“Ok, we understand the idea that the overall goal of integration is bringing together the best of both worlds – German approach and American approach. For example, German thoroughness and American speed and flexibility. But how do we react when we find ourselves bringing together the worst of both worlds – sloppy work and far too slow?”
Roles and Responsibilities
“Although I have worked with German colleagues for 15+ years in a global context, I still see the strong push from them to clearly define roles and responsibilities. This occurs with people who have already established trust and confidence in working together, as well as with new colleagues, and when timelines are short. Where does this need for such clarity come from, even prior to beginning any work towards the objective? How can we balance this need with the need to react faster in the market?”
I can attest that in the German business culture there is a very high need to define as clearly as possible who does what, meaning roles and responsibilities. German organizational charts should be taken very seriously, for example. They are always up-to-date, carefully constructed, and accurate in portraying how a German team is set-up.
And yes, the Germans come together on a regular basis to establish and maintain a common understanding of who does what, and who does not do what. Why?
Germans work independently
For one, the Germans work – and like to work – independently. They define the team structure, the tasks to be completed, roles and responsibilities, lines of communication, key processes, etc., then they go to work. The frequency, duration, depth and nature of their communication during the work is different than in a comparable American team.
The more independent the team members work, the more important it is to clearly define roles and responsibilities up front. If done well, it leads to speed, quality and efficiency. A high level of clarity about roles and responsibilities is especially important when timelines are tight.
This is not a paradox. Nor is it a paradox when German colleagues who know and trust each other well also focus intensely on first clarifying roles and responsibilities.
Germans encroach
There is another purpose, I believe, in the German context for putting so much time (as judged from the American perspective) into clarifying who does what. The Germans have a tendancy to enroach on each other’s area of responsibility, on each other’s mandate, work scope, roles and responsibilities.
Merriam-Webster defines encroach as: To gradually move or go into an area that is beyond the usual or desired limits; to gradually take or begin to use or affect something that belongs to someone else or that someone else is using.
The path to success (promotion, prestige, higher pay) in German companies is usually via size. The larger your organization, the larger its revenues, the more people it has, the greater its scope (roles and responsibilities), the better.
Germans can be very territorial, which means they are to a certain degree wary of each other. They are careful to “protect their garden”, as they say. Protect from encroachers.
I believe – without being a psychologist of the German people – that it is very important for Germans to be able to say: “This is my job. It belongs to me and to no one else. I own it. And no one else will take it away from me.”
Americans don’t encroach
Americans, on the other hand, also value the importance of clarity in who does what. They approach it more fluidly, however. They prefer to get only a required degree of clarity in order to then get started with their tasks quickly, knowing that through the actual work they will gain on-going clarity about roles and responsibilities.
Secondly, Americans are far less inclined than Germans to encroach on each other’s work scope. Americans in the workplace certainly aren’t angels, nor are the Germans devils. But Americans have very low tolerance for internal bickering about who does what.
American team leads reserve the right anyway to “move players around on the field”, meaning making constant adjustments to who does what.
Finally, the way in which teams in the American business culture operate requires that flexibility in roles and responsibilities. Any restrictions or overly-defined internal rules inhibit rather than enable rapid-reacting teamwork.
Depending on the team, individual tasks meld together, overlap, work so closely hand-in-hand that clear lines of delineation between them would be difficult to define.
Two cultures. Two approaches to clarifying who does what. Plenty of potential for misunderstanding, problems, suboptimal collaboration.
“How can we balance this need with the need to react faster in the market?”
I think you may know my response to the question. Sit down together. Address the issue. Step 1 – Understand the respective cultural approaches. Step 2 – Combine the inherent strengths of both.
Not specific enough?
Ok. Get clarity on who does what at a basic level, the fundamentals. Talk it through thoroughly. Your German colleagues will expect it. Do it with them. It won’t kill you. In fact, it will give you deeper insight into how they work.
Then remain in constant dialogue for the duration of your collaboration on those areas not clearly defined: the overlaps, the hand-offs, the grey areas. That’s where the potential for misunderstanding and friction will occur.
