company?" - will describe mainly development plans, future prospects. Such people are good at planning and development tasks.

A person with the present metaprogram is primarily focused on what is happening now. Good idea of ​​the current situation. Will talk about the current state of affairs at the enterprise.

A person with the Past metaprogram is primarily focused on the past - on what happened before. Usually speaks in the past tense, but not necessarily. Will talk about what happened to the company in the past. Inclined to analyze past events. These people are excellent analysts.

This is just a brief overview of some of the most important Meta-Programs. In specialized literature (for example, D. O'Connor and D. Seymour "Introduction to NLP") you can find a wider list of meta-programs and a more detailed description of them. But the above six meta-programs are already enough to make a decision on many issues.

It should be immediately noted that only a few people exhibit the described patterns of behavior in pronounced, extreme forms. Most people's behavior is a mixture of the two extremes described in the metaprograms. For example, a person may be motivated partly by a desire to avoid problems and partly by a desire to achieve a goal. Or in one proportion or another, his attention can be focused both on the past and on the present, the future. But, nevertheless, any pattern of behavior is more pronounced than another. This leads to the fact that a person, first of all, shows a certain style of perception of the world.

It is also necessary to add that, depending on the context, a person's characteristic set of metaprograms may change. The General-Particular and Past-Present-Future Meta-Programs are usually the same for all contexts, while the other four Meta-Programs can vary greatly depending on the situation. So, for example, a person who has an internal reference at work and independently makes all economic decisions may have an external reference at home and follow the recommendations given by his wife in everything. A person who is quite conservative in the selection of clothes, who comes to work in the same suit that is familiar to him, in a situation where the decision is made to purchase new equipment, may turn out to be a person of difference and insist on looking for something completely new and modern.

Therefore, when collecting information about a person, one should ask for the most typical contexts that he will encounter during his future activities in the workplace in order to determine what thought patterns will appear in these situations.

A metaprogram portrait will be a set of pronounced metaprograms characteristic of a person, for example: internal reference, approximation, active, general, difference, future . If some metaprogram is not strongly expressed, then it can be excluded from the list, and the metaprogram portrait will consist of a smaller number of patterns. Knowing the metaprogram portrait, we can conclude how well this person is suitable for engaging in a particular activity, how successfully he will cope with one or another type of task.

Part II. Metaprogram portrait analysis.

Compilation of metaprogram portraits for various positions.

In this part, we will consider such an area of ​​​​use of metaprograms as the analysis of an applicant for a particular position when hiring a new employee.

If it is clear enough what activity he will be engaged in, and a metaprogram portrait is drawn up that is most suitable for vacant position, then it remains to choose from all the applicants the one whose thinking style is closest to the desired one.

The question of how to quickly and accurately build a metaprogram portrait of a person is discussed in more detail in Part III. Examples of compiling metaprogram portraits for various positions and activities will also be given here.

In each case, one should take into account all the specifics and features of the activities that a person holding a certain position will be engaged in. At the same time, different portraits can be drawn up for the same position in different companies. Below are descriptions of the most typical metaprogram portraits for positions: company director (manager), secretary, marketer. A very brief and compact description of the criteria on the basis of which this or that metaprogram was chosen is also given.

Director of the company (manager).

1. internal reference. The director of the firm should make most of all important decisions concerning the activities of the firm. It is more preferable if he makes decisions himself, based on his own opinion, and not on the opinion of other people.

2. Active. It is desirable that the leader be active, energetic, proactive. So that he does not wait for any external events or other people to push him to take action, but he himself takes the initiative.

3. Approximation. It is more preferable for the director of the firm to carry out any changes or reforms in the company to a greater extent to expand the capabilities of the firm, achieve more successful functioning, generate additional profits, and not focus on combating the shortcomings of the firm.

4. Nast. and Bud. The leader must have a good idea current position affairs in the company and clearly see the prospect of the company's development in the future. The leader must be able to clearly plan for some time ahead, be able to predict how external factors may change in the future. To do this, it is necessary that the director of the company keep the focus of his attention on the events of the present and the future.

5. General. It is important enough that the director can imagine the overall picture of the firm, so that he can see the whole overall effect of any change, and not just a local effect.

6. Difference. It is desirable that the head organizes the activities of the company not in a standard, not conservative way, but using latest methods and technologies. So that when making any decision, he no longer relied on how he solved this problem last time, but looked for some new options that are more suitable for the current situation.

Secretary.

1. external reference. It is necessary that the secretary be guided by the opinion, norms and criteria of the management, which will allow him in his work to better meet the intentions and goals that the manager wants to realize. If the secretary starts to act based more on his own opinion about how something should be done, and not on the opinion of his management, then this may lead to a mismatch with the results that management wanted to get.

2. Active. One of the qualities of a good secretary is that he does not wait for the manager to remind him that he needs to do some business, but actively and quickly completes most tasks. It is desirable that the secretary does not wait until other people begin to act (someone will call, bring the necessary papers), but quickly and proactively solve the tasks facing him.

3. Private. The secretary must perform a large number of small specific cases that require attention to detail. Therefore, it is desirable that the secretary prefer small pieces of information and would be focused on clarifying and concretizing details.

4. similarity. Secretaries are usually required to perform certain types of tasks that are repeated from day to day. A person with a similarity metaprogram is, firstly, more inclined to follow the instructions of the manual exactly, without adding a lot of new things from himself. Secondly, he follows already well-established schemes of work, and the results of his activities are predictable, while a man of differences is able to draw up a new way every next report.

5. Future. Most often, the secretary faces tasks that require him to pay attention to future events. It is desirable that the secretary clearly and clearly imagines all the planned affairs for some time in advance. Although it is useful for a good secretary to have a wide range of attention, including the past, the present, and the future. This will allow him to keep the focus of attention on all the people and all the cases that he encountered, and at the same time control all current tasks and contacts and at the same time keep in mind most of the planned future cases.6. Approach - Evasion. This meta-program is not particularly important in the context of secretarial work. Knowing it can be used when developing an incentive system for the secretary (either reward for the successful completion of all cases, or fine for late completion of any work).

