Face-time with management

A fascinating article in the New York Times about how a few major U.S. companies are handling the post-Covid work environment. Some employees are returning full-time to the office. Others are working exlusively, or almost excluisively from home. And many are splitting the time between office and home.

There are, of course, consequences for each choice. And in the U.S. some companies are concerned about reduced opportunities for those folks who are less present in the office. Why? Reduced face-time with management.

This is a clear statement about the nature of leadership in the U.S. business environment: Get face-time with your boss !

If you collaborate with Germans, ask them if less face-time with management would be a disadvantage or an advantage. And when you do, read to them, as best you can this, well-know, German figure of speech: “Gehe nicht zu Deinem Fürst, wenn Du nicht gerufen wirst.”

Phonetically: Gae nisht tsu die nem first, venn doo nisht gae-roofen veerst.

Mistrust, a Virus

Follow up in Germany is a sign of mistrust, of doubt in one’s reliability, in that person’s ability to deliver what they have promised. For Germans typically only commit if they are close to absolutely certain that they can execute.

Germans are very sensitive about mistrust, and do not deal with it well. A fictitious example: Small team. The members have their individual tasks, but need to collaborate at certain points. They work well together. The team lead can pay less and less attention to them. A new team member, though, begins to take advantage of the lead’s hands-off management style by looking for personal advantage.

The other team members become a bit unsettled. A few others also begin to think only of themselves. Mistrust creeps into the team, the points of contact become strained, collaboration more difficult. Their boss sees the signs and reacts by scheduling team meetings more frequently, checking on each team member’s work. Then come the emails and phone calls going into more detail.

The increased follow up strains relations. Several of the team members begin to look for alternative jobs within the company. A top performer is gone within a month. Others have sent out their resumés. Follow up can lead to mistrust, a virus with potentially deadly results.

Führen mit Auftrag

Führen mit Auftrag, a multifaceted leadership concept roughly translated as Leading by Mission, has been the foundational leadership principle in the German military over the last two hundred years. It has its roots in the famous Prussian Reforms of the early 19th Century when the Germans did a comprehensive root cause analysis of why they were so suddenly and thoroughly defeated by Napoleon‘s armies.

Führen mit Auftrag – leading by mission – is how Germans define Menschenführung or leadership of men. The officer issues to his troops a mission, a goal. It is generally formulated, includes a time component and an indication of forces required. It is then up to the next level to devise how they will complete the mission independent of their leadership.

Unique about Führen mit Auftrag is the degree of freedom on the tactical level given to those issued the mission. As long as they complete the overall mission, they decide independently which approach is best, including significant adjustments to possible changes in the situation. Required at the tactical level are flexibility, creativity and executing independent of next-level leadership.

Of critical importance to Führen mit Auftrag is that the tactical level understand clearly and thoroughly the strategic thinking of their commanding officer, and are trained to act independently of that commanding officer, yet in the spirit of his strategic intent.

Those on the tactical must also possess both good judgement and the will to make independent decisions. They must have a strong sense of responsibility and duty. The commanding officer, for his or her part, must make their strategic thinking clear, transparent and understandable for those on the tactical level.

Führen mit Auftrag – Elements

Führen mit Auftrag – very loosely translated as leading by mission – is the foundational leadership principle in the German armed forces, and has been since the early 1800s. It has six key elements:

1. Decision making: Those with the most expertise should be involved. The team analyzes the Auftrag (mission), the parameters of the situation, and the possible options to complete the mission. This is the basis for making the optimal decision and for maintaining motivation and morale within the team.

2. The Auftrag describes the goal: The core task of military leadership is to issue well-defined Aufträge, missions. The focus is on defining the end state, not the specific action taken to reach it. Define the goal clearly, allow as much tactical freedom as possible. The path to the goal is best defined by those at the front. A clear Auftrag allows the tactical level to make necessary adjustments due to situational changes independent of their leadership.

