Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life

Hearing a Negative Message: Four Options

NVC-influenced thinking posits that the actions and comments of others are a stimulus of our feelings, but not the cause; individuals should accept their role in how they interpret the behavior of others. Our first option when we receive a negative comment from someone is to blame ourselves. A second option is to fault the speaker. There are two more preferable options, however, which include understanding our own needs and feelings in the moment, expressing them, and seeking to understand the needs and feelings of the speaker.

Feelings should be traced back to our own needs, rather than being put on others. For example, a parent is putting the cause of their unhappiness on their child by saying, “Mommy is disappointed when you don’t finish your food,” rather than recognizing their feeling as originating from their own need: “Mommy feels disappointed when you don’t finish your food, because I want you to grow up strong and healthy” (52).

The Needs at the Roots of Feelings

Judgments of others are, at their core, expressions of our own unmet needs. If we express judgments of others, they are likely to respond with defensiveness, rather than fulfilling our needs. Unfortunately, we are usually more skilled in noticing the deficiencies in others than identifying and expressing our needs.

We share many common needs, including needs in the areas of autonomy (such as choosing our own path), integrity, celebration (such as the right to observe occasions that are of significance), interdependence (such as friendship), play (such as fun and laughter), spirituality (such as peace), and physical nurturance (such as food and movement).

The Pain of Expressing Our Needs Versus the Pain of Not Expressing Our Needs

It can be difficult to express our own needs when we have been socialized to repress them. If we plaintively rather than honestly assert our needs, we are less likely to be met with compassion. For example, Rosenberg’s mother had a purse that she cherished, which was given to her as a gift after a surgery when she was a child. She lifted it up to show it to a nurse, but the nurse misinterpreted her and took the purse, assuming that it was a gift. Not accustomed to expressing her needs, Rosenberg’s mother did not clarify the situation and was devastated to lose her purse.

From Emotional Slavery to Emotional Liberation

Rosenberg describes the steps from what he calls emotional slavery to emotional liberation. First, in the state of emotional slavery, we feel that we are responsible for the emotional states and needs of others. When couples find themselves enmeshed in emotional slavery to one another, it can be extremely damaging to the relationship; it may feel stifling or overwhelming. In the second stage, the obnoxious stage, we feel resentful of being responsible for others’ feelings; we rigidly assert our own needs and ignore the needs of others. At stage three, emotional liberation, we respond to the needs of others out of compassion, rather than feeling compelled by guilt or shame, as well as prioritizing and clearly communicating our own needs.

Summary

It is vital to recognize the needs behind our feelings. In the stage of emotional liberation, we have learned to accept full responsibility for our own feelings, but not the feelings of others.

Rosenberg states that we should request what we need in a manner that positions people to want to respond compassionately to us.

Using Positive Action Language

It is more effective to tell people what we do want rather than what we don’t want. For instance, a woman who asked her husband not to spend so much time at work was angry to learn that he had signed up to a golf tournament; she had failed to express what she did want: for him to spend more time with her.

Rosenberg cites an example where he worked with a group of high school students who were having conflict with the school principal. Rosenberg helped them to condense their general critiques, such as the claim that the principal was racist, into specific, positive action language requests, such as a request to put Black students onto the advisory council for decisions about dress code; reframed in this way, the principal granted all of their requests. This illustrates that vague language is less likely to generate change, whereas specific, concrete requests that are assertively named are more likely to inspire change in others.

Making Requests Concisely

Rosenberg observes that, sometimes, we express our discomfort and assume that people will be able to interpret the request coded in it. However, it may not be clear to the listener what we want if we simply express our feelings. Sometimes, we are not aware of what we want, leading to frustration for both the speaker and the listener. Hence, to have our needs met, we should make requests that are clear, specific, and concise.

Asking for a Reflection

We can ask the listener to reflect our request back to us in order to clarify that it has been received as we intended. Although this can feel awkward at first, this can be an effective way to ensure that our requests haven’t been misconstrued or misunderstood.

If the listener inaccurately summarizes your request, ensure that you express appreciation for their effort, rather than replying combatively, such as by saying, “that’s not what I said” (75). Gently and empathetically restate your request using different wording, and ask again for clarification.

Requesting Honestly

We can ask, in clear and direct language, what the other person thinks or feels about our request and whether they can fulfill it.

Making Requests of a Group

It is especially important to seek responses from our requests when we are working with a group. Time can be wasted in group meetings when the speaker isn’t clear about what response they require from the group they are addressing. We should feel confident in indicating whether a conversation has produced a satisfactory response for us or not.

Requests Versus Demands

When people hear a demand, they identify two ways of responding: submitting or rebelling. A demand is distinguished from a request because for a demand there is the presence of a consequence if the listener does not comply. If the speaker criticizes or judges the other’s refusal to comply (such as by applying guilt or shame), then the speaker has made a demand rather than a request. In terms of requests for company or time, those who interpret noncompliance as rejection become more likely to be rejected in future, as people hear demands, rather than requests, and are more likely to avoid that person.

We demonstrate that we are making requests rather than demands in the manner that we respond when our request is denied, that is, empathetically.

Defining Our Objective When Making Requests

Rosenberg states that we need to be aware of our own objectives when making requests. Our priority should be to maintain the relationship, rather than to change people’s opinions or behaviors. We can successfully employ NVC, but people still may not comply with our requests; this doesn’t make the process a failure, but rather expresses the reality that people have autonomy. Often, if people are not obliging our requests, it is because they interpret them as demands. If we frame our needs in a self-righteous manner, such as by thinking, “he’s supposed to do as I say,” our requests are more likely to sound like demands (83).

Summary

By using clear, action-based language, we can express requests that enrich our lives. We should convey our desire for listeners to comply only if they are doing so willingly, so that our requests do not sound like demands.