Marketer.

1. Difference. The situation on the market is changing very quickly, especially when it comes to advertising, marketing, promotion of goods on the market. Those techniques and methods of work that were used a month ago may already be ineffective today. Therefore, for a specialist promoting a product to the market, it is especially important to be able to see and notice new opportunities that the market provides. It is important to focus on finding new methods of working with customers. The ability to notice in everything new the potential for use.

2. Future. Focusing on the future, on possible events that may occur, is very important so that a specialist can predict the development of the market situation, so that he is always half a step ahead.

3. Active. Waiting for some external circumstance or people to push you to take action in an area like getting a product to market almost always means being late and misses out on many development opportunities that active action could create. It is important not to wait for other people to take action, but to quickly move the matter forward by vigorous work.

4. external reference. The result of promoting a product to the market is how buyers react to the actions of the manager. And it is important enough that the marketer, when making a decision, focuses primarily on the opinion of potential partners and buyers. So that he does not take the actions that he considers correct, but those that buyers expect from him.

5. Approximation. Marketing is a continuously evolving activity. For development, for new market research, for testing new methods of working with buyers, the “carrot” motivation is more effective when a marketer conducts a company, hoping to improve the company’s performance, and not because of the fear of losing some of the buyers.

6. General. For strategic planning, for creating a general picture of the development of the project, a person with a general meta-program is well suited. Market research provides many detailed descriptions of the various nuances involved in promoting a product. To make the right decisions, it is important to be able to see something in common in this intricacies of various information, and not get bogged down in details.

As already mentioned, for each specific case, it is necessary to draw up its own separate metaprogram portrait. The examples given above allow us to see how, knowing the requirements for a certain position, one can draw up an optimal metaprogram portrait for a particular activity.

After collecting information about the optimal metaprogram portrait for a vacant position, you can conduct interviews and test applicants, choosing among them those who are closest in their style of thinking to the required parameters.

Achieving 100% matching of the applicant's style of thinking with the desired one in all respects is not at all necessary. It is often enough to match 3-4 key meta-programs for this position. At the same time, a discrepancy in one, but the most important in this context, metaprogram can lead to the fact that a person will be unable to perform the work entrusted to him.

Even if the thinking style of the applicant for the position turns out to be 100% the same as desired, strong influence on the success of the work can be provided by such other important factors such as education, work experience, competence, marital status... Therefore, the technology of metaprogram portraits should be accompanied by other well-proven methods of recruitment. This will allow you to evaluate the candidate for the position more comprehensively, seeing his strengths and weaknesses from different points of view.

An example of using knowledge of a metaprogram portrait when making a hiring decision.

To help the HR manager, you can offer the following table. It contains data on the leading metaprograms of a person, on the degree of their severity, and this example also provides information on the most optimal metaprogram portrait for a vacant position.

FULL NAME. Ivanov Ivan Ivanovich
Metaprogram	3	2	1	1	2	3	Metaprogram
internal reference							External reference
Approximation							Evasion
Active							Expectant
General							Private
similarity							Difference
Past
The present
Future

*Here 1 - weakly expressed, 2 - moderately expressed, 3 - strongly expressed.

*+ indicates the leading metaprograms and their degree of expression.

In this example, we have a person - Ivanov I.I. - with a pronounced internal reference, the metaprogram Future and Particular. With moderately expressed metaprograms Active and Evasion. And weakly expressed metaprograms Present and Difference (weakly expressed difference or similarity figured in the description of metaprograms as similarity with difference).

If we now superimpose on the metaprogram portrait of this person the most optimal metaprogram portrait of the position for which he is applying, then you can get a clear picture of how his style of thinking is suitable for performing the job for which he is applying. In the above example, the optimal metaprogram portrait of the position is indicated in the form of shaded squares.

In this example, you can see that the applicant is optimally suited for almost all metaprograms, except for Evasion and Difference. Strongly pronounced meta-programs Evasion and Difference were required, but the applicant has a moderately expressed meta-program Evasion and Similarity to Difference. It remains to be decided how important, in the context of the job that the applicant will perform, such a strict correspondence to these meta-programs.

If it turns out that a pronounced difference is a key characteristic of thinking necessary for a person who will hold this post, then it will be regrettable to say goodbye to the applicant, despite the fact that in other respects he is very well suited (although it is possible to offer such a creative decision on how to find a partner with a pronounced metaprogram Difference, who can complement him according to this weak characteristic of thinking).

If it turns out that the meta-programs for which the applicant is not suitable are not the most important, then you can decide to hire him (provided that, according to such other characteristics as education, work experience, etc., he is also suitable ).

Part III. Technology for compiling metaprogram portraits.

Unfortunately, it is rather difficult to come up with a test (computer or text) that would allow one to accurately determine the leading metaprograms in a person, since yes/no answers do not provide complete information.

This article suggests two ways to collect information.

First way. Compile a written questionnaire in which it is necessary to give detailed, detailed answers (mini-essays). And then, analyzing these mini-compositions, one can draw conclusions about the leading meta-programs. The main advantage of this method is that it allows you to cover a sufficiently large number of respondents in a short period of time. The main disadvantage of this method is that it takes a lot of time to write mini-essays, which often do not contain sufficient information for conclusions, and in this case an additional survey has to be conducted.

The second way. Personal interview. In the dialogue mode, asking questions and receiving answers, you can quickly enough (in 10 - 15 minutes of conversation) find out all necessary information and make a metaprogram portrait. This way of working requires some experience for the HR manager to identify metaprograms in the speech of the interlocutor, but this method allows you to quickly ask additional questions, finding out the missing data and paying attention to the most important metaprograms in each context.

Further in this chapter, a series of questions will be proposed, the answers to which provide information about a particular Meta-Program. These questions can be used both in the interview and in the preparation of a written questionnaire.

The purpose here is not to present a detailed list of questions that guarantee the definition of metaprograms, since it is impossible to foresee in advance in what direction a conversation with a person may flow. The purpose of these examples is to give an understanding of how metaprograms can be identified, so that the reader, after reading 2–3 examples, can, by analogy, independently supplement them with his own options.

