GOING DEEPER: The Foundations of Modeling

Previous Essay      Next Essay

Getting Started

Anything that human beings do can be modeled, and everything we do is worthy of being modeled. It is crucial to model "exemplars," people who in fact have the ability you are interested in. Therefore, you must have a clear and appropriately specified idea of what you want to model before selecting your exemplars. The modeling process itself involves discovering significant patterns of experience and behavior through contrasting examples of the ability in action.

"Jachin-Boaz traded in maps. He bought and sold maps, and some, of certain kinds for special uses, he made or had others make for him. That had been his father's trade, and the walls of the shop that had been his father's were hung with glazed blue oceans, green swamps and grasslands, brown and orange mountains delicately shaded. Maps of towns and plains he sold, and other maps made to order. He would sell a young man a map that showed where a particular girl might be found at different hours of the day. He sold husband maps and wife maps. He sold maps to poets that showed where thoughts of power and clarity had come to other poets. He sold well-digging maps. He sold vision-and-miracle maps to holy men, sickness-and-accident maps to physicians, money-and-jewel maps to thieves, and thief maps to the police." (The Lion of Boaz-Jachin and Jachin-Boaz, by Russell Hoban)

So, what do you want to model?

Notice that we did not ask, "What should you model?" Nor did we ask, "What is worth modeling?" Those questions assume that some abilities are more valuable or important than others. But this is not the case. In fact, nothing in human experience is inherently more or less worth modeling than anything else. A statement like that, of course, puts us way out on an ethical limb. Before you get out your saw, give us a chance to explain.

When the prospect of modeling is raised, most people reach right away for the brightest stars. Our thoughts and aspirations naturally fix upon those incandescent human abilities that most of us consider represent human beings at their best. There is nothing wrong with that conceptually, surely. In practice, however, it is often the case that what are identified as human abilities at their most luminous are glowing from the applause of society. Again, there is nothing wrong with that. But there is something stifling about it. In seminar after seminar, when our participants have been given the opportunity to select something to model, their thinking immediately goes to what we as a society seem to value. They want to model being a great business leader, trading stocks, making killer investments, winning at negotiations, being an entrepreneur. Of course, all of these are worth modeling. Brilliant stars, true, but a mighty small universe.

As we mentioned in the previous essay, the quality of our lives is determined far more by the myriad of "little" human abilities that fill the millions of moments of our days. Making money is fine, but as you journey through your day making it there are disappointments to be dealt with, a joke you would like to tell, the abstract painting in the lobby you don't understand, the criticism of an associate that makes you feel small, a shaft of sunlight through your office window that you would like to stand in but can't justify the time, an employee who needs help understanding something and you just don't know how to get it across, the lunch at which you order things you know you will pay for later in Alka Seltzer, the boss who is asking you to do something that is against your values, a moment of emptiness when you wonder if there is meaning to your life, the phone call from your teenage daughter with whom you cannot seem to connect, and your nervousness during a presentation to the Board.

But there are people who bounce back from disappointments. There are others who are good at telling jokes. There are those who can be delighted by an abstract painting, or respond to criticism as an opportunity, or take time to step into a shaft of sunlight. Some know how to explain things clearly, while others care for their bodies, or maintain their values in the face of demands to do otherwise, or feel an ongoing sense of meaning in their lives, or connect with their teenagers. You can even find people who consider a Board presentation fun. These are not the kind of abilities that will get any of these people on the cover of a national magazine. In fact, the people who have these abilities probably do not recognize them as anything special or worthy of modeling. And, of course, for them they are NOT special; it is just what they do. But for someone who has always been sucked dry by disappointments or fumbled the telling of a joke, or who is mystified by art or infuriated by criticism, or yearned for the sunlight, felt helpless when trying to help others, anguished over not caring for their bodies, easily let their values slip, felt meaningless, estranged from their teenagers or petrified by Board presentations...these are priceless abilities. For those of us whose daily lives would be enhanced by these abilities, it is obvious that they are worthy of modeling. And for some of us, a particular ability may be worth anything it would take to have it. The smallest, most seemingly mundane ability you can think of is something of inestimable value to someone who needs it, whose life would be improved by having access to it.

