Agreements – Page 2 – understand-culture

In the German culture why does a yes or a no need to be absolute

Question

“In the German culture, why does a yes or a no need to be absolute and not conditional upon changing input factors? In other words, is a qualified yes or a qualified no acceptable in Germany?”

Answer

Yes, the German culture allows for a qualified yes and a qualified no. In fact, what culture could not? Life, reality, the interactions between individuals and groups demand this day in and day out.

Especially fast-moving, complex and sophisticated economies depend on contingency-planning, on the ability to act in ways which imply that the parameters of a given situation can change at any time.

That is the very definition of the term flexibility. Merriam-Webster online writes: “characterized by a ready capability to adapt to new, different, or changing requirements.”

And it lists the following synonyms: adaptable, adjustable, alterable, changeable, elastic, fluid, malleable, modifiable, pliable, variable.

As antonyms it lists: established, fixed, immutable, enelastic, inflexible, invariable, nonmalleable, ramrod, set, unadaptable, unalterable, unbudgeable, unchangeable.

So yes, the German culture does allow for qualified yes and a qualified no. One could argue that they are especially good at it, when one considers their precision, how well they plan, coordinate and manage actions taken at the same, or near same, time. The Germans are proud of their ability to develop complex, interrelated work processes.

Which means the question is not so much whether the German culture allows for a qualified yes and a qualified no, but rather the following questions:

How do Germans define what is qualified?

When in the German context is a qualified yes or a qualified no a response which a German can deal with, factor into their work, coordinate with other situations, versus when do Germans prefer to hear either a clear yes, a clear no or a clear “I don‘t know at this time”?

Stated another way: When is yes or a no too qualified, too unspecific, so that it cannot be dealt with in the German contingency logic? Germans will often say: “Come back to me, please, when you have a higher degree of clarity of what it is you are asking for.”

Every culture‘s contingency logic has its own bandwidth, borders, poles, extremes, degree of tolerance (pick your term), within which they operate, plan, factor in potential sudden change.

Perhaps the German bandwidth is narrower than the American. Perhaps not. The Germans would argue that they are more flexible than the Americans. See the intercultural divergences in leadership approaches. See how the two business cultures handle processes.

The German contingency logic works. Germans and Germany are exceptionally capable and successful. Remember, Germany is the third-largest economy in the world with only about eighty-five inhabitants. The American bandwidth, the American contingency logic, works also. Americans and America are equally capable and successful. They are, however, two different contingency logics.

Contingent yes, contingent no, this appears to be a rather simple, straightforward topic. Americans ask themselves: “Why can‘t the Germans be more flexible?” Germans ask themselves: “Why can‘t the Americans think things through first, before acting, then inevitably changing course?”

This is a very complex topic. The fundamental divergence in contingency logics involves the following topics: agreements, decision making, leadership as well as systematic (German) versus particularistic (American) thinking.

The challenge – with great upside potential – is developing a common, or near-common, understanding about contingency planning, of how flexible a yes and a no should be.

Americans overpromise

Question

“We Americans overpromise. Much more than do our German colleagues. How do we strike a balance between overpromising to our American team-leads – and/or to our American customers – and underpromising or realistic-promising to our German colleagues?”

Answer

Reduce the overpromising to your American team-lead. Get real. Get realistic. Only promise what you can deliver. Reduce inflation in the broadest sense in the U.S. Take that chapter from the German book. And encourage your American team-lead to reduce their overpromising to their next level management.

On the other side of the coin, encourage your German colleagues to aim higher. The term encourage means literally to give courage. The Germans are chronic underpromisers, to a fault. They can reach higher and achieve more. They take things too safely, too often.

Third, make this a topic in your collaboration with both Americans and Germans. Stating it in an oversimplified, but accurate, way: Americans are inflationary. Germans are deflationary. Work together towards the middle.

There is no hiding from this cultural difference. Therefore, address it head-on.

Germans do far less follow-up

Question

After entering into an agreement Germans do far less follow-up than do Americans. Customers in the U.S., however, often want to maintain high frequency follow-up with their suppliers. How can we get our German colleagues to acknowledge that and help their American colleagues to keep their U.S. customers up to date?

Answer

This is an extraordinarily important question. Why?

It is one thing if collaboration between Americans and Germans about the frequency of follow-up leads to internal problems. It is a wholly different thing if those problems affect their relationship with customers.

Let’s first look at my response to a previous question about how to handle follow-up within the organisation, and not regarding customers. The question was: “How to follow up on an agreement without upsetting German colleagues?”

First, ask yourself when is it truly necessary to do follow-up. Americans do a lot of follow-up purely out of nervousness and anxiety.

Second, when entering into an agreement with your German colleagues, discuss and agree on the frequency of follow-up. Be sure to point out to them the American logic regarding follow-up. Sensitize them to the cultural difference. While doing so allow them to sensitize you about their German logic.

