AAA – John Otto Magee

Welcome.

You work in a multinational organization. You experience cultural differences. And those differences are making collaboration difficult.

But no one is helping you. Not management.
Not human resources. Not corporate learning.
“You all speak English. Where’s the problem?”

Here’s the problem: there are differences between cultures, the differences are in foundational areas,
the differences impact collaboration.

We explain those differences. Beginning with Germany, the United States, and ten foundational topics. So that your collaboration succeeds. So that you succeed.

Get one-year full access for 99 Euros.
The topic of Persuasion is open to all.

This Exercises forum is experimental. If it proves to be helpful, and if we can afford to maintain it, we will do so.

The value of Exercises, however, is determined by the quality of the contributions from you, your colleagues and peers in other companies.

Back to Exercises.

Ten Topics

Communication

Americans communicate interactively. All too often German and American colleagues end their communication with the false assumption that each has understood the other.

American e-mails follow the form of informal spoken communication, using a kind of insider-English in telegraph style. German e-mails are similar to a written document, implying a higher level of binding character. In the transatlantic context meetings are run differently.

Americans meet on a regular basis in order to inform each other. Meetings tend to be less structured. Attendees enter and leave. Side-discussions and cell-phone calls take place.

German information exchange occurs more often bilaterally. German meetings are more structured, with an agenda set clearly beforehand and adhered to with discipline.

Agreements

Germans are reluctant to enter into agreements without thinking them through. Americans often misperceive this as lack of cooperation.

In their context a spontaneous yes signals a basic willingness to help. The level of commitment of that yes is then determined by the details. The instinctive American yes surprises Germans, however.

They interpret it as a firm commitment, regardless of the details of the discussion. Americans maintain an agreement primarily via follow- up, which allows one to gauge the level of commitment, to monitor the details, and to react rapidly to changing parameters.

Germans view follow-up as superfluous, even as a sign of mistrust. Once an agreement is struck, it is assumed that it has been clearly thought through. The reliability of the other party should not to be doubted.

Persuasion

Presentations are integral to the communications of any company. More importantly, presentations are the basis for decision-making. Effective presentations are persuasive presentations.

Germans and Americans persuade differently, however. Transatlantic organizations without common criteria for judging what is persuasive run the risk of miscalculation.

Important content, understood and accepted on one side of the Atlantic, suddenly does not resonate on the other. Decision-making processes lose their effectiveness.

Key people feel misunderstood, possibly ignored. Political calculation slowly creeps into otherwise open and objective analysis and argumentation.

Decision-Making

Decision-making processes go to the heart of a company’s forward movement, on both strategic and operational levels. For German-American teams, integrating their key decision-making processes is a complicated and delicate task.

It is an attempt at combining the strengths of two approaches without damaging the fragile consensus needed to maintain them. For the potential risks and gains involved impact the bottom-line directly.

The first step to integrating the best of the two respective logics, however, is to understand their fundamental differences.

Leadership

Ineffective leadership has immediate and direct impact on team performance. Many have experienced the demanding task of leading transatlantic teams.

Germans and Americans lead and want to be led differently. Their underlying assumptions defining successful leadership diverge significantly. Complicating the issue are misconceptions and misinterpretations about the two respective leadership approaches.

For any transatlantic organization to be successful, it is imperative that these differences be understood and managed in all of their ramifications.

Feedback

Feedback is a leadership tool with two goals: improve on weaknesses, build on strengths. Feedback helps one to know “where I stand” in the team.

Feedback, both formal (performance reviews) and informal, is complicated, however. Its underlying assumptions, intentions and signals must be understood in order for feedback to be effective.

Misapplied feedback, in contrast, easily damages the morale and motivation of an otherwise well performing individual or team. Germans and Americans give feedback and motivate.

The divergences all too often have the opposite effect: demotivation, a sense of injustice, in the end poor performance.

Conflict

Conflict is natural in any competitive performance-oriented organization. Imbedded in its legal system is a national culture’s approach to resolving conflict.

Conflicts within German-American teams are commonplace. The respective approaches to conflict resolution, however, differ in several key areas.

For Germans conflicts are inherently negative. They expect conflict parties to solve their problems themselves. Escalation, a sign of a breakdown in the team, reflects negatively on the team and its lead.