And we will scoot even further out on our limb by including "problems" in the category of human abilities worthy of modeling. Obviously, modeling a problem is useful as a way to gain a deeper understanding that reveals clues for intervention and change. But problems ought not to be thought of only as things that need fixing. "Problems" are just as much experience as are the laudable and worthy things we do and, so, are also the natural manifestations of some structuring of human experience. Or, to say it the other way, all of us have structures of experience that work perfectly to generate both the experiences we want to have, as well as those we do not want to have.

A useful and more accurate way to think about problems is that they are effective and potentially useful structures that are being used inappropriately. For example, we all agree that procrastination is a problem. But for someone who finds it impossible to be on vacation without worrying about what needs to be done back at the office and at home, the ability to procrastinate may be precisely what he needs. Procrastination is a problem when there is something that truly does need to be done and you can do something about it; procrastination is a blessing when it is time to let go of doing things for a while. The same is true of, say, the problem of responding to criticism with indignation. Clearly this is a problem for the person who always responds this way, as it may preclude him from ever getting useful feedback. But the ability to respond with indignation may be precisely what is needed by someone who constantly subjects his sense of self to the judgements of others. That is, this "wide-open" person would benefit from being able to give his self-judgements far more weight than the judgements made about him by others.

Notice that we have said that the "person would benefit from having access to the ability." We are not suggesting that he simply trade one ability for the other, discarding the old for the new. In fact, what serves us far more is to have access to a wide range of abilities that we can call upon depending upon the demands of the particular situation we are in. This makes us flexible and robust in our responses and experience. There is much more to say about this topic, but it would take us deep into the realm of therapy. For now, suffice it to say that there is undeniable value in having access to the full range of human experience and abilities.

So, when considering what to model, it is not necessary to limit yourself to the relatively few obvious stars of human abilities, the few that we can still see and point to through the haze of city lights. Stand under darker skies and you will discover millions of experiential stars. They appear to be small, but that is only because they are further away. Each one, however, is an ability of great value to someone and, so, worthy of modeling.

Specifying the Ability

Where to start? Pursuing a model can be a long journey down some pretty tangled paths. The first (and perhaps most important) step of your journey is to specify what it is that you want to model. If you are not clear where you want to get to, you could end up anywhere, or nowhere. Furthermore, you need to know where you want to go so you can find guides (your exemplars) who already know the way there.

So you begin by answering the question, "What do I want to be able to do?" This is an important question in two respects. First, it puts your attention on what you value in the realm of human abilities, and second, it puts your attention on doing. Every ability is a means to an end, that is, it has some effect or outcome. Often when we think of what we want for ourselves, we put our attention on that outcome, and not on the "doing" that makes that outcome possible. It is the difference between saying, "I want to get an 'A' in chemistry" (the outcome) and "I want to be able to understand chemistry" (the "doing"); the difference between "I want to be a leader," and "I want to be able to inspire and motivate people at work"; the difference between "I want there to be harmony with my spouse," and "I want to be able to harmonize with my spouse." When you model, you are not acquiring a fish, but learning how to fish.

You may need to dig a bit deeper than your initial answer to the question, "What do I want to be able to do?" Suppose that you want to model how to write books. Does, "I want to model how to write books" point you well enough in the direction you really want - and need - to go? Well, is writing technical books the same as writing non-fiction books for the mass market? Probably not. Is writing non-fiction the same as writing fiction? Again, probably not. And is writing in the various fiction genres - science fiction, mysteries, novels, children's book - all the same ability? No, there are undoubtedly some different abilities involved in writing in each of these forms. Of course, there will also be some similarities. The fact that all of these different kinds of books involve writing means that we will surely find some patterns that are shared by people who write books, regardless of the genre. If what you want to model are the patterns that underlie writing in general, then you would certainly want to draw your exemplars from various genres. If instead what you are really interested in is writing children's books, then it is essential to specify that as the target of your modeling.

This process of greater specification ("chunking down") can continue, of course. You might not be interested in children's books in general, but specifically books for pre-schoolers, or science books for grade schoolers, or adolescent fiction. Again, if your interest is at that level of specificity, then it is in your interest to find exemplars of that particular ability. How fine you need to split these hairs depends both upon what you want to end up with in terms of a model, and what you find as you begin modeling. For instance, you may discover that writing fiction for 13-year-olds is not significantly different than writing for 17-year-olds. In that case, people who can serve as possible exemplars include anyone writing Adolescent Fiction. On the other hand, you may find that writing fiction for adolescent girls is different than for boys. In that case, you need to decide if you want to model writing for girls, boys, or adolescents in general (in which case you would want exemplars of both kinds of writing).

