This is the P2PU Archive. If you want the current site, go to www.p2pu.org!
Conflict Resolution
My recent threads
You haven't posted any discussions yet.
Recently updated threads
- Notification of research observation Tue, 2011-04-05 23:19
- Week 8: Multi-Track Diplomacy Mon, 2011-03-21 03:19
- Week 7: Ethics Sun, 2011-03-13 23:39
- Week 5: Facilitated Dialogue & Appreciative Inquiry Wed, 2011-03-09 21:50
- Week 4: Mediation Wed, 2011-03-09 21:14
Week 3: Nonviolent Communication
This week's topic is Nonviolent Communication (NVC). The reading materials are "Foundations of Nonviolent Communication" and "NVC Concepts."
The following discussion questions are suggestions for your group chats. Participants are also invited to share responses and additional reflections in response to this forum topic.
-Do you think NVC is an effective method for communication? Why, or why not?
-How can NVC still be effective when only one party is using it?
-What challenges might individuals face when learning to use NVC?
-Can NVC be used in conflicts between large groups of people, such as in the international arena? How?
-Have you used NVC in your own life? If so, have you found it to be helpful? If not, do you think you will use it now that you have learned about it?
If you would like to learn more about NVC, I highly recommend the book "Speak Peace in a World of Conflict" by Marshall Rosenberg, the founder of the Center for Nonviolent Communication.
I do believe that NVC can be effective. However, some have anger so deep it may take longer to get through. There are many challenges, overcoming our own preconveived thoughts, staying in the moment. remaining calm but engaged. Even the most angry person will find it difficult to stay enraged in the face of calm oen communication. I think everyone should take a course in NVC. As nations we've been doing what we're doing for too long. You do this, or I'll do that. It's archaic and sad. Deep down inside we all know better. It doesn't have to be that way. I wish Our leaders were passionately committed to world peace, as they are to money, religion and borders.
I try to practice NVC in every conflict. Not to say it always goes as plan, but I try. I am the type of person who does not shy away from conflict and, at times, can be quite advesarial. Don't get me wrong, I'm not petty, and can let alot go. I am passionate about my beliefs and have conviction in many of my views. So I am definately working on letting certain disagreements go, and not judging others. I have seen first hand that when you change your view and the way you engage others you really change your world.
I do believe NVC is an effective method for communication. It emphasizes on focusing ourselves away from “a language of criticism, blame, and demand.” This is like steering away from emotions in any negotiation or conflict resolution and focus on problem solving for mutual gains.
When I refer to “emotions” throughout, I mean the negative kind.
A nature and direct response a “threat” is usually an emotional response. This undoubtedly will cloud our judgment and cause us to lose focus on our real goal.
NVC helps to steer us away from emotional responses and help us avoid causing emotional responses from our counterparties.
NVC can help defuse an emotional situation. It will take more time and more skills when only one party is using it.
The first challenge is to keep ourselves from delivering an emotional response and direct our own self to start using the NVC process/skills at the very beginning of the communication exchange. Then, throughout the exchange, the second challenge is to maintain the discipline in using the NVC process/skills and not revert back to the “violent” emotional responses.
This would be even more challenging. Dealing with large groups means dealing with different varying degrees of negative emotions at the same time. This will take even longer time to show our own compassion.
I believe this can still be done. Gandhi has done it. This will take unwavering focus on staying on course with the NVC process. Through our actions and consistent communications, we can convince groups and move groups.
I often find not responding to emotional responses and keep focusing the communication on goals and objectives helpful. Eventually, we all want to accomplish something. Emotions tend to get in the way more often than not.
I am compelled to say that the Nonviolent Communication (NVC) method as presented would not be an effective one for communication. As I spoke to Emily in last week conference call about my concern that the NVC method as presented did not seem to take into account that different cultural backgrounds of today's conflict. Let us then say that the NVC method will or does take into account cultural backgrounds, then it leaves, in my opinion the doubt of the meaning of words like; "to meet the needs of all concerned.", "human needs", "power to remain human", "differentiating", "deeper needs" and "give from the heart". Sure many of us could say they understand and even some may say they know as a matter of fact the meaning of these words within the contexts of the NVC method. This leaves me with the question of who gets the final authority say, on what is the "deeper need" or when we are really "deep listening" or truly do "give from the heart"?
For argument's sake let us say that the person or persons that are "using it", NVC method, are doing it right. Keeping this in mind I found that the core "skills" are found at the beginning of the article "Foundations of NVC". The "compassionate giving and receiving" skill would be one used by the party in hope that something would be accomplished. I must say that even here it is unclear if the party will be effective in the end, for even the other article, "NVC-Concepts", the writer gives the reader a sense of hope, but at the same time mix within its words a sense of doubt in my opinion, in the last sentence which said, "While this may not happen quickly, it is our experience that compassion inevitably blossoms when we stay to the principles and process of Nonviolent Communication".
If these individuals who are learning to use the NVC method have no teacher or mentor or at least some one who claims to know what they are doing, then I for see many challenges. Let say they have a "pastor" whom they can go to when they have questions, so then our main question becomes focus on what kind of challenges will they bring to their "teacher" for guidance?
In the article "NVC-Concepts" they do seem to give us a clue to the answer of our question. They go on to say, "NVC does not require that the persons with whom we are communicating be literate in NVC or even motivated to relate to us compassionately." Some how this is supposed to give the reader hope that one could use the method in conflicts between large groups of people, it goes without saying that this reader thinks quite the opposite is true. Though I am not a marriage counselor, but I have read many books that suggests to the parties involved in the conflict the following solutions; communication is a two way street, letting go of the past, taking action on agree upon small goals every day by both parties. I find that the NVC method as presented borders the line of wishful thinking when if neglects to take into account the cultural and religious backgrounds of the people they say they are helping.
I have not use the NVC method as presented, nor believe I will in the near future. As I have told Emily in our weekly group chats, I am reading other books on conflict resolution but I made and will keep this promise to buy the book by Marshall Rosenberg "Speak Peace in a World of Conflict" in order to understand the NVC method a little better.