Charter for Compassion

   I was recently reminded that in 2009, some folks created a worldwide Charter for Compassion, a document which urges the peoples and religions of the world to embrace the core value of compassion. 

   The charter has reportedly been translated into at least thirty languages.  Learn more here.

NVC is contributing to cultural change for a real organization (finally!)

For the past 14 months, I have been working with a social service organization in Indiana -- teaching them practical NVC skills with the purpose of increasing workplace morale, creating more effectiveness and building trust among the staff of 20+ people.

I have visited their group four times, and have a fifth visit scheduled next month, which is a real luxury for me as a trainer who has frequently been given "one shot" to do a training in a workplace.

These "one shot deals" are challenging for a variety of reasons, among them that they lack continuity and that people often don't retain the skills very well without follow up... even if they resonate when exposed to them.

Consequently, if I'm honest I would have to say that until now, I have not contributed to cultural change within any organization or business that I worked with.

Yes, I helped many individuals gain valuable skills that reduced their suffering, and increased their enjoyment on the job.

But it simply wasn't enough to impact the center of gravity in those organizations; after all, patterns of communication and behavior are decades in the making :-)

However, I am celebrating wildly about my current work with this organization.  Actually, the more prominent feeling is RELIEF -- relief that it's actually possible!

I have been getting feedback from the staff members that they have been using the skills I have shared with them, and it's been successful.

Furthermore, they have been giving and receiving the "gratitude grams" that I introduced to them and they, too, have been making a positive impact.

Most of all, I can see with my own two eyes -- and feel in my heart -- the energetic shifts that are happening there, simply by watching them interact with each other in my training sessions and over lunch time.

Hooray!

Applying Compassionate Communication in group settings (and in organizations)

For several years, I have been seriously questioning whether Compassionate Nonviolent Communication (NVC) has any value whatsoever in group settings.

As useful as NVC is in interpersonal relationships, and also with my inner relationship with myself ("intra-personal"), I haven't witnessed much success with applying it to organizations.

Mostly, groups informed by NVC create a zoo-like atmosphere where nothing of value gets accomplished -- neither moving forward with the objectives of the group, nor deepening connection among the people present.

At times, I have concluded that NVC's usefulness is limited to intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships, and that it's best to confine it there -- and not aggravate groups of people with NVC who are trying to get something accomplished.

I have a new insight that gives me hope that NVC can be useful in group settings: The work of Gregg Kendrick, namely clarifying that when groups of people gather, there are new needs that emerge specifically as a result of the group.

I've heard this called the "needs of the whole" or "organizational needs" or as Gregg says, "The WE." In other words, there are three levels in which we can apply NVC:

1. I
2. You
3. We

1. I: This is my relationship with myself: how I view myself, what my inner talk says to me, and the care with which I hold my own needs.

2. You: This is my relationship with "you," in other words I am holding my own needs equal to yours, in a dance of mutuality and seeking connection.

3. We: This is where the group's needs come in, which is more than simply a compilation of the needs each individual comes to the table with, but also needs that emerge specifically from the group's purpose in existing. Gregg calls this the "shared purpose."



It's vital to recognize that there is such a thing as a shared purpose, because it orients the group toward the actions it can take to achieve its goals (stated or unstated).

Furthermore, without a shared purpose, a meeting of the group ends up being merely a group of individuals attempting to have a series of "you" (or interpersonal) exchanges, without holding the needs of the whole in mind while doing so.

This quickly produces aggravation, if not downright ineffectiveness... unless, that is, they have joined the group for the explicit purpose of exploring and practicing interpersonal interactions, in which case the entire purpose of the gathering is to practice communication with each other.

But short of that, and assuming people are in a group to achieve some goals, NVC practiced at a "you" level in a group setting can be downright maddening (and confusing).

Because you see, when people recognize the needs of the "we" -- again, the needs that only emerge as a result of the shared purpose of the group, and that simply do not exist until and unless an organization is formed -- they create synergy by marshalling their collective energies around the pursuit of a common goal.