It is delightful and wonderful that the pool of human abilities is as deep as the universe of human experience, a well from which we can draw endlessly. What will you draw out of those depths?

SUB-ABILITIES

Even then you may not be done nailing down what you want to model. The process of writing probably involves a number of "sub-abilities." We can think of these as a set of foundation ("smaller") abilities that combine to make possible the global ("larger") ability of writing a book. For instance, it may be that the ability to successfully write adolescent fiction involves the sub-abilities of "Keeping current on the adolescent world," "Formulating a plot," "Creating characters," "Writing text," "Editing," "Interesting a publisher or agent in the work," and so on.

Each of these sub-abilities can be considered (and, indeed, is) an ability in itself, and can be modeled as such. It is probably becoming obvious to you now that it may be possible to chunk down any sub-ability into its own set of "sub-abilities" (or, if you prefer, "sub-sub-abilities"). As the modeler you might choose (or perhaps find it necessary) to approach the modeling of "Writing text," for example, as a set of sub-abilities: "Ordering ideas in a useful way," "Describing clearly" and "Compelling the reader's attention." Each is a modelable ability in its own right which, when combined with its companion foundation abilities, work together to create the global ability.

Sequential or Parallel

Each of the sub-abilities affects - and is affected by - the other sub-abilities, and all of them contribute to the larger ability. This does not mean that the sub-abilities are necessarily operating simultaneously. It may be that the action of one sub-ability is a prerequisite to the action of another sub-ability, and so they are sequential. In the case of writing a book for adolescents, for instance, "Keeping current on the adolescent world" is something our exemplar is doing throughout the steps of "Formulating a plot," "writing," and "editing." (Even during editing, the exemplar may make changes in responses to some new development in the world of adolescents.) But "Formulating a plot" precedes and informs the "Writing," which in turn precedes "Editing."

The sequential nature of these sub-abilities does not mean that their objectives are necessarily completed before the exemplar moves on to the next sub-ability. "Keeping current on the adolescent world" is something the exemplar is probably engaged in periodically throughout the process of writing the book. Similarly, the exemplar may step into "Editing" mode periodically as she is writing. What it does mean is that when the exemplar is unable to fulfill the objectives of a particular sub-ability, she will likely drop back into a prerequisite ability. As an example, if she is having difficulty writing the text, she may reconsider her plot structure or characters (both the products of prerequisite abilities). If she still cannot resolve the writing problem, she may step even further back in the sequence and consider again what is going on with adolescents, which can then newly inform her characterizations and plotting, which in turn form the basis for her writing.

Alternatively, it may be the case that two or more of the sub-abilities are operating in parallel, that is, they come into play at the same time. Our exemplar's sub-abilities for "Writing text" are an example of parallel abilities. For the most part, the sub-abilities of "Ordering ideas in a useful way," "Describing clearly" and "Compelling the reader's attention" are all operating at the same time as the exemplar is writing the text. All three abilities represent ongoing evaluations and operations, with no one of them a prerequisite to the operation of the others. All work together in "Writing text," but none are dependent upon each other. Poorly ordered ideas can nevertheless be described clearly and be compelling, for example. Likewise, the ideas may be well ordered but not clearly described, and descriptions can be clear but not compelling.

What Do You Really Need To Know?

Whether you want to pursue an ability at a relatively global chunk size, or pursue it at the level of its sub-abilities depends upon your particular needs and interests. You can certainly model the ability "Writing adolescent fiction" at that general level. And, in doing so, you will glean a set of patterns that will in some way include or reference some of the sub-abilities of "Writing adolescent fiction" ("Keeping current on the adolescent world," "Formulating a plot," "Creating characters," "Editing" and so on). If instead you model one of those sub-abilities (the ability to "Edit," for instance), you will glean a set of patterns that will also in some way include or reference its sub-abilities. (In the case of editing, for instance, the sub-abilities might include "Reading from the reader's perspective," "Accepting criticism" and "Letting go of things you like.")

