How does Nonviolent Communication differ from other types of conflict resolution? (Jeff Brown)

What makes Nonviolent Communication (NVC) unique?

Many people
point to the inclusion of universal human needs as a way of identifying
the deeper source of our feelings, whereas many systems point only to
our thinking as what causes our feelings.

I agree, and I was intrigued several years ago when I came across a chart developed by Bay Area Nonviolent Communication (Bay NVC) that compared and contrasted NVC with conventional conflict resolution.

First
of all, let me say that I regard NVC as much, much more than a method
for conflict resolution. I see it as a set of principles to live by --
a system that provides an orientation from which to live, in order to
fulfill my purpose for being on the planet.

Included within the NVC toolbox are communication skills that, yes, help us to resolve and transform conflict into connection.

And so, here are the, "Unique Features of NVC," again inspired by Bay NVC and expanded by me and a few others:

Unique features of Compassionate Nonviolent Communication (NVC)

OBJECTIVE:

Conventional Conflict Resolution: Compromise, find common ground, problem solve, and “agree to disagree.”

Nonviolent Communication: Mutual understanding, equally valuing everyone’s needs, and searching for a solution that works for everyone involved.

COMPONENTS:

Conventional Conflict Resolution: Observations (often mixed with evaluations), feelings, requests (usually does not identify human needs).

Nonviolent Communication: Observations, feelings, needs, and requests (emphasizing the deeper, human needs).

REQUESTS:

Conventional Conflict Resolution: Often vague and wide-ranging. Sometimes come in the form of demands.

Nonviolent Communication: Specific,
present, doable. An invitation for others to joyfully contribute to our
well-being, without obligation, expectation or demand.

SELF-RESPONSIBILITY:

Conventional Conflict Resolution:
I-statements: Use of “I” acknowledges my feelings, but the identified
cause of my feelings may remain you. Example: “I feel upset because you
_________”

Nonviolent Communication:
Double I-statements: Feelings linked to needs acknow- ledges
responsibility for the source of feelings. Example: “I feel upset
because of my need for consideration.”

FOCUS:

Conventional Conflict Resolution: Intellectual. Expressing our point of view, and understanding the other’s point of view.

Nonviolent Communication: Connection. Expressing our feelings and needs, and receiving other people’s feelings and needs.

PITFALLS:

Conventional Conflict Resolution:
Even when immediate issues are resolved, underlying causes are often
not addressed and transformed. Moving too quickly to settlement before
establishing mutual understanding.

Nonviolent Communication:
May be more challenging in situations where acknowledging feelings and
needs is not the norm. May take more time and energy due to some
people’s fear of vulnerability.

PREMISES:

Conventional Conflict Resolution:
It’s in everyone’s best interest to find common ground with others in
conflict situations. People in conflict are capable of resolving their
own conflicts, sometimes with assistance from a third party.

Nonviolent Communication:
Human needs are universal and never in conflict. All human actions are
attempts to meet needs. It is possible for everyone’s needs to be
satisfied through compassionate giving. Each of us is responsible for
meeting our own needs.