You’re right — it’s a fine line between making the excuse “this is how we are” and asking the question “how can we do this in a way that is authentic given who we are?”. The first statement is an excuse; the second statement is a challenge.
There are far too many organizations ready to use ‘who they are’ as an excuse, and not as a jumping off point for insights.

Probably a more complete way to phrase the agency’s specific challenge is — how can we create something that feels welcoming and homey to Americans, while being our German selves?

Along with my academic colleagues Kevin Corley and Spencer Harrison, we think about authenticity as being about the question “What does it mean to be (who we are) in this situation?” to ask organization members to look for new ways of being (ones that fit the situation) that are linked to a deeper identity (the values that define us).

This is not really an issue of national identity or culture, though it was framed that way initially b/c that framing made sense to Charles, fwiw.
cv

I know of one European company entering the American market, which neither understands nor wants to understand its customers here. It wants to *sell* to them, but not build relationships; it wants to continue to do business the way that “worked” before. (I suspect it only worked before because when they first came on the scene in 2003, money flowed freely.)

Granted, this is a different problem from the one you talk about… to an extent. The excuse I frequently hear is, “They’re from [Europe], they do business a little differently over there.” So if its employees told it 1) to build relationships and 2) to do this the same way they do in their country… I’m not sure it wouldn’t backfire, at least within that particular company culture!
.-= Christa M. Miller´s last blog ..A starting point for professional officer development: LinkedIn =-.