Recently, my friend Sean from Columbus, Ohio posted this message to an online group that I created for Compassionate Communication of Central Ohio (CCCO).
Sean and I were friends in the 1990s and we were both part of the Student Environmental Action Coalition and involved in environmental activism.
Here is what Sean wrote:
> SEAN: OK, Jeff- I'm joining this group, bringing a communication degree, 20 years of non profit work, and a nagging skepticism born of frustrations with dysfunctional communication patterns in the non profit community. In my experience, communication processes in leftist/consensus communities are inefficient and too easily manipulated by minority interests in group settings- and they USUALLY only work when when everyone is on the same page, which is rare. Convince me that there's a different way.
And my response:
JEFF: Sean, I hear what sounds like a lot of frustration about communication in the nonprofit community, and you're a bit skeptical about this work, concerned that it's just "more of the same"... yes?
My experience is similar -- too many drawn-out meetings where little gets accomplished, other than people stimulating and irritating each other... and then what we're left with is either to engage in endless dialogue, or else the people who have power to make decisions just make them, despite a lack of cohesiveness in the group. Sound familiar?
After 5 years of activism, I burned out on this kind of thing, myself. I felt hopeless and discouraged, to say the least.
When I was exposed to NVC, it rocked my world. It showed me how to "cut to the chase" and express myself authentically and effectively, and to further connection and mutual understanding.
NVC (Nonviolent Communication, the formal name for this process) is not an imperative to dialogue endlessly, nor is it a rehashed version of consensus.
It's more a set of principles and skills that we use to track what's important to us in the moment -- something in NVC we refer to as, "human needs."
We trust that when we can be aware of, and connected with, our own and others needs in each moment, things will flow and we'll move forward in fulfilling everyone's needs.
Let me clarify what we mean by needs in NVC: universal qualities that live in each human being, regardless of race, class, gender, time or place. Things that we all yearn for and move toward, like security. Community. Meaning and purpose. Growth. Love. Affection. Rest.
The idea is that anyone who shows up at a meeting, or gets involved in your organization, is doing so in order to fulfill or experience their own needs. And the more you can be aware of those needs, and communicate your understanding of the needs, the more likely those needs can be met with effective strategies.
Likewise, the more you can be aware of YOUR OWN needs in a given situation, the more likely you are to be able to communicate those needs powerfully and effectively, and again suggest effective strategies that get all the needs met.
So, there is no imperative in NVC to talk and talk and talk endlessly -- instead, we operate with a moment-by-moment needs awareness, that guides us in how to respond.
Having said that, however, using the communication principles of NVC greatly increases the likelihood that whatever words we DO use, will be received and understood by others.
For me, NVC is not a rehashed version of dozens of "effective communication" methods circulating out in the world. Rather, it's a profound paradigm shift, something that enables me to speak from my heart, listen with deep empathy, and move beyond all of the endless babbling that ordinarily takes place in group communication.
I'll pause here because I want to stay connected with you in this. How is this for you to hear? What comes up in you reading all of this?
2 comments:
N.V.C. CAN IT BE USED AS A TOOL FOR BULLIES?
Non-violent communication is an ambiguous term; that is to say it's meaning is up for discussion because not everybody agrees on what forms it can take. Some might say any kind of swearing is a act of violent communication, others would laugh at that kind of extreme view. Saying anything that offends a listener could be put in the same category, so who is ultimately the judge? Before we have a go at answering that, let's step back a fraction and look at the bigger picture.
In the past a person of lower class structure had a limited vocabulary and when lacking the appropriate word for the occasion, often would revert to a coarse familiarity. This was just as often used by the authorities as an opportunity for disciplinary action and the laws were put in place to support them. Now it is not so strict but still, a misplaced word at the inappropriate time can land it's utterer in hot water and I would suggest that the whole situation is a hang-over from a time when people were more aware of what side of the track they sprung from. Never the less the brunt of the burden was shouldered by the poorer end of society and the whip was cracked by the wealthier citizens.
Why I have described this is not to argue over who is right and who is wrong but to create a framework for discussion on what I see happening around me in today's Australia. If we want to participate in a modern way and close the gap that was our cultural heritage, then an understanding of this phenomenon is essential for both sides and all those caught up in the middle. It is not so difficult to see in hindsight, the way empowered advocates of polite society could abuse there power by inflicting a code of behavior on the unsuspecting, mostly uneducated masses, but if it was happening to you in the here and now; what form would it take and who would be your detractor?
To answer the questions raised in the preceding passages, let's focus on a microcosm of society at large;
the Internet community, a brave new world we are all thrust into courtesy of the most educated and wealthy participants, however they got there. If a unsuspecting surfer strays onto the web without a proper education of procedures and protocols, then it's not a stretch of the imagination to see what troubled waters lay ahead, just as we examined in our example of the coarse individual of the past. So without expanding this scenario out of proportion, we the people of cyberspace should be asking some basic questions about the governing body, of a somewhat obscure moral police force, lurking behind the screens of conscience we are all pouring over.
Should not there be some level of transparency in the electronic "democracy" we have bought into?
Do we have any right to know who carries the big stick that can rap anyone of us over the knuckles ?
Is there any avenue of appeal if you are unjustly dealt with?
Who decides what is just and how do they get themselves into that position?
Considering we have at our finger tips a tool aptly appropriate for informing us of the answers to those questions and any other concerns we may have, I suspect those that have the power don't want anyone to know who they are or how they got there. So even though I have probably raised more issues than addressed, the basic premise to the article that Non-Violent Communication can be used as a tool for bullies stands except I am more of the mind that No Communication can be used by even bigger bullies.
To Wayne, I believe NVC can only be used as a tool for bullies if there is only a chronic situation - a situation where no immediate threats are present (that would be an acute situation). If in an acute situation, no communication is probably best, and the removal of oneself to safety.
Yet I'd think that a group of NVC 'warriors', whose shields are their empathy and whose swords are their words, could defuse a situation of tension if there were equal numbers on both sides (bullies and a quasi-NVC-police).
As I say this, I would also point out that if such an NVC squad could be assembled, then they would hopefully be interacting with these bullies so as to not allow some climactic showdown to even begin.
To Jeff, first, after responding to Wayne, I am wondering if any actions could come of my idea - of NVC participants acting as an agent of change by interceding in a tension-filled activity to ease that tension and 'ratchet-down' the group mind, from violent behavior to more appropriate behavior to allow them to achieve their goals ... ?
To Jeff, second, for the idea of does NVC lead to endless, drawn out discussions that go nowhere - I believe that it does for me. I also acknowledge that I am a novice in both my verbal skills and my self-awareness. Thus, if I could grow in both those areas, then NVC might be less cumbersome. I judge that I would take a long time (3-5yrs) to mature, so I don't undertake it. Saying that, I sense I am impatient with myself and have a hard time loving myself when I do not 'get it right' immediately.
That is where I am, today, 3-7-10.
Thank you
Post a Comment