United States – Page 71 – understand-culture

Business travel

Business travel via airplane or automobile remains extremely common in America despite rising airline ticket and gasoline prices. Businesses remain committed to approving business travel, appreciating the importance of face-to-face contact.

Although companies often work to cut costs, they are increasingly thinking about travel in terms of its carbon footprint. These companies are responding to customers’ increasing demands for sustainable business practices. Some companies are scheduling longer, less frequent business trips to cut down on air travel or using communications technology to decrease the need for frequent air travel.

Efficient and inefficient

Many of the most popular brands of children’s toys in the U.S. are wooden toys manufactured by fairly small companies. Compared to mass-produced plastic toys from China, they are inefficient to produce and more expensive to ship. Quality and design is the focus, not speed or quantity.

American-made tools: The websites of popular American toolmakers such as Snap On and Craftsman include many statements about non-negotiable product quality and safety but make no mention of efficiency. Production of American products often maximizes quality and safety while giving much less attention to efficiency of production.

U.S. health care: The delivery of health care in the United States is perhaps the best example of disregard for efficiency in exchange for safe, high-quality output. According to a report from the Institute of Medicine, „about 30 percent of health spending in 2009 – roughly $750 billion – was wasted on unnecessary services, excessive administrative costs, fraud, and other problems.“

The reasons for this waste are complex, but the underlying logic is that in the health care sector (and in most other industries), Americans view a safe, comfortable, and positive output as the primary goal of their activities; therefore, efficiency is often ignored.

U.S. military: The U.S. military spends vast sums of money to achieve the strategic goals of the nation. For example, it costs the U.S. an estimated $1 million dollars to outfit a single soldier in Afghanistan for a year. The U.S. has spent more than $1 trillion dollars fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001. The key focus of military operation is achieving the strategic objective (or output); efficiency and costs are rarely discussed. If they are discussed, they are always secondary to achieving the mission.

Federal hiring process: President Obama signed a memorandum in February 2010 ordering the Office of Personnel Management to streamline the federal hiring process. Although implementing this order will vary across different agencies, the act symbolizes a concerted effort to add efficiency to what was previously an incredibly slow and ineffective process.

Hotel chains: Many companies cannot focus exclusively on output while neglecting efficiency. Hotel chains have started to encourage customers to conserve water (thereby increasing efficiency) by re-using towels and not changing linens every day. These campaigns are often marketed as „eco-friendly.“ They are aimed at lowering costs and increasing the company’s efficiency. The output must be of good and uniform quality, but if the company does not operate efficiently, then it will not be profitable.

Assembly line: With the assembly line Henry Ford revolutioned the automotive industry and the way products are produced in almost every industry. This new manufacturing process made building cars more efficient. Because of the increase in efficiency, the cost to produce a car went down and when production costs were lowered, so was the retail price of the cars. Today, almost all products – from faucets to airplanes – are produced in some form of assembly line.

Intelligent, not independent

Team member to team lead. Product to consumer. Could there be a link between those two relationships? Could it be that how a culture defines the relationship between team lead and team member is similar or analogous to the relationship between the consumer (B2C) or the customer (B2B) on the one side and the product on the other? Between the consumer and the electronic device like a computer, tablet smartphone, or between the customer and a complex production system?

But analogous not in the sense that employees are tools, objects, inhuman – although certainly there are managers, organizations, companies who indeed treat their employees as means to an end. More in the sense that it is expected that the employee, the team member, get the job done, make work and life easier for management, for fellow employees, for internal or external customers.

In the American product philosophy, how intelligent should a product be: kitchen oven, washer, automobile, computers and their software, technologies which utilize forms of artificial intelligence? Intelligent in the sense of independent, of the user?

Just as the American team lead reserves the right to go from the strategic level down to the tactical in order to manage or even implement (player-coach), so too the American consumer (B2C) or customer (B2B) wants a product which can be managed, controlled, directed, steered, run.

See the print advertisements, including large banners for example in airports, stating „Company X runs SAP.“ Enterprise software, highly complex, but at the service, at the disposal, of the client.