Internal reference - External reference.

“How will you know if you have done a job well or badly?” A person with an internal reference will answer that he himself decided so. A person with an external reference can answer: “The authorities praise (scold),” referring to the opinions of other people.

· “How would you like to organize your relationship with the client (boss)?” A person with an external reference will answer that he would like to receive feedback from the client (boss) quite often that he is doing everything right. (If you ask the question here: “Why do you need feedback?” - the answer: “So that it doesn’t happen that I did something, but the client didn’t like it,” will mean evasion. Answer: "To do the best job for the client that he wanted" - will mean approximation). A person with an internal reference will answer that he would like to be not strongly attached to the opinion of the client (bosses) and would like to have a certain freedom.

Approach - Evasion.

· You can ask the question: “What did you most dislike (did not like) to do at work (during training)?” When you have found out 2 - 3 contexts when a person did not want to do something, but then did it, you can ask the following question: “What prompted you to do this work? Why did you do it anyway?" A person with the Approach metaprogram will respond that he imagined how great it would be when he completed this task, or that he saw some benefit in what he was doing and was striving to get it, describing the good that he received. as a result of the work. The evasive person will answer that he understood that he would be punished (fined) if he did not do the work, describing what problems he managed to avoid due to the work done.

· This meta-program can also be defined by asking the question: "Why do you want to change jobs?". An analysis of the answers to this question is analyzed in the description of this metaprogram.

Active - Expectant.

· To the question: “What will mainly determine how successfully you will cope with the work?” - an active person, first of all, will name himself and, perhaps, 2 - 3 more external factors. The expectant one will be more attentive and name 7 - 8 significant external factors that can affect the successful completion of the work, and even describe the conditions, after waiting for which you can be sure that everything will go well.

To the question: “What did you do best at your job?” - the expectant person will most likely answer that he did an excellent job with the tasks that he was assigned, or was able to offer several good ideas(but at the same time did not push them forward on their own). The active one will tell you that he was able to implement and complete several projects in the shortest possible time.

General - Private.

· Here it is important to listen to a person's speech, noticing how often he uses specifics and details in his speech. How many small details and descriptions appear in his speech? Or does he prefer general answers, using only large chunks of information?

· The story of a person with the “general” metaprogram about what he did in the past will be quite short, containing only the most significant events. A person with a private will describe even insignificant stages in his life for a long time.

· To the question: “What was your activity at the previous place of work?” - you can get either a detailed and detailed story, or short description the most important elements of what a person was doing.

Similarity - Similarity with difference - Difference.

You can find out how often a person changed jobs (including the type of activity within the same job). A frequent change will speak of differences, a rare one will speak of similarities. Usage various methods to solve the same problem, rather, it will tell about a person of differences, while adherence to one, but reliably proven way of solving a problem, will identify a person of similarity.

To the question: “Why did you choose our work?” - a person of similarity will answer that it is quite similar to what he did before; a person of distinctions will talk about what is new in this work that interested him.

Past present Future.

The main recommendation is to notice what a person most often refers to in a speech: events of the past, present or future. At the same time, questions should be without reference to time, i.e. leave the person the opportunity to decide for himself at what time to tell everything.

To the question: “How are you? What's good? - a person who keeps the past in focus will talk about what happened to him in the past. A person oriented to the present - about what he is doing now. A person focused on the future - about what he plans to do in the near future.

A more detailed and detailed understanding of how it is possible to find out the leading metaprograms of a person in the course of an ordinary conversation is given in the special literature, which analyzes a large number of examples and analogies that make it possible to determine the style of a person's thinking.

Conclusion.

NLP offers such an effective and reliable tool as the compilation of metaprogram portraits to identify a person's preferred style of thinking. Knowing how a person thinks, and understanding what style of thinking is best suited to perform a particular activity, allows you to assess how successfully a person will cope with the job for which he claims. Given this information, you can avoid many mistakes already at the interview stage and guarantee successful development organizations by selecting employees with the most appropriate sets of Meta-Programs.

This article provides a brief description of metaprograms, examples of compiling metaprogram portraits for some positions and for various people. This gives the reader a complete set of tools for qualitative analysis of the organization's personnel and for making decisions when hiring a new employee.

In addition to such a context as recruitment, there are several other areas in which knowledge of metaprograms can be effectively used.

First, knowing the metaprogram portrait of your employee, you will be able to use his potential more optimally. By knowing the strengths and weaknesses of a person's thinking style, you will be able to set tasks for him that he can handle more successfully than anyone else. This will allow you to more meaningfully distribute responsibilities among your employees.

Secondly, knowing the metaprogram portraits of several employees, one can estimate in advance how successfully they will work together, in one team. This allows you to form effectively working groups, where each person enhances the potential of the team and successfully complements all other members of the group.

At the end of the article, I would like to emphasize that, although the compilation of metaprogram portraits is a very effective and powerful tool for analyzing personnel, it allows you to fairly clearly and clearly consider only one facet of such a complex object of study as a person. Therefore, this technology should be considered only as a powerful and beautiful addition to the treasury of those tools that should be used when working with personnel.

