NVC Model, Processes and Key Differentiations
NVC Model: Parts and Components
To explain the NVC Model and the parts/components, I am providing grabs from my online course, Connecting through Talk. The course includes text, audio, video, powerpoint slides and activities. The audio relate directly to the screen shots which I have provided in this section, however, as the audio are cut out of the course there are some directions to learner in the audio which don’t apply in this format. I don’t believe that this will detract from the requirement to demonstrate my understanding of the model and its parts. As I enjoy teaching grammar my explanations include some grammatical and semantic features about the model which I think aid learners understanding. In one sense I am bringing my skills in grammar and meaning to the process of teaching NVC.
The NVC Model: Expressing honestly and receiving empathically, the four components, the Giraffe dance.
Below is the audio talk that I present in the first model of the INTRODUCTION course. I outline the model giving an explanation of Intention, Attention, Observations, Feelings, Needs, Requests, Self Connection, Honest Self Expression and Empathic listening. I use the slide of the NVC tree reproduced below as a screen shot. Learners follow along with audio while studying the slide of the NVC tree. I have attached the transcipt for your convenience.
The Tree of Life by Inbal Kashtan (2012)
The Giraffe Dance
This is an image of the dance floor from Cate Crombie’s Foundation Course, 19-20 June, 2021 in Brisbane. Thank you, Cate!
The NVC Giraffe Dance forms part of my online foundation course. I have provided a clip from my session on self connection to demonstrate my knowledge of the process. I use the dance floor handout (Belgrave and Lawrie 2003) with participants, but demonstrate the process through animated slides which can be seen in the video grab below. As the course is online, I encourage the support person to use gestures and words to indicate where on the dance floor the self empathiser is. I model the process using personal examples which I build up as the course unfolds.
2. The four ears (four choices we have when hearing a difficult to receive message)
Below is the audio talk that I present in the Connecting Through Talk - BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER (Course #3) on the 4 ways to hear a ‘hard to hear message’. I describe the talk which is reproduced below in the talk and I have provided the transcript of the audio for your convenience. As I am respecting the CNVC.org request about permission, I have not used jackal and giraffe. Instead I talk about reactive and responsive language. I treat reactive as equivalent to Jackal, responsive as equivalent to Giraffe. However, when I teach the Foundation training via zoom or face to face, I introduce Jackal and Giraffe language
Screen shot of Hard to hear message page in Online course #3
3. Three kinds of Giraffe requests.
Below is the audio talk that I present in the Connecting Through Talk - THE INGREDIENTS (Course #2) on the Requests.
This is screen shot of the module on requests explaining the general features of requests. Below is a screen shot of the three kinds of requests: for action, clarification and connection
This is a screen shot of the summary of the three kinds of requests. The audio below explains this.
Transcript of the three kinds of requests audio
NVC Processes
1. Hearing another's anger (blame, criticism)
Hearing another’s anger is about receiving an angry, possibly defensive response from someone which could trigger you. But instead of reacting angrily ourselves, in NVC we want to look for the unmet needs which are alive in the person and which sit behind their angry reaction. We want to guess their feelings and unmet needs.
In my online course, I had a feedback question from a learner about choosing feeling words which are blame-free. I have provided the exchange here as it addressed anger and what it tells us and how to use it to discover feelings and unmet needs.
I also wrote this blog, Hearing the ‘hard to hear message’ with empathy, which demonstrates looking behind the ‘no’ to the unmet needs of the other. Hearing No can be an opportunity to humanise, that is, consider the feelings and unmet needs of the other, offering your guesses to them as an act of empathy, thereby demonstrating your intention to truly hear them even when they are triggered and saying things that may be hurtful or hard to hear.
2. Expressing "no"
Expressing ‘no’ in Jackal language doesn’t usually reflect what the person expressing ‘No’ actually wants. To explain, I’ll use an example between my partner and I. An ongoing sadness for me in my relationship with him has been his pattern of saying no to me when I come to him with a plan, an activity, a purchase etc. His first reaction is to say, No. When I spoke to him about this with the intention to understand why he says no, he thought about it and then explained that saying No gives him space to process what I have said to him. But of course I hear No, to the activity/plan or purchase. When I connected with my feelings and needs, I felt lonely and sad because I wanted connection and planning. I began to wonder if needs are in competition. And this deepened my sadness. I brought this dilemna to my coaching session with Alex. Here is my excerpt from my journal (27.8.19) on discovering that needs are not in competition,
1. As I write, I feel relieved and open to the precious possibility that our needs, both sets of needs can be met. Following my session with Alex, I’ve been reassured that needs aren’t/can’t be in opposition to each other, but rather it is strategies that are deployed to have our needs met which can be. Alex has reassured me that Tony and I can meet our needs, we just have to negotiate strategies and make requests of each other which don’t use demand energy but instead ask a do-able and enjoyable request of each other. This advice has lifted my spirits as I was feeling trapped, sad and then very angry. I love the idea of us working out together doable and enjoyable requests. Alex has asked me to activiate my internal wisdom by being present in the now. So, “How do I feel now?” Very hopeful, and excited. I feel my happy self.