Discovering that the ability you want to model is made up of some important sub-abilities does not mean that you must then choose either to model all of those sub-abilities or to ignore them and instead model the ability as a "whole." What it does mean is that you must decide what are the abilities (sub-abilities) you specifically want to have "in focus" as you model. In looking at those sub-abilities, you may decide that there is only one (or perhaps a few) that you really want; the others are either not of interest to you or are ones you already have in some measure. For example, in "Writing adolescent fiction," you may recognize that you already are adept at "Keeping abreast of the adolescent world" and at "Creating characters." There is no need for you to model those abilities. And since you are interested only in writing stories to be given to the teenagers in your classes, there is also no need to model the ability to "Interest publishers and agents." Perhaps what you DO need, however, are the abilities to "Formulate a plot," "Write text," and "Edit." Those, then, will be the abilities you will want to have in focus as you gather information from your exemplar.

Finding Where You Are As You Go

Okay, now take a breath.

As you can see, the number of possible sub-abilities for any one ability is enormous (perhaps infinite). And so, as the modeler, it is necessary for you to choose the ability - or abilities - that will be the focus of your modeling. This will help ensure that you pursue what is, in fact, of primary interest to you, and that you select those exemplars who are most likely to give you the kind and quality of information you need. This is the ideal.

In practice, however, it often happens that even the most rigorous pre-elicitation specification of the ability must be re-assessed when you discover the reality of the ability. After all, you are delving into an aspect of the human world that is not an area of competence for you. It is very likely that you do not know all the relevant distinctions in terms of areas of application and of activity significant for successfully manifesting that ability. So one thing you will find is that in the course of gathering information from your first one or two exemplars you will, at the same time, be discovering just what application and activity distinctions are important. And so you may well find yourself readjusting your expectations and needs regarding the focus of your modeling.

You cannot know everything ahead of time, and you do not need to. It is useful to be as specific as you can before selecting exemplars and plunging into elicitation. But be ready to discover as you gather information that you need to rethink what you want to model, regarding areas of specific application or sub-abilities. This reassessment may mean that you need to find different exemplars than the ones you had already lined up. But far better to do that and end up with the ability you want than to exhaust yourself modeling abilities that are either not of interest to you or are already in your personal repertoire.

Selecting Exemplars

While it is true that every person is a potential source of fascinating abilities to model, it is most likely the case that you have selected something specific to model. If you are to avoid eliciting confusing and inapplicable patterns, it is essential that you select individuals who are, in fact, exemplars of the ability in which you are interested.

Exemplars can come to your attention through your personal experience of them, recommendations of others, hearsay, or their own declarations. Regardless of how you become aware of this person as an exemplar, you need evidence of their competence. You need to satisfy yourself that she or he does in fact manifest the ability you want to model. The best way to do this is to arrange to witness them in action, as well as see the results of their efforts. This will tell you two important things.

First, witnessing your exemplar "at work" will tell you whether or not he has the ability. He is supposed to be a wonderful teacher; do the students learn? She is great at telling jokes; do people laugh? She creates easily accessible magazine layouts; do people actually find them accessible?

Second, direct experience of the exemplar manifesting his ability will give you a sense of the manner in which he manifests the ability. For example, you may have two exemplars of good teaching, both of whose students are clearly learning. One of those teachers, however, is a calm presence at the front of a placid classroom. At the end of her day, she is both happy and tired. The other teacher ricochets through the classroom, a blur of energy and interaction. At the end of the day, she is both happy and exhausted. Both of these teachers can serve as exemplars of excellent teaching, and will share fundamental patterns that make that ability possible. If, however, you want to model a calm-classroom style of teaching, then this second exemplar is not someone to model.

In some cases the perceptions of others will be significant in assuring you that your exemplar is someone who indeed has the ability you want to model. For instance, if you are modeling someone who is good at attaining rapport with groups, you would want to talk with people who have been in groups with this person to find out what was, in fact, their experience. Evidence of an exemplar's ability may come in other forms as well. The magazine layout artist who has been recognized with a national publishing industry award for her work probably knows what she is doing when it comes to creating compelling magazine layouts.

How Many?

In modeling we are trying to discover what are the essential patterns that make it possible to manifest an ability. Finding what is essential requires weeding out the masses of idiosyncratic things people say, think and do, leaving standing only those sturdy patterns characteristic of the ability, rather than of the individual manifesting it. We do this by contrasting several exemplars to find out what is the same about all of them when they are manifesting the ability.

