Self-Expression
The process of learning to communicate more effectively while accepting the risk of vulnerability is interestingly addressed in a relatively new method called Non Violent Communication, or NVC for short. NVC is currently enjoying much popularity because of its wide range of application, and has been presented to the public in recent years by a man named Marshall Rosenberg. Trained workshop leaders in NVC offer these techniques for low prices or donations, and Rosenberg’s book Non-Violent Communication: A Language Of Compassion (1999 ) is recommended, but not required reading to take a workshop. Through various handouts of worksheets and exercises, the participants in an NVC group learn new ways of regarding the dynamics of conflict, and personal experience from several workshops is shared by this author.
The central theme in NVC is that all of our emotional needs matter equally, and all of us have the same needs. Identifying our core needs and a strategy to get them met (as well as helping the other to meet their needs) becomes the main focus. The challenge is for us to go through our “layers” so that the needs are recognizable to us, versus staying focused on the reasons for disagreement. It is often said by spiritual workshop leaders that what we disagree on is strategies, not needs.
NVC is also a system whereby we can learn to express ourselves emotionally and formulate requests in ways that work specifically toward conflict resolution at the time of dialoguing. By searching for agreement on ways to meet our needs, we conserve a sense of personal power, and it is easier to risk becoming vulnerable when we feel permitted to acknowledge our needs. Knowing we can be “heard” rather than thinking that we will “simply have to compromise” in resolving a situation is more of an incentive to risk disclosure. As well, the emphasis on meeting needs in NVC promotes compassionate connection by considering what the other person’s underlying needs might be in the situation.
To address the challenge of identifying deeper emotional needs in the midst of stressful conflict, there are certain key points in NVC. To help us isolate our needs, we are encouraged to focus on observing the feelings, and to keep away from the common tendency to evaluate or judge the situation/issue in terms of who is right or how unfair it might be. This is a new way of thinking for many of us, and it requires practice so that we can see how we automatically judge issues in a conflict. Thus it is encouraged in NVC workshops that people form practice groups, using role-playing, so that others can help us detect our tendencies to do this.
When we go through the process of asking ourselves how we are feeling in the midst of a conflict, we can begin to see how the feelings point to the underlying needs. In NVC workshops there are distributed lists of emotional needs associated with feelings, which are studied and referred to often. The List Of Needs has several categories. Grouped under the Need for Connection, for example, are needs such as Acceptance, Consideration, Support, etc.; under the Need for Autonomy there is Choice, Spontaneity, Independence; under the Need for Physical Well-Being is Safety, Sexual Expression, Touch; and so forth. In using NVC, we become conditioned to asking ourselves, as well as the other person, “if we are feeling a certain way because our need for (whatever we are lacking) is not being met.”
The process of asking questions regarding feelings and needs (both of the other person and ourselves) in the above-mentioned way is one of the main components of NVC; however, it seems formulaic and difficult to do, at first. Expressing ourselves in this way is therefore reinforced in spiritually focused practice groups so that it can become more automatic. As well, we can refine questions to our way of speaking, so that it becomes more natural. For example, if someone is upset because we are not able to commit to a travel plan, we can ask them if they are feeling frustrated because they need to count on having an itinerary, rather than asking if they are feeling angry because their need for predictability is not being met. Saying it this way can suggest an underlying need that the other person may want to clarify, but the attempt to understand what the need may be is appreciated, and can help diffuse the emotional charge.
NVC has been described as a language of strategy for fostering compassionate connection between people. This objective is achieved by striving to observe ourselves and the situation in a non-evaluative way, and by expressing genuine human emotional, mental and spiritual needs. In this regard, it is important to distinguish what feeling-words are being used in expressing oneself. For example, there is a difference between saying that one feels disrespected rather than feeling frustrated, angry, or sad. Being disrespected implies judgment of the other person’s action, and it takes the focus away from what universal need is not being met.
A similar effort to reduce blaming can be found in more traditional psychological approaches which encourage us to use “I Statements” versus “You Statements,” which focus on faulting the behavior, and not the perpetrator of that behavior. However, NVC cuts through a lot of red tape when one is taught to say, “I feel annoyed because I need support” rather than “I feel annoyed because you didn’t do the dishes.” In NVC, the goal is not only about avoiding emotional intensity, but also about taking responsibility for those emotions by connecting them to our needs, which changes the picture considerably.
John Gray is a popular therapist specializing in interpersonal communication, especially between the sexes. In describing the problems people have in communicating, he speaks of the difference between expressing emotions and information. In his book Mars And Venus On A Date (1997) Gray writes, “we are trained to express information that assumes those close to us will understand and acknowledge what we feel.” It is true that we have been generally conditioned to directly address issues rather than feelings around the issues as a way to communicate. The reality is that expressing information in this way will very likely raise immediate defenses, because even if it is done in innocence, it creates the burden of projected expectations. The implication that the other person “should have known” can be perceived as accusing them of their lack of responsibility, especially as the issue itself may catch the other person entirely by surprise. Starting a dialogue in this way, therefore, can be very counterproductive.
According to Gray, a more effective approach is to express the emotions that we feel based on the occurrence of something specific. It is further recommended that the stage be set ahead of time by an opening statement that is essentially neutral but addresses general feelings. For example, as an opener one might state that they are concerned about a situation, and pause. When the psychological space is offered by such a preparatory statement, it gives the other person a chance to adjust their energy, and a tone for dialoguing is established that can follow this format.