This award-winning spy thriller follows a young East German soldier recruited as a spy in West Germany during the Cold War. The series highlights the slow, strategic nature of intelligence work, where decisions are made only after extensive analysis, weighing risks, and considering long-term consequences rather than yielding to immediate political or military pressures.
Imperial Reforms (1493–1519)
The Holy Roman Empire underwent significant reforms, including the establishment of supreme courts and the Imperial Diet as a key decision-making body. These reforms unfolded over decades and required patient negotiation and compromise between the emperor and the estates. The slow, consultative process exemplified the German belief that important decisions should not be rushed and must be given the time their complexity demands.
Do it right the first time
The (American) Black Forest Family. “Between Jonathan and me, we have 12 years of collective work experience in Germany. And during that time, German work culture has taught us a lot about work values and the atmosphere of employment in Germany, and how different it is from working in the United States.
Some of these are monumental (like parental leave in Germany, work/life balance, and sick leave) and some of them are small nuances (like work habits and break time). But collectively, our experience of working in Germany has made us better employees and strengthened our relationships with our colleagues. Let’s explore them together.”
Jump to 9:40 about: German “do it right the first time” vs. American “just go.”
Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact
The Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact exemplifies several core German decision-making strategies, particularly the emphasis on strategic patience, pragmatic calculation, and allowing the nature of the decision-not external pressures-to dictate timing and terms.
Deliberate Negotiation and Timing:
The pact was the result of extended negotiations between Germany and the Soviet Union, following the breakdown of talks between the Soviets, Britain, and France. German leaders did not rush into an agreement but instead waited for the optimal moment-after other diplomatic options had failed-to secure a deal that would best serve their interests. This patience allowed Germany to negotiate from a position of strength and maximize its strategic advantage.
Pragmatic, Interest-Driven Approach:
Despite deep ideological differences, Germany prioritized practical considerations over ideology, focusing on immediate military and territorial objectives. The pact included secret protocols dividing Eastern Europe into spheres of influence, demonstrating a willingness to set aside personal or political animosities in favor of concrete, performance-based outcomes.
Control Over Decision Pace:
Germany resisted external pressures-such as the urgency from Britain and France to form an anti-German alliance-and instead set the tempo of negotiations to align with its own strategic timetable. This approach reflects the German logic that the time allotted to a decision should be determined by its complexity and importance, not by outside urgency.
Patience in Execution and Adjustment:
After the pact was signed, Germany continued to renegotiate and adjust its terms, as seen in subsequent agreements modifying borders and managing resource exchanges with the Soviet Union. This ongoing, patient adjustment process ensured that decisions remained aligned with evolving strategic needs.
In summary, the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact demonstrates German decision-making strategies through measured, pragmatic negotiation; patience in timing and execution; and a consistent focus on achieving well-defined, interest-driven objectives, regardless of external pressure or ideological differences.
Risk too high
February 2022. Politicians and business leaders call for alternatives to Putin’s pipelines.
The country gets a whopping 55 percent of its gas imports from Russia. With the crisis triggered by Vladimir Putin’s belligerence toward Ukraine prompting renewed questions about the reliability of that supply, politicians and business leaders have begun calling for the country to urgently find ways to diversify its energy mix.
“Well. Welcome to the brave new world where Europeans are very soon going to pay €2.000 for 1.000 cubic meters of natural gas!” Dmitry Medvedev, the former Russian president and prime minister who is now deputy chair of the country’s Security Council, tweeted in reaction to Scholz’s move. Just to make sure the message got tweeted in German, too.
“Sitting out“
Former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl was often innaccurately portrayed as the master of Aussitzen (sitting out) by journalists and political elites alike. Instead of approaching a problem directly, it was said that he would wait until it would either resolve itself or people would lose interest in it.
But even with Kohl’s retirement from politics,“sitting out“ political issues supposedly has not gone out of style. At least according to Stern maganzine, which claims that Angela Merkel has become the new representative of this style of governing. As Wochenmagazin wrote in March 2010: “Angela Kohl – wait it out, weigh it out, sit it out. Chancellor Merkel reveals herself ever more strongly to be an adept pupil of the greatest sitter-outer Helmut Kohl”.
More accurate is that Kohl was and Merkel is a master of thinking things through, patience, and building consensus.
74 Billion Dollars
On May 7th, 1998 Jürgen Schrempp, CEO of Daimler, and Bob Eaton, CEO of Chrysler appeared together at a press conference in London to announce a merger between the two companies. It was emphasized that this was not a takeover by one company of the other, but rather a fusion between equal parties. Schrempp deemed the merger of Daimler and Chrysler “a match made in heaven”.
