I want to expose you to an idea that I’ve been trying to integrate into my life recently. I first encountered this idea a few years ago, when I was reading about NLP, or Neuro-Linguistic Programming. NLP is typically associated with Tony Robbins, who popularized parts of it. Many sales training techniques will utilize the eye cues from NLP that can reveal the parts of a person’s brain they’re using during conversation (popularly, to see if the person is “lying,” though this isn’t the purpose in NLP). But I’m getting off on a tangent here…

One of the main concepts within NLP is that every person has a “map” of reality that they refer to when thinking about or doing things. An integral part of this concept of a “reality map” is understanding that every person has a positive outcome intended in every action. No one does things to achieve what they would then perceive to be as a negative outcome. They always want to create what they currently understand to be a positive outcome.

Finally, and most importantly, every person is right about what they think.

Take a second to consider these statements.  Consider the worst person you can imagine.  A criminal of some sort, perhaps.  That person’s actions reflect their map of reality.  And within that map, their actions have a positive outcome for themselves.  They either gain esteem, personal wealth, or something else from their actions.  Not only that, but they are completely right about that belief.  While their actions may not be “right,” their thought about what their actions will get them, in relation to their map of reality, can never be wrong.  They may change their map after suffering consequences other than what they believed would happen (or they may not).

Understanding and accepting this concept is the first step. Learning to accept that what another person tells you is true to them is the second (and I think, more difficult) step.

To highlight this again, let’s take another, less extreme example.  A teenager is in the “rebellion” stage.  They have formed a map of reality based on their prior experience, their current environment, and their perception of the future.  Their actions reflect this map.  They do not intend to experience negative consequences as the result of their actions.  They want to express themselves and their understanding of the world, whatever it may be – to correct perceived wrongs done to them, perhaps.  While they might get grounded for bad behavior, they never intended to get grounded from the outset.  Again, not only that, but they were not wrong in what they believed.  They were completely right, based on their map of reality, to behave the way they did.

My second exposure to this same concept happened this semester in my Motor Learning class. We learned a new definition of the word “skill,” which is skill as the ability to solve a motor problem. Skill, then, is a continuum, with several factors influencing each person’s level of skill at any moment.

The first article we read with this approach to the idea of skill was by Dr. Susan Higgins. In it, she points out that “the degree of skill we attain on most tasks is generally to the satisfaction of the individual within the constraints imposed by cognitive, morphological, or sociocultural factors. We thereby settle for a level that suits our momentary needs.”

She also says that “You cannot impose a strategy or movement on another person, but should instead regard their own solution and consider the expression of their own personality and problem-solving ability in that solution, and then find ways to enhance their chance of success at the task and increase their pool of resources for solving the problem.” Because – “Each strategy a person uses complements their strengths and weaknesses and reflects their current level of understanding and skill.”

Isn’t this directly in line with what NLP says? I think so.

But what is the lesson here? I don’t want you to think that this post only applies to physical training, or therapy, that’s why I included the NLP tie-in.

I guess my reason for this post is to make a suggestion, which is this:

The next time you’re speaking with, or dealing with another person (or even thinking about an interaction you’ve previously had with another person), consider the perspective presented here. Consider the fact that the other person is referencing their map of reality, and that it is absolutely true to them. Also consider that, whatever the outcome of the interaction, they were ultimately interested in attaining something positive for themselves, in some way.

When you see people doing things, realize that they are expressing their current level of ability in solving the problem presented to them (whether it’s a movement or other type of problem) in their world, based on their previous experience, and their level of consideration of the situation.  What is their map?  How can you help them to express themselves more clearly (whether it’s through actions or words)?  What questions can you ask that will help you to understand them better?

Then, you can think about yourself and your own actions and reactions in this way.  Examine yourself, and see how you’re trying to solve problems.  What might facilitate your problem-solving capacity?  How can you be more understanding and allowing toward yourself?

Finally, consider they way your map presents you to the world.  How do you look to other people, based on the map of reality you reference?  How can you communicate your map more clearly to others?

Seek first to understand, then to be understood.

Taking this approach has been a challenging (to say the least) but incredibly eye-opening experience for me. I hope that it will be for you too!