Usually you will need at least three exemplars of the ability you want to model. Contrasting two exemplars will certainly provide you with patterns that the two of them share. That is, you will probably find things about the structure of their experiences that are the same (as well as differences - patterns that belong to only one of the exemplars - which you will leave out of the model). The third exemplar makes it possible to:

- Confirm the patterns you have found.

- Resolve questions about patterns you are unsure about.

- Alert you to patterns you may have missed in the first two elicitations.

Of course, you can model more than three exemplars, and may need to if you are not recognizing the patterns in the first three. But if you have selected three exemplars who really are exemplars of the ability, you will probably find few surprises during your elicitation of the third individual. This strongly indicates that you have indeed culled the essential patterns from your first two exemplars. When this is the case (as it usually is), going on to model a fourth, fifth and sixth exemplar is likely to be unnecessary.

And, of course, if you are NOT finding essential patterns common to all three of your exemplars, you then need to do one of the following:

- Model additional exemplars.

- Reassess whether or not your exemplars are truly competent at the ability you are modeling.

- Reassess whether you have appropriately specified the ability you want to model.

Person-Specific Models

As with most things in life, there is also an exception to the rule of "three exemplars." It may be that you are not interested in modeling what makes it possible for human beings to manifest a particular ability, but in modeling what makes it possible for Joe to manifest that particular ability. Joe is an excellent elementary school teacher, let's say, AND you want to be able to teach just as Joe teaches. That is, you want not only to get his kind of results, but to actually manifest his distinctive manner as he teaches (to the extent it is possible). In that case, you want to include Joe's idiosyncratic patterns in your model, rather than weed them out through contrast with other exemplars. Joe, then, would be your only exemplar.

FRAMING FOR EXEMPLARS

Some people are reticent when asked to be the subject of modeling. Usually this is because either they do not see what they do as being anything special (and, so, not "worthy" of your time and effort), or they are concerned that they do not know enough about how they do what they do to be able to tell you what you want to know. Both of these concerns can be addressed by simply telling the truth of the situation. The first of these truths is that she is able to do something that you admire, consider of great value, and want to understand well enough that you can do it too (or help others do it). The second truth is that she does not need to consciously know how she does what she does. She needs only to be herself, and that it is your job to ask those questions that will help reveal to both of you just how she does what she does.

Almost invariably, once the modeling begins, exemplars become completely engaged in the process. Most of us find it fascinating to see how we are "put together," as it were. You will find that the exemplar will almost immediately become a co-modeler with you, working hard to help you make sense out of her experience. What is more, if your exemplar thinks you are off on a wrong track, she will probably correct you. After all, it is her experience that is being described, and all of us want to be described accurately. Indeed, it is almost always the case that exemplars report truly enjoying the experience of being modeled, finding it "interesting," "gratifying," and even "ennobling."

The General Process of Elicitation

Now you have your exemplar before you and you are ready to begin eliciting information. Where and how do you begin?

In general, the process of elicitation will take two forms: observing the exemplar manifest his ability, and asking questions regarding the nature of his internal processes. All abilities will have some external and some internal components to them, though the ratio between these two will vary greatly depending upon the nature of the ability. If the ability involves significant external behavior, then of course it is important to observe your exemplar. However, simply observing is rarely sufficient. As we shall see in the Going Deeper sections to come, even abilities that seem to be purely about manifesting certain external behaviors are, nevertheless, tremendously influenced by internal processes. Ultimately, it is internal processes that are most responsible for generating abilities. And, so, it is the internal processes in which we are most interested.

Of course, internal processes are generally not as evident as external behaviors. They are accessible, however. Your exemplar will reveal his internal processes as he (1) describes his experience when manifesting the ability and (2) responds to your precise questions about that experience. His internal processes are revealed through his direct descriptions of those processes, through his use of language, and through his external behavior.

As your exemplar relates his experience, you are initially trying to notice what seems significant in his experience. As you proceed, gathering more descriptions and more examples, you can begin to identify what truly is significant, that is, what are the essential patterns operating in his experience when manifesting his ability.

