Silence, chit chat and opinions.

One of the discussions which came up recently in the board of the Finnish-Dutch Chamber of Commerce was a discussion on the interest in different working practices between Finland and the Netherlands. In some earlier articles, I wrote about differences among other holiday practices. Let's take a favorite Finnish past -time, called “Hiljaisuus (silence)” and compare that to a favorite Dutch past-time called “ouwehoeren (chit-chat)”. 

What do we do when we have nothing to say? Most Dutch will fill the gap with chit-chat, Finns will remain silent.

But what does this silence mean? For Dutch, we tend to have a habit (at the national level) to enter discussions with a “stretched leg”. Basically, we position a strong opinion, in order to generate a discussion. Silence might even lead to taking a stronger position. 

In Finland, this can actually have the opposite effect. The tendency in Finland tends to be much more into first carefully calibrating a position by analyzing available facts and then having a fact-based exchange that might or might not lead to changing one′s position – but it won't be easy. The fact that many Dutch are reasonably skilled in “selling ice to Eskimos” also means that if we position our opinion as a fact, there is little space for Finns to enter into a discussion, because there is no way to win the argument – in Finland leaving things in the “grey” area is not a comfortable position, there is a clear emotional need for “black” or “white”. 

The “why” do we differ question is easily answered – because we are programmed differently. In Finland kids in school still tend to be encouraged to investigate an opinion, not just have an opinion and to argue based on facts, not on opinions alone. The discussion you could say (perceived from a Dutch perspective) is a bit more clinical, bit more aloof/restraint in emotions. In the Netherlands, kids are still encouraged to have an opinion, then discuss and reach a consensus on the group opinion, before yet another opinion comes in and a new discussion follows. Everybody should have an opinion, be able to voice that opinion, and is expected to discuss their opinion from the perspective of persuasion (not necessarily reason). Just have a look at the difference between Finland and the Netherlands here, and you′ll quickly be able to see the main cultural differences: 

https://www.hofstede-insights.com/product/compare-countries/

The question with regards to silence, on a personal level, is that for me I have started to enjoy the silence. I am still Dutch tough, so tend to speak and think too fast for many of my Finnish clients (and friends/family). Yet, when in the Netherlands I have found myself appreciating the silent feature of Finland, especially in public transport, the silence has its blessings. 

What to concretely do about the issue of differences with regards to silence at the workplace (tips applying in general, not specific to just Finland/Netherlands):  

1. Agree with each other, especially when working in teams, what is your team way of communication. 
2. Do you agree to indicate “give me a sec, I'm thinking” or do you stay silent and let the other person think “why are you so silent?”. 
3. Do you agree on stating opinions as such: “my opinion is that this car is great”, or stating them as facts: “this car is great”- with the risk of killing a discussion before it ever started. 
4. Do you communicate when a project is done (only to find out that something else was needed) or do you communicate intermittently “we are analysing, and can't share our findings yet”, even when you feel nothing new can be mentioned (mentioning that is still worthwhile because it gives people a status update)
5. Think before you speak and don't assume the other immediately understands you. We have a saying in our consulting practice that to assume is to make an ASS of U and ME. 

Understanding the differences is the first step in becoming more culturally aware and with that starting to understand when to apply silence, and when to speak up.