It’s also where the critical questions of your teamwork will pop up. It’s where collaboration actually takes place. It’s where you’ll either succeed or fail together.
Processes and Certificates
“I’ve always been baffled by how Germans can attempt to persuade by referring to processes and certificates. That is certainly a cultural issue which even after 14 years I’m not willing to accept.”
One right solution
“Why do Germans believe that there can be only one right solution?”
„Alle Wege führen nach Rom“
„There‘s more than one way to skin a cat“, an American idiom which communicates that there are different ways to reach the same goal, to complete a task, to „get the job done.“ When Germans are asked for an equivalent idiom they always say „All roads lead to Rome.“
But do the two idioms really have the same meaning? First let‘s understand the meaning of „All roads lead to Rome“ via its history.
During the days of the Roman Empire everyone was to know that Rome was the center of all life. Every road in the Roman Empire either led directly to Rome, or was linked to one of the major roads which did lead directly, or more directly, to Rome.
Not only did this fact help to point out the dominance of Rome in the Roman Empire, it also enabled trade. One of the reasons that the Roman Empire lasted several centuries was because travel was easy. „All roads lead to Rome.”
But not only trade. Also Roman troops. „All roads lead to Rome“ signaled that no matter what one did, no matter how one tried to get around it, one had to do things the Roman way. The well-planned and -guarded Roman road system was designed to make sure that the provinces couldn’t organise resistance against the Empire.
In modern times the phrase „All roads lead to Rome“ has since taken on another meaning, that something is set up so that disparate means will eventually achieve the same goal. The key word is „eventually“, for not every path to Rome was equally fast, efficient, affordable and safe.
Americans are a pragmatic people. They care far more about the results than they do about the method. They believe strongly that there are several, if not many, ways to „get the job done.“ As an immigrant people, with a multi-ethnic society, the pursuit of the „one right solution“ would be close to impossible.
Nor could that pursuit be reconciled with the American deeply-held understanding of freedom, individualism, individual rights. And the American experience has demonstrated that the varied, flexible, situation-specific approach to „skinning a cat“ also leads to success.
Scientific
There Germans are very strong in the natural sciences, mathematics, physics and engineering. They have a national cultural inclination to take a scientific approach to whatever problems they address. Science aims to discover the truth, the solution, the correct answer. It is a pursuit.
Germans believe that there, indeed, can be only one truly best approach, one best solution, one optimal way to do something. In that they are not wrong. Although all roads did lead to Rome, not all were equal. Depending on the situation, one route was best. Put another way, the parties traveling should try to identify which route was right, best, optimal. A pursuit.
So for the Germans, the „one right solution“ is the best solution at any given time. And because the pursuit of that route‘s optimization never ends, at a later time there will be another „one right solution.“
But also human
The Germans are human beings and not scientific machines. It should be of no surprise that such a capable, ambitious and self-confident people would view their approach to a given task as „the right solution“, the best route to Rome, the optimal way to „get the job done.“
And their success verifies to and for them that this is the case. Until proven otherwise they, understandably, are not always willing to consider „another route.“ Why take the risk? Why change things? The English figure of speech would be „never change a winning team.“
Unless, of course, another approach has the potential to become the new optimal way. That is where an additional factor, or motivation, comes into play. It, too, is deeply human.
Fear
What if an alternative approach also leads to the same, or better, results? And what if the logic embedded, or at the root, of that approach is not familiar, or even foreign, to the Germans and the logic behind their approach?
If there is a competition of approaches, and the one wins over the other, then the consequences for the losing side are significant. Those on that side need to adopt and adapt to the other logic, to the other approach. And if that approach is unfamiliar (not from the same family, meaning culture), it can be difficult to learn it, to take on, even to understand. For any culture, not just the German, this all means change, insecurity, risk.
„All roads lead to Rome“ also meant that the provinces, areas subjugated militarily by the Roman army, remained subservient to Rome. Command and control over the roads (transportation, logistics, troop movements) was synonymous with power. Rome as headquarters, the provinces as regions.
