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

251–260 of 415 posts

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#251

Post by metabren »

leesalminen wrote: post #126

I’m generally a good conversation participant, but this week has made me second guess myself. My father-in-law is currently hospitalized after his heart stopped this weekend. He’s currently in an induced coma. Brain damage is a foregone conclusion at this point and they’re unsure if he will ever regain consciousness. My wife and I happened to be on vacation in Costa Rica when this happened. We hopped on the next avai…

Sorry to hear.

Check out Crucial Conversations (https://www.amazon.com/Crucial-Conversations-Talking-Stakes-...). It's a framework that I've found immensely helpful.

If interested, I do recommend you read the book, but you can still get something out of this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFaXx3pgaxM (it's a summary masquerading as a review).

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#252

Post by mef51 »

The way NVC has helped me the most is ironically not with conversations with other people but with conversations with myself, and helping me explain to myself why I'm feeling a certain way in response to something. Specifically, what has helped me were the distinctions between feelings and thoughts, and needs being universal while wants are just the ways you try to fulfill a need in a certain moment.

Applying NVC with myself is also a lot less awkward -- with people early on I often overdid it and got a lot of funny looks :) But over time, using NVC primarily to understand a situation, I can pick and choose the way I say it to a person so that person trusts that I'm being genuine instead of just applying a formula.

In my case, the ideas in NVC probably saved my life by giving me a tool to work through several personal crises. In my social group no one really knows NVC or that it's important to me, I often try to be subtle about it. It's fascinating to see it on the front page of HN.

I'd be happy to share my experience with NVC, which I primarily use with myself but often guides my approach to problems at work or with friends.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#253

Post by greg7gkb »

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.

What are some good alternatives then?

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#254

Post by funfunfun »

vfinn wrote: post #206
__blockcipher__ wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was shocked when I saw that Krishnamurti quote. J Krishnamurti's talks are some of the most insightful and clear-headed that I've ever encountered. And yet it's very rare to encounter references to him in the wild. Sounds trite to say but some of "his" teachings (he hated that phrasing) got me through some very difficult times in my life. There was a time when I realized that my relationship with my parents was twi…

True about the rarity of Krishnamurti. Not sure how Krishnamurti would feel about Rosenberg, though, since he seems to be offering template solutions. What comes to your asterisk issue, the help says: "Text surrounded by asterisks is italicized, if the character after the first asterisk isn't whitespace."

I think this summary offers template solutions. They are an approximation of the insights of the book. The book is more about relating a human experience to a conversation,

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#255

Post by gambler »

jacobolus wrote: post #211
chroma wrote: post #156

Calling it "nonviolent communication" is a brilliant marketing move, as it implies that not conversing in this manner is violent. I've seen this style many times in my career, and it always comes off as patronizing. It also tends to be used far more often than recommended. Instead of being deployed in difficult conversations, it gets used in every one-on-one. My guess is that NVC ends up like power posing[1]: pop-psy…

I think you (and probably the people adopting this form in talking to you, if it is coming across as patronizing or passive-aggressive) are mistaking the point. This style of communication is not supposed to be a tool for more efficient (or deniable) emotional manipulation / control. The “nonviolent communicator” is supposed to spend a lot of work up front thinking about what their real emotional needs are (which tak…

>This style of communication is not supposed to be a tool for more efficient emotional manipulation / control.

In corporate environments, at least, "I feel [blah]" is a formula for manipulation and control. It allows people to make demands without ever acknowledging that they are making demands. It becomes a form of doublespeak. For example, "I feel frustrated and I need commitment to the project" means "start working overtime". Except now no one can say they're being asked to work overtime. And they can't even discuss working overtime, because it's phrased in terms of values and emotions. Suddenly saying "I will not be effective when working overtime" becomes an attack on other people's feeling and shared values, because the original demand is phrased in such terms.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#256

Post by greg7gkb »

edoloughlin wrote: post #158

When [you use NVC on me], I feel [patronised] because I'm needing some [respect as a fellow human being]. Would you be able to [drop the insincere MBA bullshit and treat me like an adult]?