2. I’ve been telling myself that Tony wants me to do all the changing. I feel that that is deeply unfair. I want him to see that he can change his strategy of saying, ‘No’ each time I offer a plan, an activity, a purchase etc. I also want him to stop being in his head and not available – either aloof and therefore not available, or distracted with some thought or action and therefore not available. When I demand his attention, he reacts like a bunny in the headlights. He is shocked, hurt and embarrassed. I can see immediately that no malice or unkind intention is there. Instead I just activate his shame and guilt. I feel guilt, shame and grief at the possibility that we are at an impasse. Meeting our respective needs would result in hurting the other. I am stumped.
3. But what is alive in me now is joy now that I understand it is about doable and enjoyable strategies. It isn’t a ‘crisis of imagination’ – it’s an opportunity to create, imagine, cooperate and enrich each other’s lives together. This approach will meet my need for communion with the man I love, and my loneliness will dissolve. I feel hopeful. Tony comes home today and we’ll meet each other and speak about what is alive in us. I anticipate this with joy!
Expressing ‘no’ in Giraffe is usually said with reference to needs. Consider this example from my online course in which the Chair of a meeting makes a request of a colleague to allow other voices to be heard because of the Chair’s need for diversity. The Chair isn’t saying ‘no’ to contributions by the person, but rather ‘yes' to additional voices of others.
3. Hearing "no"
Hearing ‘no’ can be hard to hear but it also is an opportunity to be curious and discover what’s going on for someone. There might be lots of reasons why someone might say no. We can’t always guess what it is but we can enquire with giraffe ears with a connecting question like, ‘I’m wondering what’s alive in you right now? Would you be willing to tell me what is going on for you when you say, no?’
I wrote this blog, Hearing, NO. When your request lands on deaf ears, about making a specific, do-able and choiceful request which may result in needs met rather than a straight up, No. It is relevent to this Key concept. And when you hear, No, it is an opportunity to discover the feelings and needs of another. Once this known, it becomes possible to strategise on how to meet everyone’s needs. We connect through our universal needs and look for mutually agreeable strategies.
4. Self-empathy when (a) stimulus is external
Self empathy when the stimulus is external is a process of recognising our stimulated response and then going inwards to see what’s going on for us. What are our feeings? What unmet needs are our feelings pointing to? I wrote this blog after a close family member approached me for empathy and support as they worked on their reaction to a social encounter which left them very confused and angry. The blog, Recognising and responding to lane violations, describes the processes of humanising and of self empathy, with me acting as an empathy buddy. My family member was able to recognise their feelings and needs and also guess at what their friend was doing, what need they were meeting, when they stimulated my family member. The experience resulted in self-regulation and a feeling of empathy towards the person who stimulated them.
4. Self-empathy when (b) stimulus is internal
Self empathy when stimulus is internal is a process of recognising a core belief or judgement of ourselves which puts a brake on us. The brake stops us stepping into our authentic self, or perhaps our power. This happened to me recently when I was buying a new car. I wrote this blog, The colour red after I had sat with myself and looked inward to sense my body, to find my feelings and the activated needs sitting behind them. The process was internal with some helpful support from my partner when I was caught by my unhelpful core belief of not being deserving. It is a personal example of self empathy when stimulus is internal.
5. Mourning and learning from our regrets
I want to use a personal example to demonstrate, Mourning and learning from regrets.
Scenario: At the IIT, during the harvest session of our group’s discussion, I added in Giraffe to the statement, We want to learn how to say No (in Giraffe). After our presentation, a young woman in our group said that she hadn’t agreed to this and didn’t know what Giraffe meant. She seemed very distressed by this.
Mourning:
I reacted to her statement and felt regret and shame. I sat with these feelings and looked for the unmet needs that were alive in me. I was regretful as consensus is important to me and I felt shame because my actions were based on the assumption that we all shared a foundational knowledge of NVC. I decided to share my mourning with her as I felt it was important to share this so that I would be able to reconnect with her.
Honest Self Expression:
When the opportunity arose, I asked her if I could speak with her for a moment. I said,
“I’m mourning the fact that I included the word, Giraffe during our presentation, because consensus is important to me. And I assumed everyone in the group was familiar with the term which wasn’t very inclusive of me. This made me sad because social inclusion is important.” I asked her how my words had landed for her.
She said that she was upset when it happened but it passed quickly and that she held nothing against me. She then said that I could feel reassured that she was OK and that I had nothing to worry about.
