Non-Violent Communication (or “Giraffe Language”)

I saw this great post by Robin Weinick on LinkedIn about her bowl of tiny giraffes, and it reminded me to share a photo of our own “Speak Up Giraffe”! This giraffe is passed around the room to those who exemplify Non Violent Communication, or “Giraffe Language”.

The idea comes from Marshall Rosenberg’s Non-Violent Communication. Non-Violent Communication was developed by Marshall Rosenberg not as a way to avoid conflict, but to increase empathy and improve the quality of communication between people, in part, to resolve conflict. It’s been described as a practice to get to a state of interpersonal harmony and obtaining knowledge for future cooperation. The “harmony” spoken of here is not an absence of disagreement, but a space where disagreement is met with enquiry, empathy and care. The “ultimate aim” of non-violent communication is to develop relationships based on restorative, “partnership” paradigms with mutual respect, rather than retributive, fear-based, “domination” paradigms.

The Steps of Non Violent Communication

NVC consists of empathetically listening, and honestly expressing, using the four steps of: 

• Observations
• Feelings
• Needs
• Requests

I.e.

1. Observe what is happening and describe the situation without judgement:

I notice … / I hear … / the situation is …

2. Identify / express your feelings:

Then I feel …

3. Identify the need behind your feeling:

My need is … / because I would like … / I desire … / I need …

4. Make a clear, positive, actionable request:

Would you please … / are you willing to …?

I believe NVC is a core competency for people and teams who are trying to foster greater psychological safety. Read more about Non-Violent Communication or “Giraffe Language” in this psychological safety post from September 2022.


Further Links:

Psychological Safety and Yogic Philosophy
Verbally Speaking Up at Work
Psychological safety means I can say whatever I want! 
PACE: Graded Assertiveness

Psychological Safety in Practice

Systems Over-thinking

I love these “systems over-thinker” tips from Viktor Cessan and John Cutler. There are good things in here for everyone, whether you consider yourself a systems thinker, an over thinker, or neither! I particualrly like the point about “hacking” hierarchies over trying to change them, and being careful not to wrap up too much of your identity in successful change. 

Courage doesn’t always roar.

Thanks to @toyoufromsteph on Instagram

To Deploy, or Not to Deploy, That is the Question.

Read Jessica DeVita’s qualitative study of the decision-making experiences of engineers who deploy software changes in production.

Jessica DeVita’s thesis explores the complex decision-making experiences of software engineers during the deployment of code and config changes. Through interviews, she identifies key themes influencing deployment decisions: risk perception, temporal reasoning, and interpersonal relationships. The study reinforces how engineers often face significant pressure and uncertainty, which can lead to costly (both in terms of finance and human life) incidents if deployments go wrong. Engineers rely on various strategies such as risk mitigation, testing, and automation, to manage these risks. However, automation itself introduces new challenges and complexities.