Level Playing Field

I was talking with a colleague and friend this week about needs based communication and she suggested, “It's like creating a level playing field”.  I am jumping on this gift of words she gave me!

There are so many ways that I, and other Nonviolent Communication teachers and promoters present about what needs are.  
1.  They are where we are one.  
2.  They are abstract nouns.
3.  They are experiences you want to generate.
4.  They are what is important to you in any moment
5.  They are what’s at the root of your feelings —the cause.
6.  They are the light through which god shines (it’s on a handout that I give out sometimes).
7.  They are universal to all humans.

And, as my friend suggested: They create a level playing field.

If you are steeped in considering your needs and another’s in any given conversation or negotiation (request), then indeed, the playing field is level.  Marshall Rosenberg (developer of NVC) teaches, ‘when we value each others’ needs being met equally, then we are in the consciousness of Nonviolent Communication’.  It is when true connection and care can happen. 

If your attention is focused anywhere else, then the likelihood that you think your own needs are more important in the situation, or the other persons’ needs are more important [Moms out there, does this sound familiar?]  Either way, the playing field is not level.  Someone is more important than another.

Often this happens when you aren’t thinking about needs, and you are more likely only considering strategies.  The things you are asking yourself and others to do.  In this mindset it is often difficult to level the playing field, even if you want to.  Because you aren’t connected to the need that will get met, by the activity you are suggesting, you will have less capacity to negotiate the actual needs:

Here’s an example:

I just bought my own home and have 2 incoming roommates.  I want us to agree on how we use the common space—regarding the food, the cleanliness, guests, and other things like that.  I suggest that we have a meeting on Tuesday evening, over dinner and even hint at monthly Tuesday night meetings over dinners is what I am going for.

I have offered strategies only:
1.  Meeting this Tuesday evening.
2.  Eat dinner together.
3.  Imply (maybe not quite explicitly ask for monthly dinner meetings).
4.  Discuss how we use the common spaces.

I haven’t identified the needs either to myself, nor have I shared them with the others —which is actually necessary at this point.  It is essential that I know them myself, so I can keep the playing field level as we negotiate.  This will become obvious as we move along in the story.

Needs that I think will be met by the strategies are:  cooperation, shared reality, collaboration, ease, order.    Can you think of others I haven’t listed here?

For now, let’s stick to the strategy-based conversation.  

One of the roommates works in the evenings and isn’t available this Tuesday.  The other didn’t respond to my request at all —so far it’s been 2 days.

My 2nd communication is this:  Let’s meet this weekend, I’ll make brunch.  I am open both Saturday and Sunday.   I want to agree on what chores we each do, and how to handle food, cleanliness, guest etiquette and the like for the shared spaces.  How about we meet at the house at 10am?

One roommate replies they are headed to the beach with their partner for the weekend, the other is available.

Now I feel frustrated, they are moving in in two weeks and I want to hash this out before they arrive.  I am starting to worry, feel a bit of resentment as well that this isn’t happening as I imagined or as easily as I wanted.  Still connected to the strategies only, I am laying the blame on the roommates that they aren’t as enthusiastic about this strategy as I am.  These feelings point to additional needs that I hadn’t identified before:  Belonging and community.

Likely as I continue to negotiate with my new roommates, the tone of my communication shifts to a bit of urgency and should energy —they should want to meet with me and prioritize these things.  I am trying to be nice, although my frustration is bleeding through.  There is a pull on them that I am not admitting to them.  I am guessing most of you have experienced something like this, on your own end, and from others at some point?

Only being connected to my strategies, and feeling this frustration, I am likely not checking in to what’s alive for me.  Instead, I am thinking (and believing) that they should be doing as I ask for any number of reasons.  1.  I am the homeowner, so they should defer to me.  2.  They should say yes because how else will we navigate uncomfortable situations.  3.  They are not the roommates I am hoping for and now I am stuck with them.  4.  They are not interested in collaborating with me.  These are just a few examples.

If you will notice, inside these thoughts I haven’t moved my attention at all to my needs and what ways I might consider getting them met.  Nor did I consider what their needs are, what are they hoping for in a roommate situation.  In this case, it will be more difficult than it needs to be to create a situation where we are all enjoying ‘room-mating’ together.  No level playing field is created in which to navigate the roommate situation

Let’s start over. 

Consider looking at this from the perspective of knowing what my needs are before I begin my negotiation and holding the others’ needs as equal to my own.  

These are mine as a reminder:  cooperation, shared reality, collaboration, ease, order, belonging and community

There are some the other experience(s) I am longing as well for in the roommate situation.  (I haven’t mentioned security ßfinancial contribution to the mortgage, as it isn’t directly relevant to this particular part of the negotiation).  It is implied for now and they have agreed to the rent I am asking for.  Yet acknowledging all the needs will be helpful and may influence future conversations about maintenance, upkeep, bigger chores and contributions to the space as well as other considerations that arise.

Beginning the process of considering who moves in, I let them know the experience I am hoping to have by inviting roommates into the home.  Let them know that I am hoping to create a community, where time is spent together, meals are shared and that the people in the house will be meeting with some regularity so that they all can enjoy the shared spaces equally.  I would like to have shared reality so that camaraderie and friendship and goodwill will develop between us.

This allows those who are wanting spaciousness, calm, solitude and autonomy as the priority needs in their new space to opt out.

It allows me to ‘feel into’ the responses of those who say yes to this.  Are they super enthusiastic?  Do they offer their own ideas about how to do it?  Do I see a smile on their faces?  Or confusion, yet a sense of “I better say yes.”  

If I get a few yeses, I can begin to genuinely begin to engage in the very process of needs based communication.  I will ask them questions if they think they would enjoy monthly dinners together?  That either separate from or in addition to those meals, that we meet monthly to address agreements about how to handle the common space concerns.  I let them know what agreements I want to have in place before they move in.  If I want to be on a level playing field, I will be just as curious about the others’ needs as well.  I can ask directly, what experience are they hoping to create in their living situation.  Understanding this creates the circumstances in which making agreements is a pleasant and enjoyable experience for all. 

Using a sports metaphor (and Top Chef —a competitive cooking show), the contestants that rise above the rest share a similar thought.  They only want to win the competition when it is fair.  They don’t want to cheat.  It is less fun to win if the other person is injured, or hampered in some way.  They all want to thrive and shine and win only when they are on level playing field.

Is this true for you?  Do you prefer to ‘get your way only if there is a level playing field and everyone agrees that their needs are being met equally?  Marshall Rosenberg, (and I) suggest that getting your way any other way will ultimately prove to be unpleasant at some point. 

Are you interested in and able to creating relationships that are played out on a level playing field? Like any sport or or talent you want to develop, get started, apply the skills you learned and practice!