The process of mourning:
In NVC the process of mourning uses Observations, Feelings and Needs to understand and connect to reactions to our own behaviour. I demonstrate this above in an act of quiet self connection. I identify the incident through the observation, recognise my feelings and look for the needs that are unmet which the feelings are pointing to. I then I made a request of myself to honestly express what was going on for me.
What I didn’t do was go to a negative place of self-loathing and self-judgement. The process of mourning opens up the opportunity to grow and develop, rather than confirmation that I’m not good enough, or I’m a bad person. It is a learning opportunity. What I learned from the incident was
1. Check with the group if I want to add something additional and
2. Think about everyone’s knowledge base when I start using the technical language of NVC, being sure to define the terminology before using it .
6. Screaming in Giraffe
Screaming in Giraffe is about urgency in order to ‘give weight to our message, but the words used to describe our feelings, needs and requests are used with the intention to connect’ (Larsson and Hoffmann 2011). Its about making it very clear what our own and the other person’s needs are.
I’m so frustrated, because I want to get through to you, and I don’t know how. I long for more connection and wonder if you are willing to tell me what is going on in you right now? (ibid 2011, p51)
7. Interrupting
Interrupting using NVC is an opportunity to bring a person back to life, bringing them back to what is alive in them in the moment. They might be lost in story and wanting empathy but aren’t aware that this is what they are requesting. Interrupting in Giraffe is one way to bring them back to an awareness of their needs. For example, in the YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPanBJFOP84, Marshall suggests you interrupt as follows:
Excuse me, excuse me for interrupting but I really want to be sure that I am connecting to what you really want me to hear.
It is not about taking the conversation away from the person but to bring the person back to life.
At The NZ IIT, Jeff Brown gave a talk on interrupting and after explaining various kinds of ways to avoid someone who is using too many words, he said,
So we're trying to serve life here in its totality. We're not aiming to meet our own needs at the expense of the other. We're trying to bring more meaning, more life, more realness into everything that's in our environment. So in a strange way, we're actually trying to help the other person by interrupting them. I care enough about you to interrupt you and to stop you….
If we plan to interrupt, first thing to do, connect with your intention. What is your intention? … the general thrust for me would be, how can I bring life back into this interaction so that it's really serving both of us? So that we're both really connected to it. Because here's the thing, even if they're going on and on and on, if you're not hearing them, it's not satisfying for them because they're speaking to be heard.
Jeff explained that if your intention to interrupt is not related to connection then it is time for some self empathy. This is important to do in order to be able to offer empathy once you interrupt . Or honesty.
"I'm not following you and I want to be connected with you." (Honesty example)
"Is what really matters to you that you know that everybody's safe?" (Empathy example)
8. Expressing gratitude
Below is an excerpt from the Foundation Course Manual which I use. Alex Norman gave me permission to use her Foundation Course Manual. I explain expressing gratitude/appreciation as an Observation, Feelings and Needs with Giraffe ears out. The intention is to say what the other person did and what needs of yours were met as a result.
Taken from page 32 of the Foundation Course Manual used by Coaching to Clarity, with permission from Alex Norman.
9. Receiving gratitude
When receiving gratitude with Giraffe ears, we want to know what it was about our behaviour or actions that prompted gratitude. We do this as we want to know how our actions have contributed to the wellbeing of others. We want to know if we are making life more wonderful for others and for ourselves. We might say something like,
‘Thank you very much for your valuable statements. I’m wondering if you could tell me what needs of yours were met by my actions? I’d really enjoy knowing how I have contributed to your wellbeing.
10. Making conscious choices with awareness of needs
Being aware of our needs supports us in making conscious choices which serve to meet these needs. Having an awareness of needs means we take responsibility for what it is that we are needing; we then look for strategies to meet those needs. And if we find ourselves in conflict, then taking time to understand our needs and the needs of the other person, offers a pathway towards reconciliation. With the needs identified, it becomes possible to sort out strategies that will allow all needs to be met. I wrote a blog about expressing needs as abstract nouns as this is the linguistic strategy to deploy when choosing not to blame others. Here is the blog, Needs as Nouns.
11. Expressing an "apology"
Below is an excerpt from the Foundation Course Manual which I use. Alex Norman gave me permission to use her Foundation Course Manual. I explain apologising as an act of mourning with Giraffe ears in.
Taken from page 32 of the Foundation Course Manual used by Coaching to Clarity, with permission from Alex Norman.
12. Resolving an inner conflict through NVC dialogue.
When we are stimulated or triggered, it is really helpful to engage in a self empathy dialogue. We take the time to sense into our bodies to identify our feelings, which then point to our unmet needs. Once we understand what needs are at stake, we can then decide what to do in order to meet our needs. We can come up with strategies. I wrote about this in a blog, The freeze survival response. I composed an inner dialogue with myself to step through the OFNR process and work out a strategy to be OK.
Key Differentiations
The 25 Key Differentiations of the CPP are presented below in the order that they appear in the CPP.