Our conscious attention is able to understand a maximum of nine pieces of information. We are surrounded by such a mass of information that we could pay attention to, but most of it is ignored. Metaprograms are the patterns we use to determine what information will be allowed into consciousness. For example, think of a glass filled with water. Now imagine that you drank exactly half of the water. Will the glass be half full or half empty? For both, of course, the only question is how to look at it. Some people in any situation pay attention to its positive side, to what it really is, while others see only what it lacks. Both points of view are useful and each person will prefer one or the other way of looking at things. The Meta-Programs operate systematically and habitually, and we rarely ask ourselves if they serve us well enough. These patterns may not change from context to context, but few people have stable habits, so Meta-Programs are likely to change from context to context. What grabs our attention in a work environment may be completely different from what we pay attention to at home. In this way, Meta-Programs filter the world around us to help us create our own map of the world. You can notice other people's Meta-Programs both in their language and in their behavior. Since Meta-Programs filter experience and we convey our experience through language, certain language patterns are typical of certain Meta-Programs. Meta-programs are key points in the processes of motivation and decision making. A good communicator shapes his language to match the other person's model of the world. Therefore, the use of language consistent with the interlocutor's meta-programs pre-adapts information to perception and ensures that he can easily extract meaning from it. This will save him the energy he needs to make decisions and motivate. As you read descriptions of the Meta-Programs, you will probably find that some points of view are closer than others. It may even seem strange to you that anyone can think differently. So you will find the pattern that you use yourself. Of the two extreme points of view within the same metaprogram, it is probably the only one you cannot accept or understand. The opposite will be your own. There are many patterns that could qualify as metaprograms, and various NLP books focus on different patterns. In this section, we will offer some of the most commonly used ones. No value judgments are applicable to these patterns. None of them are "better" or "more correct" in and of themselves. It all depends on the context and on the goal you are striving for. Certain patterns work better for certain types of tasks. The only question is, will you be able to act in the most useful way to solve the problem set before you? Active - passive. This first meta-program concerns the mode of action. An active person takes the initiative himself, he quickly starts and moves things forward. He does not wait for others to take action. A passive person waits for others to act, or waits for an opportunity to start. He may spend a lot of time in indecision or take no action at all.
An active person will soon use complete sentences with a personal subject, an active verb, and a real object, such as "I'm going to negotiate as soon as possible!". In the speech of a passive person, verbs in the passive voice and unfinished sentences will be more common. It is likely that he will use definitive phrases and nominalizations, for example: "Is there any possibility of negotiation?" Even in such a small example, you can see many possibilities for applying this pattern. An active person is more often motivated by phrases like: "Go there", "Do it", "It's time to act." In a buying situation, an active person is more likely to go ahead and make a purchase. He will make decisions quickly. A passive person will respond better to phrases like "Wait", "Let's analyze", "Think about it" and "Let's see what others think. Few people exhibit these patterns in such extreme forms. Most people's behavior is a mixture of these two characteristics. heck. Approach - evasion. The second pattern has to do with motivation and explains how people focus their attention. People with the Approach Meta-Program focus on their goals. They move towards what they want. People with the Avoidance Meta-Program are easily aware of problems and they know what to avoid because they are clear about what they don't want. This can lead them to problems in establishing a well-formed result. Remember the old business, education, and parenting dilemma: which is better to use, the carrot or the stick? In other words, offer the person an incentive or threaten him? The answer, of course, is that it all depends on who you want to motivate. Approach people are ignited by knowledge of purpose and reward. The “avoiders” are motivated by the avoidance of problems and punishment. And arguing about which of these methods is better in the general case is completely pointless. It is easy to recognize this pattern by the person's language. Does he talk about what he wants, achieves or acquires? Or does he talk about situations he would like to avoid and problems he would like to avoid? "Approaching people" do better in cases where the ability to relentlessly strive for a specific goal is needed. "Shy people" are excellent at spotting bugs and will work well as quality controllers, for example. A striking example of "deviationism" is the critics who bring so many unpleasant moments to artists, painters, writers, and so on. Internal reference - external reference. This pattern is about where people find their norms. A person with an internal reference will refer to his internal norms and use them to compare different patterns of action and to decide what to do. When making a comparison and making a decision, he will be guided by his internal norms. In response to the question: "How do you know that you did a good job?" - he will most likely say something like: "I just know about it." People with internal reference perceive information, but insist on an independent decision based on their own norms. A person with a strong internal reference will resist any other decision, even if the decision is in his favor. People with an external reference need someone else to show them the norm and direction of action. They are convinced that the work is done well, only when someone tells them about it. Such people need externally defined norms. They will ask you about your standards. It all looks like they're having a hard time making decisions. People with an internal reference are difficult to manage. They can make good entrepreneurs and usually find jobs on their own. They don't need outside control. Externally referenced people need to be led and controlled. They need norms to be set from outside, otherwise they are never sure they are doing the right thing. You can identify this meta-program by asking, "How do you know you've done a good job?" A person with an internal reference will answer that he himself decided so. A person with external reference will say that he knows about it because someone else has confirmed it. Alternatives - recipes. This pattern is important in business. The advocate of alternatives seeks to have a choice and considers various possibilities. He will feel constrained if he has to follow a strict prescription, however good it may be. The recipe lover is good at following clear instructions, a well-planned sequence of actions, but not very good when he has to make plans himself, because he is more interested in how to complete the task, and not in the goal. More often than not, he is convinced that there is a "right" way to do things. Obviously, it would not be a good idea to entrust a prescription person with the development of alternative ways of developing existing systems. There is little use in suggesting that an alternative person follow a fixed procedure when the outcome depends on the meticulously rigorous execution of each step of the procedure. Such a person is not inclined to obey the routine, which will always fetter his creativity. You can identify this metaprogram by asking, "Why did you choose this particular job?" The alternative person will explain to you the reasons why he is doing this. The prescription clerk will most likely tell you how he came to this, or just give you the facts. He will answer as if he was asked the question "how" and not "why." Alternative people respond to innovations that expand their choices. Prescription people respond to ideas that provide them with a well-defined, proven path. General - private. This pattern deals with the process of division (generalization). "General" people like to look at paintings up close. They feel more comfortable working with large chunks of information. They think globally. The "private" person is more comfortable among small pieces of information from which he can build pieces of large sizes, and therefore he is pleased to deal with sequences and only in extreme cases proceed to the next step in the sequence that he follows. "Private" people will talk about steps and sequences and give precise descriptions. They have a tendency to clarify and call everything by its proper name. The "general" person, as you might have guessed, likes to generalize. He may skip steps in the sequence, thereby making it difficult to play it. He will see the sequence as a whole, as one piece, and not as a series of consecutive steps. The "general" person misses out on a lot of information. "General" people are good at developing plans and