It's a guide, and once it's been used a few times the language can be adapted to sound more like your nature voice but still conveying the same information.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#257

Post by funfunfun »

realradicalwash wrote: post #49

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…

If you read the book you'll notice that I-messages are a rough approximation of the tools. Sometimes I think this summary does more harm than good by presenting it without the richness of the book

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#258

Post by rhizome »

Aeolun wrote: post #207
leesalminen wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course we tried that first. My wife tried, their uncle tried, their cousins tried. I was the last resort. I agree that it’s best now to back off. There’s nothing else I can do. It hurts me to see my wife in additional pain because she’s not allowed to talk to the medical staff herself. She has medical training and is likely to understand the medical “Mumbo Jumbo” better than anyone else in the family.

I’m not sure I understand how it is impossible to talk to the medical staff, even if the brother still holds power of attorney. They won’t tell her anything about her dads condition without it? She doesn’t want to do it because her brother would freak out?

HIPAA, I imagine.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#259

Post by silveroriole »

excepttry wrote: post #144

As someone who has never heard of NVC, I recall echos of such tactics in the language a former teammate employed at work. However, nobody found him sincere or honest. Instead, he cam across as mechanical even though it was clear that he was trying to foster a transparent and open environment. There was always a disconnect between this noble goal and the hostility he made everybody feel when he talked with them. I thi…

And I think it’s so easily improved by just not sounding like a robot manager: “Hey, is 1pm not a good time for the team meeting? We had to wait for you the last few.”

The formal-speak sets off most people’s “I am being disciplined” alert right away.

Re: A guide to difficult conversations

#260

Post by excepttry »

FooBarWidget wrote: post #228
excepttry wrote: post #144

As someone who has never heard of NVC, I recall echos of such tactics in the language a former teammate employed at work. However, nobody found him sincere or honest. Instead, he cam across as mechanical even though it was clear that he was trying to foster a transparent and open environment. There was always a disconnect between this noble goal and the hostility he made everybody feel when he talked with them. I thi…

I don't get it. What part of that question is aggressive? Arriving late is a fact. The author requests helping him understand what's happening -- not an unreasonable request, unless you think that author magically understanding the situation without any communication counts as reasonable. The author feels an emotion -- again, not unreasonable because emotions are private and are not a choice. The author does not give…

> It sounds like you expect people to give you the benefit of the doubt all the time, without needing to expend any effort communicating.

I am saying there should be a culture of trust. What do you lose by trusting that your peer coworker did not intend to be late? If you don't trust your peers, you will create a hostile environment where everyone is on the defensive.

I trust that my former coworker did not intend to raise tensions by interrogating his peers and I trust that he really thought he was helping and creating a culture of radical transparency.

I agree that arriving late thrice is a fact. Calling it out can be done in a fair and neutral way.

Where I disagree is that as peers we have the expectation for a full explanation for banal coworkers actions. I have seen this exact scenario play out with my former coworker.

> "can you help me understand why you were late?" > the cross team sync ran 10 minutes late and I needed to present - i notified slack) > "could you have left the meeting early?" > No, i needed to present and I was at the end. > "could you have reordered the meeting?" > No, other people also needed to present and were late to meetings. . . .

What a pointless conversation. Nothing of value is gained!

Instead, we can trust our coworkers - ask to diagnose the problem and help work towards a solution.

"hey, _____, you have been late to the last three meetings, and we need to have you present. I am frustrated that we have lost 30 minutes of the team's time. Can we sync up after to adjust our timings so this works better for everyone?"

Here, we make clear that we are going to do a blameless postmortem to find a solution. I don't need to know exactly why my coworker is late, all I want to understand is if there are process inefficiencies that we can fix.

I trust my coworker, first.

Post reply on HN