In the workplace, violent communication often leads to conflict and inefficiencies, and product managers, as team coordinators, especially need to master effective communication skills. This article explores how to improve the workplace communication environment through non-violent communication from the perspective of a product manager.
What I share today is a bit serious, with a lighthearted beginning (to paraphrase a lyric): As long as everyone communicates in a nonviolent way, the workplace will become a beautiful world.
Don’t know if you’ve ever encountered these scenarios?
The boss said:
“Aviation rockets have flown to the moon, general artificial intelligence is coming, what functions can’t we achieve?” ——Moral judgment
Sales says:
“This functional competitor has it, why don’t we have it?” ——Make a comparison
The channel said:
“How can other systems do it, what needs can’t you solve?” ——Moral judgment
Customer service said:
After 10 years of interaction design, why did I transfer to product manager?
After the real job transfer, I found that many jobs were still beyond my imagination. The work of a product manager is indeed more complicated. Theoretically, the work of a product manager includes all aspects of the product, from market research, user research, data analysis…
View details >
“This demand has been reported by many customers, and we need to spend a lot of time explaining every time, when can we schedule a solution?” ——Moral judgment
The customer says:
“My needs have been expressed clearly, how to solve the rest is your problem, if it can’t be solved, then what to do with your system? You can’t do such a simple thing. ——It is difficult for strong people
R&D said:
“I don’t care, anyway, I’ll change it, let the test go. If there is a problem, I can’t change it” – evading responsibility
Product Manager says:
“This technology is not too difficult to implement, our competitors have already realized it, why can’t we achieve it?” ——Moral judgment
These scenarios all demonstrate the characteristics of violent communication, that is, through coercion, threats, judgment, orders, punishments, etc., allowing one party to try to dominate the dialogue and force the other to submit.
Dr. Marshall Luxemburg, author of the book “Nonviolent Communication”, summarizes them into four categories:
The first category is moral judgment。 Even if you use your own values to evaluate others, anything that does not match your own values is wrong. For example, you are too selfish, you are too useless;
The second category is to compare。 Comparing the other person with others greatly hurts the other person’s self-esteem. For example, you see how others do it, why others can do it, but you can’t;
The third category is avoidance of responsibility。 That is, downplay the responsibilities you should bear and blame others. For example, this is your job, and it is because of you that you have led to the current situation;
The fourth category is difficult for strong people。 That is, imposing personal will on others, and may be accompanied by threats, orders, etc. For example, just do it, don’t talk about it, listen to me.
It is these violent communication scenes that lead to us in the office, where we often see scenes of arguing, reprimanding, ranting, slamming the table, slamming the meeting door, and quickly tapping or smashing the keyboard.
If you want a harmonious work environment, start with yourself and learn to use non-violent communication methods.
It has four main steps (i.e., observe, feel, need, request) and a premise (empathy).
Step 1: Observation。 The key point is to state the facts after observation without judgment.
For example, customer service can say: “There have been 5 customers feedback on this demand in the past 2 weeks” instead of “There are many customer feedback on this demand”.
R&D can say: “This is your second time changing requirements”, rather than “how to change requirements again”.
Step 2: Feel。 The key point is to express your emotional feelings, not your thoughts.
For example, the boss can say, “I am very disappointed to hear that you can’t do this function, and I know your predicament, but I don’t know if there are other possibilities?” Instead of saying, “The spaceships are all in the sky, what else can’t be done.” ”
Step 3: Yes。 The key point is to make clear needs, not requirements.
For example, the channel can say: “We don’t have X function now, but competing products do, and customers are currently comparing the differences between different systems, do we have any solutions to deal with it?” Instead of saying, “Why does this feature have competitors and we don’t?” ”
Step 4: Request。 The key point is to make a clear request, not an order.
For example, the customer can say, “After our needs are clearly communicated, please look at it from a professional point of view, is there any good solution?” We can accept paid plans. ”
Finally, empathy。 We focus first on the feelings, needs and requests of others, not just our own.
How to do it?
Observe, recognize, and expressfeel, let the feeling withneedconnection, final useClear, specific, and positivetargetLanguage of actionSuggest what is feasible to othersrequest。
Here are some practical tips on the job:
First, express needs and requests directly without analyzing the other party’s problems。
When we communicate, we habitually hide our real needs and express them in an obscure way, as if expressing shame. At the same time, they will also habitually use analysis and criticism of other people’s behavior to express their “needs”.
