What is the difference between Metaphors of Movement and Clean Language?
Metaphors of Movement, developed by Andrew T. Austin, and Clean Language, originated by David Grove and further developed by James Lawley and Penny Tompkins, are two approaches that work with metaphor in therapy, coaching and communication. Each model has its own philosophy and methodology. Below is a comparison highlighting their key differences.
1. Theoretical Foundations
Metaphors of Movement (MoM): Developed by Andrew T. Austin, this approach is built upon the understanding that the metaphors people use in their language can reflect their internal and often unconscious emotional landscapes. Austin’s work is influenced by cognitive linguistics and neuro-linguistic programming, focusing on how metaphorical language structures can keep people within particular behavioural and emotional patterns.
Clean Language (CL): Originated by David Grove and further developed by James Lawley and Penny Tompkins, Clean Language is a therapeutic technique that emphasises the client’s metaphors without introducing content or bias from the therapist. It is grounded in the view that these personal metaphors are closely aligned with the individual’s mental and physical experiences.
2. Methodology
MoM: This method involves identifying and exploring the client’s metaphorical descriptions of problems or challenges. For instance, if someone says they are “stuck”, Austin would explore this metaphor literally to uncover its emotional, behavioural and relational dynamics. The approach may also involve physical movement or enactment as part of the process.
CL: Clean Language uses a set of specific, open-ended questions to help clients explore their metaphors in depth. These questions minimise the therapist’s influence on the client’s responses. For example, if a client describes a problem as being “like a wall”, a Clean Language therapist might ask, “What kind of wall is that wall?” or “Is there anything else about that wall?”
3. Goals and Outcomes
MoM: The goal is to examine the logic and structure of the client’s autogenic metaphors and make the consequences of those patterns more apparent. This can support new choices, shifts in perspective and possible strategies for action.
CL: The aim is to develop a rich picture of the client’s metaphor landscape, enabling them to discover insights and solutions within their own words and symbolic representations. The process supports the client in becoming more aware of their thought patterns and behaviours, potentially leading to self-initiated change.
4. Applications
MoM: In addition to its therapeutic applications, Metaphors of Movement is used in coaching, conflict resolution and organisational change, where understanding and shifting responses to metaphors can influence attitude and approach.
CL: While primarily used in therapy, Clean Language also applies to coaching, management and education, helping individuals and groups clarify their thoughts and intentions, improve communication and enhance mutual understanding.
5. Interaction Style
MoM: MoM is often dynamic, utilises content-imposition and is sometimes challenging. It may invite clients to confront and physically enact aspects of their metaphors, making previously implicit patterns more apparent.
CL: Clean Language is generally more reflective and gentle, allowing the client to lead the exploration of their thoughts and metaphors at their own pace.
Metaphors of Movement and Clean Language offer distinct frameworks for understanding and working with the metaphorical language that shapes human thought, emotion and behaviour. Each has particular strengths and may be more or less suitable depending on the context and the client’s needs.