Power
The discussion, often battle, over the „right way“ to do something – internal processes, IT systems, product development, go-to-market strategies – is not only about businesses working more effectively, it is about power.
This is even more true when different cultures come together to collaborate. Colleagues in mono-cultural companies – or companies in which one culture dominates – share the same logic behind their approaches. Variations in approach are no more than variations on the same theme.
Collaboration in companies with several cultures involves a more complex discussion and debate about which approach to take, which method is best, about the „right solution.“
And since the Germans focus very strongly on „how the work is done“, they instinctively recognize that power is rooted in who has the say about the „right solution“ understood as process, method, approach, about the „road.“
The discussion about the „one right solution“, therefore, is at a far deeper level a debate, a battle, about who has the say about the route, way, road.
Like a legal battle
“Germans love processes and procedures and rules. Our American point of view is: ‘Processes are man-made. We can change them.’ Customers in the U.S. find it difficult to do business with us as a German company: ‘too inflexible.”‘ We are constantly debating internal business rules. We struggle to get things done. We can’t get them to change. They always find a way to logically disprove what we are trying to do or they keep pushing for more data. It’s like a legal battle. They wear us down. Help! What can we do?”
We lose customers
“We’re in the U.S. Our company is based in Germany. Our manager here in the U.S. is German. Our customers are American. Headquarters makes product changes without input from us. Our customers do not like the changes. We’re in danger of losing those customers. Our German manager escalates to headquarters. Their response: ‘Your customers are much smaller than those in Germany. Nothing can be done for them.’ Result: we lose customers. How can our German manager better address this problem?”
Diagrams vs. Text
“Why do Americans prefer describing processes in prose text? Germans prefer diagrams, which can then be combined to illustrate processes. The German approach seems to be übersichtlicher (clear, clearly arranged).“
Traditional engineering
“Why do Germans seem to support (maybe even promote) using traditional engineering design versus newer, less complicated, and in most cases, less expensive design? It seems that even experienced engineers will not question or go against established engineering practices even when there are good reasons to do so. Why?”
Your question takes us to a fundamental difference between Germans and Americans.
Tradition
Germans honor and value tradition. For them the past is highly relevant. One doesn’t break from tradition without having very good reasons. Germans view things that are new – or pretend to be new – with a certain degree of skepticism. They are sensitive to the difference between claiming to be new and actually being new.
Americans believe in new. Hardly any consumer product can survive without claiming to be “new and improved.” For Americans new is fresh, innovative, young, promising, better than before.
In contrast to the Germans, and to continental Europeans in general, Americans are often skeptical of things which are too linked to the past. Tradition can mean old, encrusted, inflexible, immovable. “That’s the way we’ve always done it” is seldom persuasive in the U.S. context.
Less complicated
Germans are complicated. They think in complicated ways. They can handle complicated situations and subjects. They believe that intelligence is the ability to deal with complexity as it is.
To think, read, write, explain complicated things is a sign of sophistication. And it is. Assuming, of course, you get the complexity right. Less complicated can be interpreted by Germans as simple, simplified, oversimplified, even simple-minded.
Americans are less complicated, and complicating. They value the ability to handle complexity in a pragmatic way. KISS. “Keep it simple, stupid!”
In the American culture intelligent is the person who can explain complex matter to the “man on the street”. Americans view complicated as complicating, not workable, not robust.
Less cost
The Germans say Was nichts kostet, ist auch nichts. Literally: What costs nothing, is nothing. Meaning also, what hardly costs anything, is hardly anything. Germans are expensive. What they produce is expensive.
Germans seldom sell – or buy – based on price. If an engineering design approach leads to lower costs, they’ll suspect that less (and less quality) engineering work is being performed. They’ll look for the shortcuts made, the quality sacrificed, the unnecessary risks taken.
Americans – whether they admit to it or not – buy and sell far more based on price. If work can be reduced, saved, minimized via a new process, they’ll do it, as long as the quality does not suffer too much. American look for shortcuts.
Even experienced engineers
Actually, it’s the experienced German engineers who will be most inclined to be skeptical of a new design process. Why? We all feel comfortable with our habits. If we do good work, or at least believe so, why should we change what works?
