A comment by a German with extensive experience at the university level in the U.S.: “I think the real issue here is not how grades are officially classified but that there is a much stronger tendency of grade inflation in the U.S.
Almost everyone gets an A, whereas a B already feels like a failure even though it’s officially considered “good”.
Germans – at least at university level – are much more likely to give a student a C and think that she/he did a good job. When professors give a B they think the student’s paper is great. A basically means a professor could have written this.”
August 10, 2015. 8 a.m. Eastern Standard Time. National Public Radio (NPR). The segment is Marketplace.
Stating that many students (pupils from elementary to high school) are returning to school, the announcer reports that school-related consumer shopping – supplies, clothes and electronics – is down 5% or more.
An expert is interviewed briefly. He is asked to give a grade for the disappointing results thusfar. His voice is low, unanimated, sounding a bit depressed: “I’d give it a B+.”
B+ is only half a grade from an A. And an A is considered to be excellent.
Rankings – or standings – are particularly popular in the U.S. Where an individual, team, organization „stands“ is always in competitive comparison to other individuals, teams, organizations.
Examples of college and university rankings include US News and Business Report, Princeton Review College Rankings, College Prowler Traditional College and University Rankings. Subjects of rankings include Liberal Arts Colleges, National University, Research, Student Satisfaction, Diversity, Alumni Networks, among others.
Business school rankings are found in BusinessWeek, Forbes, US News Business School Rankings, Princeton Review Business School Rankings, Wall Street Journal Business School Rankings, Poets&Quants, the Economist. Subsets include region, country, specialization, composite, and endowment.
Law School rankings are found in Vault, LLM Guide, Princeton Review Law School Rankings, US News & World Report, Gourman Report, Hylton, Leiter, National Law Journal, QS World University Rankings, and Judging Law School Rankings.
Corporate rankings are found in Fortune 500, MarketWatch, Most Ethical Companies Rankings, Netweek Green Rankings, Careers.org Company Rankings, Forbes Company Rankings, SEO Company Rankings. Subcaterogies include revenue, ecologically friendliness, ethical behavior, innovation, size, industry, sector, social media presence, pay, employee satisfaction, and career development.
“I started working for a German company a few years ago and was immediately excited to find that they had a culture of frequent feedback.
As the weeks went on, the feedback kept on coming. Very quickly, I began to see a pattern; it was almost entirely negative. All delivered amazingly well, with examples of how I’d fucked up alongside helpful guidance on how I might want to improve.
The onslaught continued; it was relentless. It became apparent to me that there was very little chance of me passing my probation period if this continued. So I buckled down, pushed myself to breaking point and put in those extra hours to save my job. But still, it kept continuing critical feedback, after critical feedback.
For the first time in my career, I was going to fail my probation period. There was no point in getting feedback on how I improve the situation. I was getting it daily. I was just shit.
So finally, my final probation review came around. Everything was excellent; the company was super happy with my progress and delivery. I passed my probation period with flying colours. But it had broken me. I was fried and burnt out.”
From a German:
“I have recently started working in an entirely new industry, leading a small team. Shortly after joining, my team’s scope changed to a new problem space.
Again, this company had an active feedback culture and processes. Constant feedback was given to the team every two weeks from leadership. As we built the team and worked out how we were going to achieve our new goals, we got feedback all the time. And it was always positive.
This didn’t play well for me. I knew that there was no way that we could be that good, we were a team with little experience in what we were doing, how could we be doing that well? There must be areas for improvement.
As this continued, positive feedback began to feel more and more empty. I went hunting for critical feedback. Unfortunately, this manifested in me trying to find critical input for the team bellow me. I became overly focused on trying to find areas for improvement in the team.
The problem came to a head when one of my team said ‘I only get negative feedback from you, and I don’t know what to do about it.’ I was so focused on finding the negative areas that we could improve on, and I had not given any support for improvement. I had also failed to celebrate the positive.”
Because Americans find it difficult separate what they say from the person they are saying it to – especially in the case of criticism – they strive to use softer, more indirect language, including euphemisms: mild or indirect words or expressions substituted for ones considered to be too harsh or blunt when referring to something unpleasant or embarrassing.
Examples of euphemisms: pre-owned car instead of a used car, sex worker instead of a prostitute, to be between jobs instead of to be unemployed, senior citizen instead of old person, underserved neighborhood or underserved population instead of the poor, or an impoverished, needy neighborhood.
Further examples: economically disadvantaged instead of poor; temporary negative cash flow instead of broke; enhanced interrogation methods instead of torture; collateral damage instead of civilian deaths.
Feedback scores are most effective when they are accurate and realistic enough, but also motivating. When in doubt, Americans are inflationary. The school grading system is: A is excellent; B is very good; C is good; D is unsatisfactory; F is failure. Examples
Germans believe that feedback scores are most effective when they are accurate and realistic. When in doubt, Germans are deflationary.
The school grading system is: 1 is sehr gut (very good); 2 is gut (good); 3 is befriedigend (satisfactory); 4 is ausreichend (sufficient); 5 is mangelhaft (insufficient); 6 is ungenügend (failed). Examples
American Approach
Feedback scores are most effective when they are accurate and realistic enough, but also motivating. When in doubt, Americans are inflationary. The school grading system is: A is excellent; B is very good; C is good; D is unsatisfactory; F is failure. Examples
American View
German grades come across as deflationary, thus demotivating, confusing, potentially unjust. The American receiver of feedback is confused about “where I really stand.”
German View
American team leads give inflationary scores. Germans expect – and welcome – negative feedback as orientation and to sharpen their sense of self-critique. Weak performance is described in sugar-coated terms, which over time lose credibility.
Advice to Germans
You‘re getting better scores than in Germany. Be careful. Don‘t let it go to your head. Knock it down by ½ a grade. Look for an opportunity to speak with your American lead alone.
Insist diplomatically that he/she spell out more directly where your weaknesses are. If you lead Americans, erring on the side of praise and motivation has to take the concrete form of higher scores. Inflate them by ½ a grade.
Advice to Americans
If your lead is German, understated praise will come in the form of understated scores. Take it based on the German, not the American scale.
If you feel the assessment is inaccurate or unjust raise the subject carefully, for you could be seen as a coddled American who can‘t take criticism.
If you lead Germans, deflate the scores you give by ½ of a grade. Reduce the “sugar coating”. Germans can take criticism.
If their weaknesses are not addressed, if improvement measures are not recommended, they‘ll draw the conclusion that you‘re either incapable or unwilling to analyze and recommend how they become better players. And that‘s weak leadership.