Levels of Complexity

The three levels of I, You and We have increasing complexity, and therefore require a greater awareness and higher level of skills as you proceed.

For instance, when learning NVC, the first thing people usually learn is to identify their own needs, and express them as desired. At this level, one needs only pay attention to one set of needs -- their own.

With the "You," it now requires connecting not only with my own needs, but also including and considering another person's needs in real time. Therefore, there are two sets of needs to track, which requires more practice and integration of NVC.

Finally, in the "We," in addition to my own needs (I) and the other person's needs (You), there are multiple parties needs present for me to be aware of (We). And again, there is another set of needs that appears exclusively as a result of the shared purpose of the group. This is a higher level skill that requires a lot of practice for most people.

And for those people who are at the "You" level of their skill development, if they do not have an understanding of the "We" level, they might even greet it with suspicion or defensiveness if people are attempting to operate at the "We" level in organizations.

For instance, they might say: "But wait a minute! We can't move forward until we've heard from everyone. Plus, I'm in pain about something that another person said, and I need empathy!"

Or, "What good is it to say that we're an NVC organization if we can't even live it within our own community?" (with the underlying assumption being that living NVC in community means that we halt progress at the slightest indication that someone is in pain, direct all of our available resources to giving them empathy, and not moving forward until everyone is absolutely and 100% calm and peaceful inside themselves... which is an idealized state that will virtually never happen!)

Jeff launches yearlong program for deepening in and sharing NVC!

I'm pleased to announce that in 2012, I will be launching my first year-long program in Compassionate Communication (NVC):

"Living, Integrating and Sharing Compassionate Communication"

The program will include four in-person retreats in Columbus, Ohio of 3 or 4 days each, and will be a combination of deepening in NVC skills and consciousness, and also sharing NVC with others (formally or informally).

I'm still arranging the venue -- exact dates and other details will be announced soon.

I celebrate this development and look forward to being with a group of 20-30 people... maybe including you!

Sincerely, Jeff
_________________________________________
Jeff Brown, Executive Director
Compassionate Communication of Central Ohio [www.nvcohio.org]
2350 Indianola Ave., Columbus, OH 43202 USA
614-558-1141 office ~ 812-320-3842 personal

* Certified Trainer, Center for Nonviolent Communication
* Associate Trainer, NVC Training Institute

Alfie Kohn's "Unconditional Parenting" resonates with NVC

I have heard Marshall Rosenberg, creator of NVC, reference Alfie Kohn on numerous occasions. Today, I saw a video of Kohn for the first time and was struck at the similarity of his work and my understanding of Compassionate Communication.

Click here to watch a 5-minute video of Kohn being interviewed by CBS news about his work on, "Unconditional Parenting."

Creating Internal, Interpersonal, and Organizational Peace

10 Things We Can Do to Contribute to Internal, Interpersonal, and Organizational Peace

This is an oldie, but goodie, written by one of my colleagues, Gary Baran (also a Certified Trainer with the Center for Nonviolent Communication) back in 2001 when he was Executive Director of the Center. (pictured below)

(1) Spend some time each day quietly reflecting on how we would like to relate to ourselves and others.

(2) Remember that all human beings have the same needs.

(3) Check our intention to see if we are as interested in others getting their needs met as our own.

(4) When asking someone to do something, check first to see if we are making a request or a demand.

(5) Instead of saying what we DON'T want someone to do, say what we DO want the person to do.

(6) Instead of saying what we want someone to BE, say what action we'd like the person to take that we hope will help the person be that way.

(7) Before agreeing or disagreeing with anyone's opinions, try to tune in to what the person is feeling and needing.

(8) Instead of saying "No," say what need of ours prevents us from saying "Yes."

(9) If we are feeling upset, think about what need of ours is not being met, and what we could do to meet it, instead of thinking about what's wrong with others or ourselves.

(10) Instead of praising someone who did something we like, express our gratitude by telling the person what need of ours that action met.