Who likes change?
Human nature. Think about it. Engineering design processes are all about how the work is done. And “how the work is done” goes to the heart of our self-understanding, as engineers, as marketers, as supply chain specialists, as human resources professionals, etc. How the work is done also determines the tools we use. Very basic, very pragmatic.
Who likes to change how they think and how they work? I don’t, even though I know that it is often necessary.
And then there is the question of power. Those who have the say about how the work is done, have the power in the working relationship. People sense that immediately, consciously or unconsciously, explicitly or implicitly.
So unfortunately, there are all kinds of barriers to you getting your German colleagues to take an honest look at what you are proposing. Working across cultures is not easy. I suspect it was never easy, and never will be.
I recommend you take a look my analysis on understand-culture(dot)com about two topics: Persuasion and Process. Do some reflecting. Then ask your German colleagues to do the same. That is Step 1, understand the cultural differences.
Then – Step 2 – engage with them about what you are proposing. Keep an eye on possible misunderstanding and misinterpretation based on those cultural differences.
This is more about culture than engineering. And remember, the American engineer is an American first, then an American engineer. Much later. Same for the German engineer. German first. Then a German engineer. Much later. This is less about engineering, and more about culture.
Most admired companies
“What German companies do Germans admire the most?”
Accurate. Helpful.
“Is it accurate – and helpful – to refer to the American? What do a New Yorker, a recent Mexican immigrant in Texas, and a Californian have in common?“
Broad and deep consensus
This is an extraordinarily important question. Why?
If the answer is: “John, you cannot generalize about people. There is no such thing as the American or the German”, then CI, my work, your reflecting on intercultural differences has little to no value.
This foundational question is posed to me time and again. Since I intend to address it soon in a more systematic way, I’ll just give you some food for thought, in the form of questions and statements.
If a large, complex society functions well (see Germany, USA), then there must be a broad and deep consensus among its people about how it does some very fundamental things. See the ten topics CI currently addresses. There are more. What is meant is not a lowest common denominator in those things, but a deeply rooted belief about those things.
Immigrant influence
Although America is an immigrant nation, with newcomers arriving constantly and from different cultures, can you name which newcomer-cultures were immediately embraced by the dominant culture(s) within America?
Asked differently: If you are an American, when was the last time you – in the workplace – went up to a colleague who is a recent immigrant (or at least first generation American) and asked them about their culture, with the expressed intent to allow your own thinking (culture) to be influenced by that colleague’s culture?
American history makes clear that the dominant cultures within the U.S. invariably demand of immigrants that they assimilate.
Your success in other American companies
If you are capable at what you do, you are able to transfer immediately to another company within the U.S. and to perform the same or similar work at the same level – or higher – of proficiency. Why?
Because of your capabilites, yes. But primarily because you are an American and would be moving to another American company. Would this be the case if you were to move to a company in the same business sector, doing the same work, but in another business culture?
Let me finish by addressing one difference between Germans and Americans. The topic is Persuasion. The German logic is: “Arguments should speak for themself.” The American logic is: “Sell yourself first, then your product or service.”
People in Boxes
If those two statements are true – the one for Germans, the other for Americans – would there be any significant variation – in the context of German-American collaboration – if the German giving a presentation were man or woman; young or old; Catholic, Protestant or non-believer; from Northern or Southern Germany; extrovert or introvert; trained in the sciences, engineering, law, economics or humanities; from a large or a small family; working in the automobile industry or chemicals or software or financial services; in a position high, mid or low in the organization?
Or flip it around. If the statement is fundamentally true about how American persuade, and an American were attempting to persuade a German audience, would it make any significant difference whether that American were male or female; young or old; etc.?
I believe not.
You see, we can “put people in boxes.” We can generalize. In fact, we do it all the time. We look for patterns in order to deal with complexity.
There are such things as national cultures. There are peoples. And peoples have charactistics. They have ways of thinking and acting. Our job is to understand those ways, discuss them, and find out how to best combine them. That is what our work is all about.