Euphemism: The substitution of an agreeable or inoffensive expression for one that may offend or suggest something unpleasant: eliminate for kill; suboptimal for below standard; interesting for bad; issue or challenge for problem; career change, early retirement opportunity, career transition, involuntarily separation for being fired;
economically disadvantaged for poor; temporary negative cash flow for broke; substandard housing or economically depressed neighborhood for slum; collateral damage for deaths of women and children and old people; pre-owned vehicle for used car; adult beverages for alcohol.
Almost every American has at some point in their lives heard the statement „If you can‘t say anything positive, don‘t say anything at all.“ Americans are careful about giving negative feedback. Charles Schwab has been quoted: “I have yet to find the man, however exalted his station, who did not better work and put forth greater effort under a spirit of approval than under a spirit of criticism.”
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.
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 aircraft﹣strategic long-range bombers﹣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
“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.”
Comments: “They become weak and then they become American.” … “My mom says “geh mit Gott aber geh” (Go with God, but go)” … “My mother is German, and as a child when I would get upset over something she would say to me, “YOU AMERICANS ARE SO SENSITIVE!” *my father is American. I grew up in the states lol” … “We only miss people when they die.” A bit harsh, but thats the German way.”
Germans focus on reducing errors. When providing feedback they concentrate on weaknesses, on what is not working. Germans address that directly, openly, in a neutral, matter-of-fact way. Examples
Germans focus on reducing errors. When providing feedback they concentrate on weaknesses, on what is not working. Germans address that directly, openly, in a neutral, matter-of-fact way. Examples
American Approach
Americans focus less on reducing errors, more on reinforcing what leads to good results. When giving feedback Americans concentrate on strengths. Critique is communicated in a carefully worded way. Examples
American View
The German focus on the reduction of unforced errors is seen by Americans as short-sighted, defensive in character. All too often, critique is voiced without suggestions of how one can improve on their individual weaknesses. Germans come across as overly, at times unfairly, critical.
German View
The American style of wrapping criticism in euphemisms and politically correct language is often difficult for Germans to decipher. The more critical the message, the more likely an American will formulate it in positive terms. They come across as unwilling to address problems for what they are, problems and not issues or challenges.
Advice to Germans
Americans are neither naive nor ignorant about their weaknesses. When addressing their weaknesses be less direct and literal. Choose positive, supportive language. Note the things which are going well.
Never criticize without suggesting a way to improve. If you are led by an American be prepared for more praise than you expect. Accept it. Be sure, however, to ask for more input on your weaknesses. You’ll get it, eventually.
Advice to Americans
Germans see the road to success largely via a minimization of errors. When giving feedback, be prepared for a strong focus on what you are not doing well, and far less on what is working.
This will come across as direct, harsh, imbalanced. It is meant to be helpful, for why focus on what works? If you have transatlantic responsibility, acknowledge the need to improve on weaknesses.
Focus more attention on what is not working. But, continue to combine critique with improvement suggestions.