Nonviolent Communication
Observation first, never evaluation
The first sentence settles it
Nonviolent Communication, chapter 3
Most arguments are lost in the first second of speaking. This is about the exact word that loses them.
What actually happened?
Rosenberg lays his foundation on a line from Krishnamurti: observing without evaluating is the highest form of human intelligence. He then separates two sentences that look alike. You were late three times this week is an observation, and there is nothing in it to argue with. You are always late is an evaluation, and it has to be argued with. The difference sits in words like always and never, which promote a piece of behaviour into a verdict on a person. Once the defence is up, nothing else gets in.
Take the frequency words out and the sentence comes alive
Always, never, constantly and again are the markers of evaluation. Strip them and what remains is usually a checkable fact. Facts can be discussed and verdicts can only be resisted, and that is the whole divide between two outcomes of the same conversation.
You never deal with the children becomes three of this week's school runs were mine. The first starts an argument, the second starts an explanation.
Adjectives that rate people are evaluations too
You are lazy and he is unprofessional look like descriptions and are labels. The checkable form describes behaviour and effect: the document he sent was missing three figures. A label turns a person into its defender; a description leaves them room to change.
In a performance conversation, you have an attitude problem can only be denied. Four emails in two weeks went unanswered for over two days can be discussed.
Observing is not softening
The common misreading is that observation means being tactful, so the point never actually gets made. Rosenberg is asking for more precision, not less edge. A fact can be very hard as long as it is a fact, and vague kindness fails exactly as a sharp verdict does.
Things have been a bit off lately says nothing. Three deliveries slipped this month is accurate, carries no judgement, and lands harder.
How do I use it today?
Where you are: you are about to raise a problem with someone and you have been rehearsing it for days.
Ask first: does your sentence contain always, never or constantly? Swap them for a count or a specific action, and see whether you can still say it.
Where it goes wrong: turning observation only into conflict avoidance so the point is never made; or stacking exact facts into a trial of somebody's character.
Lines to keep
When we combine observation with evaluation, others are apt to hear criticism.
Always and never turn one action into a verdict on a person.
Same situation, other people are asking
We've had this same fight a hundred times.I said something I can't take back. Can this be fixed?We are not having the same conversation.Once it starts, neither of us can stop it.We keep fighting · all 8 questions →If this one named what you are going through,
send it to someone who needs it, or keep it somewhere you will find it again.