1. "Being Giraffe" vs. "doing Giraffe"
Being Giraffe is all about having the intention to connect, listening empathically and expressing ourselves honestly as a way of ‘being’, as a way of living. It is about living with an intention to connect. Importantly, when we live Giraffe we are honest with ourselves in order to check that we have capacity to be present to the pain of others. We then can connect with honesty and compassion for the other. Doing Giraffe is more like being a wobbly Giraffe. We have just learnt the framework, are excited about practising it but noticing perhaps just how stitled or inauthentic our communication might be. This could be because we need more practice, as we are sounding formulaic, or perhaps because we are feeling obligated… ‘this is something I should or need to do’. This kind of response means we are caught up in a story rather than aware of our needs, our capacity and our intention to connect. When I was first trying to connect with my daughter using NVC, I recall my daughter saying to me, “Don’t use that shit on me, Mum. Just say it”. These days, I’m pleased to say that I’m being more that doing Giraffe these days, and my relationship with my daughter is very authentic. We both connect with each other with intention and can say when we don’t have capacity, later returning to reconnect when the moment is right.
2. Giraffe honesty vs. jackal honesty
Giraffe honesty is when we sink into our body to discover our feelings that point to our needs. With this new wisdom about ourselves we then seek to express ourselves taking full responsibility for our feelings and needs. We also then make a request in order to meet our needs. In contrast, jackal honesty is a ‘suicidal’ attempt to meet our needs but it laced with judgement and blame of others, or some kind of defensive response which suggests we are reacting to a set of circumstances in the present which actually have their origins in events separate to what is happening in the moment. It is like we are lost in past trauma which we play out on others. Below is an example of jackal honesty which is hard to hear and following that is an example of the same situation expressed using giraffe honesty which opens up the opportunity to be heard and to receive assistance and support. The giraffe example calls on the language of NVC, observation, feelings, needs and request.
a Jackal honesty example in a business content from Course 1, Connecting Through Talk - Introduction
One possible giraffe alternative to the jackal honesty above. Taken from Connecting Through Talk - Introduction.
3. Empathy vs. sympathy and other forms of response (fixing, reassuring, storytelling, etc.)
As part of a collaboration with a peer of mine, Elke Haggerty,who is also going for certification, I participated in a series of presentations on the key differentiations. Here is a 5 min presentation on Empathy vs. Sympathy. Following the presentation, I was encouraged to demonstrated empathy using an example that I had prepared and then received feedback. Some of the feedback was a bit hard to hear, but I’m pleased with how I responded with appreciation for their honesty and for the opportunity to offer empathy. This clip demonstrates presence and empathy on my part as I fielded the feedback. I also received some written feedback which I share below.
Reflecting on this presentation as I write, I observe myself as authentic, thoughtful and warm. I can see my development as an empathetic listener, my ability to receive hard to hear messages while remaining self-regulated and my knowledge of NVC.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KWVz231PHjA
Feedback from John Sweeney, CNVC Candidate.
ET demonstrated compassion when participants offered feedback that was more in the form of fixing and strategies. She excepted the offerings with grace and reflection. When Sterling prefaced his feed back with not knowing if it was “NVC or not” I felt a bit anxious, but when ET open heartedly received the information without judgement, I felt expansive and nurtured and my needs for support, shared reality and consideration were being met.
When I heard ET state that she was “nervous” I felt warm and calm and my needs for community and vulnerability were being met.
When ET spoke of “sympathy brings the self in” and “shifts the topic-hood”. I felt intrigued and engaged and my needs for clarity, growth and learning were being met.
4. Protective vs. punitive use of force
The protective use of force is about using force in order to protect someone or oneself from danger. It is based on an assumption that people may behave in ways that are injurious and thus need correction, which involves having an educative response.
The intention behind the protective use of force is only to protect, not to punish, blame or condemn (Rosenberg 2015, p. 186)
The punitive use of force is about taking a ‘power over’ stance in order to control, coerce or injure (or worse) another person. The assumption in this case is that people are basically bad or evil and need to repent. The involves suffering, which may just build resentment resulting in their compliance being based in fear rather than from a desire or willingness to comply.
The intention behind the punitive use of force is to cause individuals to suffer for their perceived misdeeds. (Rosenberg 2015, p. 185)
A recent example of this was shared by a young mother who attended a zoom training session with me. She was frustrated with her young son who wouldn’t get ready for school despite her pleas and then threats to do so. For example, the punitive approach went something like this: “If you don’t get ready now, I won’t give you tuck-shop money today”, instead of something more like, “Mummy is feeling a bit anxious because she has a meeting this morning and needs to get to work early. Would you be willing to get ready quickly so that we won’t be late?”