Since successful elicitation comes from collaboration, make your exemplar a collaborator. One of the most effective ways to foster this is by recording the information you are gathering about him in such a way that he can see how you are understanding and representing his experience. Flip chart paper works very well for this purpose (as do chalk and white boards, or even pieces of paper on the table turned so the exemplar can see them as the elicitation proceeds). As you capture bits and pieces of their experience and start to organize them, the exemplar can see how he is being represented. In the course of conversation, an exemplar's moment of uncertainty about a particular response of theirs is quickly swallowed up - and usually lost - by the continuing conversation. But when that same information is down on paper, the exemplar has the opportunity to continue to consider it. And consider it they will. We have noted consistently over the years that people are loath to allow a characterization of their experience that does not quite fit for them to remain on that paper. We have been corrected, and exemplars have corrected themselves, countless times. And this is, of course, precisely what we want to have happen.

THE CORE DUMP

You could plunge right into the elicitation, having the exemplar access examples and asking him your pointed questions. But those waters may be pretty deep, deeper than they at first appear. For this reason, we suggest that you begin your elicitation with a "core dump." This is a term we have borrowed from the land of computers, and refers to the phenomenon of a computer "dumping" all its stored data at once. Doing a core dump with your exemplar means simply asking him to tell you, in general, how he goes about doing what he does. The core dump is useful for a number of reasons:

- The Core Dump creates an opportunity to get an over-all sense of the ability, so you will have a better sense of where you are in the ability when doing the more explicit elicitation. In elicitation, it often happens that you ask about one particular element of the exemplar's experience, and he answers by telling you about some other element. This can really get you in an informational twist if you do not recognize that this is happening. The core dump, however, makes it much easier to avoid this confusion. Because it gives you a sense of the lay of the exemplar's experiential land, it is easier to recognize where in his experiential terrain his answers are coming from. You can then either choose to follow that new lead, or bring him back to the element you are currently interested in. But in either case, you know where you are.

- The Core Dump gives you a first opportunity to note any aspects of their experience that seem significant to you. Later, when you get into the more explicit modeling elicitation, these noted "pieces" of experience might prove to beÑor at least point toÑimportant patterns in the exemplar's experience when manifesting the ability.

- The Core Dump provides an opportunity to discover how the exemplar organizes his ability in terms of sub-abilities. We call this organization of sub-abilities the "flow of the outcomes."

- The Core Dump can be a great relief for the exemplar. Wanting to be helpful, almost certainly he has been fretting prior to the modeling session about what exactly it is that he does, will have thought it through as best he can, and will be primed to tell it all to you. (It is much like when you go to the doctor with a complaint; you rehearse how you will describe what has been going on with you, and you are ready to deliver that speech. You know how very unsettling it can be if you do not get to make that speech to the doctor.) The core dump, then, allows the exemplar to make good on their rehearsed intention to be as helpful as possible.

The Flow of Outcomes

Virtually all abilities can be chunked down into sub-abilities. You will hear them marked out for you by your exemplar during the core dump. These distinct steps (sub-abilities) are typically indicated by such phrases as "First I...," "then I...," "after that it becomes necessary to...," "I also have to...," "An important step is to...," and "Finally, I..." These kinds of linguistic markers indicate that these elements of their ability are, for this exemplar, distinct from one another. How the exemplar sequences this set of sub-abilities when manifesting the ability is called the "flow of outcomes."

For instance, a teacher who is being modeled for his ability to teach high school algebra may offer something like (abbreviated here) "I work on my lesson plan the night before, checking that it will fit with where the students are in their studies. Then I consider if I can come up with any new ideas for presenting that material. If so, I work that out ahead of time. When it comes to the class itself, first I review where we have been, then I give them a preview of the day's lesson, then I get into it. Usually, as I present the material, I will stop to check with them on their understanding, etc..." This exemplar is marking out as separate steps:

- Checking the fit of the lesson plan.

- Considering new ways of presenting the material.

- Working out new presentations.

- Reviewing for the class.

- Previewing the lesson.

- Presenting the lesson.

- Checking on class comprehension.

