Effective Communication With NLP & The Enneagram

One important factor behind being an effective communicator is to take responsibility of the communication. In other words, when our messages are not being received correctly by our audiences, it is our responsibility to make suitable changes. Instead of expecting others to suit the way we communicate, we have to be pro-active and adapt so that our messages goes across to them.

Just yesterday, I was having dinner with some like minded friends. One of them was about to have her examinations, and we touched on the topic of examination strategies, and here is where the problem occurred.

Having tried and succeeded in getting desired results time and again, I went on to share with her a strategic style of answering an essay question. And because this is something that I’m passionate about, I got really excited and as a result, the pace of my speech increased as well. So I went on and on, giving various examples in the process.

Some time later, another friend entered our conversation and very correctly pointed out that I wasn’t matching my friend’s pace. As I was going on and on and getting all excited, the friend of mine was trying to keep up because this was something new for her. I had neglected to be responsible with my communication and as a result, my tempo was going off, and I was speaking too fast for her to process the information. In NLP terms, I was breaking rapport with her.

So I i took corrective measures immediately. First, I slowed down my thought processing, and broke my delivery into small segments. I put in more pauses,  asked for feedback and looked for agreement before continuing. As I changed my conversation style, her body language changed too. She started to relax more and showed more agreement signs like nodding and smiling.

This example reflects very clearly, that the moment we take responsibility for our conversation and adapt our style to suit our audience, the receptivity increases. So the next time you find that your point is not getting across to someone else, take a step back and consider if you are empowering yourself by taking responsibility for your communication.

In my previous post on Ambiguities In Interpersonal Communication, i mentioned about how generalisation, deletion and distortion would normally occur when we are communicating, and how we can ask questions to clarify, or even help empower the other party.

One common scenario is when a person’s behaviour is being confused with his or her identity as a result of some limiting beliefs. An example of this could be, “I’m a slow learner”.

In this example, the individual views himself or herself as a slow learner because of experiences where more time was required to learn new things. Some ways to help loosen that self identity include asking questions such as:

• What did you learn that required more time than usual?
• What do you consider a fast learner?

Alternatively, you could reframe the content of the statement (Reframing is a very powerful NLP technique to help suggest new meanings to an experience or belief, and I’ll be posting stuffs about it in the future so stay tuned).

By agreeing with the person and changing the meaning of the statement, you can help redefine what was initially an identity label, into a skill, behaviour or feeling. Using the same example of “I’m a slow learner”, you could agree and reframe the content in this manner:

• I understand, there are definitely times when you feel that the rate of learning isn’t as fast as you would like. This will improve over time as you pick up new skills along the way.

Responding in this manner loosens the identity label, and imply that it is actually a feeling. It also allows the person to look at the issue from another angle, that he or she will pick up new skills with time and improve on their learning ability.

Here’s another example of confusing behaviour with identity, “I’m a shy person”

• Yes, I understand that there will be situations where you would feel shy, and it’s perfectly alright to take your time to feel comfortable in such situations.

This response also implies that it is a feeling, rather than an identity. In addition, it assumes that the person just wants to take a longer time to feel comfortable and confident.

When you are more aware of this common error due to limiting beliefs, you can help empower others when you notice that they are confusing behaviours with identity. More importantly, you can stop yourself from making the same errors.

As mentioned in my earlier post Paradigm Shift, every one of us uses a different map to view the world. As a result of that, the way we process our thoughts into words would differ as well.

Very often, when we talk to others, we use words that make sense to us. We also phrase our sentences in a manner that reflect our reality and beliefs. In NLP, this is known as deep structure, where a speaker have a full and complete idea of what he or she wishes to say. The thing is, this deep structure is not conscious.

From deep structure to surface structure, where we actually say what we are thinking, three things would usually occur unconsciously. Firstly, we generalise. It’s almost impossible to find someone who would specify every possible exceptions and conditions in a normal everyday conversation.

Secondly, we select some of the information available, and leave out the rest. This is known as deletion. And lastly, we simplify the structure of what we want to say, and inevitably distort the meaning of our thoughts.

Here are some common examples

Generalisation: Words such as always, never, all, every, no one.

• He is always late for work (Always? Has he been on time at least once?)

• Good things never happen to me (Never?)

• All students from that school are naughty (All students? Is there at least one good student?)

Deletion: Something is left out of the statement, such as a person, a thing, a reason, an unclear comparison.

• I have bad memory (Who said that? Were you born like this? Has it got to do with the method?)

• That’s silly (What is silly? In what way is it silly?)

• This route is better (Compared to what?)

• That is a bad school (In what way is it bad?)

Distortion: Linking two statements to mean the same thing, presupposing, attempting to read the mind of others.

• She’s not smiling, therefore she’s not enjoying herself (How does not smiling mean she’s not enjoying?)

• Why don’t you smile more? (I don’t smile enough? How much more is enough for you?)

• I could tell she did not like her present (How could you tell?)

Knowing how generalisation, deletion, and distortion can cause ambiguities in our interpersonal communication allows us to be more aware of what we say. At the same time, it allows us to be conscious and aware of what others are saying to us.

This awareness can empower us, and also allow us to empower others, especially if you are receiving information during a conversation. The other party could be generalising, deleting and distorting their sentences because of past experiences or limiting beliefs, and a question or rephrase from you could help them significantly.