Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A guide to difficult conversations

medium.dave-bailey.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 415 posts

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#41

Post by ThePadawan »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #37
ThePadawan wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for your input. I want to point out though that you propose "I might try ask them". I want to point out that that would get no response. That is the whole issue which I'm trying to find an "out" for.

IMO You can't force people to behave in a manner that is most condusive to you- especially if the manner they're behaving is most advantageous to themselves (a previous example you provided is to be able to deflect blame by sharing tasks). There is no NVC strategy to force people to behave in manners you want them to, only to try and convince them that your goals are aligned- if they're simply not, then that's just h…

Thank you. I believe your final sentence has really helped me understand an actual issue I am currently facing, but hadn't realized yet.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#42

Post by AmazingAtalanta »

It's interesting, because I believe as a child we learned a simplistic version of this in elementary school. The basic construct was the "I feel ______, when ______." Obviously, this was for child-level conflict resolution, so unlike the guidance provided in NVC it most likely left it open to making accusations ("I feel hurt when you pull my hair"). But it's possible that children might do better with that sort of directness compared to adults in more complicated situations.

But I have continued to use that approach as a manager and had never heard of NVC before I saw this article. I really appreciated the expanded guidance and a better way to plan the conversation. I also found the section on Consequences to be helpful as well. When you are in an authority position, I believe it is important to help people understand that there might be consequences to their actions or continued in-action.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#43

Post by zenpaul »

rhn_mk1 wrote: post #12

What's the purpose of expressing the feeling? It seems like it's there only to underline the urgency of the unmet needs. At the same time, it implies an emotional investment in the issue at hand, which I would see either as unnecessary or insincere in a work environment.

What I always say is "speak what you know" in a confrontational situation. It is an authentic way of communicating that opens up conversations. For example, I can say that "I feel frustrated when you show up to the meeting 10 minutes late." instead of "You are so disorganized that you never show up to the meetings on time." The truth is what I know is my feelings and what I don't know is what is going on in their world.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#44

Post by roenxi »

ascar wrote: post #30
acl777 wrote: post #20

I learned about Non-Violent Communication at a programming conference when the speaker said: "If you want to be a better programmer, read this book" Such a game changer in my pull request comments and life. Non-violent Communication is not easy, it takes continuous practice. I even blogged on each chapter: http://redgreenrepeat.com/2017/05/12/nonviolent-communicatio... and still feel I can improve my communication, e…

I'm curious, if NVC goes for indirect instead of direct conversation. I was working in an American company (I'm German) and had to learn to adapt to the style of being too nice (in my opinion). E.g. an "it might be better to do it like this", wasn't really meant as a weak suggestion, but a strong one. Something completely counterintuitive to my German mindset. I took it as a "might" and was met with negativity that I…

Memory suggests NVC has some pretty nasty things to say about people who "suggest" things and they later turn out to be orders. Heading 4 of the fine article is the relevant one, bit it actually gets Requests vs. Demands wrong based on the telling of it I heard.

My understanding based on a YouTube video I watched many years ago is that a request is either fulfilled or not fulfilled, and that is the end of it. A demand is backed up by some sort of threat, like threat of a negative reaction. The key was that to distinguish a request from a demand was impossible based on the language used. It was only detectable by the reaction if you don't act on it.

So, ironically "Go get me a beer" can be a request but "do you think it is a good idea to open the window?" might be a demand, depending on what happens on a flat "No".

Nothing in NVC says you have to be nice, and I'm not sure it takes a position on direct or indirect. But a negative response from not following a suggestion is exactly the sort of violence that NVC is trying to avoid.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#45

Post by motohagiography »

davesuperman wrote: post #28
motohagiography wrote: post #7

This is a valuable post. I have not taken an NVC course before, but I have done a lot of work in negotiations, writing, and was brought up to use this style of communication. One thing I would be interested in either from the OP or someone with experience with NVC, is how you recognize when you are being patronizing. Much of this communication style is the artifact of an implied power relationship, where the speaker…

Great question. I use NVC frequently to people with a lot more power than me, and I'd actually suggest NVC is actually about putting yourself (and your needs) on the same level as those of the person your speaking with. The fundamental premise is that fundamental needs are shared by all humans... and the ideal strategy is one where all needs are met. So, you can avoid patronising someone by truly seeking to understan…

That's the key I think. Appreciated. By putting your universal needs on the same level (not your "self"), you are in effect appealing to principle, so there is likely a great deal of alignment between the methods as described. Looking forward to reading up more on this. Thank you.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#46

Post by hnthroaway1926 »

ascar wrote: post #30
acl777 wrote: post #20

I learned about Non-Violent Communication at a programming conference when the speaker said: "If you want to be a better programmer, read this book" Such a game changer in my pull request comments and life. Non-violent Communication is not easy, it takes continuous practice. I even blogged on each chapter: http://redgreenrepeat.com/2017/05/12/nonviolent-communicatio... and still feel I can improve my communication, e…

I'm curious, if NVC goes for indirect instead of direct conversation. I was working in an American company (I'm German) and had to learn to adapt to the style of being too nice (in my opinion). E.g. an "it might be better to do it like this", wasn't really meant as a weak suggestion, but a strong one. Something completely counterintuitive to my German mindset. I took it as a "might" and was met with negativity that I…

I definitely prefer the direct style when it comes to features, tasks, and deadlines. If someone is too indirect then they are more likely to bury the lede, not mention the deadline or a critical dependency, etc.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#47

Post by SCdF »

tenaciousDaniel wrote: post #26
weeksie wrote: post #14

It's funny because few things make me seethe like someone talking to me in this way during a high stress moment. The artifice is transparent and if the conversation is tense the tone is quite easy to read as condescension. I'm hardly dismissing NVC as a tactic, just that when done poorly it's worse than simply being direct.

I supported my girlfriend throughout her grad studies to become a therapist. A huge part of her studies were in NVC. Even though I didn't go to school with her, I spent a lot of time with her classmates. Nearly everyone's conclusion, after 3 years of being deeply embedded in NVC, was that they hated it. And for the same reasons you describe.

Is there something else her or her classmates recommend?

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#49

Post by realradicalwash »

There seems to be quite some overlap between NVC and I-messages [0], which are constructed in a similar manner:

1. I feel... (Insert feeling word) 2. when... (tell what caused the feeling). 3. I would like... (tell what you want to happen instead). (from [0])

I learnt about I-messages about 10 years ago in a seminar on conflict resolution and have tried to use them eversince. My personal impression is that they have really helped me - in solving conflicts, but also in growing as a person. Because, again purely subjective, my impression is that once you give others your I-messages, they are more likely to also respond with I-messages. Which again helps me to understand others and their needs better.

That said, NVC looks like a great addition, by making things more explicit with those four distinctions (observations vs. evaluations, etc.).

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-message

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#50

Post by ritchiea »

weeksie wrote: post #14

It's funny because few things make me seethe like someone talking to me in this way during a high stress moment. The artifice is transparent and if the conversation is tense the tone is quite easy to read as condescension. I'm hardly dismissing NVC as a tactic, just that when done poorly it's worse than simply being direct.

You're right about the tone. If someone has not sincerely committed to believing the NVC framing of the problem is accurate then the tone comes off as incredibly condescending. You have to believe that the emotional component of the issue is a real problem and not just that you're caring about the emotions of other's as a chore to get what you want.
Post reply on HN