After two years, Co-chairman Eaton announced his resignation, leaving Schrempp to be the sole head. In 2006 Schrempp passed this position on to Dieter Zetsche. By March 2007 the first speculations began to emerge that DaimlerChrysler would sell the ChryslerGroup.
Since the merger, Chrysler had reduced its net worth by 35 billion Euros, while the net worth of DaimlerChrysler has been reduced by another 50 billion by the end of Schrempp’s resignation in 2005. On May 14th, 2007 the sale of ChryslerGroup to Cerberus was announced. During a special general assembly on October 4th, 2007 it was officially decided to rename the company Daimler AG.
For Mercedes-Benz this merger to DaimlerChrysler AG seriously damaged the company’s image, which many attribute to quality issues and cost-cutting. The leading role which Daimler-Benz AG once had in the auto industry has still not been completely restored.
A study conducted by the consulting firm McKinsey estimated that the company’s value had dropped during Schrempp’s reign by 74 billion dollars.
Fehlerkultur
Fehlerkultur – literally failure-culture – is defined by sociologists as the way in which societies react to failure (mistakes) and to those who commit them. A German psychologist took a closer look at Fehlerkultur within German companies.
In the past, innovation in Germany, he wrote, was the product of a long collective decision making process. The great inventions of the Industrial Revolution in Germany were very seldom the result of an individual genius, but instead the achievement of groups of men and women.
Problems (mistakes, errors, failures) were identified, analyzed and solved collectively, as a group. The final product was ausgereift – technically mature, well-engineered, sophisticated. American-styled “trial and error” does not exist in German thinking, which is why there is no accurate German translation for it.
The negative side of this German national-cultural strength is that a systematic, perfection-oriented group approach to solving problems (to innovation) requires patience and time. And time is not always offorded by today’s rapid market developments.
It is in such circumstances, according to the study, that the Germans inclination to blame those who take risks and inevitably make mistakes comes stronger into play.
Mistakes are deemed almost as a personal and professional transgression which demand being exposed, and the perpetrator punished. This heightens even more the innate German fear of commiting errors, which in turn stymies creative thinking.
Personal liability
Germany is a country based on the rule of law. And there are many laws in Germany. The Germans abide by them. For Germans, rules and regulations are one way to reduce risk of personal liability. This can make working with Germans difficult for non-Germans. A conditional German yes might very well be based on the fear of being made personally responsible for the outcome of an agreement.
Working with Germans or setting foot on German soil immediately involves coming in contact with German laws. Why are escalators in Germany so slow? Because the store owner is liable for any accidents.
Bus drivers in Germany will only let passengers enter or exit at designated bus stops, even if it is only ten meters away. For legal reasons. When sending an email to a group of friends the other email addresses should not be visible. Personal email addresses are private and protected by Datenschutz, information privacy protection laws.
Computers often need repair. Employees of companies are not permitted to take action, unless they are in the IT department. If repairing leads to further damage, the employee is personally liable. For it is not their job, but the employer‘s, to repair company equipment.
The same goes for cleaning. Rolling up your sleeves and cleaning dirty windows in your office is a nice gesture, but not a good idea in Germany. The employee is liable for any injury incurred during the cleaning. The company‘s insurance company certainly will not pick up the costs. And the company can even charge the employee for not focusing on the work they are paid for.
German laws also prescribe clearly in which locations what kinds of commercial space can be used for. Many an organization has learned the hard way that the space they rented cannot be used for the purposes they intended.
When follow-up is ok
Despite German reluctance to use follow-up, there are situations in which it is unavoidable: In order to stick to a well-defined plan; when the customer requests information; if work results are not delivered on time. The Germans prefer the term nachfassen – literally, after hold. Or nachhaken – literally, after-hook or -check.
Follow-up in Germany can be either negative or positive. Negative in the sense of control. Positive in the sense of support. Follow up – negative – questions one’s ability and willingness to produce good work results. At the same time – positive – it is essential to checking technical details, getting necessary information, verifying due dates.
Organizations which are time-driven rely on follow up. News organizations are just one example. Any and all forms of logistics is another. Timing is critical. Schedules need to be met. Employees are under pressure. Deadlines are deadlines.
Follow-up can be supportive. An older, more experienced colleague can inquire in a friendly way about the status of another’s work. A team lead who coaches her team well knows when and how to follow up by simply asking “How are things going? Can I help in any way?”
Follow-up by colleagues on a report, speech, or published article is positive. It means that they have taken sincere interest in your work. It also gives them an opportunity to demonstrate their competence by asking intelligent questions.
In German team meetings follow-up is the rule, not the exception. Open action items can be addressed directly. Team members establish a common baseline of information.
Finally, there is another very legitimate reason to use follow-up in Germany: If things are not going right, if an error has been detected, if the work is being performed improperly. In such cases there is only one course of action. Follow up, and fast!