[BeetleB]

> "Hey, I noticed you were a little bit late, which is unusual for you. Is everything OK?"

"Yup."

> "Hey, I noticed you were a bit late in the last couple of meetings. I think it is somewhat important to be on time. Is there anything I can do to help you avoid being late next time?"

Below are very real (and somewhat common) responses I've seen to this type of question.

"Nope." (single word answer)

Also:

"I wasn't late" (person believes being up to 5 minutes late doesn't count as "late").

"We don't discuss anything important in this meeting."

"I have real work to do."

"I'm not needed in the meeting."

"You have plenty of topics you can discuss where I'm not needed. Just save the stuff you need me for till I arrive."

"No one's going to die if I'm a few minutes late."

Granted: Many of these responses would come with my phrasing as well :-)

I'm not opposed to your phrasing other than you never explained what the problem is with my being late. While it may be clear to many that you have a problem with being late, I assure you from experience that many (ordinary) people will not pick up on that. Why is being late a problem? Not in general, but for you and for this meeting.

You instead try to appeal to some kind of norm: "I think it's somewhat important to be on time." I can assure you many don't share that norm. Academic/tech/science people tend to avoid personalizing and prefer making statements that feel objective, like this one. I did this all the time, and it often led to arguments. This is one key thing I learned from all the books/courses I read/took on communications: Do personalize and do be specific. Don't invoke norms unless it's a company value without exceptions or your 100% sure the other party shares the norm. And don't make general statements.

I would take your statement and say it as:

"I noticed you were more than 5 minutes late in the last couple of meetings, and the meeting cannot proceed without you. It can be annoying for us to interrupt our work to attend the meeting and lose productivity while sitting and waiting. Would you be able to find a way to arrive on time? Is there anything I can do to help (e.g. change the meeting time to a more convenient one)?"

As for saying it to your boss: I have no problem saying it to mine. If my boss is consistently late and it affects my work, I do make sure to let him know. I've had to set up private meetings with my boss to let him know that his behavior in a working group meeting was causing problems. If you're not comfortable with these discussions with your boss, then I suggest you change your communication style or change your boss.

[spawarotti]

I think you touch on an important point: you have some expectation and the person doesn't share it. But here is the rub - maybe they are right, not you? Why do you assume you are right? Maybe that person indeed is not needed on that meeting. Maybe by being late they are trying to communicate to you this meeting is in fact a waste of everyone's time. Did you consider this?

For me that's one of the main failing points of NVC as I see it represented here - it starts with "I am right, and you need to adjust" instead of "let's find the underlying root cause of the problem together".

[BeetleB]

Your points are valid, and are well within the framework of NVC, so I disagree that this is a failing point of NVC.

> But here is the rub - maybe they are right, not you?

That is actually to be expected, and the book is full of such examples. The point is to get the conversation going. If their response is "You complain about productivity? The meeting is a whole hour long and I'm usually needed for only about 10 minutes of it. I do not see the importance of me being on time when I'm losing most of the hour for your meeting" then we're now in negotiation territory. Maybe I should change the format of my meeting. Or always have his item first on the agenda so he can come on time and just leave. The fact that he gave me this answer is helpful.

> it starts with "I am right, and you need to adjust"

I'm too lazy to reread the article, but a key aspect of NVC is that a request is just a request. If you make a request that is denied and get upset about it, then you never made a request to begin with - it was a demand. There's no "You need to change" in it. One thing that I find articles like these don't stress enough is that body language, tone, etc needs to match. You could take my original NVC formulation and speak it in a hostile way, or in a very non-confrontational manner. Of course, since we are communicating using written communication, this aspect is lost and different readers will imagine it with different tones/body language - which may explain some of the polarization I've seen when NVC is discussed in the written form.

And again, I have no disagreement with starting with "let's find the underlying root cause of the problem together" - it's not as if that violates NVC. I could state that in a horrible way as well:

"You and I are going to sit down right now and come up with a solution to this!"

If I wanted to say what you said in a more NVC way, it would be:

"This morning you arrived ten minutes after the meeting start time. I was disappointed that we couldn't go through the whole agenda and thus lost productivity. Would you be willing to discuss ways we can make these meetings more effective?" (this could include alternative times, alternative formats, etc).

(This time I dropped the word "late" because although I view it as a "fact", others tend to attach judgement to it).

[civilized]

People are forgetting that this is a guide to difficult conversations, not a guide to all conversations pointing out a problem. Difficult conversations are occasionally necessary when all else fails.

[BeetleB]

That's fair. The article invokes NVC, though, which is a guide to general conversation - not just difficult ones.