Third, when following up with your German colleagues simply ask them if you are upsetting them. Yes, literally ask them. Give them a chance to signal to what the right frequency is. At the same time, explain to them the parameters within which you are operating, which, in turn, require follow-up.

Fourth, at an appropriate time reach out to your German colleagues and ask them to explain to you how Germans fundamentally handle follow-up. Ask them literally what the German logic is. Chances are your German colleagues will ask you about the American logic.

Ok, let’s now look at the question stated above: how to coordinate follow-up with your German colleagues when it involves keeping the U.S.-customer informed.

First: Continually explain to your German colleagues the nature of the American business environment, especially the important of follow-up in maintaining an on-going overview of commitments, priorities, decisions, projects.

Folks, this will require a lot of patience on your part. You will have to do a lot of explaining. And explaining of things which for you as Americans in the U.S. business context are seldom discussed, seldom debated, seldom questions. It is what it is.

Well, you are working in a global environment. Or more precisely, you are working in the US-German environment. You have no other choice but to address the deeper-lying cultural differences. Good. Do it. Get good at it. Combine the strengths of two great cultures. To the benefit of your customers. And to the detriment of your competitors !

Second: always acknowledge the rightness and legitimacy of the German logic. Honor the strengths of the German approach to follow-up. Remember, Germany has the fourth-largest economy in the world with only about 80 million people. They are certainly doing a whole lot of things right. Which means that how they handle agreements in general, and follow-up specifically, works and leads to success.

Third: in the case of specific customers, go into the details. Explain to your German colleagues: 1. the concrete follow-up needs of the customer; 2. the customer’s reasons for those needs; and 3. the deeper-lying logic in the U.S. which drives such needs.

Fourth: then, together, formulate a follow-up plan, and with the customer. Yes, seriously. First you ask your customer to define their information and follow-up needs. Get into their heads. Identify what their real needs are not their nice-to-have needs. They’ll have plenty of those.

Then discuss those customer-defined needs internally, come up with a draft plan, send that draft to your German colleagues for discussion. Then work out a joint-plan. Take that back and discuss it with the customer. When doing so, explain to the customer the German logic.

I’ll bet they will find that interesting. Why? Because they, too, are probably working in and across cultures. They, too, experience cultural differences. And they very likely will be impressed by how you and your German colleagues manage the cultural complexity, and most importantly, get the complexity to work for them as the customer !

Avoid irritating our German colleagues

Question

We have established expectations regarding both individual agreements and to how we will handle follow-up on those agreements. How do we then avoid irritating our German colleagues with requests for updates?

Answer

First, ask yourself when is it truly necessary to do follow-up. Americans do a lot of follow-up purely out of nervousness and anxiety.

Set up the scope of an agreement

Question

“Would it be beneficial to set up the scope of an agreement? In other words, to get clarity among all parties to an agreement what the expectations are? For Example: the team will have check-ins to share project progress even without aspects being fully complete.”

Answer

It is true that Americans have a much higher frequency of status-checks than do Germans. For Americans, an agreement actually kicks off the collaboration. And collaboration in the U.S. means a lot of back and forth, a lot of engagement, high levels of communication. That’s how Americans work in teams.

And it is true that Germans have a much lower frequency of status-checks. For Germans, an agreement actually kicks off each party to the agreement working on their part of that agreement. And collaboration in Germany does not mean a lot of back and forth, does not mean a lot of engagement, does not mean high levels of communication.

That is not how Germans work. They first get clarity on who does what. Then they as individuals get to working doing the what. They come together only when necessary. Ideally when each is finished with their part, with their deliberable.

So, if you feel that check-ins, also called status meetings, are important, propose to your German colleagues: when they should take place, for how long, who should participate, and most importantly why the status meeting is necessary, how it adds value.

But be prepared for your Germans colleagues to ask why all of this is necessary. You need then to explain to them how Americans work in teams, that much of it is iterative, tactical, flexible, less structured.

They will tell you how they as Germans work in teams. You should find a happy middle ground.

Get Americans to do more self-follow-up

Question

“How can I (as a German) get Americans to do more self-follow up, so that I don’t have to do the follow up?“

Answer

Symptomatic

Thanks for the question. It’s symptomatic for German-American cooperation, and it can be answered.

There is follow up and there is follow up, meaning different kinds of follow up, depending on the context in which it takes place. First, take a look at the respective logics under: Agreements_Follow up.

If you manage Americans and you feel that you have to follow up too often on their work, or on certain tasks which you have assigned to them, then I can think of the following explanations:

Not competent

It’s entirely possible that certain members of your team are not competent. Plain and simple. This requires of you to constantly check on them and their work. If this is the case, you need to address it with them.

Competent

If your team is competent then perhaps your instructions are not clear. Yes, start off by taking a critical look at yourself and ask: “What am I not doing right which then requires of me that I have to follow up on members of my team?”