2001, revised 2004 Gary Baran & CNVC. The right to freely duplicate this document is hereby granted.

A new monetary system: The NVC Pain Exchange (NVCPE)

Over my twelve years of learning, practicing and sharing Nonviolent Communication (NVC), I have noticed some common tendencies in NVC communities.

With some degree of trepidation (which I will explain in a moment), I suggest that one of these tendencies is what I playfully refer to as the, "NVC Pain Exchange (NVCPE)."

This is a playful variation of the "New York Stock Exchange (NYSE)," a famous entity for trading and valuing stocks, bonds and other financial products.

The NVC Pain Exchange enables and perpetuates groups of people to get together and recycle and exchange pain with each other, all in the name of compassion.

Here is a common scene: People experience NVC and are deeply moved by it. Many of them -- and this includes myself -- have never before received genuine empathy or non-judgmental presence from others.

Naturally, these people develop relationships with each other in community, and seek each other out to offer empathy to one another about challenging and painful experiences they have had.

So far, so good. After all, I regard empathy as one of the most powerful abilities we have as human beings, in terms of being able to make in impact on the lives of others.

Sometimes, however, a little problem begins to develop: people who get together to offer each other empathy can get locked in their "pain bodies," as described by Eckhart Tolle (author of "The Power of Now" and, "A New Earth").

Tolle describes the pain body as "an accumulated pain that becomes a negative energy field that occupies your body and mind. The pain body wants to survive, just like every other entity in existence, and it can only survive if it gets you to unconsciously identify with it. It can then rise up, take you over, "become you," and live through you. It needs to get its "food" through you. It will feed on any experience that resonates with its own kind of energy, anything that creates further pain in whatever form: anger, destructiveness, hatred, grief, emotional drama, violence, and even illness."

Uh-oh.

This is what I meant about recycling, recirculating and exchanging pain under the guise of being compassionate and offering empathy to one another.

Using empathy as a catalyst for transformation of that which ails us is one thing; recirculating the pain (often by telling and re-telling the same old stories) with, and through, each other is yet another thing.

As Tolle suggests, the pain body thrives when we gather together and share our drama with each other! (at least without the explicit intention of transformation)


A Holistic, rather than Dualistic, Relationship to Needs

All of this further reminds me of the difference in holding needs in a dualistic vs. a holistic structure.

Often times, we refer to needs as being "unmet," with which pain and suffering is the automatic byproduct. Even when we receive empathy from others or ourselves about the unmet needs, if we are still in the dualistic construct of "met" versus "unmet" needs, the relief will most likely be temporary.

Instead, I encourage people to see needs non-dualistically, or holistically. A place where there is no "either-or", "good-bad", or even "better-worse."

If we are genuinely connected with the energy of our needs, we are in the flow of life itself. There isn't really any such thing as "unmet needs," per se.

As Dominic Barter, NVC trainer and creator of Restorative Circles, explains, needs are, "that inevitably produced by the nature of things, so that the contrary is impossible."

The contrary is impossible, which I take to mean that there is really no such thing as "unmet needs."

How could something that is inherently whole by its' very nature be non-whole?

A similar question: "How could we human beings see ourselves as anything less than whole beings? How could we see ourselves as anything less than spiritual beings having a human experience?"

I suspect that these questions are all related to each other!


Challenges with the NVC Pain Exchange

Another difficulty with the "Pain Exchange" is that while it might be OK if the expressed purpose of a gathering is to offer empathy to each other (e.g. an "Empathy Circle"), it quickly becomes exasperating for people who come to a business meeting where the goal is to get something accomplished.

This is a common challenge in NVC communities, as far as I can tell -- people come with different expectations of what will be occurring at a particular gathering.

Some people come with the expectation that empathy will be the primary focus, and that whenever anyone in the group experiences the slightest bit of discomfort about anything, the group stops whatever it's doing and offers that person empathy.

And then, if another person is triggered, offer them empathy until they "feel better." Before long, however, the very act of stopping progress in the meeting and offering empathy triggers those who come with the expectation that the focus of the gathering will be forward movement on projects.