3. Context and boundary conditions: The Auftrag includes a description of the mission‘s boundary conditions. The tactical level needs to understand how its mission fits into the broader strategic picture. They should be informed and understand the strategic thinking two level above their own. This allows the tactical level to make independent decisions should next-level leadership not be reachable.

4. Resources: Critical to mission completion is providing the tactical level with all necessary resources. Anything less is not only unfair, it threatens team morale and the mission itself. Capable commanders do their best to prevent a gap between mission and resources.

5. Coordination of forces: If the Auftrag requires action by several units, disciplines, organizations, then it is critical to clarify lines of authority and of communication. Overlaps should be avoided, areas of integrated approaches well defined.

6. Communications and reporting: Information flow needs to be set both on the tactical level and between the tactical and strategic levels. Progress reports are critical not only within military units, but also between the military and their civilian commanders.

LeBron James calls plays

Sunday, May 10, 2015. Sports Illustrated online. 

„Cleveland Cavaliers forward LeBron James says head coach David Blatt wanted him to inbound the ball on the final play of Sunday’s Game 4 but he overruled the coach. Instead, James hit a game-winning jumper as time expired to give the Cavaliers an 86-84 series-tying win.  

`To be honest, the play that was drawn up, I scratched it,’ James told reporters. `I just told coach, Give me the ball. We’re either going to go to overtime or I’m going to win it for us. It was that simple.

`I was supposed to take the ball out,’ James continued. `I told coach, There’s no way I’m taking the ball out, unless I can shoot it over the backboard and it goes in. I told him, Have somebody else take the ball out, give me the ball, and everybody get out of the way.’”

Führen mit Auftrag – Requirements

Führen mit Auftrag – very loosely translated as leading by mission – is the foundational leadership principle in the German armed forces, and has been since the early 1800s. It has the following nine requirements.

1. Training: Führen mit Auftrag requires well-trained troops who ideally have been fighting together over a longer period of time. Soldiers should be viewed as masters of their craft. This includes not only expertise in using their weapons, but moreso their overall behaviour when in battle.

    2. Self-confidence and cohesion: The entire group must possess a high degree of self-confidence. Every member, from enlisted soldier to the highest ranking officer, must view themselves as an expert at what they do. The officers should be proud to lead such troops. They should identify themselves with their troops and not have an eye on their next promotion.

    3. Acceptance: Officers should accept soldiers who take different approaches as long as the overall goal is reached. Officers should not get too involved on the tactical level, thus allowing soldiers to develop their skills. Too early, too much involvement on the tactical level frustrates self-leading soldiers.

    4. Trust: Officers and soldiers need to trust each other. Officers cover for their soldiers when things go wrong. Mistakes are either not punished or at least not immediately. Common thinking and acting is critical. It is based on common training.

    5. Information: Detailed information is important, especially explaining the strategic thinking behind individual missions. Soldiers need to understand the big picture, the broader context in which they are operating. Officers take seriously input provided by the tactical level, thereby encouraging soldiers to think and act independently.

    6. Few orders: Commanding officers state only the mission, provide necessary resources and makes sure that participating organizations coordinate their activities. Everything else is left to the tactical level, which makes their own decisions about how to complete the mission. Leadership is decentralized.

    7. Motivation: Commanders at the front know best the strengths and weaknesses of their troops, and can best judge the situation. Allowing for independent decision making and action strengthens motivation and morale among the troops. They identify more closely with the overall mission, view themselves as subjects and not objects to be commanded here and there.

    8. Deviation from mission: If the situation on the ground has changed, it is expected of officers and their troops to make the necessary adjustments immediately, even without having informed their next level officer.

    9. Situation analysis: Officers and soldiers at all levels are expected to constantly reassess the situation. What is our overall mission? What are we expected to achieve? Has the situation changed in any way which requires of us to modify our approach? If so, in what way and when?

