Landmark Education

[mcb]

I did the Landmark Forum just over a year ago and still feel very ambivalent about it.
On the up side, I'd say that the people who "got it" (and what they "got" I'm not exactly sure)

Ha... Its so funny you mention the words "got it"... <snip>

There is quite a bit of material about LGATs at _http://pagesperso-orange.fr/eldon.braun/awareness/. I came across the site perhaps 8-10 years ago while searching for information about the group I had belonged to in the 80's.

One article, located at _http://pagesperso-orange.fr/eldon.braun/awareness/pathology.htm and published in Psychiatry, Vol 46, August 1983, by Janice Haaken and Richard Adams, talks about what people "got" during Lifespring. While not the same program as Landmark, there are many common elements in all LGATs, which is a main point of the above website. The article begins

This paper presents an overview of a Lifespring Basic Training workshop from a psychoanalytic perspective. Basing our conclusions on a participant-observation study, we argue that the impact of the training was essentially pathological. First, in the early period of the training, ego functions were systematically undermined and regression was promoted. Second, the ideational or interpretive framework of the training was based upon regressive modes of reasoning Third, the structure and content of the training tended to stimulate early narcissistic conflicts, and defenses, which accounted for the elation and sense of heightened well-being achieved by many participants.

Stimulate narcissistic conflicts? Hmmm.

At the end they discuss how their role as observers and researchers prevented them from "getting" the training, and then they go on to say

However, as parficipant-observers, we did share some of the group's subjective experiences, particularly the extraordinary pressure to conform. In this instance, the context of participant-observation, which as Rabinow (1977) says is dictated by "observation and externality," provided us with the opportunity to note the lengths to which the trainer was willing to go in attempting to achieve the required submission and commitment which we have described In this paper. Thus participant-observation, although a research strategy not suited to fully integrating the researcher into the Lifespring Basic Training, did prove to be invaluable for developing insight into the processes of that training.

This is one of the things I remember most about the workshops (not Lifespring or Landmark) that I did--the emphasis upon submission. During the workshops I experienced a great deal of anxiety, which I see now as coming at least partly from being in a situation that in some ways resembled the extremely coercive, narcissistic family in which I grew up. Coming back later and assisting while other people did them, however, offered me a safer place from which to observe the process and, even though I didn't understand much of what was happening, enabled me to make significant adjustments. And that is another thing I remember now--my positive results seemed to come more from assisting workshops than from participating in them.

Finally,

We have not addressed the normative implications of the training nor the extent to which participants are prepared by our culture to respond positively to Lifespring. The ideational content of the training would he less persuasive, perhaps, if beliefs concerning the autonomy and power of the individual were not deeply embedded in the prevailing ideology of American society. Growth organizations seem to be capitalizing upon the erosion of traditional means of supporting these beliefs and of anchoring individual identity. A deeper understanding of this phenomenon would require an analysis of the sociohistorical context out of which it emerged and from which it has gained its legitimacy.

I am not sure I fully understand everything this final paragraph is saying, but it is scary anyway. Is it saying that LGATs seek to gain from eroding traditional beliefs in autonomy and power of the individual, and undoing one's anchoring of "individual identity?" No wonder the web page is named pathology.htm.

In several articles at the same website are descriptions of what I would call the "emotional roller coaster" (alluded to in the first article quote above) that underlies these programs, and gives people their final "boost" that gradually wears off and brings them back for more. One example can be found at _http://pagesperso-orange.fr/eldon.braun/awareness/pressmn1.htm, by Stephen Pressman.

...Around the room there were a few more nervous coughs and plenty of quizzical expressions. So they were machines, supposedly without emotions, without feelings, without the ability to understand. And for this they had paid a few hundred dollars while sitting in uncomfortable hotel chairs for dozens of hours. Just then, only moments after the trainer had plunged everyone into the depths of a depressing gray funk, he offered them a final redeeming ray of hope.

In a rising voice that signaled the training's climactic moment, the trainer exhorted everyone to accept the true nature of their own minds. Assume responsibility for creating everything in their lives, for being precisely who they were. And in doing so, the trainer summed up, each new est graduate now became what he or she always wanted to be. In a word, they were perfect. They were perfect just the way they were...

