Hearing

German Approach

Germans avoid hearings. Allowing the conflict parties to go head-to-head increases tension, making it more difficult to resolve the conflict. In Germany the conflicting parties are interviewed separately. Examples

American Approach

Americans expect a hearing. The conflict parties, in the presence of each other, make their case. Self-defense is only possible when one knows what the other side is accusing them of. Examples

American View

The absence of a hearing is viewed by Americans as a loss of the fundamental right to self-defense. The German approach of separate hearings is considered ineffective, secretive, fundamentally unjust.

German View

An American hearing is seen as unprofessional, antagonistic and counterproductive. It pits colleague against colleague, in competition with each other, in an open forum. It adds „oil to the fire.“ 

Advice to Germans

If you have an American boss and are in conflict with an American colleague be prepared for your hearing. It will come sooner than you think. If you lead Americans, and a conflict has been escalated to you, they‘ll expect you to hold some kind of a hearing. Do it quickly.

Advice to Americans

If you lead Germans, and a conflict is finally brought to your level, do not hold a hearing. Talk to the conflict parties separately. Prevent any kind of direct dueling among the conflict parties in your presence.

If you have a German manager, you will most likely not get an American-style „day in court“. The „judge“ will speak with you individually. You won‘t know the case made by your colleague, with whom you are in conflict.

Acceptance

In the U.S. a true and lasting resolution is attainable only when a clear decision is made. Americans don’t have of a problem with one party winning and the other losing. “You win some, you lose some.” Examples

Speed

German Approach

Germans are skeptical of rash action of any kind. Resolving a conflict requires patience. Hasty resolutions are seldom effective. The conflict most likely will resurface. German mediators take their time. Examples

American Approach

Americans become impatient if too much time is required to resolve a conflict. Festering conflicts are disruptive for any team. A suboptimal, yet prompt resolution, is often better than an optimal, but late one. Examples

American View

The negative effect of a festering internal conflict on a teams internal cohesion, and thus performance, is almost always costlier than the benefits of a perfect resolution. Maintaing forward movement has priority.

German View

Quick (hasty) decisions are rarely good decisions. If poorly resolved, a conflict resurfaces, demanding a repeat of the resolution process. Americans all too often address the symptoms, not the illness.

Advice to Germans

If you lead an American team, move much faster than you normally would. The longer the conflict festers, the sooner your American team will question your leadership capability. If you need time nonetheless, explain to the team why.

Don‘t leave them in the dark. If you have an American boss be prepared for a decision you might like or not like, but which either way will come much sooner than you think. 

Advice to Americans

If you lead Germans, and a conflict has been escalated up to you, do thorough due diligence. That takes time. Don‘t rush it. In the German context Aktionismus (actionism) – acting before thinking or „shooting first, then asking questions“ – is a criticism which goes to the heart of your reputation.

If the issue has finally caught the attention of your German manager, alter your internal clock. The wheels of justice in Germany move slowly.

Remember, a German working in the U.S. – colleague or boss – is nationalculturally still German. Like snails or turtles, we drag our „homes“ with us whereever we go.

Escalation

For Americans conflict is a fact of life. Escalation is often not only necessary, each individual has a fundamental right to seek resolution, to “have their day in court.” Americans escalate quickly. Examples

Acceptance

In Germany a conflict resolution is successful when accepted by all parties involved. There is little tolerance for solutions that create winners and losers. Germans aim for mutually beneficial outcomes. Examples

Speed

Germans are skeptical of rash action of any kind. Resolving a conflict requires patience. Hasty resolutions are seldom effective. The conflict most likely will resurface. German mediators take their time. Examples

Speed

Americans become impatient if too much time is required to resolve a conflict. Festering conflicts are disruptive for any team. A suboptimal, yet prompt resolution, is often better than an optimal, but late one. Examples

Evidence

When resolving a conflict American managers see themselves more as judge than mediator. They consider both objective facts and subjective witness testimony. Examples

Hearing

Americans expect a hearing. The conflict parties, in the presence of each other, make their case. Self-defense is only possible when one knows what the other side is accusing them of. Examples

Evidence

When resolving a conflict the German mediator focuses on reconstructing the causes and circumstances. Objective evidence is sought to answer the question: “Why did this have to happen?” Examples

understand-culture
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.