NVC offers a level of moral development based on autonomy and interdependence, whereby we acknowledge responsibility for our actions and are aware that our own wellbeing and that of others are one and the same. (Rosenberg 2015,p.190)
5. Power with vs. power over
I wrote this blog, Connecting compassionately by saying what you mean, and meaning what you say, to demonstrate ‘power over’ through the use of Jackal language between life partners. I wanted to demonstrate the unequal power relation of dominance, fight back and submission that is present in relationships based in pain and which use ‘power over’ to have their needs met. This strategy is what Marshall calls a suicidal way of getting needs met. I then used the piece to attract interest in Foundation Training. While this blog demonstrates power over and the pain that drives this mode of interaction, I didn’t supply an example of ‘power with’. Here is the same scenario from a power with perspective. To achieve the ‘power with’ perspective, I composed an empathic response to the pained husband, thereby humanising him and recognising his needs by listening behind his ‘hard to hear’ message for the feelings and unmet needs. Having heard him, the female partner then moves into a Giraffe OFNR to express how the ‘hard to hear’ message landed and what her feelings and needs are in that moment. This approach afforded respect to the male partner, acknowledged their pain and then from a grounded, self connected and heartfelt place, the female partner spoke her truth in a blame-free and judgement-free manner. This I believe is an example of ‘power with’.
6. Appreciation vs. approval, compliments or praise
Appreciation is about telling a person how their actions have made my/our life more wonderful. It is a celebration of needs met. The expression of appreciation in NVC involves expressing the observation, the positive feeling and the needs which were consequently met. It can also include a request for connection, such as ‘how was that to hear?’ I really enjoy expressing appreciation using NVC because it provides specific feedback on the actions of the other. It is pragmatic and helpful. It helps the other person know how they impacting the world which is something I don’t think we readily know or hear about. Approval, compliments or praise tend to be limited to generalised statements that don’t point directly to specific behaviours which have been appreciated. They tend to suggest a paradigm of right/wrong or good/bad which steps out of a paradigm of feelings and needs.
7. Choice vs. submission or rebellion
Choice is about feel will. In NVC, responding to a request is choiceful. If we want to do it, then we do it. If we don’t want to do it, then we don’t. If a request isn’t choiceful, then we are no longer in a state of choice. Instead we are likely to be doing something because we ‘have to/should/must’ and so on. This is a kind of power over. We are being ordered rather than requested. In this case of ordering or commanding, when we comply, we do it for reasons other than choicefulness. For example, we could be submitting to the will of another, or perhaps we are rebelling because we never had a choice, so we rise up and refuse.
When I think about ordering my kids to clean their rooms before going on holiday, I wonder now how it would have been if I’d used an OFNR which talked about feelings and needs instead. It was always so stressful prior to leaving. We were all cranky with each other and I was impatient and anxious. Had I known about NVC then, I might have said something like this,
"Kids, when I think about how much I love tidiness and order, I feel happy and calm. I’m wondering if you’d willing to tidy your rooms before we leave so that when we come home, the house is tidy and welcoming. I love it when coming home is so inviting. Would you be happy to make your bed and put your things away before we leave?”
8. Observation vs. observation mixed with evaluation
I have provided the section on the language of Observations from Connecting Through Talk, course 2 - THE INGREDIENTS. The details of the slide information are covered in the short audio. In summary, Observations in NVC are designed to be non-contestable, meaning all people involved would agree on the events. They avoid negative evaluations which can trigger jackal responses thus reducing the opportunity to connect.
Connecting Through Talk - THE INGREDIENTS, Module 2
9. Feeling vs. feeling mixed with thoughts
I have provided the section on the language of Feelings from Connecting Through Talk, course 2 - THE INGREDIENTS. The details of the slide information are covered in the short audio. In summary, feelings are derived from our bodies, our somatic responses to the environment. Given this, we select adjectives of ‘affect’ which give meaning to our physiological reactions, such as sad, happy, glad and mad. These adjectives don’t implicate others or imply that others ‘do’ something to us. In NVC, adjectives which imply blame or which point to a judgement or ‘a story’ about who is responsible are avoided. These adjectives are ‘feelings mixed with thoughts’, such as bullied, harassed, betrayed, abandoned.
Connecting Through Talk - THE INGREDIENTS, Module 4
10. Need vs. request
I have provided the section on the language of Needs from Connecting Through Talk, course 2 - THE INGREDIENTS. The details of the slide information are covered in the short audio. In summary, Needs are universal and common to all humanity. They are fundamental to our physical, mental and spiritual health. We strive in our lives to meet our needs. While we are responsible for meeting our needs, we can ask others for their assistance, and if we do, we make requests for strategies to meet our needs. Sometimes our strategies aren’t very successful and sometimes our requests aren’t met. In NVC, we try to express our requests for needs in choiceful, specific and doable ways.