Oddly enough, I came across a somewhat similar description of how certain PC action/adventure games called "crying games" are designed to work, at _http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Key_(company)#impact ...

...the developers at Tactics created a simple formula for a game: a comedic first half with a heart-warming romantic middle followed by a tragic separation and finally an emotional reunion formed what is known as a "crying game". The main purpose of such a game is to make the player feel for the characters and make them cry due to emotional scenarios which serves to leave a bigger impact on the player after the game is over...

This is remarkably similar to what happens during an LGAT, but the games are much cheaper to play than LGATs. In both cases, the purpose of the emotional manipulation would seem to be to "bring them back for more" as the good feeling at the end wears off.

It is very interesting and helpful to come back and read this material after reading Trapped in the Mirror and beginning to connect the terms used with what I experienced growing up.

It is also very interesting how two different people can take away very different things from the same event or similar events, as I mentioned before. (Martha Stout describes this possibility in some detail in The Myth of Sanity.) For me, the narcissistic pressures to conform during these workshops were much milder and less threatening than what I had experienced growing up, and I found that I could explore my feelings and try new approaches, quite apart from anything that the workshops were "supposed" to do. I wonder then, if people who grew up in abusive and exploitive families might not have more potential to benefit from from LGAT experiences (if they don't come completely unhinged--which apparently does happen sometimes), and if there is a greater risk of people from more nurturing families losing ground instead?

Some of the worst LGAT experiences I had came from the "guest evening leadership trainings" in which I participated. I bombed. I never got it. The heart of those trainings consisted of getting on the phone and trying to convince people to do workshops that they didn't want to do, and working with coaches to do a better job of it. Something in me simply said "no way," and we found other things for me to do instead (recalling even more childhood experiences, now that I think of it). I wasn't going to mess with people that way, on the phone or in person, as if it didn't matter. By the time I had had enough of that, at least no one could sell me anything that I didn't want to be sold. I failed the "leadership" (narcissist?) training, but I think I got what I was there to get. I left the organization with the feeling, though, that "there has to be an easier way than this."

There may not actually be an "easier" way, but there certainly are other ways to learn, without all that craziness. I don't steer anyone toward this kind of group today. But for some people, I guess they can make a positive difference.

[Edited to add "crying game" information and est seminar example.]

 

[mcb]

Oh one other interesting thing that I noted in the intro speech, Landmark claims to have worked with many FORTUNE 500 companies, and the US MILITARY... I nearly spit out my free cup of instant coffee when I heard this

I suspect Donny Rumsfeld may have taken the Landmark Fourm, as they illustrated his famous "known knowns, known unknowns and unknown unknowns" concept.

I had the opportunity to see something of the process used to train new "trainers" in the LGAT organization I left 23 years ago. They offered their services to psychopathic corporations. I can't remember if they had military customers--maybe.

There were two stages of leadership training, "guest evening leadership training" (GELT--later renamed to something more obscure that I can't remember), and "Trainer's Training." I participated in the former, but only had glimpses of the latter. "Guest Evenings" were held the Wednesday after a weekend workshop completed. This was the "bring your friends and family" event. They wanted workshop participants to invite people they knew, while they themselves were still high from the workshop.

As I mentioned earlier, the main focus of the guest evening training was upon telephoning people--cold calls or people we knew, the latter being preferred--and signing them up. (I found after a few times that I simply couldn't/wouldn't mess with people this way, and I don't remember now what I did instead during these sessions.) One could also bring guests to the trainings, and the staff would deal with them individually. We had an "agenda" of one new member per week, which was tracked. People with lots of new members were rewarded in various ways, including being invited to the Trainer's Training. There wasn't any real penalty for not meeting one's "agenda," and I very rarely did, but there was no reward either. We were paying for this training, so I guess not meeting the agenda could be thought of as "wasting one's money." What a setup.