For example, if you expect R&D students to clarify the project duration, you may say: “We are slow to evaluate the needs every time, and this time the customer is more anxious, please evaluate the construction period as soon as possible.”
Instead of saying directly: “We promise that the customer will inform the online time before Wednesday, so we expect to assess the clear construction period before get off work on Tuesday, is that okay?” ”
Second, empathize with the emotional feelings and needs of others, without rushing to explain, oppose, question or judge。
When we are faced with rhetorical questions, doubts, or criticism from others, we may have four reactions: blaming ourselves, blaming others, empathizing with others, and empathizing with ourselves.
Among them, blaming others is the most common and easiest way we communicate violently.
For example, when the channel asks:
“My question is, why didn’t it trigger before? Now triggered? ”
In the face of the other party’s rhetorical question, you will feel the feeling of being questioned and blamed, and you will subconsciously reply-for-tat: “Where is it not triggered?” Why didn’t it trigger? We haven’t updated it here. ”
The result is mutual accusations and unhappy breakups.
A better way to cope is to empathize with the needs and requests of others, and to speak out about your own needs and requests. At the same time, learn not to attribute your mood swings to the behavior of the other party.
For example, you can reply to the above question: “Well, the customer expects it not to be triggered automatically, right?” ”。
If he replies: “Yes, the customer said it wouldn’t be triggered before.” ”
You can continue to ask: “Well, if it is triggered by the customer’s custom configuration, is it possible?” ”
He replied, “When is it expected?” ”
Ke replied: “We now have more promised demands, you can see the link on my signature, and the customer demand is reasonable, but it is not blocking the business, so the plan will be put in the 2025 Q3 plan.” ”
Third, do not use rhetorical questions。
It is not the actions of others that make us angry, but the interpretations and perceptions of these behaviors in our minds。
For example, sales say: “Why do competing products have this feature but we don’t?” ”
His need may be “I want to sign a client, they need this function to avoid losing the customer”, but he does not express his need, but uses rhetorical questions of an accusatory nature.
Normally, we interpret it as “accusation”, and once we do so, you may also fight back: “Why do we have to have this function?” The dragon has nine sons, each with its own differences. ”
The other party will interpret your rhetorical question as “shirking responsibility” and “questioning the other party”, which will further evolve this communication into mutual accusations.
SoWe need to avoid using rhetorical questions, and no matter what kind of expression the other party uses, you should not over-interpret it, but focus on the needs and requests behind what he is expressing, and provide solutions accordingly。
For example, you ask, “Well, we don’t have this feature now, do you have customers who need this feature?” You can describe the customer’s specific needs and see if there is a good solution. ”
There is another type of application scenario that does not use rhetorical questions.
For example, when introducing the solution to the customer’s needs, or reviewing the requirements, after each lecture,You can ask, “Did I express it clearly?” Instead of asking, “Do you understand?” ”
The former attributes the problem of communication to the way of self-expression, and the latter attributes it to the other party’s ability to receive information (which may be suspected of being blamed).
Fourth, learn to express in true, specific, positive and quantitative language, instead of habitually using vague words such as “probably”, “should”, and “a lot”.
For example, R&D said: “Why did you change the demand again?” You can further reply clearly: “Well, it is true that for various reasons, I have modified the requirements twice, and I will not take it as an example.” ”
Or when replying to the channel demand planning schedule, you can say: “We have now committed to 6 customer needs, 2 of which are large projects with a workload of more than 1 month, so the current customer demand is reasonable, but the priority will be low, and the plan is to put it in the 2025 Q3 plan.” ”
Instead of saying: “We promise that there is a lot of demand, and it may not be easy to schedule.” ”
Fifth, prioritize solutions rather than problem causes or excuses.
What is hidden behind the problem is emotion, and what is needed behind the emotion is a solution。
If the other party uses violent communication, it is not recommended to “use violence to counter violence” (such as questioning the other party’s purpose or just explaining the reason, but providing solutions after understanding the other party’s needs and requests).
For example, customer service asked: “There have been many customer feedback on this demand, and we need to spend a lot of time explaining every time, when can we schedule a solution to solve it?” ”
You can clearly express your needs and requests and give corresponding solutions.
For example, “Please compile a list of customer needs (i.e., needs), clarify the key needs and expected resolution time (i.e., requests), and I will finally give you a clear schedule (i.e., solution) based on the existing requirements.” ”
Instead of replying: “We currently have a lot of commitment demand (i.e., forced explanation), and it may not be easy to schedule.” Or “You mention the demand pool first, and then unify the planning (i.e., shirk).”