Americans see conflict as commonplace. Conflict parties seldom solve their problems alone. Escalation is a basic right. The team-lead is expected to resolve conflicts actively.

These and other divergences in approaches, if not understood and properly balanced, hinder just and lasting conflict resolution. Overall team performance suffers.

Product

In Germany, the essence of a product is in its quality. It is the primary guaranty for success. The goal of innovation is to be one step ahead of the competition and of the market itself.

In the U.S. quality is one important product characteristic among several, all of which are measured relative to that price which the market is willing to pay.

Along with value, functionality, service, customer orientation and timely delivery, quality is based on the specific needs of the customer. Joint product development requires, therefore, a high degree of agreement on those characteristics which will meet these needs.

Process

Processes and procedures are in a sense the manuals governing a company’s inner workings. They make possible not only quality control and consistency.

Processes and procedures coordinate complex, interrelated activities. They are the platform on which products and services are envisioned, developed, produced and optimized.

In the transatlantic context, however, Germans and Americans do not share a common understanding of processes and procedures. The divergences in their respective logics is a source not only for diminished efficiency.

Determining processes and procedures can become a transatlantic battleground with broad implications for cooperation within an entire organization.

Customer

A company’s success depends on meeting the needs of its customers, both internal and external. Meeting needs, though, runs deeper than merely supplying a particular product or service.

The foundation is a common understanding of the business relationship between customer and supplier. Clarity on expectations and approaches is the prerequisite for a cooperative, lasting and successful business relationship.

There are significant differences between how Germans and Americans fundamentally approach the customer, however. Regardless of whether the customer is internal or external, divergent customer philosophies mean divergent customer approaches. And divergent customer approaches lead to different customer reactions.

Consulting

I have been helping multinational teams for more than two decades. Here’s how:

Culture

I explain deeper-lying cultural differences between Germany and the United States.

Topic Talks

We’ll go deeper on specific topics. Currently we have ten. We’ll take a systematic approach. Topic for topic. We’ll discuss in-person and/or per videocall.

Q&A Sessions

I respond to specific questions. Teams discuss and formulate their questions, then send them to me. I prepare. We’ll discuss in-person and/or per videocall.

Executive Coaching

I work individually with senior-level management. Customizing to their needs. Applying my insights to their situation. We’ll discuss in-person and/or per videocall.

Integration

I integrate cross-Atlantic teams by guiding them through a three-step process:

Step 1 – Learn

The first step is to learn about cultural differences. To go deep. About how we think. About how we work. Learning is the foundation for discussion.

Step 2 – Discuss

The second step is to discuss the influence of those differences on your cross-border collaboration. Discussing is the bridge from learning to applying.

Step 3 – Apply

The third step is to apply to your work what you have learned and discussed. Together as colleagues. This is about improving collaboration. About your success.

Collaboration

I improve collaboration in and between multinational teams:

Step 1 – Interviews

I’ll interview your key people. As a neutral, outside, unbiased party. Whose mandate is not to address the substance of their work. But instead to focus exclusively on improving collaboration. In and between multinational teams.

In the interviews I listen for three things: where the problems are, their impact on the bottom-line, what the contributing factors could be.

Step 2 – Analysis

In the interviews I ask the important questions, listen carefully, and take accurate notes. I reserve the right to conduct follow-up interviews. Then it’s all about analysis. Because that is the basis for my recommendations. About if and how I can help.

I then present my results to you. We will discuss them in-depth. Including if and where I should begin. With an initial action. We’ll then proceed step-by-step. Assessing. Tweaking. Continuing. Or not. With a constant eye on the impact on your bottom-line.

Step 3 – Actions

Actions is a generic term. Here it means things done to improve collaboration. In and between global teams. The actions can take many forms: workshops, structured discussions, coaching,
web-based exercises.

Actions are situational. Based on context, people, problems. The pieces, however, are always the same: bring the right colleagues together, address an important problem, guide them closer alignment and to a solution.

Back to John Otto Magee.

Patterns

It’s not what we say about how we think, about how we work. It’s what we do. The examples we provide are from many areas of society. They reveal patterns in our behavior, in how we think and in how we work.