About the dignity of work and the rights of workers the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops writes:
„The economy must serve people, not the other way around. Work is more than a way to make a living; it is a form of continuing participation in God’s creation. If the dignity of work is to be protected, then the basic rights of workers must be respected: the right to productive work, to decent and fair wages, to the organization and joining of unions, to private property, and to economic initiative.“
Let’s Stop “Throwing More Bodies” at the Problem, written by Adam Ziegler, August 8, 2013, on: smallfirminnovation(dot)com:”
“In my early days as a lawyer, there was one all-too-common phrase that drove me nuts: ‘just throw more bodies at it.’ I think it’s time to give this phrase a proper, final burial.
It’s insulting Most new lawyers enter the market as smart, well-educated and highly motivated professionals. They’re not that different than you were a few years or decades ago. And most importantly, they’re people.
It’s dumb Treating associates like cannon fodder is bad business. Associates work harder and better for supervisors that respect them.
It’s bad for clients The ‘throw more bodies at it’ mentality is terrible for clients. Treating legal problem-solving as a brute force function of the quantity of lawyers and billable hours that can be brought to bear on a situation leads to flawed, wasteful, overly expensive work.”
It is difficult for Americans to see the relationship between team lead to team member as anything but personal. This for three reasons.
“Your success is my success.” Every American team-lead thinks this, and often says this, to their team members. For it is literally true. The team lead’s success or failure is dependent on her team’s success or failure. Co-dependence is by definition personal.
An American team lead sees himself as coach, mentor, in some cases perhaps even as friend. Each of these roles – in sports, education, relationships – is deeply personal.
Finally, Americans consider it to be next to impossible to have a working relationship between lead and team which is purely business, objective, impersonal. In fact, Americans would not want to work in such an atmosphere. In the U.S. feedback talks, both formal and informal, are personal.
But, in Germany, also. The approach, the logic, the shared operating assumptions are different, however. The more objective, impersonal and neutral the feedback, the more accurate, fair, therefore helpful it is.
“I want you to succeed. Therefore, I will be as clear, analytical and precise as possible.” The German team lead seeks to take herself and the working relationship out of the equation. The focus is on what the company is trying to achieve and the team member’s important role within it. This is neither about her as lead or about their personal relationship.
Team leads are also expected to defend the team against criticism, whether internal or external. The lead is „out in front“, shielding the team from attack, „taking personal ownership“ of the problems. An American team lead does this also out of self-interest. For any and all criticism of the team is direct criticism of that team lead. „Your success is my success“ has an opposite. „Your failure is my failure.“
To „take ownership means“ to take responsibility for one’s actions; not blaming others. To „take the heat“ means to listen and accept criticism or blame. Take „the bull by the horns“ means to confront a problem head-on, as it is, and deal with it openly.
“If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.”, John Quincy Adams – America‘s sixth president, 1825-1829.
“No man will make a great leader who wants to do it all himself or get all the credit for doing it.”, Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919), an American industrialist who led the expansion of the American steel industry in the late 19th century and who was one of the highest profile philanthropists of his era, whose 1889-article on wealth remains a major advisory for those who aspire to lead philanthropic lives.
Isolate: To cause a person or place to be or remain alone or apart from others; to identify something and examine or deal with it separately.
Simplicity: The quality or condition of being easy to understand or do; the quality or condition of being plain or natural; a thing that is plain, natural, or easy to understand. Late Middle English. From Old French simplicite or Latin simplicitas, from simplex.
Sophistication: The quality of being sophisticated; development to a high degree of complexity; the quality of being aware or and able to interpret complex issues; the characteristic of having, revealing, or proceeding from a great deal or worldly experience and knowledge of fashion and culture. From medieval Latin sophisticatus, “tampered with”.
Elegance: The quality of being graceful and stylish in appearance or manner; the quality of being pleasingly ingenious and simple; neatness.
KISS: The acronym for “keep it simple, stupid” is attributed to Kelly Johnson, an engineer at the U.S. weapons company Lockheed. Although there are several other variations, the principle states that systems work best if they are kept simple. Complexity should be avoided. Johnson had given a team of design engineers a set of tools, then challenged them to design a jet aircraft which can be repaired by an average mechanic under war conditions with these tools only.
There is nothing original about KISS, however. To Leonardo da Vinci is attributed “simplicity is the ultimate sophistication”. Mies van der Rohe, widely regarded as one of the masters of modern architecture, stated time and again that “less is more”. Antoine de Saint Exupéry, the French aristocrat, poet, writer (The Little Prince) and pioneering aviator has been quoted: “It seems that perfection is reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.”
