Miki works with a course participant to transform begrudging attendance at a mandatory meeting into the possibility for collaboration, more connection where little is expected and focus on clarity of purpose for meeting in the first place.

The way we talk to one another, and think about or react to our lives, may seem "normal" but eventually, this may reach a point where we realize something isn't working, and we make adjustments. But often the suffering continues if we aren't addressing root causes. In studying NVC we can become more aware of what we are doing and its effects -- plus imagine and implement alternatives that lead to greater fulfillment for self and others.

The impulse to say "I love you" is an opportunity to check-in both with our level of presence (eg. are we saying it by rote?) and also with what we really mean in that moment (eg. what are the needs and real purpose deep beneath the word "love"?).  This can invite us to explore a deeper, more heartfelt way of communicating and being...

Trainer Tip: Anger can be an opportunity to hear the "Please" behind the words and create a path to resolve conflicts compassionately.

How does change take place?  In this brief segment, Miki explores the three key ingredients that make change possible for individuals as well as for societal change.

In the third in a series on applying NVC to daily life, Shantigarbha follows directly on from Episode 2, showing us that listening isn't a passive activity, and offers five tips for how to improve our listening skills.

Anger can bring in judgment and blame. Instead, use anger and frustration to identify what’s important and express what matters to you in a collaborative way.

Here are some very basic forms and distinctions of NVC. It covers the 4 D's, OFNR, some NVC distinctions, tips, quotes from Marshall Rosenberg, and "feelings and needs" lists, and more. As with any art, these rudiments necessarily must be learned, practiced, understood, embodied and then let go of so as not to become rote and block creativity.

Our world trains us to think in terms of providing for everyone’s needs because they deserve it, earned it, or they possess the resources -- it's fair, socially just, supports equality or because people have rights. Instead, can we step outside this worldview to look at providing for everyone’s needs because those needs exist -- can we hold this basic reverence for life? Are we able to have a needs-based dialogue when such a reframe could alienate those who live in the worldview of earn/deserve?