A personal perspective on neuro-linguistic programming: Reflecting on the tension between personal experience and evidence-based practice

Neuro-linguistic Programming (NLP) has been a significant presence in the business training and personal development fields since at least the early 1980s. NLP as a change methodology has attracted significant controversy over the years with claims and counter claims as to its effectiveness and validity. Although there is little to no empirical support for the central tenants of NLP, many coaches, psychologists and reputable agents of change who are otherwise committed to an evidence-based approach to their practice, utilise and engage with NLP methodologies. Not surprisingly, such practitioners often experience dissonance, tension and confusion about NLP. In this paper I reflect on the tension between my personal experience of NLP and my own commitment to an evidence-based approach to coaching. My assumption here is that the tension and ambivalence that I have personally experienced in relation to NLP is not singularly mine and that others have experienced similar feelings. I conclude that, coupled with the lack of empirical evidence for many core NLP constructs, the multiple misrepresentations made by many in the NLP industry over a significant period of time have effectively ruined the NLP brand. The demise of NLP is a salutary lesson for all who are engaged in the personal or professional development genre. This serves to remind us to ensure that our coaching methodologies and the broader coaching industry remain firmly grounded in evidence-based approaches, that we adhere to professional ethical standards and through practicing critical thinking and open-mindedness we remain forever vigilant against the onset of ‘guruism’.