Germany. Election night 2005. Chancellor Schröder against the challenger Angela Merkel. German television. The heads of the major parties are present to discuss the results, including Schröder and Merkel.
The moderator addresses Schröder with Herr Bundeskanzler. Schröder grins and says with a touch of irony: “How nice it is for you to address me so.” The moderator is taken aback: “Have you already conceded defeat?” Schröder: “No, absolutely not.”
Gerhard Schröders behavior on that September 18, 2005 remains unique in German television history. It is 8:15 p.m. and Schröder’s SPD and Merkel’s CDU are neck and neck at 34% and 35% respectively.Â
Schröder acts, though, as if he has won handily. siegessicher, siegestrunken – sure of victory, triumphant – were the terms later used by the German media. Schröder went on the attack against Merkel on live television: “There is a clear loser, and that very clearly is Merkel.”
Six years later Schröder looked back on that evening and explained to the German people in an article in the Welt am Sonntag what his motives were. His thinking was “there is now no room for diplomacy. This is the moment of truth.”
But it is not true, Schröder continued, that on that evening he thought the election results could swing in favor of his SPD. The Chancellor admitted that “a little humility would have been better.”
Hart aber fair – Hard but Fair – is a very popular weekly 75-minute talkshow in Germany about political topics. The moderator, Frank Plasberg, and his guests take on especially current and controversial issues.
As the name of the show suggests the discussions are open, lively and controversial. The show is well prepared and well structured. Ideological speech-making is blocked. Facts and logical argumentation are critical.
Between five and six guests are invited representing politics, academia, non-governmental organizations as well as “the man or woman off the street.”
The guests are carefully selected to represent the specific sides of the argument. The show’s research staff provides background information during certain segments.
An American woman. Married to a German man. How her husband is very direct. And about how Americans learn to be indirect, especially when giving negative feedback.
Warning ! This woman is a youtuber. And an American on top. So, she is more than a bit animated. And frankly, she could have made her points in about two minutes instead of seven and a half.
An American woman. About how her German husband is deflationary with scores. And how she is inflationary. Can’t separate the two.
Now this woman is a youtuber. And an American on top. So, she is more than a bit animated. And frankly, she could have made her points in about two minutes instead of seven and a half. But wait, it’s YouTube. And not a webinar.
“Germans, in general, can often be more direct and straightforward than Americans, and to be honest even after living here for eight years, that directness is still sometimes a little shocking for me, a little bit too much, or even sometimes has made me cry!”
A German comment: “Just your example about some shop assistent telling you that the piece of clothing does not fit you at all: I’m always more suspicious about a shop assistent telling me how good it fits keeping in mind he or she just wants their merchandise sold. So I tend more to appreciate an honest, though maybe direct answer.”
Another German comment: “I’m always irritated how well the Americans can hide the truth of what they are thinking behind compliments and smiles. In Germany If you are getting an honest critique, then the person likes you, thinks said critique can improve you and is interested that you do better. So its a good thing 😉 “
Oh, here’s a good one: “As a German, i feel like lying when i am asked about my opinion and i would try to let it sound “nicer”. Everyone is honest and tells what they think about everything. I tried for a while the way that is used in the staates and i gat really that awfull feeling of lying and i konstantly had to think about how i say things and not what i like to say.
In my opinion germans are just used to that honesty and fee unconfortable to alter the opinion just to sound nicer. The other way around, when i meet people from the staates, i have allways that feeling they are sneaky and false, they try to hide their thoughts behind words. I was never sure how they really are and think.”
In his book A Fiery Peace in a Cold War: Bernard Schriever and the Ultimate Weapon (2010) author Neil Sheehan describes the life and work of Bernard Schriever, who is considered to be the father of the American nuclear intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).
Schriever and his military and civilian colleagues believed firmly that if both the United States and the Soviet Union possessed these weapons of mass destruction the probability of them being used actually would be decreased.
Schriever had to overcome strong institutional resistance within the U.S. Air Force whose leadership was convinced that manned aircraftï¹£strategic long-range bombersï¹£was the only way to maintain a credible deterrent against the Soviet Union.
Through telling the story of Bernard Schriever and the development of the American ballistic missile program from the end of Second World War up to the mid-1960s Sheehan tells the history of the Cold War, which would last up until the 1990s with the Fall of the Berlin Wall, the unification of West and East Germany, the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact and the Soviet Union, and the freedom of Eastern Europe from Russian domination.
In a 2010 television interview (Booknotes on C-SPAN) Sheehan contrasted Schriever with his American-born military colleagues, Generals Paul Harkins and William Westmoreland, both who had overall command of U.S. forces in the Vietnam War.
Schriever would tell his subordinates that he would never fire anyone for failing, but instead for failing to inform him immediately of problems. For Schriever, as stated by Sheehan, success would take care of itself if one focused on solving the problems at hand. Go to minutes 25:10 to 26:50.
Sheehan had been a young war correspondent in Vietnam for United Press International (UPI), later with the New York Times. As told in his book A Bright Shining Lie (1989), which won both the Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award, the American generalship during the Vietnam War was unwilling to accept that America was losing that war.
General Schriever, according to Sheehan‘s research, made clear time and again to the members of this organization, whether military or civilian, that he wanted timely and accurate reports on the problems the program was experiencing, and was far less interested in the progress made.
So-called progress reports had become common within the U.S. military after the Second World War, and according to Sheehan, symptomatic for an institution unwilling to face what was not working.
Bernard Adolph Schriever was born in 1910 in the German port city of Bremen. His father was an engineer. They immigrated to the U.S. only months before the U.S. entered the First World War in 1917.
Schriever grew up in New Braunfels, Texas, an area mostly populated by German immigrants. Read about his fascinating life in Wikipedia
The absence of criticism can be taken as praise in Germany, Courtney Tenz learned the hard way. On Compliment Day she explains why she misses superficial American compliments, but appreciates the German approach.
“Though it has taken me more than a decade, I have finally come to terms with the fact that in Germany, I won’t be complimented on everything I do and when — if — I garner attention for praise, it will likely be more sincere than anything I’d have heard in the US. Like the one a young girl recently gave me after I visited the beauty salon: ‘You look much better now that your gray hair is gone.'”
Deutsche Welle – Do you know your Gymnasium from your Gesamtschule? The German school system is certainly complicated. For this week’s Meet the Germans, Rachel heads back to the classroom to get to grips with the different types of schools and to find out what kids like about going to school in Germany.
A notable historical example of a German company successfully using neutral, performance-focused feedback is Daimler-Benz (now Mercedes-Benz Group) during its process of historical reappraisal after World War II. In the 1980s, Daimler-Benz became one of the first German companies to appoint an independent commission of experts to conduct a scientific and objective study of its activities during the Nazi era.
This approach was marked by a clear separation of personal feelings from professional responsibility, with the company focusing on facts, accountability, and measurable actions rather than emotional statements or personal blame. The findings led to formal reparations and the establishment of the industry foundation “Remembrance, Responsibility and Future,” involving over 6,500 German companies. The process and communication were characterized by a neutral, unemotional tone, focusing on performance (in this case, historical accountability and reparations) rather than personal sentiment.