strategies. "Private" people successfully cope with tasks consisting of a small number of sequential steps and requiring attention to detail. By talking to a person, you can determine whether he thinks in general or particular categories. Does he describe details or paint a close-up picture? Similarity - difference. This pattern is about how people make comparisons. Some people notice things that are similar in different things. They are classified as "searching for similarities." Others, when comparing, pay attention to differences. They often point out distinctive features and often get into arguments. A person who thinks from the general to the specific and pays attention to differences will comb through the information to the smallest detail in search of discrepancies. If at the same time you are inclined to look for similarities and think in generalizations, then such a person will drive you crazy. Look at the three triangles in the picture. Stop for a minute and silently answer the question "What is the connection between these triangles?" Of course, there is no correct answer to this question, since this connection includes both similarity and difference. This question highlights four possible responses. Some people who are looking for similarities will note those things that turn out to be the same. They can say that all three triangles are equal to each other (which is actually true). Such people will often be satisfied with the same job for many years, while they will do well in those tasks that are essentially similar to each other. There will be people who will notice the similarity with exceptions. They will first see the similarities and then the differences. Looking at the drawing, they may note that two triangles are the same, but the third one is different, being upside down. (Absolutely.) Such people often prefer that change be gradual and slow, and that work situations develop slowly over time. Once they know how to do a job, they are willing to do it for a long time and succeed in most tasks. They often use comparatives, such as "better," "worse," "more," "less." People who pay attention to differences will react differently. They will say that all three triangles are different. (Which is true again.) Such people seek and enjoy change, and tend to change jobs frequently. They are attracted to innovations if they are advertised as "new" or "unparalleled". People who think in terms of differences with exceptions will first note the differences and then the similarities. They may say that these triangles are different, but two of them are the same. They are prone to change and diversity, but not to the same extent as the people of the previous category. And to define this metaprogram, ask the question: "What is the relationship between these two things?" Patterns of the persuasion process. There are two aspects to how a person becomes convinced of something. Firstly, through what channel the information comes and, secondly, how a person manages this information, having received it once (mode). First, about the channel of perception. Imagine a trading situation. What needs to be done by the buyer to make sure that this product is worth buying? Or what kind of evidence does a manager need to make sure that this employee is doing his job well? The answers to these questions are often related to which representational system this person has is primary. Some people need to see this evidence (visual). Others want to listen to someone. Some people need to read the report, for example, the Consumer Association report provides comparative characteristics and information about many products. Other people need to do something. They may need to try out the product to evaluate it, or work side by side with a new person to judge their level of expertise. The question to be asked in order to define this Meta-Program is: "How do you know that a person is suitable for the job?" The visual person needs to see the examples. The listener needs to talk to people and gather information. The reader needs to read the message or information about the person. The doer will definitely work with the person to make sure of his suitability. The other side of this meta-program is how people most easily get used to new tasks. A visual person can take on a new task more easily if they are shown how to do it. The listener will learn better if he is told what to do. The reader learns faster by reading instructions. The best way to teach the doer - to do it with him. The second part of this meta-program concerns how a person manages information and how it should be presented. Some people need to present the proof a certain number of times - maybe two, three or more - before they are convinced of its correctness. There are people who are convinced by a few examples. Others don't need much information. They take a few facts, think of others, and make a quick decision. They often come to a conclusion based on very little data. This is called an automatic pattern. On the other hand, some people are never fully convinced at all. They are only convinced specific example or specific context. This pattern is called the persistence pattern. Tomorrow you will probably have to find evidence for them again and again, because tomorrow is another day. They need to be convinced all the time. And finally, for some people, the proof must be presented ahead of time - a day or a week before they become convinced of it. This is only the briefest overview of some of the most important Meta-Programs. They were originally researched by Richard Bandler and Leslie Cameron-Bandler, and further developed in relation to business by Roger Bailey ("Language and Behavior Style"). Criteria are often seen as meta-programs, but they are not patterns, criteria are values, things that really matter to you, so we treat them separately. Orientation in time is also often presented as a metaprogram. Some people will go through time, i.e. they will be associated with their own timeline. Others will go along with time, those will be initially dissociated from their timeline, another pattern that is often presented as a metaprogram is the preferred representational system. Some people spend most of their time in first position, in their own reality. Others are more empathetic and spend most of their lives in the second position. Another category of people prefers the third position. Different books offer a wide variety of lists of metaprograms, and there is no right decision here, except to use those patterns that are useful to you and ignore the rest. Remember that everything can change with a change in context. A 200-pound person would be heavy for an aerobics class. Here, his weight will be considered in excess of the norm. Among Sumo wrestlers, on the contrary, he will be the lightest. A person who is active in one situation may be very passive in another. Similarly, a person can be very specific at work, but at leisure think only in generalities. Metaprograms can also change with changes in emotional state. A person can become more active when stressed and take a passive stance when calm. As with all other patterns, the answer should be sought in the person in front of you. A pattern is just a map. Metaprograms are not another way of breaking people down into psychological types. The basic question is this: can you become aware of your own patterns? What choices can you give others? These are useful guiding ideas. Learn to recognize patterns one by one. Learn to use these skills gradually. Use them only when it's useful. Summary 1. Active - passive.
The active person is the initiator of action. The passive waits for others to take action and for everything to happen by itself. He needs some time to first analyze and understand everything. 2. Approach - evasion. The "approaching" person focuses his attention on his own goals, and he is motivated to achieve these goals. Avoidance focuses on problems to be avoided rather than goals to be pursued. 3. Internal reference - external reference. A person with an internal reference has his own internal norms and makes his own decisions. The extrinsic person borrows norms from others and needs someone else to point him in the direction and give him detailed instructions. 4. Alternatives - recipes. Alternative people tend to have choices and are good at developing alternatives. Prescription people successfully follow the prescribed sequence of procedures. They are not motivated by their actions, but they will easily follow a fixed series of steps. 5. General - private.
Generalizing people feel more confident when dealing with large chunks of information. They don't pay attention to details. People who are prone to specialization pay a lot of attention to details and need to study small pieces of information to understand the big picture. 6. Similarities - differences.
People looking for similarities will notice mostly similar details when comparing. People looking for differences will pay attention to distinctive features. 7. Strategy of persuasion.
Perceptual channel: Visual: Need to see confirmation. Listener: Need to hear.
Reader: Required to read. Doer: Required to do it yourself.
Fashion:
A few examples:
It is required to provide information several times before the person becomes convinced. Automatic: Only partial information is required. Sustained: Achieving a state of conviction requires continuous provision of supporting information that will only be valid in this particular case. Period of time: He needs information to have persistence over a certain period of time.