It is typical in the German-American space for people to think they understand each other, including tasks assigned. Make sure that everyone is “on the same page”, that they have a common understanding of who is expected to do what, by when and how, including small-scope tasks.

Priorities change

Consider also the possibility that priorities can change. Americans are especially sensitive to changing parameters. What you expect from individual team members by a certain date and in a certain form might change in the eyes of that team member.

Follow up in the U.S. context is a key instrument for maintaining overview of not only tasks, but also their respective priorities.

Your team members might misunderstand or misinterpret which of their tasks assigned to them by you has priority for you. In other words, if you do not signal to them that the tasks you assigned are still important – and that signal in the U.S. is follow up – they could easily misinterpret your lack of follow up as: “That task is no longer so important.”

More self-follow up

The amount of follow up you have to do in order to “stay on top of” your American team members and/or colleagues is most likely typical for the U.S. context. It is certainly far too high for the German context.

So, how can you get Americans to do more “self follow up”?

First, discuss the topic with them. Make sure that they understand follow up in the German context. But make sure, also, that you understand how Americans use follow up.

Second, once all of you understand the cultural differences between Germans and Americans when it comes to follow up, both parties – you and your American team members – will be in a position to decide how you want to handle it.

Remember: First understand, then combine!

Asking our German colleagues the when-question regarding the completion project

Question

“I find myself constantly asking our German colleagues the when-question regarding the completion of a project. Their response is frequently vague. How can we get the response to be better for us, even if only it is an approximate answer?”

Answer

Germans do not like to be nailed down – festgenagelt – on anything. Who does, actually?

Why? Not because they are non-committal, but because they feel nearly 100% bound to their commitments. Because they know that there are factors not in their control. And because the Germans hate any kind of pushiness. And what for Americans is not pushy is often for Germans push to very pushy.

So what to do with German colleagues who are reluctant to give a completion date, even if it is only an approximate answer?

First, give them as specific information as you can about why it is important for you to at least get an estimate of a date. These should be business and technical reasons. Spell out for them the timing of the project from our perspective, about the ramifications if certain work is completed by certain dates. You can almost never give a German colleague enough context information.

Second, provide them with a few scenarios. “Well, if you can get me that data by the 15th of the month, that will allow me to do this or that.” or “I don’t want to be pushy, Klaus, but if I have your work results by the end of next week, that would be good, because it allows me to then present to the customer during the week thereafter, and the advantages there would be XYZ.”

Third, ask for a time-frame, a window, in which your German colleague can reach completion. And while you do that ask them what factors are affecting the project on their side of the Atlantic. Do your best to put yourself in their shoes. Literally ask them: “Anna, what are your parameters, your boundary conditions? Give me a chance to work within them. We can get this done if know each other’s situation. Thanks!”

Who decides hard deadline

Question

In the U.S. once a decision has been made the time afforded to implement that decision can be very short. Who is responsible for deciding what the hard deadline is?

Answer

That would depend on the situation. What kinds of situations, or scenarios, are there?

There are teams. Most decisions which are implemented exist within the context of a team. You have a team-lead and team-members. The team operates within some kind of business ecosystem, meaning within a broader context of a company. Who determines deadlines? The team-lead. Perhaps the team-members. Possibly the receiver of the deliverables, which could be another team within the ecosystem.

Then there are projects. And projects are nothing more than a variation of a team. A project is a team for a limited time with a limited purpose. Who determines deadlines? Well if a project is simply a variation of a team, then it would be the project-lead. Perhaps the perhaps-members. Possibly the receiver of the deliverables, which could be another team within the ecosystem.

Then there are customers. Stated more precisely, teams or projects who iteract directly and closely with customers. Is this scenario any different in nature to the two above, teams and projects? I think not. Why?

Because all teams deliver results. Those results go to a customer, who is either company-internal or company-external. Yes, you can make the argument that the external customer is always more important than the company-internal customer. But, that also depends.

Who decides what the hard deadline is? Well, there are only three possibilities.

First is hierarchy. That would be the team- or project- or customer relation-lead. “I’m the boss. We need those results out the door and to the customer by this date. No discussion. Get to work.”

Second is implementation. These are the colleagues actually responsible for delivering the results. They should know best what is realistic, what makes sense, what best serves the customer, whether internal or external. They also are in constant contact with the customer, which means that they are in a position to adjust the schedule expectations of the customer, and together in agreement with the customer. The closer the collaboration with the customer “on the ground”, the more likely that deadlines can be handled flexibly.

Third is the customer. Taking the approach of “the customer is king” would place responsibility of setting deadlines in the hands of the people receiving the deliverables. But is this wise? Is this what truly benefits customer? Often their scheduling needs change. And any well-managed customer-supplier relationship is more of a partnership than it is a master-slave relationship.

My preference? Second, implementation, but in very close collaboration with the customer, and keeping informed the next-level hierarchies on both sides: supplier and customer. Time, speed and deadlines, however, should be managed by those implementing the decision.