And then, we see the breakdown of the meeting, people being in even more pain, and most everyone departing frustrated and discouraged about what happened.

Sometimes, I hear one person say something to the effect of, "Look, we can't just sit around and offer each other empathy; we need to get some things done here!"

To which another person responds, "But that's not NVC! That's just like they do it in corporate America! The reason I came to NVC is because we're more compassionate than that!"

My trepidation in bringing forward this dynamic that I see is about wanting to be seen for my real intention, and for acceptance.

I fear that people reading this post will have similar reactions as the above example. Something like, "Geez, Jeff is an NVC trainer? He's not very compassionate. He should be more compassionate to people who are in pain! After all, I'm sure he's been in pain before. I doubt he would want people analyzing and diagnosing him. He would probably want empathy! What is he trashing empathy for, anyway?"

Assuming that this is actually my inner voice projecting this -- which is almost always the case -- then I suppose I feel torn about this post and wishing for more understanding and insight into this phenomenon.

Which is why I posted this on a blog... so that you could comment!

So what do you think about what I've written here? Anything you'd care to share?

Jeff's long-awaited ease in offering NVC training

Miraculously and with grace, I am experiencing a long-awaited ease and self-acceptance in offering Compassionate Communication (NVC) training with others.

I have been facilitating NVC events since 2003, and have led trainings literally hundreds of times with all kinds of audiences.

Most of those experiences included some degree of angst and "efforting" within myself to embody the consciousness I was attempting to share with others.

As I write this, I am facilitating a 3 1/2 day NVC Dance Floors training in Denver, CO, and experiencing total ease on the first day of the training.

And the ease comes not because it's "going well" by conventional measures -- in other words, I don't feel ease because people are giving me positive feedback, or because they are understanding what I am presenting.

It's an internal experience not directly related to external feedback. Somehow, some way -- and I have no need whatsoever to cognitively understand why -- I am in total acceptance of myself, of others, and what happens in this training experience.

Paradoxically, of course, this is probably creating more connection and a more "effective" training, judged in terms of embodiment and how my living of the consciousness is being transmitted to others.

Celebration!

Blocks to receiving appreciation from others

Is it sometimes difficult for you to receive expressions of appreciation from other people?

Do you have resistance or reluctance to fully "taking it in" and allowing the nourishing energy of gratitude wash over you and energize you?

Check out this 8-minute video clip from a recent NVC training, "An Attitude of Gratitude" on March 11-12, 2011 in Columbus, Ohio.



For me, I notice a few common themes for why it's been hard for me to receive others' expressions of gratitude.

One is shame. In order to receive another person's gratitude about me fully and authentically, I need to encounter my own divinity and inherent value as a human being.

That's something that's challenging when many of the subliminal messages I've given to myself over the years are negative and focus on what I deem in wrong, bad and stupid about myself. (my inner critic can be ferocious!)

Another reason is because I fear that the other person is "buttering me up" by slathering some skin-deep gratitude, in preparation for asking me to do something I probably don't want to do.

I can think of a few times when they've been successful, and I ended up agreeing to do something and hated myself -- and the other person -- for agreeing to do it. Thus, I can be vigilant about checking out the other person's motivation in appreciating me.

Watch the video above to learn more reasons, and comment below after you watch it!

Most exciting practical application of NVC ever

During the eleven years I have been studying and practicing Nonviolent Communication (NVC), I have never encountered a practical application of NVC more promising to me than Dominic Barter's Restorative Circles.



Dominic, one of my colleagues as a Certified Trainer with the Center for Nonviolent Communication, has developed and tested a process for creating a place for people to have conflict with each other without the typical distraction of violence.

Yes, that's right -- a place to have conflict! ...because much of what we tolerate, Dominic suggests, is to withhold and suppress our needs and that's why conflict eventually escalates into some form of violence.

