A guide to difficult conversations

It takes time.

It's only after you have a few big unrecoverable screwups in life, will some of this stuff make more sense.

You are better off being aware and not understanding its value, than not being aware at all of NVC.

Once you hit an issue where you find yourself automatically avoiding things, attacking someone or defending yourself and producing all kinds of misery, just remind yourself that there is another tool available. And then pick up the book. You will find value.

What I've found - in high emotion situations people need express that emotion before they start listening, and they need to know that emotion is being heard.

This is tough. Sometimes people need a lot of prodding to start expressing a strong emotion because it invites judgement. It's kind of the end of artifice - 'this is who I am and what I'm really feeling'

Also, I find it exhausting to deal with high emotion.

But once that's over with, folks are more open to hearing the 'feeling statements' and observations.

--------------------

And can't resist old NVC joke -

Person 1 - "I'm really mad! This is so unfair!"

Person 2 - "I FEEL your anger"

Person 1 - "Everything's so chaotic, I don't know what to do!"

Person 2 - "I FEEL your confusion"

Person 1 - "I've got a lot of shit going down in my life!"

Person 2 - "I FEEL your shit going down!"

Presenting this communication pattern as an effective "one size fits all" method is a pretty bad idea.

You have to "know your audience." This means you need to know your employees, bosses, or colleagues as people and work to understand what motivates them. This is challenging, risky, and requires an opening of the mind to not just understand different psychologies but to accept them as viable alternatives to your own.

NVC communication will be very effective for some and thoroughly ineffective for others, and if you know your audience you'll know which is which.

I'm an example of the latter: I absolutely despise the NVC communication pattern because very few people actually speak like this and when they do so it's an obvious deviation from their status quo. It feels fake because it is, and it feels fake because I know the pattern. It's like when I get "feel/felt/found"[1] from a salesperson...I know what they're doing and it's not going to work.

[1] http://www.tomhopkins.com/blog/presentation/the-feel-felt-fo...

> >To a teammate: ‘You arrived 10 minutes late to the last three team meetings. I am frustrated because, as a team, we have a need for efficiency. Please, could you help me understand what’s happening?’

> This one is super passive aggressive. Your intention is to communicate a problem but instead of just doing that this is asking a question. I think this example shows the problem most clearly. These should be statements and not questions. I mean, do you really want or expect an honest answer to the question? Because it's probably something along the lines of "I think these meetings are a waste of my time".

+1 to this. I get the point that the OP was trying to make and think it's valid, but the specific phrasing provided would likely cause more harm than good in many cases. Specifically, it comes across more as "you better come up with a good excuse or you're in trouble" than "I care about you and hope everything is OK, and am here to help if there's a fixable problem at the root of your lateness".

I've also heard good things about "The Art of Hard Conversations: Biblical Tools for the Tough Talks That Matter" [0] and "Difficult Conversations: How to Discuss What Matters Most" [1].

Can anyone comment on the relative merits of these articles' / books' approaches?

[0] https://www.amazon.com/Art-Hard-Conversations-Biblical-Matte...

[1] https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0143118447/ref=oh_aui_sear...