The experience of "congruence" (the exit point in the TOTE) and of "incongruence" (the operate point in the TOTE) as the result of a test will also be represented through one of the representational systems. When the carpenter tests the nail, for example, and notices that it is not flush, the incongruence between the incoming experience of the nail and the stored representation of what the nail should be like (that causes the carpenter to operate) may be represented through an image, sound or feeling. He may get a certain feeling in the stomach area that initiates the "hammering" subroutine. He may actually hear a voice in his head that says, "No, needs more hammering," or he might see an internal image of his hammer hitting the nail again.[9]

Notice that a test need not take place only between externally and internally generated representations. A test may also take place between two internally stored or generated representations. The two compared representations, however, will often remain in the same representational system. A visual representation will most accurately be tested against another visual representation; auditory with auditory; and kinesthetic with kinesthetic. (It can be postulated that the simultaneous pairing of two different representations within the same representational system is one of the functions of the two cerebral hemispheres in human beings.[10])

Not all tests, however, involve the comparison or matching of two representations; some may be tests of the intensity of particular representations. That is, some feeling, sound or image may be required to reach a certain threshold value (due to the operation procedure) before the TOTE will exit. In this kind of comparison a representation from one system is often "tested" against a representation from a different system — for example, when something looks good but just doesn't feel right. This kind of test often takes place in decision and motivation strategies. Depending upon the nature of the behavior involved, the "incongruence" resulting from this kind of test is often experienced as stress or internal conflict. The conflict is resolved when one of the representations becomes strong enough that it assumes prime control by initiating the next step in the chain of response, or when the individual, through his or her operations, changes, balances or compromises the representations so that they become congruent with one another.

Other examples of this multi–representational testing would be instances where a particular behavior feels good but something tells you that you shouldn't be doing it; or when an option sounds like a good idea but you can see there may be negative consequences. Operations for assisting people in dealing with the "incongruence" caused by these sorts of conflicts have been presented in our other works (Patterns II and Structure of Magic II).

2.3 Applying the Representational Analysis of TOTEs.

By making the representational form of test and operate procedures explicit, the NLP model makes the analysis and transfer of any behavior much more accessible and systematic. By identifying the representational type and the function of each step out of a behavioral continuum of steps, NLP describes how to unpack essentially any behavioral sequence so that it may be easily taught, communicated or modified. NLP also provides important and useful insights into such complex behavioral structures as "personality."

The concept of "representational system primacy" (or "most highly valued representational system") was introduced in Structure of Magic II and Patterns I. It asserts that many individuals tend to value and use one representational system over others to perform their tests and operations. A visually oriented person would consistently choose to look at the hammer and nail to test for congruence. A more kinesthetically oriented individual would consistently do it by "feel." This kind of preference is often generalized to many different types of tasks, even to those for which the preferred representational system is inappropriate or inadequate.

TOTE and representational systems analysis are also very useful, as we pointed out earlier, in working with group or organizational dynamics. For example, consider two individuals involved in making a decision. They could be business executives, administrators, a therapist and a client, a husband and wife or any two people involved in a decision–making process. One of the individuals tests the material to be decided upon visually — his criterion involves seeing the results of the decision clearly — perhaps plotted on a graph, perhaps through internally constructed images, etc. The other tests on the basis of how she feels or how she thinks the outcome of the decision would feel to those affected by it.

The process of making the decision on the larger scale will require a comparison of the visual criteria of the one individual and the kinesthetic criteria of the other — images with feelings. The two people involved as a team in the decision–making process then operate through discussion, negotiation, perhaps even fighting or arguing, until any discrepancies in their combined representations are resolved or changed. Depending on the nature of their operation procedures, the different representational processes of the two individuals could either serve as a positive resource to them, and to the system or organization of which they are a part, or as a hindrance or detriment. We began our presentation of effective group operations in Changing With Families (with Virginia Satir), for family systems specifically. Throughout this book we will provide other strategies and operations that we consider to be effective for working with other groups and organizations as well as for families.

2.31 Matching Representational Systems to Task.

As we pointed out earlier, some representational systems are more suited to the test and operation procedures of specific tasks than others, for achieving effective outcomes. The representational systems analysis of TOTEs provides an extremely useful way of sorting effective behavioral strategies for particular tasks. This offers a reliable and powerful means for increasing individual or group effectiveness in any occupation or endeavor.

Let's start out with a simple example from elementary education, of two different spelling strategies: the visual approach and the phonetic strategy. We have observed that a "visual" speller, when presented with a word (an external auditory stimulus — A^e), will go through a synesthetic operation in which s/he constructs a visual image of the letters of the word from the sound. This constructed visual image (Vⁱ_c — the "c" stands for "constructed") is then tested against a remembered visual image of the word written out somewhere that the individual has seen it before (a remembered visual image is notated Vⁱ_r). The congruence or incongruence of the two images is represented as internal kinesthetic feelings (Kⁱ). If the constructed image does not "look right" the speller gets a negative feeling and operates to construct another image. If the two images are congruent the student gets a positive feeling and exits to a TOTE in which the image is vocalized.

The operate phase of this particular TOTE will probably consist of some synesthetic sequence in which the speller repeats the word to be spelled, or some problematic syllable, internally or aloud, and another image is constructed. This loop continues until an image is generated which, when tested (Vⁱ_c /Vⁱ_r), initiates a positive feeling (Kⁱ₊).