From meta at acsol.net Sun Jan 4 14:39:02 2026 From: meta at acsol.net (Michael Hall) Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2026 12:39:02 -0700 Subject: [Neurons] FW: 2026 Neurons #1 THE 5-MINUTE PROBLEM-SOLVING CIONVERSATION Message-ID: <020601dc7db1$c7eec670$57cc5350$@net> From: L. Michael Hall 2026 Neurons #1 January 5, 2026 Problem Solving Expertise #3 THE 5-MINUTE PROBLEM-SOLVING CONVERSATION Here's something audacious to imagine-imagine that you set out to solve a problem in five minutes. Yes, as an absolutely outrageous idea which pushes the limits of what's believable. But for the sake of the argument, what if you could? What if you could, as a NLP practitioner or as a Neuro-Semanticist, you could actually lead a 5-minute conversation that could enable a person to get to the heart of a problem? Would you want to be able to do that? Would that be a new level of competency? If you were to be able to do that, there would be several prerequisites. Facilitating a 5-minute conversation doesn't just happen. There's a specific structure to it. First, a mental model. You would have to have a mental model that would give you insight into what a 'problem' is, what it is not, and how it operates. You would have to have some sort of tool and guideline for us, that is a strategy so that you would know how to anticipate identifying the problem, defining it, and then addressing it. You would need the ability to make distinctions about what is inside and what is outside. Without that, problems you would to confuse external conditions with internal problems. Second, problem-solving skills. Additionally you would have to have developed the skills for how to distinguish a problem's facets, get through the confusions and get to the heart of the matter. You needs particular skills for probing into a person's mind (his meta place) for how a person has created a problem. Now for a confession. Even in presenting the first 5-Minute Manager training in Hong Kong, I was not aware that I actually did not know the structure of a problem. I assumed I did. I assumed that since I knew the steps of a well-defined problem, I knew the structure. What I did not know was that these are not the same but very different processes (Neurons 2025, #52). I came about the discovery of that structure backwards, I first worked through the steps in how to flush out a problem, separate it from the problem's pseudo-versions, and getting to the heart of things. Doing that, I accidently learned to identify the key variables which comprise a problem. I then sketched out those variables on a paper and from there I was able to specify the actual structure of a problem-its anatomy. This description is the basic NLP strategy for modeling. We begin by asking someone who is skilled in doing something, "How do you do that? Show me." Now, if for some strange reason I would want a problem (!), I now know how to create one (Neurons 2025, #53). That's what a structure provides-a description of how an experience works. Obviously, not all problems can be solved in five-minutes. But some can. Doing the information gathering with some people can make the problem-defining extremely complicated. That's because they do not answer your questions. Sometimes they suffer from an intrusion of thoughts which distracts them (and you). At other times, they get too caught up in content or they simply do not feel safe to share. No wonder the information gathering part of the problem-solving can take a long, long time. Key Steps to Problem-Solving First, distinguish and separate the external features from the inner problem. Typically the external features comprise the noise that we have to come through in order to get to the heart of the matter. This is where probably the largest percentage of failures in problem-solving occur- we not only do not clearly define the problem, we confuse 'the problem' with the external conditions in the world and with the symptom's that the problem-bearer experiences. Second, probe the layers of meanings. Once we get through the noise, we arrive at the place where we can begin to probe the meaning layers and to identify the hierarchy of meanings. This is where the meta probe begins. Here you need a laser-beam focus on the meaning which is creating the problem. Here you have to make many new distinctions to find the flawed thinking as you filter through cognitive distortions and all sorts of fallacious ideas. Probing here for the heart of the meaning, you have to learn to stay focused on getting to the problem-creating constructs which is in most instances unconscious to the problem-bearer. Third, use the two sets of questions. For the meta probing, you will need three different sets of questions. First, the Meaning Detection questions by which you can probe the meaning of anything, and everything. With those seven questions, you can quickly flush out the hidden meaning creating the problem. Second, the Problem-Solving questions for the conversation itself. As a scientist, your primary tool is the very tool the person used to create his problem- the tool of words and thinking patterns. With these you can co-create with the person a deeper and deeper understanding of his world of meaning. Voting Time for Neuro-Semantics & Meta-Coaching Rankings for the Top 30 NLP Gurus in December 2025. Click here: https://globalgurus.org/vote/nlp/ "Vote for the Best Development Programs," and enter your program's name and details here: https://globalgurus.org/best-nlp-development-program/ L. Michael Hall, Ph.D. Executive Director, ISNS 738 Beaver Lodge Grand Jct., CO. 81505 USA meta at acsol.net unnamed (3) (2) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 20631 bytes Desc: not available URL: