Non-Violent Communication

Welcome to the psychological safety newsletter and thanks for subscribing. You are amazing. This week discusses Non-Violent Communication, prospective employers, improv, and digital presenteeism.

Non-Violent Communication

Last week, in talking about the Yamas and Niyamas from Patanjali’s Yoga Sutras, I mentioned Non-Violent Communication (NVC), and I thought it’d be good to dive into it here a bit. I was first introduced to NVC a few years ago by my yoga tutor and mentor Vidya Heisel, who also emphasises the primacy of Ahimsa over Satya.

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.

To me, this resonates very strongly with psychological safety at work.

Giraffe Language

Rosenberg chose the name Non-Violent Communication to reflect his ambition to create peace on the planet, but later reflected that although NVC encourages people to empathetically and clearly talk about what we want, rather than don’t want, NVC only describes what it isn’t rather than what it is. As a result, Rosenberg actually preferred the names “giraffe language“, “compassionate communication” or “collaborative communication“.

The “giraffe” language comes from the example of the giraffe that he sometimes used to explain the concepts – the giraffe having a long neck and thus a “clear view and articulate speech”, and a very large heart, demonstrating the most important aspect: compassion. The giraffe addresses conflict without accusations, assumptions, or attacks. The giraffe also has the longest neck, allowing them to view a wider and broader perspective. The giraffe will try to be present, and listen to the feelings of those around them and connect to their underlying needs, and the context behind their behaviours.

Jackal Language

The Jackal was used to represent the opposite – Violent Communication, or aggression and dominance. Jackal Language is about blaming, judging, criticising, insulting, demanding, comparing, labelling, or punishing. This Jackal language tends to provoke fear, guilt, shame or anger. We all have an ‘inner jackal’ that tells us, “I’m such an idiot, I’m stupid for making that mistake” and leaves it without connecting with the unmet needs behind our choices. Our ‘outer jackal’ does the converse by blaming and shaming other people, without acknowledging the local rationality behind their choices.

This is the inspiration behind our own “speak up giraffe” that we use in some of our communication workshops! The giraffe speaks up, and “sticks their neck out” but does so with compassion and clarity.

Rosenberg also viewed NVC very much as a spiritual practice, even a way of life, as much as a mechanical, practical skillset for work and life.

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 …?

How the NVC process works

Step 1: Most of our descriptions contain judgements. It’s important to separate observed behavior from your judgement and reframe the judgement as a pure observation:

Jackal: “He is so disrespectful.”

Giraffe: “When I said ‘good morning’, he turned away.”

Jackal: “Michael is terrible at leading his team.”

Giraffe: “Michael explained the new project plan and was interrupted several times by Emma and Daniel.”

Step 2: According to Rosenberg, feelings indicate whether or not our needs have been fulfilled. For example, I feel relieved when telling a colleague that I completed my report ahead of the deadline, fulfilling my need for security. If she listens and shares my happiness, she is meeting my need for acknowledgment.

People often think that showing feelings in business is unprofessional, especially for managers, when such openness can be seen as weakness or poor leadership. However, when seeking conflict resolution, we know that people connect more deeply when they dare to express their true feelings.

Feelings when our needs are met: Inspired, balanced, free, enthusiastic, relaxed, calm, peaceful, lively, affectionate, etc.

Feelings when our needs are unmet: Frustrated, discouraged, tired, angry, worried, tense, unhappy, depressed, inhibited, insecure, etc.

Step 3: Rosenberg identifies human needs such as safety, understanding, respect, warmth, autonomy, etc. When needs are expressed indirectly through evaluations and behavioural diagnoses, people are likely to hear criticism and react defensively or start arguing. See the two examples below.

Supervisor: Can we meet at 3 p.m. to discuss how to handle the issue raised by …?

Team Member: I planned to leave at 3 p.m. I’ve been staying late for several days.

Giraffe language

Supervisor (Giraffe): How are you feeling?

Team Member (Giraffe): I’m managing, but my family needs me too.

Jackal Language

Supervisor (Jackal): We’ve all been working extremely hard. This is urgent and can’t wait.

Team Member (Jackal): Everything is always urgent. A better schedule would help all of us be more productive.

Identifying needs is crucial because it leads to specific solutions. Employees who describe their team leader as controlling may have different unmet needs. One may be looking for appreciation while another may want independence.

Step 4: Don’t confuse a request with a demand. Requests imply that you are open to accepting “no” as an answer:

Are you willing to assist me? Could you please prepare the data for the upcoming sales report?

If you make a request and receive a “no”, you don’t have to give up. Instead, empathise with what is preventing the other person from saying “yes” before deciding how to continue the conversation.

How you can use NVC

Here is a good represntation of the model, and how to use it. Note the explicit avoidance of blame or criticism, alongside the empirical observation, subjective feeling, identification of a need, and a clear request. 

 NVC deeply connects with me as a practice, and ever since discovering it, it’s informed a lot of my communication practice at work and in my personal life. I don’t always get it right, and it’s not necessary to follow dogmatically, but it is an incredible foundation for empathetic and effective dialogue, whether you’re on a spiritual or a pragmatic path and it is (I believe) an essential core practise for fostering psychological safety.

Psychological Safety In the Workplace:

This is a great piece by Susan Peppercorn in HBR on how to tell if a prospective employer values psychological safety. Worth a read, especially if you’re job hunting or interviewing at the moment.

Thanks to Mark Emdin for this interesting piece that links the experience of Improv to a deeper understanding and experience of psychological safety in a group. I like this point: “Nothing kills the moment like saying “no” or “yes, but”. In improv it is “yes, and..”“.

This is an excellent report by Qatalog and Gitlab that shows evidence of a phenomenon that I’ve also seen worsen over the past couple of years – digital presenteeism. They also make a key point about the privilege of asynchronous work – where 75% of execs and senior leaders are able to choose when they work, but only 25% of individual contributors are able to do so. I’m absolutely convinced that there’s a link between low psychological safety and presenteeism, but I haven’t quite got to a point where I can evidence or articulate it.

In this episode of Podagogy, Jon Adamson discusses psychological safety in sport, business and the classroom.

Not particularly related to psychological safety, but included because I don’t like the trajectory of how this sort of technology is being adopted in the workplace. On one hand, it benefits the workers involved through reducing the amount of training they need to endure, but on the other hand, it suggests, and creates, an “indifference to difference”. I’m interested in your thoughts: The AI startup erasing call center worker accents: is it fighting bias – or perpetuating it? There is no such thing as a “neutral” accent in my opinion, and it concerns me that a proposed solution to differences in communication is an AI that artificially changes the accent to one deemed more acceptable to the customer.

Things to do and try:

Thanks to Malinda Elizabeth Berry for creating these excellent printable decks of NVC communications cards. There’s a section in the pdf that describes how to use the deck, and I believe that it is a really powerful empathetic practice for two people to engage in. It’s essentially an exercise in active listening, understanding, and interpretation, alongside a chance to practice non-violent communication itself.

This week’s poem:

93 Percent Stardust, by Nikita Gill

We have calcium in our bones,
iron in our veins,
carbon in our souls,
and nitrogen in our brains.
93 percent stardust,
with souls made of flames,
we are all just stars
that have people names.