The term "meta-program" is widely used in a narrow circle of NLP fans. Outside this circle, few people know about him. But in vain.

In fact, metaprograms are filters through which we sort and evaluate information coming from the outside world. For example, think of a glass filled with water. Now imagine that you drank half of the water. Will the glass be half full or half empty? For both, of course, the only question is how to look at it. Some people in any situation pay attention to its positive side, while others see the negative. Both points of view are correct, and each person prefers one or the other way of looking at things.

Metaprograms are formed throughout life, are used unconsciously, and it is almost impossible to “simulate” them.

With special training, you can learn to notice other people's Meta Programs both in their language and in their behavior. With this information, you will be able to understand how to convey information to your interlocutor so that it is perceived by him in the best possible way and motivates him to make the decisions you need.

For example, your life experience probably tells you that in dealing with some people it is better to show the benefits that they will receive. Works better on others detailed description the troubles they will face if they do not heed your words. Someone is stimulated by the assessment of people who are significant to him, and someone is the highest authority for himself.

These are all metaprograms, and their total number is more than fifty. But we will not overload the brain and consider the most important of them:

1. The content of motivation (achievement - avoidance)

2. Level of activity (initiative - passive)

3. Dominant reference (internal - external)

4. Scheme of work (process - opportunities - result)

5. Scale of perception (global - specific)

7. Behavior in a group (completing a task - saving a team)

8.Focus of comparison (similarity - difference)

Each person, as a rule, is oriented either towards achieving goals or avoiding problems.

Achievement people keep their focus on the goal. They know what they want and act to get it. Avoidance people are active in order to avoid problems and punishment. Their choice is between the worst and the least worst. Not to get better, but not to get worse.

If the former can work effectively in positions that require decision making, then the second type of people is more suitable for positions related to identifying various problems and shortcomings, for example, in audit and quality control departments. Avoidance people tend to double-check information and work results. As a rule, they experience significant difficulties in communication.

You can define this meta-program with the questions: “What is important to you?”, “Why is this important to you?”.

For example, your friend is going to buy a car. Ask him why he needs a car? He can tell you, for example: “I can travel with my family, and in general - the car gives freedom of movement” (a person is achievement-oriented), or he can say “I'm tired of riding the subway, especially during rush hour when you have legs. And then, this way I will remove the problem with trips to the country, especially when it is necessary to transport the crop ”(a person is focused on avoiding discomfort).

“Achievement” people are characterized by a positive speech structure: “I plan to achieve”, “I want to receive”, “I want to be ...”.

"Avoidant" people predominantly use a negative structure of statements: "I don't want this", "I can't do this...".

How can knowledge of this metaprogram be used in communication with people?

A person of "achievement" will work more effectively if you work with his plans and goals, help overcome obstacles, use incentives rather than threats. On the other hand, help the "avoidant" person define their goals so they know exactly what they want and don't want. Show him that you understand him and can help.

If you are a manager, then you should know the motivation of your employees in order to influence them effectively. It is better for some employees to say: “Work hard - and you will receive a bonus”, “In order to further increase the level of prosperity, you need ...”, “If you want to get a good position, it is useful for you ...”. For others, the words will be more effective: “Understand, if you don’t fulfill your duties, you will lose your bonus!”, “If you don’t want to regret later on ..., then you need to ...”, “In order for profit not to fall, I suggest ... "," In order not to become outsiders, you need to ... "," Do not want to be fined, then ... ".

To manipulate the “avoidant” boss, the tactic of “warming up” problems works best. For example, you go to your boss's office and report that there is a problem that can lead to such and such negative consequences. When your boss is thinking, tell him "I propose to solve it in this way ..." (of course, the way to solve the problem is entirely in your area of ​​\u200b\u200binterest). After such a presentation, there is almost a 100% chance that the boss will give the go-ahead to your proposals, and will also be grateful for your concern for the organization.

Activity level (initiative - passive)

Some people prefer to be proactive, others passive. When the phone stops ringing, passive people rest. They think first and then act. Initiative people use the free time that has appeared to improve the system. As a rule, they first begin to act, and think out the details already in the process of completing the task. If initiative people act on their own, then passive people need a push, they are waiting for a command.

Revealing the metaprogram.

Ask a question, for example: “What problems did you solve at your previous job?”. An enterprising person will answer something like this: “I worked with clients, participated in negotiations, dealt with contracts, followed the assortment of goods.” The passive one will say: “You know, my Previous work was to regularly assess the situation in the market, and take into account changes in relations with customers, especially with those with whom we have long-term contacts, and therefore I had to monitor all emerging factors ... ".

Statistics show that the shorter the phrase, the more active the person. A significant number of subordinate clauses may indicate a passive warehouse of character. An enterprising person asserts more often than asks questions. At the same time, he uses active verbs: “I know”, “I do”, “I want”, etc. Passive people ask more than they say. At the same time, they are engaged in a self-eliminating position: “It would be nice to do this”, “We need to think everything over”, “Usually this is done”.

What gives us the knowledge of these differences?

It is important for passive people to give time to think about the situation, the question. Therefore, in communicating with them, such sentences are effective: “Let's wait and analyze everything”; "You can think about something..."; “When would it be more convenient for you to meet - at dinner or in the evening?”, “See what you can do here,” etc. Passive people often believe (and for good reason) that those around them are constantly manipulating them, so give such people at least the illusion of choice.

Such conventions can be omitted in dealing with enterprising people. Build your phrases in directive form: "Do it", "Solve this question yourself."

Dominant reference (internal - external)

This metaprogram shows where a person has a point of responsibility for making a decision. How a person takes into account his opinion and how he takes into account the opinions of others, as well as to what extent statistical data, known facts, and public opinion are important to him.