    Article 65, German Basic Law

    Germany‘s Grundgesetz or Basic Law is the equivalent of a constitution. Artikel 65 of the Grundgesetz defines the working relationship between the Chancellor and the cabinet:

    „The Federal Chancellor defines and is responsible for the overall political goals of the government. Within the framework of these goals each cabinet member is responsible for leading their department independently.”

    It continues:

    “Differences of opinion among cabinet members are clarified by the Chancellor and the other cabinet members. The Chancellor leads the government based on a political platform formulated by the Chancellor and the cabinet, and which has been approved of by the Federal President.“

    Soccer Teacher

    In order to coach at the highest level of German professional soccer one needs a license, which is obtained after completing rigorous theoretical and practical training. Once obtained, the professional soccer coach is granted the official title of Fussballlehrer, literally soccer teacher. Not coach. Instead teacher.

    Like a school teacher who has given a test, the soccer teacher (the Germans use the term Trainer) has very few levers during the match to influence its outcome. He must hope that his players apply during the match all that they learned and practiced.

    The coach (formally Fussballlehrer, informally Trainer) and his staff work with their players on technique, practice specific strategies and set plays, try out different formations. But once the match begins the coach can make only three player substitutions, can to a limited degree yell certain instructions to the players, has only a few minutes at halftime to provide instruction. In the end, therefore, it is the players who have to know how to react to the opposing team.

    The coach is practically a bystander. In fact, the rules of soccer prevent too much communication between coach and players during the match. Again, the coach is like a school teacher, who can only hope that his students have paid attention in the classroom, have done their homework conscientiously, and will apply during the examination what was taught to them.

    Independent. Self-managing.

    In many job postings German employers promise eigenständiges Arbeiten – literally independent work, meaning the freedom to do the work with little influence from next-level management. Selbständiges Arbeiten – self-managing work without constant status checks, without anyone “looking over your shoulder”, is highly attractive to German employees and job-seekers.

    It is a sign of trust in the person’s ability. Constant feedback to the boss on the progress of work is neither necessary nor desired. Too much communication between levels of hierarchy is in the German context a sign of Unselbständigkeit – inability to work independently, self-managing. They need to be “taken by the hand” (hand-holding). And noone in Germany, neither team lead nor member, wants to waste time doing that.

    Home is where the WIFI is

    “I wonder if Germans think their WiFi-issues are a global thing”. That’s how one of my friends from the USA recently expressed his opinion towards the WIFI situation in Germany. They alluded to the impossibility to find free public WIFI in big German cities.

    No wonder, since you can even find free mobile internet in the middle of the Israeli desert, in Estonian forests, on top of lonely Georgian mountains and along the highways in California. However, you won’t be able to find it in German pedestrian areas. 

    One reason for this lack of WiFi access is a legal situation. The provider of the free Wlan is legally responsible for the inevitable misbehavior of the users; the so-called “Stoererhaftung” (liability for disturbance).

    But there is more behind it: The term “Neuland” (unknown territory) circulated a while ago, used by Angela Merkel at a meeting with President Obama, in context with the Internet. However, she did by no means mean the invention “Internet” itself, but rather figuratively the Internet as legal terrain. 

    The existing German legal status is just not sufficient to regulate the Internet, which is a contradiction in itself. Simultaneously, legislation works slowly and thus is even less able to keep up with such rapid changes. 

    Therefore, the basic dilemma becomes clear: Many Germans (The German institutions, for one) appreciate changes to be clear, regulated and with obvious roles and responsibilities. And in the event of doubt with distinct legal liability. 

    In general, changes are usually dealt with slowly but thoughtfully. Thus, if this attitude applies to an uncontrollable and rapidly spreading phenomena such as the Internet, conflict naturally develops. 

    German reservation does not solve such conflicts until an explicit and waterproof regulation has been found. But, this manner leads to satisfactory results of the changing process most of the time because „gut Ding will Weile haben“ (“Good things are worth waiting for“).

    understand-culture
    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.