Neuro-Linguistic Programming – What Exactly is it?

A brief foray into why NLP has gained so much traction and whether it is justified.

I had heard of NLP way back in my teaching career but not really paid any attention to it as it didn’t seem to be anything to do with teaching, and then I found a little book of NLP activities for the classroom. Intrigued I bought it and it had some fun things to do that I could link with the learning, develop curiosity and building classroom relationships, but I was less convinced about the rationale given in the book (especially the claim that VAK came from NLP, and I have already covered that). Having now explored the world of coaching more, NLP looms large and many schools have trained NLP practitioners, so I expect this may prove a more controversial blog than some of my others.

What is NLP?

This is actually quite a hard question to answer because there is no formal regulation of NLP practice and texts on NLP (and so it is in my little book) don’t explain it but rather tell the story of its effects in hope of communicating what it does. So let’s go back to the start. In the 1970s Badler and Grinder observed 3 particularly effective psychotherapists and developed NLP as a way to improve communication and influencing others based on the expert communication they saw in these therapists. It is based on the idea that we interact with the world through limited ‘sensory-oriented representational systems’ – e.g. visually oriented, sound oriented (by the way this is where VAK came from). When we communicate with someone using their preferred system they feel better understood.

So what are my misgivings?

1. Lack of research evidence

The basis for the theory was not scientific evidence but qualitative, subjective analysis of 3 psychotherapists. Badler and Grinder never followed up their practice with well documented scientific research and many of their claims for success are based on anecdotes and testimonial data. According to Von Bergen et al (2006) further development of the theory and practice was based on ‘outdated metaphors of brain functioning and is laced with numerous factual errors.’

There has obviously since been much research done to find support for the benefits of NLP. However the research reviews I found on the subject (e.g. Sturt et al, 2012 & Passmore & Rowson, 2019) fail to find robust evidence for the efficacy of NLP.

2. Lack of clear process

Most psychological therapies offer a route through treatment. NLP doesn’t seem to do this, though it is based on vague, perhaps incorrect even, principles there doesn’t seem to be ‘one way’ of doing NLP. As such it is difficult to know what exactly NLP practitioners are doing and how effective it is.

3. Lack of regulation

Part of this lack of clarity seems to arise from the dispute between Badler & Grinder which has resulted in the NLP & Neuro-linguistic Programming not to be legally owned by anyone and therefore there is no one centralised regulating authority – this point being made by the BBC in 2009 when a cat was registered as and NLP practitioner! So, it turns out, I could start calling myself an NLP practitioner tomorrow without even really understanding what it is.

4. Failure to be endorsed

Various effective therapies are endorsed by NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence) and at this point NLP doesn’t make the cut. For many mental health difficulties there are far more effective, evidence based treatments that are on offer.

What to do for now?

I don’t necessarily believe that those calling themselves NLP practitioners are ineffective, but I do think that before we endorse therapeutic approaches we should fully understand how and why they work, the science behind them and their measured effectiveness and NLP just doesn’t do this. I think this quote from Passmore and Rowson sums up my feelings:

‘…coaching psychologists and those interested in evidenced based coaching would be wise to ignore the NLP brand in favour of models, approaches and techniques where a clear evidence base exists.’

Further reading

Passmore, J., & Rowson, T. (2019). Neuro-linguistic programming : A review of NLP research and the application of NLP in coaching.

Sturt, J., Ali, S., Robertson, W., Metcalfe, D., Grove, A., Bourne, C., & Bridle, C. (2012). Neuro-linguistic programming: a systematic review of the effects on health outcomes. The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 62(604), e757–e764.

Von Bergen, C.W., Soper, B., Roesnthal, G.T. & Wilkinson, L. V. (2006) Selected alternative Training techniques in HRD. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 8(4), p281-294.