People with an internal reference instinctively know for themselves whether they have done a good or bad job. They themselves decide in what situation how to act. These people usually say: “In my opinion…”, “I have decided what will be…”, “I think it is more expedient…”, “I feel that it is necessary…”, “I see that you…”, etc.

A person with an external reference needs to get an answer to this question from other people, especially from those whom he trusts. Such people tend to work under someone else's guidance, it is important for them to receive "feedback" and approval. The specified category of people can be identified by the words: “According to Ivanov, you need to do this ...”, “Vanya said that I should ...”, “The neighbor advised, and I decided ...”, “Petrov said that it would be better ...”, etc. d. These people often cannot independently, without discussion, make decisions on important issues. At the same time, they are less conflicted, ready to listen and take into account someone else's point of view.

Revealing the metaprogram.

For example, your friend decided to change jobs. Ask him: "When you made this decision, what influenced your choice?". Some will answer that “My wife said that if I don’t start working, I will lose my qualifications,” or they will refer to the circumstances: “The crisis in the country prompted me to look for a job.” Others will answer: “I thought about the situation, took into account all the circumstances and decided to look for a new job.”

Other questions for determining the type of reference:

How do you know if your work is good or bad?

How do you decide how best to do this job?

How do you decide who to vote for in an election?

Do you know computers well? Why do you think so?

Do you consider your career to be successful? Why do you think so?

Do you easily adapt to other people? Why do you think so?

Using the metaprogram.

People with an internal reference are difficult to manage. Show such a person that you respect his point of view, that you are not forcing or forcing, that he himself can make a decision. If you need to resolve the issue with such a person, then it is better to address him with the words: “Do you think it is better ...”, “How, in your opinion, would it be worth ...”, “Do you feel more comfortable ...?”.

Externally referenced people need to be led and controlled. They need norms to be set from outside, otherwise they are never sure they are doing the right thing. Praise such people often, give them as much feedback as possible. If you need to resolve the issue with such a person, then you need to make a reference to a person who is an authority for your interlocutor: “ Chief Engineer said what was needed”, “Sidorov claims that it will be better…”, etc.

Scheme of work (process - opportunities - result)

Process-oriented people prefer to follow the developed instructions in everything, they maintain the system's performance based on the specified parameters and regulations. People of the "process" tend to work with the absence of clear criteria for the result, it is not so important for them what goals they have, it is much more important what they will need to do.

Opportunity-oriented people like the variety of alternatives. They are well suited for brainstorming, idea generation, and absolutely do not tolerate severe restrictions.

For people of "result" everything has its measure and end point. These are very purposeful people. If they clearly see the goal, then they go to it, not paying attention to obstacles. Such people can quickly achieve the desired result, but can easily deviate from technology and prescribed procedures.

Revealing the metaprogram.

People of the "process" can be identified by the phrases: "I went to different stores, talked with administrators, negotiated with directors, demanded discounts from suppliers, etc." In their speech, there are many verbs of an imperfect form: I walked, organized, talked, motivated, wrote, called, etc.

People of the "result" often use value words (efficiency, perspective, understanding), as well as perfective verbs (did, agreed, concluded, achieved, received, wrung out). Example: "I found 14 promising outlets, managed to reach the directors, concluded 12 profitable supply contracts, achieved a 15% discount from the largest suppliers.

To the question “Why did you decide to spend your vacation this way?”:

- the person of the "process" will answer you how he made the decision: "I went to the travel agency";

- a person of "opportunities" will tell about the reasons: "I was satisfied with the price", or "We had a great rest there last year";

- the person of the "result" will explain the intention of this step: "I plan to meet the right person there."

Another example is the question “Why did you choose this job?”. Process-oriented people will respond, “I saw the ad on the Internet, I sent in my resume. I got a call from the organization and was invited to have an interview.” The person of “opportunity” will answer in the key: “I am sure that this job will allow me to realize my potential, since this firm is a market leader.” The result person will say, “Within three years, I plan to take a leadership position in it and move on.”

Using the metaprogram.

“Process” people are unlikely to achieve a quick concrete result, but they work very well where it is necessary to follow the technology, and there are no specific goals for the activity. Show respect for their knowledge and views, explain everything new to them in detail, trying to speak in a structured way. Use words and phrases like "it's proven", "exact", "this is the right way" in your speech.

People of "opportunities" need to be offered something new, not forced to strictly follow any instructions, offer various opportunities and options for completing a particular task. When speaking, use words like "new", "choice", "different", "opportunities", "alternatives".

It is difficult for people with a “result” to start an activity until they receive answers to the questions: “Why and why do this?”, “What will be the result of my work?”, “How will my result be measured?”. It is comfortable for such people to work when there is a direct relationship between salary and the results of their work.

Scale of perception (global - specific)

People who are characterized by a "global" scale of thinking see the project as a whole. They can effectively assess the impact that an initiative will have on the company as a whole. At the same time, such people can make inaccuracies and miscalculations in small details. They are simply not interested in them. Concrete thinkers, on the other hand, focus on the details. They clearly delve into the small components of the project. But they experience difficulties in understanding the whole picture, because they cannot rise above the situation and assess it as a whole.

Revealing the metaprogram.

If you ask a “globally” thinking person a question about a movie that he saw, you will get an answer in the vein: “a good comedy is more interesting than the previous one I watched.” A “concrete” person will be able to talk for hours and without stopping, talking about all the details of the plot. The speech of "concrete" people is more consistent, while "globally" thinking people freely jump from one topic to another.

Using the metaprogram.

To effectively communicate with people, you need to build your arguments in accordance with the level of their thinking.

Don't overwhelm a "globally" thinking boss or business partner with unnecessary details - they are interested in the very essence of your proposal. First of all, it is necessary to provide an overall picture, to make an overview. Don't start the conversation with details. You should be prepared for the fact that your interlocutor will often jump from thought to thought and react accordingly. Use words like "in general", "idea", "concept".

