Decision-Making – Page 5 – understand-culture

Appropriate Authority and Expertise

Germans believe decisions should be made by those with appropriate authority and relevant expertise. Not everyone has standing to decide everything. Technical decisions should involve those with technical competence. Decisions within certain domains belong to those with appropriate position and knowledge.

When working with German organizations, understand who appropriately decides what. Technical matters will be deferred to relevant experts. Hierarchy matters for certain decisions. Functional expertise matters for others.

Trying to decide matters outside your competence or authority undermines credibility. Conversely, those with relevant expertise expect their input to carry weight. The allocation of decision authority according to competence improves decision quality.

Decisions as Binding Commitments

When Germans make a decision, they treat it as binding. Decisions are not tentative positions subject to easy revision. Making a decision creates commitment to that course of action.

Those affected can rely on decisions that have been made. This stability means the decision process must be thorough—one cannot simply decide quickly and adjust later.

When working with German colleagues, understand that decisions, once reached, are expected to stick. Constantly revisiting decided matters frustrates expectations. Changing course requires justification and acknowledgment. This reliability enables planning and coordination—commitments can be built on decisions that hold.

Deliberation Takes Appropriate Time

Germans believe good decisions require adequate time for deliberation. Important choices cannot be rushed. The time needed for thorough consideration should be taken. Hasty decisions are suspect—they suggest inadequate thought.

When working toward decisions with German colleagues, do not push for artificial speed. Time for analysis, consultation, and deliberation is expected. Decision timelines should match decision significance. Decision-makers who take time to decide carefully are acting appropriately, not procrastinating.

Attempting to force rushed decisions on important matters will meet resistance because it threatens decision quality. Build adequate deliberation time into your decision processes.

Implementation Follows Decision

For Germans, decisions are made to be implemented. The purpose of deciding is to enable doing. Once a decision is made, implementation is expected to follow. Decisions that are made but not implemented represent failure.

The gap between deciding and doing should be small. When working with German colleagues, understand that deciding creates expectation of action. Decision-makers bear responsibility for follow-through. Organizations that decide without implementing lose credibility.

The decision process is not complete until the decision is enacted. This also means decisions must be realistic and actionable—deciding something that cannot be implemented is pointless.

Decisions Require Deliberation

When working with French colleagues, understand that they expect significant decisions to be preceded by deliberation—careful thinking and consideration before deciding. Quick, unconsidered decisions are suspect; serious matters deserve serious reflection.

This means decision-making processes may appear slow, but within French cultural logic, speed is not virtue—decision quality is. Deliberation demonstrates that the decision was taken seriously.

If you push for rapid decisions without adequate consideration, you may create resistance or produce decisions that lack buy-in. Build time for reflection into decision processes; recognize that the investment in deliberation produces better-founded, more defensible, more sustainable decisions. The process of reaching a decision matters, not just the conclusion reached.

Analysis Precedes Conclusion

French decision-making expects systematic analysis before reaching conclusions. Decisions should emerge from examining relevant information, considering alternatives, and reasoning through to conclusion. The Cartesian heritage of methodical thinking shapes this expectation—the path to decision should be analytically rigorous.

If you approach French colleagues with decisions that lack analytical foundation, or if you decide based on intuition or preference without supporting reasons, expect your approach to be questioned. Prepare thorough analysis before significant decisions. Be ready to show how you examined the situation, what alternatives you considered, and how your reasoning leads to your conclusion. Analytical rigor legitimates decisions; its absence undermines them.

Decisions Must Be Justified

French culture expects decision-makers to justify their decisions—to explain why they decided as they did. Authority to decide does not exempt one from this requirement. Parents explain to children, managers to subordinates, courts in judgments. Be prepared to articulate the reasoning behind your decisions; those affected will appropriately ask why.

Unjustified decisions are seen as arbitrary, and arbitrary decisions lack legitimacy. This accountability shapes how decisions should be approached: anticipate the need to explain, think through your reasoning, and be prepared to defend your conclusion.

If your decision makes sense and you can explain it, you will have credibility. If you cannot explain why you decided something, expect your decision to be questioned even if you had authority to make it.

Authority Is Clear But Consultation Is Expected

French decision-making combines clear authority with expected consultation. Someone has the right to decide—hierarchy locates decision authority clearly. But those with authority are expected to seek input before deciding: hearing perspectives, gathering views from those with knowledge or stake. Consultation does not transfer authority; the decision remains with the authority.

But deciding without consultation is suspect. When working with French organizations, identify who has authority to make the decision you need—but do not expect them to decide without appropriate process. Build consultation into your approach: involve those with relevant expertise or stake before pressing for conclusion. Authority that has properly consulted is positioned to decide; authority that bypasses consultation invites resistance.

Expertise Informs Decision

French culture weights expertise heavily in decision-making. Those with relevant knowledge have standing to influence decisions in their domains. Decisions that ignore relevant expertise are questionable; claiming to decide on matters one does not understand is risky.

When working with French counterparts, respect expertise in relevant domains—seek input from those who know, defer to professional judgment in professional matters, demonstrate relevant competence when claiming authority in technical areas. If you lack expertise in a decision domain, consult those who have it. The unprepared decision-maker who proceeds without relevant knowledge or appropriate consultation violates French expectations about how serious decisions should be made.

Decisions Once Made Warrant Commitment

French culture distinguishes sharply between deliberation before decision and commitment after. Before the decision: analysis, consultation, and debate are appropriate. After the decision: implementation, execution, and follow-through are expected.

If you continue to argue against decided matters or undermine implementation, you violate cultural expectations. The decision represents the conclusion of proper process; respect that process by committing once the decision is made.

This also means participating in deliberation when given the opportunity—those who remain silent during deliberation have weakened standing to object afterward. When a decision has been properly reached, focus shifts to executing it well, not revisiting whether it should have been made.