Metaprograms, on which I wrote an introductory article, are unconscious filters of human perception, according to which we sort information, and can be found deep in the subconscious. They show us how we prefer to think, feel and communicate, offering a set of criteria for sorting and organizing information.
By finding ways to elicit these criteria, we can communicate effectively with others (clients, collaborators, partners, friends) to speak to them in their language.
Metaprograms are patterns of reaction to the surrounding world and are relational functions that meet psychological and physiological needs. We react to stimuli from the outside and are perceived internally, using reception, offering a certain response to the outside. For each push, the answer can be divided into a series of categories: classes, preferences, inclinations, and dominance. The preferred distinctions within each metaprogram may be helpful or unnecessary by referencing a particular work context (Work context). The reaction can be to the stimulus itself (an authentic experience) or to a past experience, which, by association with the external stimulus, triggers a reaction that does not respond to the present stimulus but to the past experience (an inauthentic experience). The psychological purpose of an individual is to obtain and sustain authentic experiences (in which the map corresponds to the territory) and not inauthentic ones (there is a risk of “him getting lost on-site with the map in his hand”).
For decades, psychologists have been trying to find the fine aspects that correlate job satisfaction with performance. Despite its status as a pseudo-science, NLP has offered the world one of the most grounded, fundamental, and essential findings in practice that provides a deep map of understanding human behavior, language, attitude, and personality using the metaprogram theory and study. At the beginning of the new millennium, mainly due to the explosive development of iWAM and Identity Compass tools, NLP works with psychometrics to bring, through theory and research, a rigorous structuring to be applied in the organizational context. The results are tools with a refined predictive capacity and a profound understanding of behavior, attitudes, and language in the context of work.
David Schaeffer, one of the authors of the psychometric test battery Identity Compass (based on metaprograms), presented an advanced paper at the Identity Compass International conference in Barcelona (2009), in which he explored the history of personality psychology, claiming that if at the beginning of the 20th century, personality was easily defined as a static concept (the sum of features that do not change from context to context or overtime), the way society evolved in the third-millennium forces researchers to adapt, both for applications in human resources, as well as for the placement of products based on consumer preferences and behavior. Personality has thus become a fragmented concept, which changes from context to context, over time, and from culture to culture.
Markets turn into niches. Populations turn into audiences. Groups turn into communities. Technology influences how the individual communicates thinks and behaves. Information is no longer a benefit but a bonus. Searching and filtering information is in power. As a result, people’s lives are much more divided. In such a context, the future lies in capturing as accurately as possible what is characteristic of individual X, on Y date, in the Z context. Anything that offers less cannot be high-performance in the long run.
As an example noted in the 2007 Identity Compass training, the rates of preference for changes are twice as restricted in Romanians than in Americans (decision-makers metaprogram).
(keep reading ↓)
The importance of context
By definition, metaprograms are contextual.
<< Understanding the context is essential for determining motivation. Context is a person’s frame of reference around a given situation. The context creates the significance of the situation for the individual in question. Examples of contexts: work activity (writing a report); Going on a trip; Buying a house, etc.
People manifest themselves differently in different situations. Therefore, staying in the same context when using questions to identify motivational patterns is essential. Whenever the individual speaks about:
- With whom?
… the individual frames a context!
It is also essential to ensure that the caller responds by remaining in the same context and not moving to another context.
There are two “types” of persons in terms of contextualization: Some people have “thin” or almost non-existent boundaries among contexts, and then it is very easy to “slip” from one context to another in conversations (jumping from one topic to another…). Others, on the contrary, have rigid boundaries among contexts. Consequently, in the talks, they will pass from one context to another only after clearly marking (verbally or non-verbally) the finalization of the discussion about the previous context.>> (pp 5-6)
Text taken from Andy Szekely, Cele mai bune tactici ale experţilor prin care să eviţi manipularea şi să influenţezi cu integritate. (The best tactics used by experts through which one can avoid manipulation and influence with integrity) (2008), AS Publishing House, Bucharest.
Copyright © Marcus Victor Grant 2011-present Translation by Cristiana Brezeanu of the article “La ce ne ajută să cunoaştem şi să înţelegem metaprogramele“ published initially by Marcus Victor Grant in Romanian on the 6st of October 2011 on Discerne. Copyright © Marcus Victor Grant, all rights reserved.
The materials on this blog are subject to this disclaimer.