Nonviolent Communication solidifies group connection and clarity

Photo: Thomas Cunningham via Flickr

Teamwork is a highly touted concept in workplaces, and for good reason; when a group of people comes together to work toward a goal, we often feel part of something greater. Yet, we can often sabotage our very efforts because we lack group connection and clarity. In his last post, John Kinyon discussed a process by which we can connect with ourselves and reach greater clarity and effectiveness. We can use that same process in a team setting to create a higher level of group cohesion and catapult our team to more successful outcomes.

For example, I was working with a team to plan a workshop in a new area. We knew of a local group that had organized similar workshops and we very much wanted to work with them. However, a number of us on the team had fears and misgivings about approaching the local group.

My team had a meeting to discuss our possibilities. We decided to connect with what our needs were as a team and to guess what motivates the other group. To do this, we each expressed our fears and concerns about the situation, and discussed our dreams; describing our best-case scenario.

During this process, we discovered a wide range of both fears and dreams. One person expressed fear about contacting the group at all. They felt sure that the group would not be amenable to working with us and would see us as competition. Realizing this fear helped this person uncover needs to care for and protect herself, as well as to conserve her energy.  My dream outcome was to work closely with the local group in organizing the workshop: to have them help with the outreach and marketing, and for our workshop to promote their trainings. This scenario would meet my needs for collaboration and support.

Next, we brainstormed what might be going on for the other group, and what needs they’re trying to fulfill. Here, too, there were a wide range of guesses: fear that they would see us as competition, the possibility that they might welcome us, et-cetera. If they perceived us as “invading” their territory, for example, we guessed that they’d have needs for sustainability and self-care. On the other hand, we could see that in welcoming us they might see the value in an open collaboration where our two groups could learn from each other. As we uncovered this range of possibilities we connected with the needs that might influence their choices.

This process helped our team establish a sense of companionship and collaboration, and helped me relax and have compassion for myself in this unknown situation. After a series of telephone meetings between our two groups, the local group made a proposal that was over and above our team’s optimum outcome. Our team was pleased, and the local group also seemed happy to be creating something beneficial to us all.

In retrospect, of course there is no way I can say that the work we did in our team generated that outcome. The other group we worked with was willing, and open to the opportunity, whether we did our work or not.

I am highly confident, however, that if we had not connected with our needs and the (imagined) needs of the other team, we easily could have reduced the likelihood that the local group would have been receptive to our overtures. At the most obvious level, if we had simply listened to our fears that they would see us as competition we might not have contacted them at all. Without being aware of what was going on within us, we also might have presented to them in a defensive manner, anticipating an undesirable reaction. Instead, we conversed with open and inclusive language, and genuinely expressed our optimism and desire to get to know them better and to collaborate and learn from them. Our language and conduct was all consistent.

Next time you are working within a team, see if you can reach a new level of group understanding by identifying the needs your group is trying to meet. If you interact with others as a group, try to guess what might be motivating them. How does this process influence the way you work as a team?

By Ike Lasater with Julie Stiles

Ike Lasater trains people to mediate their life using Nonviolent Communication (NVC) mediation. For more information, see www.WordsThatWork.us and www.nvcmediation.com.

Julie Stiles is a health and transformation coach who supports women go from overwhelmed and overworked to poised and powerful. For more, see www.juliestiles.com

About John Kinyon

I teach people how to turn conflict into clarity, ease and connection in personal and work relationships. There are learnable skills for facilitating difficult conversations for oneself and others in a way that changes conflict into connection and working together from a natural desire to contribute to well being. This process involves developing presence, language and communication skills that connect us to life within ourselves and others. I mediate conflict and train people in conflict resolution skills around the world. Together with colleague Ike Lasater, we have developed NVC mediation trainings and year immersion programs in the U.S., Europe, Australia, and South Korea, including work with Afghan tribal elders along the Pakistani border in early 2002. I have been a trainer of the international Center for Nonviolent Communication (CNVC) since 2000 and have studied and worked closely with NVC founder Marshall Rosenberg since 1998. I am also co-founder of the Bay Area NVC organization (BayNVC). | For more info see www.johnkinyon.com, www.nvcmediation.com, and www.cnvc.org.

3 Responses to Nonviolent Communication solidifies group connection and clarity

  1. Max Rivers says:

    In NVC, they traditionally call the voice of our fears and judgments the Jackal, but I have renamed it “The Isolator” in my work with couples (I use NVC in my marriage mediation practice, which I call Teamwork Marriage Mediation). You’ll notice that every time the Isolator speaks up, the strategies he suggests end up making your world smaller. “Don’t even make the call! It will stir up a hornet’s nest!”

    In the process described in this article, the giraffe (which I call the Friend) honors the concerns and needs represented by the Isolator, but choses different strategies, ones which meet our need for teamwork.

    It’s delightful to witness this process working not only with couples, but with whole organizations. I guess what’s true for two is true for many.

  2. Judith says:

    Dear Ike,
    I really appreciate the emphasis on imagining the needs of the other as you have described. I also love the way that Max thinks about the Jackal as the Isolator. This resonates with my own experience. So many times in the past I have made rash judgements of what the other party is up to, without stopping to think about what feelings and needs they might be having — never mind inquiring into what my own unmet needs were. I still have work to do in this area, and this blog is a helpful reminder to make it a priority to self-connect and attempt to empathize with the feelings and needs of the other, before making a decision about a relationship.

  3. Pingback: Nonviolent Communication Solidifies Group Connection and Clarity | Conflict to Connection

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>