GET THE GENIUS TO BE MODELED!

It’s easy to say: model the best. But if tomorrow I call Jay Abraham how do I get him to let me be around him for 9months to model what he does?
or Peter guber?

HOW DID TONY GET THESE PEOPLE TO BE MODELED?
ps.
I tried to contact some geniuses but there are so many gatekeepers and stuff like that that unless I am already “someone”.

The steps to follow are the exact same as with a live exemplar. Simply follow the steps and you’ll maximize results. Obviously, having a live person gives you many more reference points. However, your approach as a modeler will remain the same.

I ve a question for you!
What advices would you give to someone that is modeling from videotapes?
I read that Bandler and Pucelik did it with Perls.

How can a modeler maximize the results of a modeling project done using videotapes?
How can a modeler get the most beautiful results from videos?
(of course, giving that, the videos portray the model acting in parallel contexts to the ones where the modeler is going to work)

Looking forward your answer!!!!!
Fabio

Tony modeled several performers in several different fields. Jim Rohn, Peter Guber, Grandmaster Jhoon Rhee, Jay Abraham, a top financial trader he mentions a lot. The list is endless.

Tony describes modeling as his key approach to achieving results in any area of life, so it’s a tool he leverages constantly to absorb new patterning.

Even if on the web everyone says that Robbins is a modeler…
anyways I couldn’t find anywhere (yet) WHO specifically he modeled!

I checked on the web for days and the most I found was my same question on an Nlp forum… with no answers
Do you know WHO HE ACTUALLY MODELED?

Also…
I know this might sound a bit “rash” but
(making it very easy) is it “true” to say that Tony Robbins
modeled excellent people in a field he likes (motivation, nlp, I don’t know what else anyways all stuff that produce ultra positive changes in people and their lifes)
and then he modeled the best marketers in order to “sell with excellence his excellence?”

so

1- Choose field X
2- (through modeling) Excellence in field X
3- (through modeling) Excellence in selling your products (books, seminars..) about X

THIS FORMULA LOOKS VERY EASY,
so easy that my first thought is that it’s probably too easy to be true (limiting belief )

What do you think?

Fabio
ps. I m writing from London. Where are you?

Good questions. Technically, if all you care about is replicating those results for yourself, you could be done at step 4.

There are, however, a few advantages to moving on to step 5 and 6.

1. You’ll be able to teach others how to get the results in much less time. You may not need this right now, but it might come in handy at some point.

2. It will help you clean up the model even more. While you will do some of that in step 4, having the model explicitly in front of you will help you detect additional patterns that can be streamlined.

3. You may be able to derive and design other models from this one and enhance its applications. For example, once you code a motivational language pattern for sports explicitly, you can start playing with it to apply it covertly to different contexts.

With that said, it’s really a matter of personal choice for the modeler. You can choose to go all the way in your modeling process or stay at step 4. Some modelers may find it valuable to train themselves in all the modeling skills, while others may feel content just having the result.

It’s up to you.

I ve read that in NLP modeling after you reach the same results of your model (step3), you clean the patterns getting rid of the useless things. (step4).
Then you build a model (step 5) and you transfer it (step6).

Given that my goal is to get the same results of my model (or possibly even more consistent!)
WHY should I do step 5 and 6?

I can get his same results at step 4.
UNLESS step 5 and 6 give to me an edge that make me even better than my model.

Is it like that?

Thank You VERY MUCH!

Fabio

Now I understand why I didn’t get the results I wanted even putting all my blood into it,
I was going in the wrong direction..

I m so excited about NLP modeling, I m really committed into it now!

I know what I want very well and I know the people able to get consistently the results I was struggling for from years.
I straight away contacted a couple of them, but they refused to be modeled…

So I read in “Whispering in the wind” that Grinder did some covert hypnosis to Ericksson to get him convinced to see them straight away, (I think that Ericksson just recognized that these two guys were “brave” to do that, I don’t believe he got hypnotized)

How do I get a model to let himself “being modeled”for a long term project?

I mean,
What’s in there FOR HIM?

You wrote:
“I have been confused about performance goals, outcome goals and while in a first instance I was thinking performance goal is actually the best thing to focus on, because the result comes from the performance (at least I guess so…), but in a modeling project I have the impression that is actually the outcome that counts.
For instance:
Until I don’t get her same number of sales, her same amount of money (that she constantly get) I m not “her” yet…so the phase number2 is not finished yet…”

Yes, what matters is the end result. And you have to define specifically what that end result is at the onset of your modeling project.

You can choose a macro-result like the one you stated above: same number of sales. You can also choose more micro-results from your exemplar’s repertoire: making the prospect say yes to you three times in a row.

In sports, for instance, you could model a player’s complete style of play, or you may want to model just a particular dribbling pattern that makes him or her effective.

Your end result might be: “play the game like such player”.
Or it could be: “get past a defender using such pattern”.

As you correctly pointed out, phase 2 isn’t over until you can consistently demonstrate that result without actually knowing how you pull it off.

My last question is:
when you say “Just absorb the patterning until you can replicate results”
you are talking about outcome results..don’t you?

I have been confused about performance goals, outcome goals and while in a first instance I was thinking performance goal is actually the best thing to focus on, because the result comes from the performance (at least I guess so…), but in a modeling project I have the impression that is actually the outcome that counts.
For instance:
Until I don’t get her same number of sales, her same amount of money (that she constantly get) I m not “her” yet…so the phase number2 is not finished yet..

Can you clarify this for me?

Thank you.
All the best

Fabio