William of Ockham (1288-1348), an English Franciscan friar and one of the major figures of Medieval thought, wrote that “among competing hypotheses, the one that makes the fewest assumptions should be selected”.
The saying “the buck stops here” is used to refer to the person who takes responsibility. It is derived from the expression “pass the buck” which means to pass responsibility from one person to another.
The phrase “pass the buck” comes from the game of poker, in which a marker, called a buck, was used to indicate the dealer. When changing dealers, the first dealer would “pass the buck” to the new one, thus passing responsibility.
During his presidency, Harry Truman kept a sign on his desk, which read “The Buck Stops Here.” It was his way of showing that, as the leader of the United States, he was responsible for anything that happened in the nation.
He also made several references to this quote during his public statements, and in his farewell address, President Truman said “The President – whoever he is – has to decide. He can’t pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That’s his job.”
Recent advances in technology have shortened the already very short lines of communication maintained in American business. According to a study done by American University in Washington, D.C. “a typical manager receives hundreds of emails a day, and that consumes a substantial amount of work hours.”
In response to this trend, companies such as PriceWaterhouseCooper have created internal rules restricting email on holidays and non-business hours. A survey by the Society for Human Resources Management states that one in four companies have created similar rules.
In the U.S. business environment, managers expect to be kept informed of even small developments in projects under their supervision. In practice this means that managers are often cc’ed on routine emails relating to the „nuts and bolts“ of a project, even if the content of the email does not require input from the manager. This practice is done to ensure that the manager has situational awareness of his team members’ work.
German managers are trained to hold separate hearings with the conflict parties. The initial goal is to establish the root cause of the problem and to guage the intensity of the conflict. The German approach avoids a hearing involving both parties. Student mediators in German schools are taught the same method.
A hearing with both conflict parties present almost always leads to an escalation of tension. Emotions run high. Accusations and counter-accusations are made, often without any basis in fact. The mediator can quickly lose control of the situation.
That kind of a hearing only giesst Öl ins Feuer, literally pours oil into the fire; provoke another person; to push a difference of opinions into an open conflict.
The German term Herrschaftswissen, roughly translated as domination or control via better information, in the sense of knowledge is power, has a negative connotation. It signifies power of one over another based on the former‘s access to critical information.
German mediators strive to be better informed of all the details concerning a conflict than the conflict parties themselves. This not only prevents manipulation, it is the basis for resolving the problem.
All parents in all cultures strive to teach their children how to show or exercize good judgement. They want to prepare them for difficult situations in life, in which they will have to make difficult decisions, without the benefit of parental help. American parents will, time and again, advise their children to show good judgement.
Judges – team leads – base their judgement on three sources: on any existing laws, regulations, statutes, rules, regulations; on precedents, meaning how those laws, regulations, etc. have been previously applied; and on the specific circumstances of the conflict. Good – fair – judgement balances the influence of all three.
The higher in the American legal system one looks, the older the average age is of the judges. Americans equate judgement with wisdom. And wisdom is based on intelligence and experience. It is defined as: Accumulated philosophic or scientific learning; ability to discern inner qualities and relationships, insight; good sense; generally accepted belief; a wise attitude, belief, or course of action; the teachings of the ancient wise men. Middle English, from Old English wīsdōm, from wīs wise. First known use before 12th century
A judge conducts a trial in an open court. The judge is impartial. Judges hear witnesses and any other evidence presented by the conflict parties. Judges assess the credibility and arguments of the parties, then issue a ruling based on their interpretation of the law and his or her own personal judgment. In some cases, the judge’s powers may be shared with a jury.
Americans expect their managers to resolve a conflict the way a judge would rule on a case: impartially, considering all of the facts and witness testimony (if any), using their own common sense and experience, but not in any way sharing their responsibility to „make the call“ with other members of management (no jury).
Every culture has its definition of what effective leadership is. The ability to communicate criticism in a constructive and discreet manner is one of the most important skills required. Discretion, being a discreet person, handling sensitive issues discreetly, is essential not only to leading high performing teams, but for attracting and retaining high performing individuals.
Managers who are indiscreet, who voice their criticism of individual team members in the presence of others – colleagues, suppliers, customers – are considered to have poor interpersonal skills, to be negative, destructive, even mean spirited.
Americans refer to them as „loose cannons“ or as „time bombs.“ People do their best to avoid them. And talented team players do their best to find another, a better position within the company, or if necessary outside.
Indiscretion is a danger in the American business context. It is demotivating. It scares off talent.