From Reacting to Responding: Nonviolent Communication for Teams
3
I almost put the book down. It is called Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life. The concept of violent or nonviolent communication seemed a bit outside what I was looking for, a little abstract, really. Noticing my hesitation, I opened it to the first page and read the quote from the author, Marshall Rosenberg, PhD:
“What I want in my life is compassion, a flow between myself and others based on a mutual giving from the heart.”
I was intrigued.
That was my entrée into learning more about nonviolent communication, or NVC. I have listened to recordings of Rosenberg’s talks, read his work. Rosenberg did not just talk about nonviolent communication; he appeared to live and model it.
I have started integrating it into the work I do with teams. It is especially useful for team when they find themselves under some pressure or deadline. Let me explain.
Violent and nonviolent communication practices sit at the core of how people on a team relate to, interact with, and respond to one another. When deadlines are tight, decisions are ambiguous, or people feel marginalized, the way team members speak to each other can either shut conversations down or open them up.
Violent communication is speaking in ways that hurt or harm others. On teams, this can sound like blaming, judging (“I’m right/you’re wrong”), criticizing, reacting, or subtle name-calling. This approach keeps people closed off, more interested in defending their positions than solving the problem together.
Nonviolent communication, in contrast, is intentionally engaging with others while staying aware of your own thoughts and needs and the other person’s perceptions and feelings. On a team, this looks like being able to describe how you are feeling, listening for others’ feelings and needs, being fully present, holding space without rushing to fix, and asking sincere questions to learn. This foundation supports open, caring conversations, even when the stakes are high.
At the core of nonviolent communication is recognizing your own needs, then learning about the needs of others, and navigating those needs together. For teams, that is the essence of a collaborative mindset. Below, I will walk you through what happens inside us when we react, what is different when we respond, and how NVC offers a practical path from one to the other.
Reacting on teams: what happens in our heads
Let’s first look at what might lead someone to react rather than respond on a team.
When we have needs that are not being met, we are more likely to become reactive. These needs are deep-set, often tied to our values, and we are not always aware of them in the moment. Figure 1 lays this out.
Starting on the left side of the illustration, here is what often happens when needs are not being met in a team context:
A. When our needs or interests are not being met—or when we feel like our values or beliefs are being challenged—we carry that into our feelings and our thoughts. Negative feelings like fear, anger, or disappointment are typically rooted in unmet needs such as respect, inclusion, clarity, or contribution.
B. We are usually not aware of what we are thinking, feeling, or needing in the moment, especially in a fast-paced meeting. Nor do we spend much time reflecting on the values and beliefs driving us. (We can get there if we try, which is where responding comes in.)
C. When needs are not being met, we are more likely to make up stories in our heads about the situation. This “storytelling” includes attributing motives (“They don’t care about my work”), exaggerating (“This always happens”), or not giving others the benefit of the doubt. On a team, stories like these fuel “us vs. them” dynamics across roles, functions, or levels.
D. From there, “reaction mode” shows up in behavior: jumping to conclusions, blaming, judging, evaluating, punishing, or lashing out. On teams, this might sound like: “You never share information on time,” or look like people shutting down and checking out of the conversation.
All this activity in our heads reflects a judgmental or unilateral mindset—a stance of “I’m right, they’re wrong; I see the whole picture; I need to win.” Rosenberg describes this as the tragic expression of unmet needs: what comes out of our mouths can be harsh or defensive, even when our underlying needs are completely human and understandable. In other words, this is where violent communication emerges on teams.
Responding with a collaborative mindset
Now let’s look at what needs to be in place for someone to respond, even in a tense team situation. Figure 2 uses the same left-to-right flow, but with a different mindset at the center.
A. When people’s needs or interests are being met, they are less likely to generate negative thoughts and feelings. Similarly, they tend to feel more grounded when their core values or beliefs are not being challenged. On a team, this shows up as more ease, humor, and willingness to share imperfect ideas.
B. When people are aware of what is happening in their heads—when they notice, in real time, that a need is not being met or a value is being challenged—they can more easily work with that. They recognize that they are experiencing a disconnect and can turn inward to ask, “What am I feeling? What need of mine is touched here?”
C. When people can do that, the storytelling starts to quiet. They take what is happening more at face value, rather than filtering it or adding meaning. They are less likely to judge or blame others and more likely to give colleagues the benefit of the doubt. They stay present, which lets them tap into what they are thinking and feeling before they speak.
