Explicitness Archives - Page 6 of 8

Coded Praise in the Work Reference

Every German employee who leaves a job has a legal right to a written reference, the Arbeitszeugnis. The law says it must be clear and easy to understand. In practice, set phrases carry the grade. Stets zu unserer vollsten Zufriedenheit, always to our fullest satisfaction, means very good. In 2014 the Federal Labor Court ruled that zur vollen Zufriedenheit, to full satisfaction, counts only as befriedigend, a middle grade. An employee who wants a better grade must prove that he earned it.

The same ruling quotes legal commentators. When 86.6 percent of references rate performance as good or very good, they write, a reference no longer says anything about what the employee can actually do. The ruling does not name the study behind the figure.

Coming to the matter

To come to the matter. The German for getting to the point, and the metaphor is different from the English one.

A point is a place in an argument. Die Sache is the thing under discussion. English asks you to be concise. German asks you to arrive at the substance.

Saying it to the face

Ins Gesicht sagen — to say to the face. Offen aussprechen — to speak out openly. Kein Blatt vor den Mund nehmen — to take no leaf before the mouth, meaning to speak without covering.

And the opposite: hintenherum, behind-around, and hinter dem Rücken, behind the back. Both are accusations.

The German objection is not to being criticised in front of others. It is to being criticised where you cannot answer.

Getting it on the table

Das muss auf den Tisch — that has to go on the table. Said in German when something is being handled quietly that ought to be handled in front of everyone. The image is of a table with people sitting around it. Putting something on it is making it visible to all of them simultaneously, which is the point rather than a side effect.

Mike says “no”

Bonn. An online chat with the help desk at a major telecommunications company. It's about my mobile phone service.

German Company: "A hearty welcome to your personal online help, etc. You are speaking with Mike."

Magee: "Hi, Mike. I have an xyz contract. Can I add my 17-year old son to it?

Mike: "No. You son can only have his own contract after he turns 18."

That "No" struck me as rather direct, hard, immovable.

An "American Mike" would have written something like: "We would love to add your son to your contract. And we have all sorts of flexible ways for you to configure your family plan. To give your son, at age 17, his own contract is unfortunately not permitted by law. We apologize for the inconvenience. Would you like to hear about our family plan options?"

But the chat with Mike continued and he gave me helpful information and quickly. I was thankful.

German Veto

If discussions about a possible agreement are not business-like or unfocused, Germans will readily exercise their veto. Or, if they have an alternative approach, they will reject the initial proposal, thereby affecting a change of course and eliminating unnecessary discussion.

Germans tend to be well prepared before deciding on whether to enter into an agreement, and assume that the other parties are too. Usually, they have a plan or proposal ready. Instead of explaining point for point why they reject a given proposal, they simply respond with a 'no'.

Because the 'no' can come fast and definitively, it can throw the non-German party off balance. One needs to remain calm and describe clearly the reasons for one's own proposal. If they are valid, the German partner will take them seriously and actively seek out the best approach, including a compromise.

“What are you thinking about?”

A comment on YouTube: “They are obviously Deep in Thought.”

Context Irrelevant

Germans strive to separate substance from person. They can argue vehemently and still respect each other, even remain close friends. This allows them to pay less attention to the specific context of the interaction.

It is relatively unimportant whether they are communicating with their neighbor in front of their house, an acquaintance in the streetcar, a relative on the phone or a colleague at their workplace. A discussion about a topic of substance has little to do with the person individually.

The ability to separate substance from person is in the German business context among the fundamental abilities expected not only of employees, but especially of those who lead them – management. The self-understanding of the German citizen includes – consciously or unconsciously – the obligation to argue a point, to address a problem, to state an opinion objectively, critically, fairly.

You not you

For “you” the German language has both and an informal word: Sie and Du. It is typical for German colleagues, even those who work well together and have known each other for many years to use the Sie-Form. The Knigge – Germany’s best known books on proper behavior, first pubished in 1788 by Baron Adolph Knigge – recommends the Sie-Form in the work context.

Knigge considers it appropriate to reject the offer of the Du-Form from a work colleague if one feels surprised or thrown off balance. For accepting the informal Du is a commitment to a level of personal friendship and trust one may not wish. Knigge recommends a polite response: “Your offer honors me. Thank you. However, I feel more comfortable using the Sie-Form, and prefer to continue using it, also out of respect for you (Sie).“

Maintaining a certain respectful distance to others is considered a sign of respect in the German culture. A famous example is the relationship between two of the best-known soccer tv-commentators, Günter Netzer (a former star German soccer player) and Gerhard Delling (a respected tv sports journalist).

Their conversational-type commentaries during half-time and after games are enjoyed by millions due to both their expert analysis and relaxed interaction. Yet, on camera they address each other with the formal Sie, even though Netzer was a groomsman (witness) in Delling’s.

Little Bell

Mid-1990s. University of Bonn. Professor Dr. Schmidt enters the classroom with books and papers under his arm, and his little bell. The topic: Game Theory in the Context of International Politics.

A graduate student moves to the front of the room to give his presentation. Hardly a minute into it a shrill ding-a-ling pierces the air. The students don’t dare move a muscle. “Ladies and gentleman. Time and again I simply must impress upon you the need to define the terms you use. You cannot simply throw complex terms around the room without having first clearly defined them!“

A few students risk rolling their eyes. The presenter sweats, squirms and stammers his way through his material. Professor Dr. Schmidt sits down in his chair, his left arm on his desk, in his hand his little friend the bell– ready to get shrill at a moment’s notice.