In turn, before communicating with a person who thinks “specifically”, first think over all the possible private questions that he may have, and argue in detail for each of your phrases. Don't make too many generalizations. Provide details. Use words like "exactly", "precisely", "specifically", "program", "plan", "first", "second", "consequences".

Attention focus (on oneself - on others)

This metaprogram is about the focus of attention. It is based on the question: whose interests - their own or those of others - are more priority for a person. Some people express their attention to the interlocutor with their posture, intonation of voice, and all facial expressions. In communication with others, detachment and coldness are felt, their attention is directed only to themselves. It is quite difficult to determine that you are being listened to at all.

Revealing the metaprogram.

A self-oriented person tends not to show emotions, is not very effective in interpersonal communication, and often just watches what is happening.

A person with the "surrounding" meta-program appears to be quite lively, able to be aware of the reactions and feelings of other people.

Using the metaprogram.

Do not insist on establishing trusting relationships with self-oriented people. Try to clearly express your thoughts, when talking with them, provide detailed information. Show such a person that you understand him and at the same time try not to show that you emotionally perceived his reaction to something.

When communicating with a person with the “surrounding” metaprogram, be expressive, mobile, sociable, show empathy and respect.

For what positions is it advisable to select employees who are oriented to the “surroundings”? It can be a doctor, trainer, teacher, Social worker. In turn, the tax inspector, who listens sympathetically to debtors, is unlikely to be able to fulfill the tax collection plan.

Behavior in a group (completing a task - saving a team)

This metaprogram describes the direction of energy in the work of the team. Some people concentrate all their attention on the task, and achieve this regardless of the layouts in the group and personal conflicts. For others, the preservation of the group itself is much more important. Those who are task-driven perform better at jobs that do not involve interacting with a large number of people. For those who value team retention, jobs that require good relationships, such as public relations and customer service, are better suited.

Focus of comparison (similarity - difference)

People with the similarity metaprogram are more likely to seek common ground in a conflict. Those who seek "similarity" are people of constancy. They prefer the same colors in clothes, like to go to the same hotels, go to the same restaurants. These people rarely change something radically. But if you have to change something, then they will find an option that will be similar to the previous one. Similarity-oriented people do not like to change their circle of friends and acquaintances, managers do not like big changes, and employees change jobs less often. For them, stability and fundamentality are important. They appreciate traditions, classics, proven quality, etc. Such people are stable, predictable, reliable.

People focused on “differences” are innovators who are always looking for change. For them, doing the same job for a long time is hard labor. They are constantly looking for new ways to solve problems, even if the existing ones work very well. Such people can regularly change the entire wardrobe, often change friends and partners. Managers of this category love development programs, restructuring, team change, change organizational structure etc. Employees often change jobs, leaving for new sphere activities. They are fond of new ideas and projects, but, having achieved success (or faced serious difficulties, the need to painstakingly implement the idea), they quickly lose interest in them. Such people initiate changes themselves, love to work in a changing environment, in a time pressure situation.

In turn, the "difference" metaprogram has its own internal classification: difference into "new" and difference into "no". People focused on the "new" are innovators and reformers, they are described above. Those who are “no” oriented like to argue with everyone, they do not agree with anyone.

Revealing the metaprogram.

You can recognize people focused on “similarity” by the phrases: “This is the same as ...”, “They are exactly the same ...”, “I don’t see a difference in ...”, “All the same meaning ...”. In turn, people focused on “difference” are identified by the phrases: “This is not at all…”, “I need everything differently…”, “Is there something new?”, “It is completely different”, etc. d.

You can push your interlocutor to self-disclosure with the following questions: “Compare your previous place of work with your current one”, “Compare Egypt and Turkey”, “Compare diving and parachuting”, etc. These questions have one common principle - they are aimed at comparison.

For example, ask the person to compare an omelet and a scrambled egg. He can answer the following: “What is there to compare? Both there and there the basis is the same - eggs, ”or he can answer differently:“ How can they be compared? Despite the fact that these dishes are made from eggs, they are completely different things.”

Important: Do not ask questions like: "What is the difference between ...", or "What is common between ...". Such forms of questions suggest an answer, and do not allow to draw an accurate conclusion about a person.

Using the metaprogram.

In order to motivate a person focused on "similarity", it is necessary to build your argument in such a way that your proposals only develop old traditions, slightly adapt them to changed realities, and do not change them radically. For those looking for "similarity" in a conversation, point out common points, show them that you have common goals with them, build on what they already know and can do.

To those looking for “differences,” demonstrate and emphasize change. When talking to them, use words like “new”, “one”, “different”, “unique”. At the same time, for people who are innovators, the argument that the existing system does not stand up to criticism and needs to be completely changed is better suited. Knowing that you are facing an argumentative person, you can easily manipulate him with phrases: “You will not agree with me now”, “You will now deny that ...”, “You don’t need to agree with me”, etc.

How best to start learning metaprograms

Mastering metaprograms, I made a number of important conclusions for myself.

First, it is very important not to label people. The manifestation of different metaprograms in a person may depend on the situation. For example, at work, he manifests some metaprograms, and at home with his family - completely different. Under the influence of stress, a “passive” person can become “active”, etc.

Second, ask the right questions. For example, on closed question“Do you make your own decisions?”, of course, the answer will be yes. Who admits otherwise? For, to learn to hear what a person was not going to tell about himself, ask open-ended questions. In this case, for example, it is more appropriate to ask: “When you make decisions on such and such an issue, what things do you take into account?”.

Thirdly, learn to listen and hear the answers, do not interpret them subjectively - through the prism of your own attitude towards a particular person.

Master the skill of reading your interlocutors gradually. To begin with, learn to identify one meta-program in people, after a week, additionally begin to pay attention to the second. By increasing the depth of probing the interlocutors in this way, in a couple of months you will be able to form a metaprogram map of each person almost automatically.

Understanding the psychological characteristics of your interlocutors, you will be able to build the tactics of your communication with them in an optimal way.

In addition, an extremely useful experience is the awareness of one's own metaprograms. Having mastered ways of thinking that are unusual for yourself, you will make a breakthrough in self-development, which means that the bar of your professional skills will also rise to new heights!