Connecting Through Talk, THE INGREDIENTS, Module 3
11. Request vs. demand
A request in NVC is about truly making a request rather than a command or demand. It is based on the assumption that we are ready to hear, No and accept it when it is not met. For a request to be willingly responded to, our language choices are important. This is why an NVC request typically opens with, Would you be willing…. We want the receiver of the request to respond with the energy and desire similar to the joy a child experiences when feeding ducks. Below is the audio and slides that I use when I teach this key differentiation. Listen to the audio which describes the three slides below.
Transcript of the language features of requests
12. Stimulus vs. cause
During a block of four Practice Group sessions, a participant wanted to understand and work on guilt and shame. They wanted to understand their guilt and shame from an NVC perspective. I brought in the Stimulus vs Cause discussion as a context for the ‘arrival’ of guilt and shame as a reaction to interaction and self analysis. Here are the slides of that session. We finished with an activity - Yin and Yang to explore our guilt and shame which practiced OFNR in self empathy and humanising self reflection. Here are the slides, Stimulus vs Cause.
13. Value judgment vs. moralistic judgment
Moralistic judgments are life alienating in the sense that these kinds of judgements separate us from our natural state of compassion. We are trapped in a world of rightness and wrongness. The language of moralistic judgement is negative evaluation of people, their attributes, behaviours and opinions. In a word, moralistic judgements are Jackals. Jackals are tragic expressions of unmet needs.
Values based judgments
Out beyond ideas of wrongdoing and right doing, there is a field. I’ll meet you there. (Rumi 13th century)
I believe this quote from Rumi resonated with Marshall because it offers us a way to be connected with each other in a realm beyond moralistic judgements. If we understand needs as universal, as shared by all humanity, then our needs/values aren’t in competition. We can understand judgments as values/needs based. With a desire to connect from the heart, connection is about finding strategies to meet everyones’ needs. Taking this perspective, a perspective of feelings and needs, offers an alternative path through conflict into a shared reality of needs. This is what values based judgments means. It is the means for enriching life.
In my life, I have found this approach has helped me repair the relationships with my family. It has allowed me to see the unmet needs behind the jackals of my loved ones. Also, it has allowed me to work out my needs and thus find strategies to then negotiate in order to meet needs for all. My personal journal has tracked this journey to understanding and love.
14. Natural vs. habitual
What I want in my life is compassion, a flow between myself and others based on a mutual giving from the heart (Rosenberg 2015, p. 1)
I believe that this quote by Marshall is the best starting point to explore the meaning of ‘natural’ in NVC. Marshall believes that our natural self is a compassionate self, it is part of our being. Sadly though, we aren’t always connected to our natural, compassionate selves, instead we may find ourselves, stuck in habitual patterns which we have developed as a means of protection. These habitual patterns, or core beliefs are learned and ‘lead to default intentions of blame and self protection’ (Sofer 2018, p.71) as we do our best, often in tragic ways, to mitigate, avoid or respond to conflict.
NVC guides us in reframing how we express ourselves and hear others. Instead of habitual, automatic reactions, our words become conscious responses based firmly on awareness of what we are perceiving, feeling and wanting. (Rosenberg 2015, p. 3)
Just the other day, while driving, I was feeling afraid and reacted to Tony’s driving. My behaviour was reactive and his reaction was habitual; it was defensive and angry as he tried to deflect and protect himself from my reaction. With some self regulation and reframing, I was able to empathise with him, hear his frustration at my reactions to his driving, and acknowledge his values for safety and competency. Having received empathy he was then interested in understanding my reaction and what was going on for me. In sum, we stepped out of our habitual behaviours and moved into our natural compassionate selves. It was reconnecting and life enriching.
15. Interdependence vs. dependence or independence
Interdependence is based on the premise that, we as humans, are interpersonally connected. As social being, we need each other for survival, that is, for our physical, mental and social wellbeing. In the words of Jim Manske (2021, 9.109),
Living interdependently is living from the knowledge that every individual is related to every other individual - every part of the system effects every other part.
We are born dependent, given our helplessness as new borns, but we eventually grow up into independent individuals who are aware that we are responsible for ourselves, for our feelings and needs. However, we don’t exist alone. We live in social communities and our choices and actions effect those around us, sometimes in small and insignificant ways, but then they can also impact in profound and life impacting ways. As an NVC practitioner, we know that we are interdependent. This means being open to the perspectives and needs of others, and we experience others’ needs as integrally connected to our own.
I experienced this just this week when my fall and need for medical assistance impacted my daughter who had to leave work, take the dog and wait with me while waiting for the ambulance. She then had to provide ongoing care until I could get home. As she didn’t have a car, she had to ask one of her work colleagues to help her to help me. By leaving work, she had to leave her role as exhibition installation manager and trust that the team would be able to manage the installtion without her. One unfortunate incident of falling over while taking the dog for a walk had a significant impact on many people: - my daughter, her work colleagues, the paramedics and the local restaurant staff were all impacted by my mishap. We are truly an interdependent species.