A Restorative Circle is a community process for supporting those in conflict. It brings together the three parties to a conflict – those who have acted, those directly impacted and the wider community – within an intentional systemic context, to dialogue as equals. Participants invite each other and attend voluntarily. The dialogue process used is shared openly with all participants, and guided by a community member. The process ends when actions have been found that bring mutual benefit.

Restorative Circles are facilitated in 3 stages designed to identity the key factors in the conflict, reach agreements on next steps, and evaluate the results. As a circle form, they invite shared power, mutual understanding, self-responsibility and effective action.


Learn more here.

Evocative Coaching: Transforming Schools One Conversation at a Time

A new resource is available for those working with classroom teachers and school leaders. Written by Bob & Megan Tschannen-Moran, Evocative Coaching: Transforming Schools One Conversation at a Time (Jossey-Bass, 2010), incorporates the principles of Appreciative Inquiry into the process of one-on-one coaching for personal and professional development.

The Evocative Coaching model works with Story Listening, Expressing Empathy, Appreciative Inquiry, and Design Thinking to move educators beyond old ways of thinking, doing, and being. It inspires and invigorates educators with the passion for making schools better, one conversation at a time.

David Cooperrider had this to say about the book: “If you could choose only one inspiring and resource-filled book on coaching, what do you suppose it would be? For me the answer is right here. Evocative Coaching is a gem; it’s something that should be read by anyone involved in a helping profession—and that’s everyone!”

For more information about the book and the coach training program based upon the book, visit www.SchoolTransformation.com

Unique Assumptions of Nonviolent Communication

Nonviolent Communication (NVC) begins by assuming that we are all compassionate by nature and that violent strategies -- whether verbal or physical -- are learned behaviors taught and supported by the prevailing culture.

It also assumes that we all share the same basic human needs, and that all actions are strategies to meet one or more of these needs.

Source: "Key Facts about Nonviolent Communication," by PuddleDancer Press

When to Kill People to Increase the Peace

I've been doing some healing work lately as a result of an experience I had last May in St. Louis where I was held up at gunpoint by two young men late at night, in front of the home I was then living in.



My counselor was using a process known as EMDR, and what came forward in me during that process was a desire to physically beat those men who robbed me, and furthermore hurt them so bad that they could never threaten me, or anyone else, ever again.

I also remembered reading something by Dr. Marshall Rosenberg, founder of Nonviolent Communication, in response to the 9/11 attacks in New York City. I looked it up on his organization's website, and he wrote,

"To create short-term safety, we will need to protect ourselves from further threat. This may include actions taken in, what I call, the “protective use of force.” We may need to capture and imprison the perpetrators so that they cannot attack us again. And we may even have to kill some of them if we can't otherwise restrain them."

I resonated with this statement, and it gave me companionship to know that even a world-famous peacemaker would write such things.

For me, I am so committed to peaceable communities, and so dearly want all people to be able to live without fear of being attacked, killed, or otherwise oppressed, that I'm willing to consider anything to preserve safety and security... even if it means using force. Whatever force I have in my body. Including when my well-being is physically threatened, because I matter.

Now, it's important that I offer context for how I came to this -- I was in a semi-trance state, doing healing work about a very traumatic experience that I had.

Somehow, coming to the idea that I matter, and that I can use force to protect myself and preserve peace in my community... in my world... was extremely empowering.

I suspect it was part of my healing process, somehow.

Back to Dr. Rosenberg's statement quoted above -- to be fair, that paragraph was only a small part of his response letter to the 9/11 attacks, and most of the letter (as I understand it) was about the folly of retaliating with violence, and how important it is to use NVC principles when dealing with such incidents.

Nevertheless, I still honor how Marshall includes the use of force, in a protective manner (rather than punitive), as being consistent with nonviolence.

Back to me: I cannot fathom going out looking for trouble or looking for someone to attack -- it's beyond my imagination to do that. Yet, when I connect deeply with my desire for safety and well-being and survival, I find within me immense resources (physical, mental, emotional and spiritual) to create the kind of world that I want.

