Zurückhaltung

Zurückhaltung: reluctance, reticence, caution, reserve, modesty, moderation, self-effacement.

Verschwiegenheit: secrecy. discretion, discreetness, reticence, sercretiveness.

Feingefühl: sensitivity, sensitiveness, delicacy, tactfulness, tact.

Rücksichtnahme: consideration, thoughtfulness, considerateness.

Fingerspitzengefühl: flair, tact, sure instinct, finesse, ability to deal with sensitive issues.

“A little humility would have been better”

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. 

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.”

Source: Süddeutsche Zeitung, August 14, 2011.

Yell and Scream

Spectacular was the interaction between Chancellor Helmut Kohl and SPD-Chairman and former Chancellor Willy Brandt on May 12, 1985 after elections in the state of Northrhine Westphalia.

It was a ZDF (Second German Television) discussion and debate about the results which then, however, turned into an argument between Kohl and Brandt about national topics, including German-American relations. 

“You’re hurting the German people with these lies”, Brandt screamed while smacking the table with his hand. “I cannot accept this!”

Kohl, sitting right next to Brandt, remained calm: “You can yell and scream at your employees in the SPD, but not here with us in front of the German people.”

Criticism in Front of Colleagues

Criticism of an individual team member in the presence of the team is an accepted way in which Germans make that individual aware of a weakness or reoccuring error and request that it be addressed. Not only management, but also colleagues, are authorized – and expected – to voice open criticism, to point out what is not working. This kind of open criticism is not considered to be negative.

Open criticism of colleagues is considered negative, however, if it is not aimed at improving performance, but instead in gaining advantage within the team at the expense of that individual colleague.

rügen. To upbraid, to criticize, to admonish; to point out a weakness or failure; to set someone straight.

Jemanden zur Schnecke machen. Figuratively to make some into a snail. To complain to and about someone, to put down harshly, to set someone straight in a direct and harsh way.

Discretion. To hold something private, secret; to be entrusted; to be tactful, considerate, reserved; not pushy.

Pranger. Pillory. A stone column located in the middle of the village to which individuals are chained for a period of time as a form of punishment for a petty crime. Townspeople would often slap or hit them, throw trash at them, or otherwise humiliate them. To put someone on the Pranger means to criticize, even embarrass them in front of the organization.

Friend. Freund.

What is a friend?

MerriamWebster online writes: a person who you like and enjoy being with; a person who helps or supports someone or something; one attached to another by affection or esteem; a favored companion.

Middle English frend, from Old English frēond; akin to Old High German friunt friend, Old English frēon to love, frēo free. First Known Use: before 12th century. Among its synonyms are alter ego, amgo, buddy, chum, compadre. comrade, confidant, crony, familiar, intimate, pal.

What is a Freund?

dwds(dot)de writes: Vertrauter, someone you can trust; jemandem innerlich verbundener Mensch, a person who is especially close to another. Old High German (8th Century) vriunt, friend, next closest, mate, relative.

This is not the place to address how Americans and Germans diverge in the understanding of friend, friendship, what it means to be a friend. But here is a thought:

Is it not the true friend who has your best interests in mind, and therefore is willing to risk the loss of your friendship in order to convey a message which is painfully important for you to hear?

Formulated differently: What true friend, who sees that you are on the wrong path, would not speak to you about it?

Books on advice-giving

When typing in „advice“ into amazon(dot)com – USA – roughly 140,000 books are listed. When inputting Ratgeber (literally advice-givers) into amazon(dot)de – Germany – about 640,000 books are listed.

There 320 million people in the U.S. In Germany there are 80 million. The American population is four times larger than the German. However, there are four times more books written in Germany on giving advice than in the U.S.

The Germans give advice and the Germans take advice.

“What would you do?“

With the recent popularity of YouTube and other amateur video websites, people have been staging scenarios and filming people’s reactions to them. This is particularly popular in the U.S., where, in addition to amateur reaction videos, in 2008 ABC created a television show called What Would You Do?

In the show, actors and actresses pretend to be in situations in which they would benefit from unsolicited advice (domestic abuse, drugged beverages, etc.), and the show collects statistics on how many people offer advice or warnings.

Typically, most Americans who witness these situations don’t get involved. In one episode, in which a caregiver in a park berates the elderly man for whom he’s supposed to be caring, and refuses to take the elderly man home when asked, only one-quarter of the people who witnessed the interaction intervened. Other episodes typically have similar statistics of intervention.

Advice-givers advice

There are hundreds of American advice-givers on the web. Let’s read what they write about unsolicited advice:

“Your opinion is valuable, your advice even more precious. So, save it. Keep it for yourself. Odds are, you need it more than I do. So, please don’t give that sh*t away, certainly not without even being asked.”

“Have a nice day,” said the mom to her teenage daughter; to which the daughter replied, `Motherrrr, will you pulleeeeze stop telling me what to do!´ I empathize with both parties in this old joke. Sometimes we get so overrun by unsolicited advice that even the most innocuous, benevolent advice becomes intolerable.”

“Unsolicited Advice: We’ve all received it at some point in our lives and we’ve all given it as well. In some few cases, if we didn’t know enough about the circumstance to ask for advice then we are appreciative if someone tells us – but those moments are few and far between. The majority of the time we feel that the other person is trying to take our own power away. We feel as if they believe that we are not capable of taking care of ourselves and knowing what we need.”

“Four tips on how to give unsolicited advice: 1. Rephrase your advice as your own personal experience. 2. To repeat: Keep your stories short and relevant. Most people’s attention span is a lot shorter than your speaking ability! 3. If you must give direct advice disguise it as “How I did it” or “How someone else did it”. 4. Accept that the recipient will reject or act on your advice at their own will and allow them their self motivation.”

“Who are you?!“

Many Americans are the descendants of people who left their homes to escape what they considered to be imposing or coercive laws in their native countries. As such, they’ve been raised to consider any interference (even unsolicited, but well-meaning, advice) as an attack on their freedom as Americans.

This in the sense of: ;„Who are you to tell me how to live? This is America. A free country. I can live the way I want! Americans are very fearful of one group in the U.S. dictating to another how they should live.

coerce: to restrain or dominate by force; to compel to an act or choice; to achieve by force or threat. Middle English cohercen. Anglo-French cohercer. Latin coercēre, to shut up, enclose. Synonyms: force, compel, constrain, dragoon, drive, impel, impress, make, muscle, obligate, oblige, pressure.

Not German Know-it-alls

Germans believe in norms. Conformity, uniformity. Rectitude, righteousness. Accommodation, assimilation. Subordination, subsidiarity. If the law states that adults may not ride their bicycles on the sidewalk, then German adults do not ride their bicycles on the sidewalk. Doing otherwise breaches, transgresses, goes against the law, order, against agreements made which are then communicated in the form of a law. The breach demonstrates a lack of respect, of making oneself more important than the others.

In public spaces – such as automobile, bicycle, pedestrian traffic – Germans feel responsible for each other, allowing them, expecting of them, to point out to others what they are doing wrong, which could injure them or others. Just as one would help an older person carry their packages across a busy street, so to one would point out to a parent who forgot to put a bicycle helmet on their child’s head.

Germans believe in having a high degree of collective responsibility. They show concern for, look after, the people around them. Germans do not believe in leaving others alone to suffer the consequences of their own avoidable failures. Both the individual and the group is responsible for the individual. The weak – or less informed – should be supported with “Rat und Tat”, literally advice and action.