Any one, some, or all of these could be modeled as separate abilities. Or they could be subsumed into more general and inclusive abilities, such as "Preparing algebra lessons" (encompassing "Checking the fit of the lesson plan," "Considering new ways of presenting the material," and so on) and "Presenting algebra lessons" (encompassing "Reviewing for the class," "Previewing the lesson," and so on). Or the ability could be modeled at the "highest" level, namely, "Teaching high school algebra." (In each of these "higher," more inclusive abilities, aspects of each of their sub-abilities will somehow be captured in the model: aspects - not the whole sub-ability.) The chunk size at which you decide to do your modeling depends on what will work for you (or for those for whom you are creating the model). If modeling at the largest chunk size will allow you to manifest the ability - that is, makes it possible for you to do what you want to do - then that is what you need. However, if one of those sub-abilities is necessary for manifesting the larger ability AND you do not already have that sub-ability in your own repertoire, then you need to model it. (Keep in mind, as we said earlier, "Discovering that the ability you want to model is made up of some important sub-abilities does not mean that you must then chose either to model all of those sub-abilities or ignore them and instead model the ability as a 'whole.' In looking at those sub-abilities, you may decide that there is one or a few that you really want; the others are either not of interest to you or are ones you already have in some measure.")

It is also worth noting that you may discover that your exemplar puts most of his attention on one particular sub-ability. For instance, during the core dump, does the algebra teacher go into rich and animated description about the preparation of lessons, while his coverage of the teaching itself is perfunctory? In that case, what is probably most worth modeling in this exemplar is his ability to prepare lessons. If instead he cursorily mentions preparation, but works up a sweat talking about the classroom presentation, then classroom presentation will be the richer vein to mine with this exemplar. ( More can be found about the significance of, and working with, the flow of outcomes in The Emprint Method, by Cameron-Bandler, Gordon and Lebeau. In that book, sub-abilities are discussed under the name of "sub-activities," but the concepts are exactly the same.)

The Flood of Description

Shortly after you utter the words, "In a moment I will be asking you some very specific questions, but first I would like to have you describe to me in general how you do what you do," the flood of information will begin. At first it may seem to be aswirl with currents you cannot negotiate and worrying depths. But as you understand more and more about the world of your exemplar, you will also find an increasing ability to swim in the same waters. You will start to hear the patterns that resolve a rain of words into a single drop that is simply being replicated a hundred times, but in slightly different forms each time. In other words, this person will start to make sense to you.

Of course, you will miss a great deal at first. There is no need to be concerned about that. Anything that is, in fact, characteristic of your exemplar - truly a pattern of his experience when manifesting his ability - will always be there. So you will pick it up in the second example he gives you. Or the third, or the eighth. If it was there once and it is a pattern, it will be there again, in some form or another. All that matters is that eventually you get there, that you come to understand and make sense.

We suggest that you tape your elicitation sessions. This can be useful in case a pearl tumbles from the lips of your exemplar that you want to catch, either during the elicitation or later, when you are evaluating what you have discovered. You may also use the tape to resolve something that you thought you understood during the elicitation, but now need to review. And finally, and most importantly, it will allow you to relax during the elicitation, knowing that if you miss something, it is not "gone forever."

EXPLORING SPECIFIC EXAMPLES

As a result of the core dump, you will have some sense (and probably some particulars, as well) of what is going on in your exemplar's experience and behavior when manifesting the ability. You will also know at what level you want to chunk and approach modeling his ability. Now you can ask your exemplar for actual examples of manifesting his ability, and from those begin gathering the information you need. If possible, create an actual, ongoing example of your exemplar manifesting his ability. For instance, if we want to model the algebra teacher's ability to "Present a lesson to the class," we can ask him to present a lesson to us. As he goes through the process, we can find out what he is doing in his internal experience. In addition to giving you the opportunity to observe your exemplar, he will have the clarity and immediacy of his ongoing (or at least very fresh) experience from which to answer your questions.

It is often not possible or convenient to create an actual, ongoing example from which to gather information from your exemplar. In that case, ask him to think of a recent and actual example of manifesting his ability. (For instance, we would have the algebra teacher find a recent example of presenting a lesson to his class.) You can then take him through the process he went through in that example, using your questions to direct his attention to the particular information you are interested in (just as you do when eliciting from an actual, ongoing experience).

When gathering information from a recalled example, you can help your exemplar have easier and more accurate access to his experience by orienting him into the "present" of that past event. That is, have your exemplar step back into being "there." And you can help him do this by interacting with him as though he is there. That is, makes sure that the things you say to him - in particular, the questions you ask - are in the present tense. So, instead of asking, "What were you feeling as you stood in front of the class?" you would ask, "What are you feeling as you stand in front of the class?" You will soon discover that your exemplar is answering in the present tense as well, that he "is there." (Your exemplar lapsing back into past tense is simply an indication to you of the need to orient him once again to being in the present of the example.)

