I wish I knew about nonviolent communication sooner. Just like other couples who have been together for more than 15 years, Min’an and I had our fair share of bitter fights. I said things I regret many times, yet the alternative, to not say anything, seems to lead to a worse path: resentment. A sense of resentment tends to build up over time and erupts like Mount Krakatoa.
But for the longest time, we didn’t know how to improve our communication. It wasn’t just us. In Sweden, divorces were prevalent. Several friends went to couples therapy and sex therapy to spice up their relationship (“my sex life is really good now!"), only to hear that they decided to go separate ways several months later. It’s frustrating.
We thought one way to get better at communicating is to go into couple’s therapy. But it would be difficult to find a good therapist, not to mention costly.
Luckily we found a better way in NVC.
What’s NVC?
NVC, or Nonviolent Communication, has transformed our relationships to be more open and less conflicted. It has taught us a better way to connect since we started applying it to our conversations four years ago. It has four highly structured parts, as explained in the book Nonviolent Communication by Marshall Rosenberg:
NVC Process
The concrete actions we observe that affect our well-being
How we feel in relation to what we observe
The needs, values, desires, etc. that create our feelings
The concrete actions we request in order to enrich our lives
Stating these four pieces of information clearly, verbally or with any other means is the sole purpose of NVC. Once stated, it’s usually followed with “Can you tell me what I just told you?” In the heat of an argument, it’s generally difficult to repeat verbatim what the other person has said, yet parrot-phrasing is precisely what needs to happen to build a shared understanding.
An example of an NVC statement is below:
When I see a dirty bathroom,
I feel annoyed
because I am needing more cleanliness and order in this apartment.
Would you be willing to tell me why you didn’t clean it even though you said you would?
The tricky part of applying NVC is in the nuance.
It’s observations, not judgments. The example above didn’t say, “When I see you lazying around on the sofa.”
It’s feeling, not thinking. It is not, “I don’t trust you.”
It’s needs, not strategies. It is not, “I need you to clean the bathroom.”
It’s requests, not demands. It is not, “You need to clean it now.”
NVC establishes a universal needs list. It’s the non-controversial essence that we all share. We all have the same needs, but some require more than others.
To fulfil this need, people have strategies that they have relied upon as habits. It’s the strategies that get them into conflict. Strategies tend to be only zero-sum in nature, whereas needs can be combined and satisfied as a unity. I like Yvette Erasmus for explaining these differences as clearly as possible in this 15-minute video.
I found NVC to be challenging to apply but it’s so well worth the effort.
The request formulation process alone is so tough to master. It has to be something that’s not negative (not “don’t do something”) and that the other person can actively act on the request.
Last week, I asked someone to respect me after they sent me an email with ALL CAPS (I was so shocked). After some thought, “please respect me” was an incorrect request. Respecting me is not something simple that the other person can do because the level of respect I need is only something I can judge upon. Also, if my request is “don’t send emails in all caps”, they can instead yell at me. If I then include “don’t yell” in my request, I am not sure that the request will be exhaustive.
My second attempt at formulating my request is to invite them to talk to me civilly and kindly in all of our communication. The keywords being civilly and kindly. I’m still not convinced this request is the best form as per NVC, but at least it’s an honest request, and I’m as clear as I can be.
Min’an, on a different occasion, formulated a much better request: He asked me to point out when he is defensive by reminding him to “take a breath”. In the middle of arguments, it’s hard to remember to say it, so sometimes we succeed, sometimes we fail. When it works, it’s truly a charm.
Another pillar of NVC that’s arduous to follow is the “nonviolent” aspect. The request needs to be a request, not a threat. It cannot have any penalty or repercussion. You cannot state what you will / will not do if the other person does not adhere to your request. It may well be that you will reduce the communication frequency later on if the other person does not do what you ask them to do, but it cannot be stated in the request. Otherwise, the communication will have “violence”.
Not stating a penalty is fundamentally very difficult, but it’s the difference between a request and a demand. It is where NVC produces wondrous results. Without this, resentment will continue to occur even after the request is fulfilled.
NVC does not make communication more succinct. It is very tiring to use it. Just stating a nonviolent request is enough to generate hours of conversation. Even then, the conflicts usually still appear. Not all the triggers or the needs have been identified yet.
Communication is, after all, almost always exhausting. With NVC, however, I found we can build on our communication patterns through mutual understanding. We also have a way of managing resentment, stopping it from building up and exploding to another volcano.
Note:
If this is the first time you’ve heard of NVC, this app may also be helpful to translate judgments and initial feelings we typically encounter.