Message vs. Messenger


Germany

Germans separate message from messenger. The presenter consciously and purposely moves into the background. In the German business context the message takes center stage. Germans believe that “arguments should speak for themselves.”

Patterns


United States

Americans link message and messenger. The message, its form, and most importantly its presenter create a unity. In the American business context the messenger takes center stage. Americans believe that “you sell yourself first, then your product or service.”

Patterns


Inform vs. Sell


Germany

In the German business world to persuade means to inform persuasively. The argumentation guides an audience to its logical conclusion. Selling the conclusion is not necessary. Germans don’t ask the so-called closing question in a direct and frontal way. They don’t sell.

Patterns


United States

In the U.S. business world to persuade means to sell persuasively. Persuasive argumentation leads the audience to a choice. The audience is then asked to make a decision. Americans ask the so-called closing question in a direct and frontal way. They sell.

Patterns


Past vs. Future


Germany

Germans define realistic as understanding the situation as it is. And to understand the situation is to understand how it became so. Germans expect a clear explanation of the path from the past to the present. Persuasive is first explaining the history of a given situation.

Patterns


United States

For Americans to be realistic means understanding what is possible. The possible is determined not only by past and present circumstances, but also by the ability to shape a new future. Persuasive is explaining how to move from the present into the future.

Patterns


Persuasion


Message vs. Messenger

Americans link message and messenger. The message, its form, and most importantly its presenter create a unity. In the U.S. business context the presenter takes center stage. Americans believe that “you sell yourself first, then your product or service.”

Patterns


Problem vs. Opportunity

Americans strive to see problems as opportunities. And opportunities are to be exploited. Competent is that person able to recognize opportunities in difficult situations. In the American business context to be persuasive is to focus primarily on opportunities.

Patterns


System vs. Particular

Americans are particularistic in their thinking. They prefer to break down complexity into its component parts, in order to focus on what is essential. Americans are skeptical of theory. Facts and experience are far more persuasive.

Patterns


Past vs. Future

For Americans to be realistic means understanding what is possible. The possible is determined not only by past and present circumstances, but also by the ability to shape a new future. Persuasive is explaining how to move from the present into the future.

Patterns


Inform vs. Sell

In the U.S. business world to persuade means to sell persuasively. Persuasive argumentation leads the audience to a choice. The audience is then asked to make a decision. Americans ask the so-called closing question in a direct and frontal way. They sell.

Patterns


Persuasion

There’s no action without a decision to act. And no decision without considering the options. Options are presented. Stop! What if cultures persuade differently?


John Otto Magee

I am an American in Germany: studied history at Die Freie Universität in West Berlin, helped CBS News cover the events from the fall of the Berlin Wall up to German unification, advised the leadership of the Christian Democrats in the Bundestag on German-American relations, assisted with the integration of Westinghouse into Siemens, support major global companies since 2002 as an independent consultant.

The content on this site is a product of both my experience in the Germany-USA space and my research method. I have a precise, yet pragmatic approach to identifying, describing, illustrating and contrasting how Germans and Americans think, therefore how they work, in areas foundational to their collaboration. In my research I am assisted by graduate students and Ph.D. candidates.


Back to Contact.

Five Calculations

You know your organization. You can run the numbers:


Cost

How many people in your organization work in a multinational team? Add just one hour of extra work per week per person due to cultural misunderstanding.

An example: 10 colleagues x 1.0 extra hour x 48 workweeks x 75 hourly cost = 36,000. That’s 3,600 for each colleague. USD or Euros. Year in, year out.


Results

When collaboration in and between multinational teams does not go well it can mean over budget, over schedule, poor quality, or any combination thereof.

Take your most important project. Go over budget by 1%, over schedule by 1%, reduce quality by 1%, or any combination thereof. Estimate the impact on your bottom-line.


Talent

What’s the negative impact on colleagues in multinational teams when their collaboration is slow, difficult, frustrating, or possibly even failing?

You know your team. You know your talent. Estimate the impact on the bottom-line if just one of your top performers is frustrated, unmotivated, or leaves the team.


Customers

You’re a global organization. With colleagues in different countries. Interacting with customers worldwide, whether they be company-internal or -external.

Estimate the impact on your bottom-line if just one customer is not happy interacting with your organization, and then takes some of their business elsewhere.


Suppliers

Finally, take a look at your supplier base. Your organization consists of multinational teams interacting with similar teams on the supplier side.

Pick an important supplier. You know your numbers. Estimate the impact on the bottom-line if collaboration between your teams and their teams does not go well.


Back to Access.

Privacy

UC is a read-only site. There is no user-data to collect. Therefore, no privacy to protect.


Back to Contact.