Aaron, an American, is a first-rate engineer and manager. Sent to Germany on a three-year delegation, Aaron’s job was to increase technical knowledge transfer, integrate critical processes, and to build a cross-Atlantic organization based on transparency and trust. A very tall order for the particular organization he worked in.

After the first year it was time for his structured feedback discussion with his German boss, Martin. The employer, a German multinational, has a systematic and detailed approach to such evaluations. They influence to a significant degree compensation and further career path.

Central to its effectiveness is self-evaluation. Team-members measure themselves against the goals they formulated a year prior together with their team-lead. Aaron is focused, understated, not one to put himself front and center.

Questions
Do Americans and Germans give, and receive, feedback in the same way? If not, in what ways are their approaches different?

From Aaron’s perspective, the year has gone quite well, surprisingly so. A few days before the feedback discussion he reflected on his performance. Aaron believes to have an accurate assessment of where he has performed well and less well. He tends to be overly self-critical.

Martin, a German, a few years older than Aaron, is also a first-rate engineer and manager. Very grateful to have Aaron in his team, Martin saw this as a unique opportunity to make difficult, but necessary, changes.

A year before they had met and set down ambitious goals. From Martin’s point of view the year has gone very well. With few exceptions, and those in less critical areas, Aaron has more than met the goals defined. Martin is looking forward to an even better second year for Aaron and the organization.

Questions
How do you think the formal feedback discussion with go: How will Martin proceed? How will Aaron react?

They meet for the discussion. Aaron is quiet, listening carefully, respectful of Martin as a fellow engineer and as his superior. Aaron is also very much looking forward to a meeting-of-the-minds on his performance over the last year, and to discussing the goals they want to reach in the upcoming year. The same goes for Martin.

The discussion does not go as expected, however. Neither from Martin’s point of view, nor from Aaron’s. On the contrary. Aaron departs the meeting confused, almost shocked, in a bit of a daze. “I’ll be fired within six months!”, he thought to himself. “How could I have been so wrong in my self-assessment?”

It took several days for Aaron to steady himself. Self-doubt had dominated his thoughts and emotions. Was he out of touch with reality? Did he misunderstand what the goals for the year were? How could he have so grossly misread the situation? Were the achievements over the last twelve months average, mediocre or worse?

Questions
Aaron, a rather self-critical person, was expecting a B+. Martin, no less of a perfectionist, also had a B+ in his mind. What went wrong?

Martin had focused almost exclusively on Aaron’s weaknesses. There weren’t many, but Martin managed to find some. There was so little talk about the positives, about the progress made.

Information was flowing between Germany and the U.S. Two of the three key engineering processes had been just about fully integrated. It had been decided to leave the third process separate on each side of the Atlantic.

Clearly there was a new Teamgeist, team spirit. Aaron was respected and accepted by his German peers and team-members. He had even found time to study German and could hold basic, non-technical, conversations in a language he had taken only for a few years in high school and college.

Martin left the meeting a bit surprised, also. Aaron seemed distracted, not fully engaged. When it came to formulating the coming year’s goals, Aaron had little to contribute. Martin sensed that something was wrong and decided to schedule another meeting in a week to discuss the goals.

“Strange. That’s not the Aaron I know and respect”, thought Martin. Personal problems? Family? Homesick? Lousy winter weather in Germany getting to him? Martin just couldn’t figure it out. “Such an excellent engineer and manager of people!”

So little talk about the positives. True. But why waste time on what works, on what has worked very well? Martin had voiced his satisfaction very early on in the conversation. Aaron had not picked up on it. “You’ve done very good work, Aaron. No goal has gone unmet. You’re a strong member of my team.”

Any German in the room, especially those who know Martin, would have been in agreement. Aaron got a “B+” for the year, a high grade in Germany, where “nobody can be considered perfect”, where “there is always room for improvement”, where an A is truly seldom, especially from Martin.

Martin then proceeded to focus on how Aaron can go from B+ to A-, how he can steadily, incrementally, systematically address and improve on those areas, not many, where he can stretch even further. Aaron felt that he was nitpicking, being small-minded. Untypical for Martin.

Questions
Two different feedback logics. Aaron didn’t pick up on the signals. And Martin did not realize that Aaron had not picked up on the signals. Was there any way the one or the other, or both, could have done something?

For Martin it was a source of great satisfaction to have such a capable person in his team, to discuss with that person how to become even stronger. Aaron was the kind of engineer and manager every German wants to mentor, to coach, to work with.

All of these thoughts and sentiments remained hidden from Aaron, however. And his reactions hidden from Martin. Although they continued to work well together over the next two years, they were never again on the same wavelength.

Twice more they would have these formal discussions, as well as dozens and dozens of communications in which informal feedback was given and received. Aaron always felt a bit off balance with Martin.

Martin sensed it, but could not quite articulate it, much less address it. They were successful together. And that was recognized by senior management. But, they could have gone far higher.

Questions
Aaron and Martin felt a bit off balance with each other. Why did neither Martin nor Aaron address the situation?

“They could have gone far higher.” Martin and Aaron could have become true strategic partners, motivating and inspiring each other, as well as the entire organization.

In the remaining two years of his delegation Aaron continued to perform well. But he “always felt a bit off balance with Martin.”

What if the formal performance review had been even more negative, if the miscommunication had been more significant? Aaron could have felt unjustly treated. Combine that with other potential frustrations working as an American in Germany, and Aaron might have broken off his delegation.

What would it have cost the company if Aaron had cut short his delegation from three to one and half years?

Questions
Things were just not the same between Martin and Aaron. Estimate the cost to the team. What would it have cost the company if Aaron had cut short his delegation from three to one and half years?