The "N-word" from NVC consciousness: YouTube video

I recently discovered this YouTube video of an African-American man talking about the N-word.



It is an African-American man with the screen name, "NLP NVC" who talks about
how he responds to the "N-word."

I was moved by this, and struck by the congruency with NVC consciousness he
talks with. I wonder if he's studied NVC?

Click here to view the video in another window if you cannot view it above.

What ARE the principles of NVC?

Recently, I have noticed myself making reference to the "principles and practices of Compassionate Communication (a.k.a. "NVC")."

The practices of NVC are pretty clear to me -- the three modes of communication being honesty, empathy and self-empathy, within which we utilize 4 ingredients: observation, feeling, need and request.

The principles of NVC are less accessible to me, so I am getting clarity for myself what I mean when I refer to the principles of NVC.

I came across a handout from Bay NVC (www.baynvc.org) that describes these principles in a way that I like:

--

Nonviolent Communication is based on the premises that:

1. We are all trying to get our needs met.

2. We fare better if we know how to get these needs met in a cooperative, rather than an aggressive way.

3. Each of us has remarkable inner resources we can use if we are given empathy to get in touch with them.

4. People naturally enjoy contributing to the well being of others when they can do so without any element of coercion.

5. Each of us is responsible for our actions and for how we respond to what others do or say.

6. Some forms of thinking and speaking tend to disconnect us from the life within ourselves and others, whereas other forms enable us to remain connected with life.

--

I would enjoy dialogue and exploration of these ideas.

Do you resonate with these principles, as outlined by Bay NVC?

Would you add any others?

The Connecting Power of Authentic Expression

I continue to be amazed by the power of honest, caring self-expression.

I can hardly believe how empowering and energizing it was to express my honesty to a person in an NVC organization I am a part of, in front a group of 20 people, no less.

More than 24 hours later, I continue to feel jazzed.

Here's what happened: I was part of a daylong meeting, during which one of the participants and I had an exchange where we both experienced distress and dissatisfaction.

We completed our tasks early, and the facilitator of our meeting (a consultant) suggested that we spend the final hour practicing a new clearing process that I have been developing that combines things I've learned in the Mankind Project with NVC.

After doing some heavy-duty self-empathy -- and receiving empathy on a break from another participant -- I passionately expressed how I felt about the person's actions, along with the qualities in relationships that really matter to me (i.e. my needs).

We had a dialogue over the course of 5 or 10 minutes (again, in front of the group), and it was of secondary importance how the person responded and how it ended -- I had proactively expressed my truth to the person, with the rest of the group as my witness, and wow that feels great!

NVC and Decision Making (by Miki Kashtan)

I have been gnawing on the whole concept of NVC and decision-making recently, and I came across and article written by fellow NVC Certified Trainer, Miki Kashtan, titled, "Maximizing Willingness: Facilitating Efficiency in Collaborative Decision-Making."




Miki is one of the co-founders of Bay NVC and is an instructor in their annual Leadership Program, where I understand they teach and practice these principles for decision-making.

To read the full article, click here.

Here is an excerpt:

Why Collaborative Decision-Making?

The principle of including people in decision-making can often be a hard sell because most people don’t have successful experiences combining inclusivity with efficiency. If one person makes the decision, or a management team, or a majority vote, as the case may be, the process appears faster and more efficient, qualities highly sought after in the high-speed environment of modern workplaces in particular.

In my experience, however, such shortcuts can be costly later. Including needs and perspectives of all parties affected by the decision is not just about making the care for everyone visible. It’s also about effectiveness, and about leaders and decision-makers having access to information critical to the success of whatever strategy they want to implement.

When it comes to implementation, suddenly there can be a gap, a problem, an issue that is blocking the implementation. Often it’s delayed because people are afraid to speak for fear of consequences, or are discouraged about being heard, or don’t trust their needs and perspectives matter...