16. Life-connected vs. life-alienated
I included this key differentiation in my online course, Connecting Through Talk. Here the audio and the transcript of the presentation on life connected vs life-alienated.
17. Shift vs. compromise
The act of compromise is a process of giving something up in order to reach agreement. Two parties may be trying to negotiate, but because each party seeks a particular approach or strategy, the pathway to agreement is usually a process of ‘giving up something’. In the end, both parties give something up in the interest of an agreement. Sadly though the agreement usually isn’t ideal.
An alternative to compromise is shifting. By this I mean, we arrive at strategies which are amenable to both sides by approaching agreement from the perspective of needs. If needs, which are at stake, are identified, it becomes possible to negotiate mutually beneficial strategies. With an appreciation of the needs of others and the knowledge that we can help another meet their needs, we shift away from inflexibility to a willingness to help. We enjoy the satisfaction of helping others. This shift brings us joy.
When we give from the heart, we do so out of the joy that springs forth whenever we willingly enrich another person’s life. This kind of giving benefits both the giver and the receiver. The receiver enjoys the gift without worrying about the consequences that accompany gifts given out of fear, guilt, shame, or desire for gain. The giver benefits from the enhanced self-esteem that results when we see our efforts contributing to someone’s well being. (Rosenberg 2015, p. 5)
18. Persisting vs. demanding
Persisting is the process of working towards meeting our needs. We might need to keep working on meeting our needs, particularly if our requests are not well received. This may require us to be creative and look for new or novel strategies to meet needs. We persist in the desire to meet our needs through dialogue, and self connection. I’ve heard this called, ‘dogging for our needs’.
Demanding, on the other hand, is driving for our needs without considering how others are impacted. We are so intent on getting what we want that we forget to consider others and what is alive in them and what they might be needing.
Below is an example of persisting or dogging for my needs. At the IIT NZ, I wanted to get feedback from certified trainers by offering training sessions. My need was for feedback on my living, knowing and sharing NVC for certification. When I realised that there didn’t seem to be opportunity for this in the program, I tried to create opportunities individually and informally. This surfaced similar frustrations with other candidates. We then talked together on ways of meeting our common needs. We decided to use the informal session times to offer training. This however did not work well as other participants also wanted to use the informal sessions. There was competition for limited slots. I then took the opportunity to offer feedback to the leadership team on the formal, online feedback form. This resulted in the leadership team reserving time for candidates and being available to observe and offer feedback.
In contrast, I remember when I was working full time in a demanding managerial role, I would make multiple requests of my PA. She worked hard for me, never complained, and worked overtime without any heads up. I did not consider the impact my demands were having on her and her family, as I was caught up in my own story and my own, urgent ‘to do ‘ list. I was not considering her needs, nor was I acknowledging her right to choose and manage her life and responsibilities. I look back now at those days and regret my demanding behaviour.
19. Self-discipline vs. obedience
In my opinion, self-discipline is best described as being in a state of choice because I have decided to met a need of mine. I choose a particular pathway or decision or action to meet the need. This is an act of self will. It doesn’t include anyone else. There is no coercion, nor obligation nor obedience. It is an act of self care. I find this a very empowering characteristic of the NVC practice. I am free to choose. I choose what I need to do to meet a universal need. I’m not subservient to others. I’m not acting out of fear or favour. I am autonomous. I have agency and I choose. I am luxuriating in the beauty of needs met.
20. Respect for authority vs. fear of authority
The difference between respect for authority and fear of authority lies in the paradigms in which they exist. If we comply with authority based on fear, then we are living within a paradigm of power over, of right/wrong, or good/bad. If we don’t obey, there is an implied threat to our safety because of the likelihood of punishment.
However, if you we choose to live within a paradigm of feelings and needs, then we can look upon the person with authority as having feelings and needs. We can humanise and understand their role, responsibilities and decisions. We can ask ourselves how we would like to respond to the authority figure in terms of how our needs and their needs can be met. The process of meeting needs is thus a negotiation of strategies with an intention to meet the needs of all parties. In one sense it is a win/win outcome. And if strategies can’t be agreed upon, this is an opportunity to further explore alternative strategies and develop a deeper understanding of the feelings and needs which are at stake in order to come to a mutual understanding of each other. We find strategies via respectful negotiation.
At the IIT NZ, I was privileged to witness quite a number of negotiations in relation to the multiple and complex needs of the participants. The leadership team modelled curiosity by probing what sat behind numerous questions and concerns. By surfacing the needs that were at stake, it became possible to negotiate strategies. I witnessed interactions which both negotiated strategies and which resulted in decisions to not participate based on needs. My response to these events was an appreciation of how free everyone was to participate in ways which met their needs. I was also impressed to observe how the leadership team were attuned to their feelings and needs, making them clear with justifications. By offering explanation for their intentions and needs, it was possible to find strategies for everyone. It was a joy to observe and participate in.
