Conflict – Page 14 – understand-culture

„Streit vom Zaun brechen“

Streit vom Zaun brechen. To let a conflict get out of control. Germans prefer to hide their internal conflicts for as long as possible. Conficts attract attention and curiosity. They force the conflict parties to take a stand, to explain the problem.

This, in turn, offers management and related organizations an opportunity to get involved, to exert influence on the conflict parties, thereby reducing their ability to address the problem alone and independent of outside influence.

Germans, therefore, try their best to avoid escalating a conflict to the next management level. The side which chooses to do so is viewed as impulsive and thoughtless. Germans would rather give in a bit in order to reduce tensions than to strike back. Avoiding open conflict is seen as intelligent, restrained and prudent. Conflict is for the unsophisticated.

Der Klügere gibt nach. To be willing to compromise instead of insisting on being right; to see the other side‘s point of view as valid; to take the hit in order to reduce the tension.

Das Feuer schüren. Literally to stoke the flames. To provoke; to start a fight; to turn a difference of opinion into an open conflict; to whip up the emotions.

Germans want to be responsible for their work and to perform it independently. They want their work to be clearly defined and distinguishable from the work of their colleagues. Germans do not feel comfortable with having to explain or justify how they complete their tasks.

Every form of supervision or monitoring is a sign of mistrust. Escalating a conflict is risky, therefore, for it invites a third party, typically the next level of management, to take a closer look into how the conflict parties actually do their work. This makes them vulnerable to outside influences on how they work.

Autonomy. Greek autonomía. Independence, self-governance. From autos, selbst und nomos, law. To be responsible for oneself, self-determination, self-reliance, decision making freedom.

Tischtuch zerschnitten

Der Tischtuch ist zerschnitten. The tablecloth has been ripped in two.

In the German context, to escalate a conflict within the team to the next management level is considered to be a sign of failure. Failure of the conflict parties to resolve their problem. Failure to at least come up with a proposed resolution which they can take to their team lead for her input, and perhaps her decision.

Escalation is the equivalent of going to court, of one party suing the other. For Germans, the severity of such a step just about rules out any chance that the two parties will be able to work together again. And regardless of how their German manager assists in the resolution, regardless of the outcome, she will view her two team members as having failed themselves, the team and her.

Paragraph vs. Case

It is a well known fact that the German and the American legal systems have fundamental differences between them. The modern German legal system is based on ancient Roman law, combined with a bit of French and old Germanic law, but all of it follows the paragraph law structure.

The American system is derived from the English case law tradition, which follows the law as it was laid out by judicial verdicts in actual previous cases. Key cases providing precedence are reviewed to determine how to continue.

Justice (Gerechtigkeit) and judgement are closely connected in the American system. Not just the concrete facts of the case, but also the circumstances are considered to be crucial information for the deliberations and verdict. These then must be interpreted with regard to the complex nature of the human existence.

A task which only persons with sufficient experience with life as well as with people are capable of. This experience – or the wisdom that comes from such experience – is something which only older people can have.

This is why Americans are always astounded when they hear that in Germany relatively young people – in their early 30s – can become judges. Many of the district attorneys that they see on German television look as if they were fresh out of law school.

According to the American understanding of judicial power, paragraph laws play a minor part. Case law is so difficult precisely because it concerns situations which are not found in a German book of federal law.

This is why American judges must be older people who are truly good and wise. Their process too involves stringent scientific methods of analysis, not unlike German paragraph laws. These, from the American perspective, can not deliver more than just the pure facts.

The ability to take these facts and interpret them, to make sense of them, this is what they view as true good judgement. Knowledge of methodology and analytical processes may support one’s good judgement, but can never amount to the equivalent.

First-mover advantage

First-mover advantage is gained by the first significant player in a market segment who gains control of resources that other participants in the market cannot match. Amazon had a first mover advantage over Barnes & Noble. Amazon maintained its advantage by partnering with Borders and extending product offerings into apparel, electronics, toys and housewares.

Rarely is a project, large or small, completed within schedule, within budget and meeting fully, much less exceeding, the specifications of the customer. The business world is seldom that simple. In the American business context quality is more likely to be sacrificed than schedule or budget. Americans expect products and services on-time, and at the price they agreed to. Quality – in the sense of completeness – can be made up for with extra effort.

When it comes to that magic triangle – schedule, budget, quality – the first two usually trump the third, in the U.S.

Trump. A card of a suit any of whose cards will win over a card that is not of this suit —called also trump card; a decisive overriding factor or final resource.

“Good things need their time”

The German expression Gut Ding will Weile haben – good things need their time – states that things which are supposed to turn out good will need some time. This becomes clear especially when important decisions are to be addressed:

“Quality before speed: Merkel pulls the brakes at the introduction of new supervision of European banks.” (Handelsblatt 17.2.2015)

“The German Handball Federation President Bauer: “Quality comes before speed.“ (Lahner Zeitung 20.6.2014)

“NPD-Ban: Quality before speed.” (Hamburger Abendblatt 9.12.2011)

Willing to argue

The dictionary defines streitbar as follows: [constantly] prepared, having the will to, argue, with someone over something, to critically and activelydispute something; to fight for or about something, to take a stand for something or someone, a fighter; [older] prepared for battle; warrior-like, brave.

The adjective streitbar has a very positive connotation in the German language. In recalling famous persons one often reads the sentence Er war streitbar – he was streitbar.

Politicians are ever more frequently characterized as being streitbar. Streitbar does not mean that one seeks out conflicts in a negative sense. Rather, it means to stand up for ones beliefs, and not avoid serious confrontations.

Isn’t that what management is paid for?

Americans and Germans have very different expectations about how to manage interpersonal conflicts when they arise, which can lead to huge misunderstandings. As part of an ongoing series of articles, an American consultant living in Germany offers some advice.

When Germans and American collaborate, there will be conflict. This is normal. However, their respective approaches to conflict resolution differ. These differences, if not understood and properly balanced, can hinder just and lasting conflict resolution. And unresolved conflict threatens collaboration and success.