Of course, drawing examples from recalled experiences does have some possible pitfalls that must be kept in mind. First, memories can fade, sapping the exemplar's recalled experience of some of its richness. Second, memories can warp, so that the exemplar (unintentionally) interprets or alters his experience, instead of simply reporting it "as it was." These are important concerns, of course, but this same warping of reported experience can happen even when your exemplar is reporting from an actual, ongoing experience. For this reason, do not simply rely on what your exemplar says is his experience. Instead, the best way to ensure the fidelity of the information you are gathering is by testing the information in your own experience. If it does not make sense in your own experience, then it is something to explore further with your exemplar to sort out whether they have reported their experience inaccurately, or you need more help in understanding it so that it can make sense to you. (We speak much more about this approach of using your own experience as an experiential sounding board in Going Deeper: Stepping In.)

The General Process of Forming the Model

There comes a point when you have gathered enough information to begin forming a model of the ability. That point is not when you have gathered all the information; there is never an "all." Nor is it when you have finished with your exemplar or exemplars. Remember that the purpose of modeling is for you to be able to take on the exemplar's ability. Ideally, then, as you are gathering information you are also testing in your own experience what you are discovering from your exemplar. The point when you begin forming the model, then, is the point at which what you are learning from your exemplar starts working for you. In a sense, you are testing out and building the model in yourself as you continue to gather information from your exemplar.

COMPARE AND CONTRAST

Now, you do not want to be trying on and testing everything your exemplar describes in his experience, most of which will be irrelevant content. Instead, you want to put your attention on the structure of his experience. That is, you want to search for what are the essential patterns for manifesting the ability, regardless of the content details of a particular situation. To do this, compare and contrast at least three actual (ongoing or recalled) examples of your exemplar manifesting the ability. As you compare the examples, ask yourself: What is the same across all of them? Any aspect of the exemplar's ability that is truly essentialÑthat is structureÑwill be found in all examples of the exemplar manifesting his ability.

Person-Specific Models - If you want to do something the way a particular exemplar does it, you need only contrast examples from that one exemplar.

Ability-Specific Models - Instead, you may want a generic model, a model that leaves out individual idiosyncrasies and preserves only the structure common to anyone who manifests the ability. In that case, you need to compare and contrast at least three exemplars. This comparison will make obvious the idiosyncrasies of each exemplar. These idiosyncratic patterns can be set aside, leaving only those patterns that are operating in the ability regardless of who has it.

REFINE

As we mentioned, when you are gathering information you will, at the same time, be identifying what works in your own experience. So by the time you are done with elicitation, you will probably have much of the model defined. However, now that you are no longer busy with your exemplar(s) and the spaghetti of elicitation, you are free to "be alone" with what you have discovered and its affect on your experience. Now you can turn your attention to just what, in all that you learned from your exemplar, is essential in being able to reproduce his ability in yourself (or someone else).

Of course, the way you discover what is essential to manifesting the ability is by taking on the structure yourself. Look for those elements of the structure that are effective in taking your experience and behavior toward manifesting the ability. The simpler the model, the easier it will be for you and others to acquire.

TEST

The first test of your model comes as you rehearse it in imagination. Take on the structures of experience described in the model and imagine being in situations in which you want to manifest the ability. This is not only part of the process of acquisition, but is also a way to test the model itself. Does it generate the ability? Perhaps there are some elements missing, or that need to be understood in a different way, or are not needed. This is an opportunity to experiment with the model in the safety of your imagination.

Then comes the real world and the real test of the model. The focus of these initial sorties into actual situations is to discover what still needs to be refined in the model (or in how you are using it).

* * *

In general, that is how it is done.

Like a quick tour of a house to get an idea of where to find the kitchen, the bathroom, the den, now you have an idea of how modeling is laid out. Of course, we are about to return to each of those rooms and take our time to explore them for the details they contain. And, we admit, there will be plenty of them: details of how to think about experience and modeling, details of what to elicit, details of how to gather information, details of how to find essential patterns, details of how to take on those essential patterns... This is a big house. But take heart. We are not going to explore the dust balls lurking in the corners of these rooms. We will concern ourselves with only those furnishings that make each of those rooms what it is; that is, we will cover only those details that give substance - indeed, life - to the outline of modeling presented in this essay, details that transform notions about "what to do" into doing.

Previous Essay      Next Essay