D. From this place, the behaviors on the “response” side become possible: asking questions to understand, sharing how you are experiencing the situation, checking assumptions, and looking together for ways to meet key needs. The person is open, accepting, and genuinely curious about the other person’s perspective.
During nonviolent communication, the values and beliefs a person is operating from are aligned with a collaborative mindset:
“I have a view, not the whole truth.”
“We each have needs and information that matter.”
“We can learn something by staying in this conversation.”
This mindset enables people to honor others for who they are in the moment, regardless of role, hierarchy, or disagreement. It also gives teams a practical path from reactivity to response: noticing what is happening inside, naming needs, and then speaking in ways that make collaboration more—not less—likely
Using NVC to speak up on your team
Dr. Rosenberg offers a simple formula for sharing your own feelings and needs in ways that are less likely to trigger defensiveness. Used with a collaborative mindset, it can help team members raise hard issues without escalating conflict.
Step 1: Describe what happened and how you feelInstead of leading with blame or judgment, start with a concrete observation and your feeling.
· “When you [describe what you saw or heard the other person do], I felt [name how you felt].”
On a team, this might sound like: “When the decision changed after the meeting, I felt anxious and out of the loop.”
Step 2: Name the underlying needNext, connect your feeling to a deeper need or value that matters to you in this situation.
· “I have a need for [name the need that is not being met and is leading you to feel that way], and that need is not being met right now.”
For example: “I have a need for clarity about priorities, and that need isn’t being met right now.”
Step 3: Make a clear, doable requestFinally, make a request—not a demand—of the other person or the team.
· “My request is that [what the other person or team could do to help meet that need]. Would you be willing to do that?”
For example: “My request is that we summarize any major changes at the end of the meeting. Would you be willing to try that next week?”
Result? This sequence helps bring what is in your head and heart into the conversation in a way that invites collaboration rather than resistance.
Empathy: making space for others on your team
Sometimes you sense something is off—like when a colleague answers “sure” with a shrug and a soft voice—but you are not sure what is going on. Empathy offers a way to stay curious instead of jumping to conclusions.
Empathy is about being aware of, interested in, and attentive to another person’s feelings and needs in the moment—as Marshall Rosenberg says “what is alive in this person right now.” It asks you to be fully present, to listen without trying to fix the situation or rush in with “I understand.” Instead, you create space for them to talk, process, and share, so they feel heard rather than analyzed.
On a team, this might mean pausing before offering solutions and saying, “Tell me more about what this has been like for you,” and then simply listening. When people experience that kind of attention, collaborative connections become much more possible.
A simple empathy formula for teams
Just as with the first formula, this one is not meant to be the only way to engage. Think of it as a set of training wheels you can practice with until it feels natural. Imagine returning to that colleague, friend, or family member who just said “sure.”
Step 1: Gently check in on feelings
· “Are you feeling [name how you think they might be feeling]? or”
· “I’m thinking something might be bothering you. Am I on track?”
In a team setting: “I’m noticing your shoulders dropped when we assigned that task. I’m wondering if you’re feeling frustrated or overloaded. Am I on track?”
Step 2: Explore the needs underneath
· “Are you feeling this way because your need for [name a possible need] isn’t being met? or”
· “Do you have a need that is not currently being met?”
For example: “Are you feeling this way because your need for more input into deadlines isn’t being met?”
Step 3: Ask what would help
· “What is it that you would like from the other person—or from me?”
In a team context: “What would you like from me or from the team that would make this more workable?”
Result? These questions invite the other person to move from vague discomfort to clearer feelings, needs, and requests—exactly the same inner-to-outer path you used for yourself.
Why this matters for collaboration
When we speak from judgment—diagnosing, blaming, or labeling others—our words become tragic expressions of our own unmet needs. Even with good intentions, we can leave colleagues feeling attacked or shut down, and only later notice, in their faces or silence, that we reacted too quickly.
When people’s needs are better understood and, where possible, better met, they are more able to truly honor one another, even when they disagree. On teams, that is the heart of a collaborative mindset: turning moments of tension into opportunities to see what matters to each person and to work together from there.
To read more about the Collaborative Mindset: https://i2insights.org/2024/07/23/collaborative-mindset-for-teamwork/
To listen to Marshall Rosenberg talk about NVC:
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLPNVcESwoWu4lI9C3bhkYIWB8-dphbzJ3
To order my book:
https://bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/how-to-succeed-at-collaborative-research