The key word was "registration." While I was never present for a Trainer's Training, we understood that it was all about "registration." On the surface that meant signing people up for workshops, but it was said to be about other things as well. "Persuason." Having an idea and persuading others to join you in pursuing it. i.e. "Business." Making one thing fit with another.

Words they didn't use to describe it might include narcissism, sociopathy, psychopathy. Choosing people at random or targeting those close to you and attempting to enlist them in your cause--which was actually the organization's cause, not ours. Not worrying about what effect it might have on them--letting them take responsibility for what happens to them.

I have to ask myself why I didn't remove myself from there sooner. I see now that I was trapped in a "vampire" relationship, as described in Unholy Hungers. I am not sure yet which model this relationship followed (I am still reading the book), but people do become trapped this way. Maybe the whole thing should have been called Vampire Training. The organization eventually collapsed because of a mutual feeding frenzy among the top "Trainers."

I also, while talking with one particular person that did not join, had an experience of talking, listening, and mirroring that was new to me. It was very different from my acquired narcissism, and I wanted to be more like that all the time. That desire may have held me there briefly, thinking that I this was something I was learning from the group (it wasn't), but I left soon afterward when the consequences of trying to sign people up finally caught up with me, something that did not seem to happen to "successful" (i.e. conscience free) people.

 

[anya_agarwal]

My best friend was Stalked and Sexually harassed by a landmark education program leader.

All landmark program leaders are man whores, creeps!! Landmark is full of predators. All landmark leaders are dying to sleep with all the young girls there.

Landmark Education claims are all Bullshit on providing an environment free from sexual or other forms of harassment. Please i beg all the GIRLS/WOMEN reading this to STAY AWAY from landmark forum.

I blame myself every day for registering my best friend into the landmark forum "I gave the landmark forum to her as her birthday gift"
She was so impressed with the landmark education work that she went on to do the Introductions leaders program and her lifes purpose became to become a leader in landmark education.

The Worst happened to her she was stalked by a program leader, a married man!!She struggled to function for 3/4 months,she could not talk to him to stop, she finally complained to the Introductions leader program head.
She quit landmark and now she thinks of herself as incapable of dealing with situations in life. She is so beautiful and vibrant has become dull and silent.

I want to ruin Landmark!!

My best friend is from wealthy, well known family. She was so social, famous in the party circuit.

When her dream of becoming a leader was shattered by this so called "program leader of landmark " = BASTARD he never allowed her to breathe, he harassed her, he chased her all the time, use to stare at her within 4 feet distance. So much disturbance. How should she go ahead with her dream???
Isn't a leader suppose to encourage and help others grow or want to screw up with their lives. Just want to have sex with them.
She has stopped working, doesnt talk or meet anyone, is on medication. We took her to a psychologist.

She still wants to be a landmark leader, we all are fed of this dream of hers! She doesnt want to give up, we all dont allow her to go to landmark, she still wants to go back and fight it, because she thinks why should she be deprived of her dream.

i want an avenue , someone please help me.. i want to take this piece of information in the newspapers without giving away names.
Please help me!! I have proof.. lot of friends of hers in landmark are ready to talk about it.
We all friends wanted to go to the local newspaper here but my friend and her family refused.

I have started to discourage girls from joining landmark forum.
I pray that landmark education shuts down

i want this information to go all over the world, mainly ASIA. i am ready to pay any amount. I need help.

I want to put this on TV / newspapers etc..

My friends life has been destroyed, am not leaving landmark education at all. Otherwise this will continue with other girls. i want to take action and destroy landmark.

And landmark thinks they teach an education in living - bloody assholes. They ruin lives, families.

If anyone reading this, is concerned and humane about saving girls from these man whores landmark forum leaders please help me. Please help me.

 

[shijing]

Hi anya_agarwal,

I'm sorry to hear about your friend's experience -- it seems that a lot of people have had bad experiences with Landmark over the years, and that it can be very damaging :(

In the meantime, welcome to the forum -- if you haven't seen them already, you may want to take a look at the forum guidelines to see if you'd like to stay and participate regularly; if you do, you can make an intro post on the Newbies board telling us a bit more about yourself :)