Running an English speaking company in Europe
micho.biz
micho.biz
However, I've also encountered a lot of resistance, especially outside such international cities. Some people fundamentally dislike the idea of having to speak English if working for or partnering with a local company. It's also heavily associated with pretentiousness.
One thing I noticed: Dutch people can switch pretty well during "work" discussions, but during lunch or social events, the switch is harder and you have to remind people to speak English.
I have also noticed that in Brazil, over a decade ago, in a local company that was trying its luck in the US market. Eventually it failed, for many reasons but mostly because some of the staff wasn't fluent enough in English while others were. Internal bickering ensued, until the company went bust. The management was only focused on the US expansion and failed to address internal disputes.
It's a real hassle, especially when you don't become "loyal" to any EU country in particular, thus it makes no sense to learn its local language as there are way too many languages around, me the last 4 years: I lived in Denmark (Danish), Germany (German), now I live in Belgium (Dutch AND French).
The whole situation creates "sticky" jobs, where people end up stuck in 1 country, sometimes a very small country, and they can't really embrace the full power of a unionized economic area. I mean, only for this US is so much better than EU, 300ML people all speaking the same language...
Not to mention the culture. The cultural difference between Washington state and Mississippi (for example) is much smaller than the difference between Germany and France.
I understand your frustration, but the purpose of the policy is precisely to create 'sticky jobs', and this is really the only way things can work unless countries like Denmark and the Netherlands wish over time to lose their languages, and become more or less undifferentiated provinces of Europe. Labour market mobility is important, but it is not the sine qua non of modern Europe. Small countries accept immigration on the basis that the immigrants will over time learn the language and adjust to the culture, it's impossible for them to maintain the integrity of their state if a major percentage of the population are transitory.
People are already buying into the "just a province of Europe (I'd say, just a province of US)" with their wallets. I don't see how forcing a local language is helping in counteracting the "provincialization" trend.
Finally, in my ramblings around Europe, especially north and central Europe, I noticed that people really love to keep a "fake" identity. They would wear weird dresses (the Germans), eat weird stuff (the Danish), have a weird Santa Claus (the Belgian, pardon, Flemish), just to think they are "different". They are not different, most of the EU countries are very, very, similar to each other. I really wish we realized that and stopped this craziness about "losing our culture", we already lost our culture, because that was the good/optimal thing to do, please let's get over it.
And you only have to look at the way in which the political systems operate in different European countries to see the massive cultural differences which exist. How do you think the Danish would react to a politician like Berlusconi?
Political system are a complicated beast. We all watch the same movies, buy the same stuff, but, somehow, vote in completely different ways. I think it's because of how incentives are set in the respective countries. They are not really culture, but just something that's there and it is very difficult to remove.
For example, the Italian systems protects pharmacies (you can have only 1 each xyz inhabitants). But the Danish system protects its economy taxing cars 180%. The principle behind those 2 policies is the same (the State can and has to affect the economy), yet the incentive this creates and the impacts on the economy are very different.
I take your point, although arguably institutional memory is an important part of culture, especially given the cultural norms which build up intertwined with those organizations.
Even beyond institutions, though, I'd say there are still very significant differences. My understanding is that Berlusconi does well partly because people admire his lad-ish lifestyle (fast cars, 18 year old supermodels, etc). Whereas in many other countries his attitude, and level of consumption would be considered vulgar. Berlusconi doesn't just get in because of the electoral system, a lot of people in Italy must like him. And elsewhere in Europe he is simply not liked.
Obviously, that's just one example. I don't mean to pick out Italy in particular.
Yes, you have a point that Berlusconi is a sort of cultural difference. But to be sure of that, we shall put Danes in Italy for 10 years and see what they vote after that period. Yes, institutional memory is a cultural "feature", but for me "culture" is more the day to day of people, what do they laugh at? What are they aspirations? Dreams? What do they buy? Do they travel? Do they like sunny beaches (ie: Chinese don't like sunny beaches, here you have a cultural difference...)? Etc. In this, in EU we are very, very, similar.
(From a practical perspective, I do think bicycling is more important to integration into local culture, at least in Copenhagen, than language! But parts of Copenhagen are already de-facto English-speaking, especially trendy nightlife areas like Vesterbro... perhaps not as much as Berlin, but getting there.)
If Sweden's business sector is less English-friendly in hiring, I wonder what accounts for the differences. It's a somewhat larger country, but not that much larger.
Essentially all meetings, reports, documentation, etc, etc are in English. It's only when there are just native speakers around that we use Swedish.
On a second thought, it's also fair to say that the idea is all well and good, but all you need is a disgruntled employee to ruin it to everybody else. But then, I guess it's all up to what type of people you hire in the first place, and how the company shows those new-hires what kind of culture is expected from them.
There are few rulings in the UK, based on EU's laws, supporting employees speaking they own language even when the nature of the business require them to speak English. The most recent case I recall of, is that of a Polish nurse/nanny/babysitter who would speak Polish to Polish-parents and Polish co-workers. But her managers required there to stick to English at all times, even when approached by Polish speaking parents and co-workers. She sued and won.
http://witnesshr.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/polish-worker-sacked...
(Btw, a lot of polish and spanish developers arrived to the UK in recent months)
But since you pointed out one of the many articles surrounding that particular case, fyi that article is also incomplete. Google a bit and you'll find some extractions of the court case. The speaking-during-break was the pinacle of the story, which had started months before when her boss told her to speak only English even when the clients (parents) started a conversation with her in their shared/common language.
We are more a traditional company competing in an existing industry hence Silicon Valley is not a location we compete with in terms of culture or product design.
What has been a big challenge for us after switching to English has really been acquiring local talent that is already here or willing to move here, can speak English well and also have great coding skills (in C# .Net if you want to know)
We have been successful in recruiting people in rural Spain and across Europe but it seems that all the English talent in MAdrid already is quite comfortable in their jobs.
So in summary - I think if you are in non-english Europe and do the switch, be prepared to diversify your operations and look at remote workers or branch offices away from your HQ.
YMMV of course.
I know plenty of people here in Barcelona who could earn much more in their home countries, but choose to live in Barcelona for the better quality of life.
A web developer would probably earn twice as much in London (where I'm from) than here in Barcelona, but they would have to spend all the increase on rent to rent a nice apartment. Forget buying in London on a junior- to mid-level salary, but here you could buy a nice apartment in a nice part of the city.
Not to mention the weather, scenery, beach, cheaper restaurants and bars (with better opening hours), lack of violence, and sheer excitement of being in a foreign country.
I'm still struggling for solutions, because having the sales next to the customers HQ makes sense somehow.
Since we didn't have a solid marketing or sales team, we decided to land it where our main market is. It just made sense.
Also it's difficult when the customers are big companies, they tend to culturally suck the sales in corporate thinking where the product team try to get an underdog, get-shit-done, we'll-fuck-your-bureaucracy-for-your-own-good attitude.
I am not being snarky. In my head any and all SaaS plays are inherently international. Perhaps that's because I am Slovenian and any endeavour that is not international by default is doomed from the get go.
I could not imagine a SaaS story that is viable in mid to long term without inherent internationalization. Except perhaps US based companies, however there WILL be trouble as soon as you try to enter European market if you assume that US is the world.
I would rather be a small fish in a big pond than a big fish in a small pond.
Especially if the first is many times bigger than the second one could ever be.
I think he is a great example of an Entrepreneur not just talking about it, but doing it.
With all due respect to Teambox, Getting to the US Market alone will not be considered international. Every market has its own set of rules and changing dynamics and present a different set of challenges.
This perception has to change, somehow.