Americans want intelligent products, yes, but not independent of purpose. And the user determines the purpose, not the product itself.

build a better mousetrap

“Build a better mousetrap, and the world will beat a path to your door” is attributed to the American writer Ralph Waldo Emerson from the late 19th century.

It may, however, be a misquotation of “If a man has good corn or wood, or boards, or pigs, to sell, or can make better chairs or knives, crucibles or church organs, than anybody else, you will find a broad, hard-beaten road to his house, though it be in the woods“.

The phrase “to build a better mousetrap”, has come to signify a false belief that companies need only build a better product for them to succeed, as if the sales and marketing of that product played an insignificant role. Americans rarely believe that a product can sell itself.

Mobility

Automobiles: The Hummer H2 is perhaps the best example of unapologetic disregard for efficiency. This vehicle weighs around 6,400 pounds and travels about 10 miles on one gallon of gas. They sell for $40-$50,000, although sales have declined sharply since 2005.

Americans tend to value large, powerful cars despite their inefficient use of gasoline. For example, the Ford Mustang was first sold in 1964 and is currently in its fifth generation. The newest Mustang’s 5.0 liter V8 gets a boost of eight horsepower from 412 hp (307 kW; 418 PS) to 420 hp (313 kW; 426 PS), and the V6 remains rated at 305 hp (227 kW; 309 PS) and 280 lb·ft (380 N·m). Although fuel efficiency was formerly ignored in favor of power, the Mustang was redesigned to be more efficient and now gets around 30 miles per gallon.

Energy use: According to World Bank statistics Americans use an average of 7,069 kg of oil per capita in 2011. This is more than double of most European nations and about four times China’s per capita oil use.

Car size: Although Western Europeans actually own more cars per capita than Americans, American cars tend to be much larger. Americans also tend to live in suburban areas that are quite a distance away from their workplace, so they spend an average of an hour or more commuting to and from work every day.

The average width of American roads allows for much larger trucks and passenger cars. Taxi cabs also tend to be far larger in the United States than in Europe or Asia, even though they carry the same number of passengers (1-3) at a time.

Increased fuel economy standards: In response to growing concerns about pollution and global warming, President Obama in April 2012 finalized standards which mandate an average fuel economy of 54.5 miles per gallon for the 2025 model year. These tough standards aim to force car manufacturers to create more efficient gasoline-based vehicles as well as electric and hybrid cars. Fuel efficient vehicles such as the Toyota Prius are gaining in popularity as highly inefficient vehicles. Sales increased sharply in 2004 and Toyota has sold more than 120,000 Prius vehicles each year since 2007.

Car pooling: Another growing trend in many cities which aims to decrease pollution and fossil fuel use is car pooling: people riding together to and from work in order to save money and decrease the number of cars on the road. Most Americans still travel a fairly long distance to work each day, usually alone in their car. Local governments have sought to encourage people to share cars by introducing „High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)“ lanes that are only open to vehicles with more than three passengers.

Citizens have created solutions such as „slugging,“ a common practice in Washington, D.C. where drivers pick up impromptu riders to meet the HOV requirements of high-volume interstates. Some commuters also form car pooling groups that rent vans and leave from specified locations at the same time every morning. The riders split the cost of the van and driver.

Biking: In some cities in America bike trails have been constructed from popular suburbs into downtown office locations. These trails encourage commuters to ride bikes to and from work and often involve bridges or tunnels that allow for an easy commute. This practice is still fairly uncommon among American workers, but as traffic continues to get worse and gas prices rise, more commuters may consider this option.

Navel-gazing

Useless or excessive self-contemplation; self-absorption, self-centeredness, self-concern, self-interest, self-involvement, self-preoccupation, self-regard. Navel-gazing.

Too much self. Too little other. Self being the process, how the work is done. Other being those who should benefit from the work to be done, the output, the product or service.

The deeper Germans discuss and debate how the work is done – process – the more their American colleagues fear a turn from the outward to the inward. The link is lost between process (how the work is done) and the results.