Breathing Life into my NVC work -- NVC and Abundance

I am copying here a recent email I sent to the "Nonviolent Communication and Abundance Project" that I co-founded with fellow NVC trainer, Francois Beausoleil.



It's about a topic that has a lot of juice for me lately -- how does the notion of abundance and sufficiency relate to Compassionate Communication.

Some questions that have come alive in me:

Q: Can I be in integrity receiving money in exchange for sharing NVC?

Q: Are NVC and Abundance Consciousness in harmony? Are they the same thing?


I want to share with you the single most effective "Key to Success" I have found in creating an abundant income for myself sharing NVC:

** Breathing Life into events that I organize **

WHAT DO I MEAN BY "BREATHING LIFE" INTO AN EVENT?

I hold events as though they are living organisms that require care and nurturing, much like a puppy dog requires nurturing from its mother, or human baby needs nurturing from his or her caregivers.

Too often, I perceive that facilitators and organizers "go through the motions" of organizing and promoting an event -- reserving a room, writing an email, hanging up a few fliers -- however if the event was a living organism, it would be on life support.

The event seems like it's hanging out in thin air, just waiting for someone -- anyone -- to \ breathe life / into it.

Although this might sound ambiguous, my objective is to bring the event to life, so that it becomes a living organism.

In other words, I BREATHE LIFE into the event. The way I think about it, the way I talk about it, and the way I feel inside myself about it is FULLY ALIVE.

When I do this, an amazing thing happens -- people show up.

They show up with curiosity; they show up with intrigue; and most of all, they arrive ready to learn and integrate what I have to offer.


MY QUESTION FOR YOU:

So my question to you is this: Are you willing to think the thoughts, feel the feelings, and take the actions necessary to create your work so that it's a living organism?

Are you willing to "breathe life" into your work in such a way that it comes alive and becomes an attractive force for others to join with you?

Is Nonviolent Communication an effective decision-making model?

I'm participating in a 5-day retreat in New York state this week for Nonviolent Communication (NVC) trainers. I am feeling very nourished to be with a group of my colleagues who are truly peers to me (so it's great to have empathy, shared understanding, authenticity, and all the goodies that come with NVC! ;-)



The group's decision-making process, though, has left me unsatisfied overall, and at times feeling a lot of frustration.

It raises some questions in my mind that have been "on my mind" a lot lately:

Q: Is NVC an effective decision-making model?

Q: Can NVC be used as a governing structure?

My quick answers, at least in the present, are: No; and not really.

For me, NVC is an amazing and powerful interpersonal communication model, and also is tremendously supportive for my inner work (inner peace, transforming enemy images, healing, etc.)

It supports me in focusing my attention on what is alive in each moment -- what is coming through me and the other person -- which keeps me in the present and empowered to take actions that serve everyone involved.

The dynamics shift, however, once we include much more than a small group of people -- say 4 or 5 -- and we have a group process happening.

I have experienced countless frustrating and ineffective group decision-making processes in NVC communities over the years, and I believe I know why: NVC is not necessarily an effective approach for making decisions!

In fact, it can be downright oppressive, as well as exasperating!

What I am leaning toward now is finding other, effective models for decision-making and governance, and INFUSING them with NVC consciousness; in other words, making them more powerful by integrating NVC skills within them to create synergy.

For instance, I really like most aspects of Sociocracy, the decision-making model that was originated in Holland and recently has begun being used in North America.

Sociocracy, as far as I can tell, has clear, specific processes for including everyone, gathering input, and making decisions that everyone can live with, and giving a timeline for how long the group will try out the decision before it re-evaluates it.

The goal, thank God, is not to continue processing until each person present feels comfortable and happy and totally at peace with a decision. That is nearly impossible and hardly ever happens!

I have noticed a tendency in NVC group processes to emphasize empathy more than I enjoy, so much so that is impedes the progress of a group. I like it better when individuals find ways to meet their own needs for empathy, and/or the group finds ways to build in empathy in a way that does not send the group process into a quagmire.

Does NVC lead to endless, drawn-out discussions that go nowhere?

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?