I am a grad student of anthropology at CSUN looking to interview people who have gone through (or are about to go through) the Landmark Forum. I am studying the self-improvement process as a cultural experience and reflection of individualism in American society. This is an independent study, not affiliated with LEC or any other organization.
Please email me if interested and I will send you more info.
A couple of your premises are faulty, or at least incongruent with "official" Landmark doctrine, in my opinion.
Firstly, they would balk at the "self-improvement" connotation, as they market themselves as an "awareness" or "transformational" "training," which supposedly means not so much "improving" yourself as changing, enlarging, or stepping above your attitude about whatever it is you imagine needs "improvement." (Many words don't carry conventional meanings within the Landmark programs, so all bets are off concerning what some of these words mean to Landmarkers. They'll explain to you, at great boring legnth, but you'll have to devote plenty of time to this endeavor.)
Secondly, you suggest that these programs have anything to do with a "reflection of individualism." They are referred to as "mass trainings" and graduates emerge distressingly similar in attitude and demeanor. Despite their PR, the people who go through these types of programs are generally pretty easily recognized by their copy-cat uses of language and ideas, unsettling personality changes, and devotional alignment with a commercially designed "philosophy." Quite the opposite, a good portion of Landmark "graduates" turn into cookie-cutter robots.
Students of the particular phenomena that include this type of "training" or "programming" trace the roots back to the "mind-cure" movements of the 19th Century. For some reason, Americans in particular, have been quite eager to embrace the most appalling and irrational fads, weird religious movements, and "occult" practices. Landmark, and groups like Landmark, fall into this category.
Also, consider this: were you to desire information about some other cultic group, would your most likely source of information be a cult member, a bystander who had watched the activities of cult-members over a period of time, or an "ex" or disaffected former member? I think the least likely source of credible information would be the current and participating cult member. Think about it.