Americans often have the sense that their German counterparts believe that process can solve any problem, address any challenge, even those which do not lend themselves to process. Leadership. Decision making. Business relationships. Process works with the measurable, the quantifiable, but less so to the immeasurable, the unquantifiable.

For Americans, process is a tool. Apply where applicable.

Pragmatism

Tool: A handheld device that aids in accomplishing a task; something as an instrument or apparatus used in performing an operation or necessary in the practice of a vocation or profession; an element of a computer program that activates and controls a particular function; a means to an end; one that is used or manipulated by another. From Old English tōl to prepare for use. First known use 12th century.

Enable: To provide with the means or opportunity; to make possible, practical, or easy; to cause to operate; to give legal power, capacity, or sanction to.

Pragmatic: Relating to matters of fact or practical affairs, often to the exclusion of intellectual or artistic matters; practical as opposed to idealistic; relating to or being in accordance with philosophical pragmatism. Latin pragmaticus, skilled in law or business, from Greek pragmatikos,from pragmat-, pragma deed, from prassein to do.

Pragmatism: A philosophical movement first given systematic expression by Charles Sanders Pierce and William James and later by John Dewey. Pragmatists emphasize the practical function of knowledge, as an instrument for adapting to reality and controlling it. Pragmatism, like empiricism, emphasizes experience over a priori reasoning (deductive, using presumptions).

Pragmatism holds that truth is to be found in the process of verification. Pragmatists interpret ideas as instruments and plans of action rather than as images of reality. More specifically, ideas are suggestions and anticipations of possible conduct. They are hypotheses or forecasts of what will result from a given action.

Skinning cats and Westward Ho!

There is a popular American phrase which states “there is more than one way to skin a cat.” This phrase is used to express that there are multiple processes which produce the same result, and that as long as the result is achieved, the approach taken does not matter how.

It was first used in 1840 by American humorist Seba Smith in The Money Diggers, in which Smith wrote: “There are more ways than one to skin a cat, so are there more ways than one of digging for money.”

This phrase was (and still is) so popular that it inspired many variations. In 1855, Charles Kingsley’s Westward Ho! used the phrase “There are more ways of killing a cat than choking it with cream.” Many other popular variations include killing cats (and sometimes dogs) by hanging, choking with butter, and choking with pudding.

The phrase has also appeared in many American books, including Mark Twain’s 1889 book A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, in which the author wrote “she was wise, subtle, and knew more than one way to skin a cat.”

Henry Ford’s Assembly Line

One of the few Americans to focus on processes was Henry Ford. Born in Michigan in 1863 Ford began an apprenticeship as a machinist at the age of 16, and in 1891 he was hired as an engineer for the Edison Illuminating Company. Five years later, he constructed his first model of a horseless carriage, which he called the Ford Quadricycle. In 1903, Henry Ford started the Ford Motor Company, and soon began selling the Model A.

But Ford’s legacy was less in automobile design, and more in his manufacturing processes. Between his assembly line, which allowed cars to be assembled quickly with standardized parts, and his decision to add small amounts of vanadium to his steel, which made the steel production process much easier (not to mention resulted in stronger and more durable steel), Ford revolutionized the way that cars were produced, allowing them to be produced quickly and cheaply – which in turn allowed them to be sold in large numbers at a low price.

All theory is gray

To deduce is to infer certain consequences from general premises (assumptions, propositions). Infer means to form an opinion, to reach a conclusion based on facts. Stated simply, to apply the general to the specific. This is a central part of how Germans think.

Deductive thinking is in German commercial law. What work processes should look like are very specifically defined. They should, for example, be based on German laws governing safety, but be shaped by overall knowledge of the respective company.

Work process, therefore, are based both on theory (safety laws) and on practice (knowhow developed over years).

The renowned German dual vocational training is based on this logic. The students in vocational schools learn at the same time theory and practice (or application). The so-called gray theory – classroom learning – is a requirement.