Punishments vs. Consequences: Is there a difference?

Last week, I trained a group of about 30 people who are employed by a medium-sized business in the skills of Compassionate Communication.

One of the participants asked a question while I was sharing various forms of conflict-inducing communication, namely making demands and threatening to punish people if they don't do what we want:



"How do you apply NVC in a workplace situation when you are the boss and you need to get certain tasks accomplished?"

The distinction I drew was between punishment and consequences, although I admit I didn't answer the question with as much clarity as I would have liked.

Here is the way I see it:

PUNISHMENT: If I want to get someone to do something, I threaten to punish them if they don't, either explicitly or implicitly. For example, if they don't do what I ask then I will blame them, lay a guilt trip on them, label them (irresponsible, inconsiderate, insubordinate, etc.) or use some other such alienating response in an attempt to induce them to do it. The focus is on getting the person to obey me.

CONSEQUENCES: I make it clear to a person the need behind my request, and tell them that if they act in a certain way (or fail to act in a certain way), then I will respond in a certain way. I do this without any idea in my mind that they are bad, wrong, inappropriate or otherwise if they don't do it.

I reveal to the person why this is important to me (i.e the needs that are motivating me), and even engage their creativity to show me some other way I could get my needs met, that would be even better for them at the same time.

The focus, rather than being on getting the person to obey me, is on getting my underlying need(s) met.

--

To me, the key differences are:

1) My Objective: With punishment, it's to intimidate the person into doing what I want, and if they don't, make them suffer for their actions; with consequences, it is to get my needs met.

2) My Strategies: The threat of punishment is one strategy, whereas an alternate strategy that can go along with consequences is to invite the person to tell me if they have any ideas of how I could get me needs met in the situation.

--

I welcome clarification and conversation about this point. I believe I could be a little bit clearer inside myself and a great deal clearer about how to express it. Any ideas?

When Empathy might not be the most Life-Serving Response

Frequently when I am teaching people empathy skills and practice, I get a question that sounds something like this:

"How could you just stand there and talk with the person endlessly if they ______," and then the person fills in the blank with any number of scenarios.



This illuminates how empathy -- whether done silently or out loud -- is actually NOT the preferred response in certain situations. So, as valuable and life-giving as empathy can be, I invite you to consider ditching empathy in the following situations and trying the alternative:

-----


SITUATION: You notice resentment or irritation when you imagine offering your empathic presence to another.

ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE: Remind yourself that the only way that empathy connects is when the listener is acting out of the joy of giving, and is meeting his or her own needs by offering the empathic presence. In other words, empathy is not a commodity that we “dole out,” but rather a compassionate embrace of the other that enriches our life.


SITUATION: You are too upset or triggered in that moment to genuinely offer your empathic presence.

ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE: Take a time out. Take a deep breath. Shine the light of empathy on yourself (“self-empathy”). Connect with your own feelings, needs and requests, and/or ask another person (not the person who triggered you) you trust to listen to you with empathy.


SITUATION: When you want to share your own truth with the person.

ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE: Express yourself honestly to them. This sometimes involves “Screaming Compassionately,” as in, “I am overwhelmed and needing to take care of myself, and I am not able to hear you right now! Can we talk again after dinner?”


SITUATION: The other person has a need that is more alive than empathy, such as information, clarity or honesty.

ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE: Tune in to the person’s present-moment need(s), and respond accordingly… rather than defaulting to or assuming that empathy is always the primary need. It can be extremely irritating to receive empathy – particularly the verbal reflection of feelings and needs – when another need is alive.


SITUATION: You fear for your physical safety or security.

ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE: Get out of there immediately and go to a safe place.


SITUATION: A person is behaving in a physically violent manner, and you believe there is imminent danger to yourself, others, or to the person him or herself.

ALTERNATIVE RESPONSE: Protective use of Force. In an emergency situation, if
you are able to, use force to stop the person from causing harm. Once the person is restrained and safety is restored, be prepared to empathically connect with the person.