21. Vulnerability vs. Weakness
I have enjoyed reading about vulnerability in the works of Brene Brown as well as within the tradition of NVC. I realise that one of my old patterns was to ‘armour up’ as a means of protection. I didn’t want anyone to think that I was weak, so I put on a protection of defensiveness. For me vulnerability is about having the courage
to reveal who I am instead of withholding me;
to show up as myself instead of people pleasing;
to be honest instead of choosing armour or safety.
I wrote a blog about vulnerability after I had attended one of Brene Brown’s training courses, Dare to Lead.
22. Love as an action vs. love as a need and a feeling
In November, 2022, there was a query on the CNVC Candidates email list about Key Differentiation #22, Love as an action vs. Love as a Need and as a feeling. I replied to the query. Here is my post to the list, and I have also included a response about the impact of my grammatical explanation for the Key Differentiation #22. When I reflected on my contribution to the query, I noticed how most of the posts were grappling with the meaning differences, without a sense of how meaning is construed through grammatical choices. I hoped that my contribution would clarify the difference in a simple manner using non-technical grammatical terms.
23. Self-empathy vs. acting out, repressing, or wallowing in feelings
We need empathy to give empathy.... If we become skilled at giving ourselves empathy, we often experience in just a few seconds a natural release of energy that then enables us to be present with the other person. (Rosenberg 2015, p. 103)
Below is a component of my description of self empathy. Self empathy occurs when we pause and move out of our reactive (fight/flight) part of the brain and into our conscious, thinking part of the brain. To put it simply, self empathy occurs when we are rational, while acting out, repressing, wallowing or any reactive judgemental feelings occur whileever we stay functioning from our reactive limbic system. I model the process of moving from limbic to pre-frontal cortex in dialogue with myself. The model follows the steps outlines in the image below the audio.
Excerpt from Connecting Through Talk - BRINGING IT ALL TOGETHER, Module
24. Idiomatic vs. classical (formal) Giraffe
Another collaboration with my peer, Elke Haggerty, was a 20 min presentation on Idiomatic vs. Classical Giraffe. I was keen to present this topic as it relates directly to language choice which I find so interesting and so critical to Giraffe language. The presentation is a mix of presentation and audience participation with interactive feedback. It demonstrates my approach to online teaching/learning in which the learner is asked to participate and be challenged through experiential learning. I use the chat mode to elicit learner contributions. Below is the YouTube link.
The activity of writing an idiomatic or colloquial example of a classical OFNR produced an example by Stirling which was perhaps more like a jackal example. This was picked up by others and in a written piece of feedback by Hope, a certified trainer. I have included an excerpt below.
You gave a very accepting and warm response to Sterling’s colloquial NVC. I have attended other sessions with him and he often uses his humour to make connections to the material or the group. I was curious about how you might have given him some feedback about his response, which seemed to me to carry a bit of a threat in it (rather than a true giraffe response). I wondered if this was a conscious choice you made to affirm his efforts and not refer to content, or if perhaps you didn’t see his response as needing any coaching?
My response to Hope would be that I thought Stirling’s example was deeply complex, and not necessarily following the intention of a Giraffe OFNR. I agree with Hope that it might not be a true giraffe response. However, I wasn’t prepared to say that outright, because the relationship between the interactants plays a critical role in meaning making. I didn’t want to say he was wrong because I wonder if there is space for humour in a colloquial OFNR. I wanted to affirm him and I wanted to engage him without playing into a paradigm of right and wrong. His OFNR contained an ‘indirect’ threat which could be part of the banter between couples and not at all received as a threat. It was a request which included an indirect reference to a consequence. So the interesting thing to discuss is whether the indirect reference to a consequence turns the OFNR into Jackall language. If I could have the opportunity over again, I would probably raise this in the group and explain how the humour steps away from the intention of a Giraffe request, I think!
25. Empathic sensing vs. intellectual guessing
This clip is an example of demonstrating empathic listening. Soon after my demonstration started, I became flustered by the strength of the person in pain’s delivery as she recounted her story. I wasn’t expecting the energy. She was strident, determined and directive. Her delivery landed in me and I felt surprise and timidity. This distracted me from being present during the event and allowing the flow of compassion between us. I was aware that I moved from ‘empathetic sensing’ to ‘intellectual guessing’, in the sense that I started monitoring myself, engaging in inner self talk which was noting and listing things to offer back. I was in my head and not my heart.
So for me the difference between these two concepts is empathic sensing is about being present to the other person, being open hearted and responding to them. They are at the centre of your response. In contrast, intellectual guessing is using the pre-frontal cortex to analyse and evaluate what I need to say in response. It is about my capacity to remember everything I’m hearing, being able to offer it back accurately; it is about me more than them. It is from the head not the heart.
