At the risk of being not politically correct myself, I think there are significant cultural gaps between the west coast American standard and people from Israel (Bardin is Isralei).
With the caveat that this is my experience only, Israelis are more blunt, direct and often openly critical vs Americans, especially Californians. They're often right and all the ones I've worked with have been very smart, but the way a message is communicated is sometimes more important than the message itself.
I think that in this global age people think that the notion of intercultural communication issues has gone away, but IMO it still exists.
During my career I've worked with people around the world, all in the Tech industry.
Israeli-Californian cultural gap is huge.
It is made worse by the fact that Israelis usually have a good English level, some even have an okay accent - which makes their US counterpart expect them to use the same communication etiquette they are used to.
Californians will go out of their way to avoid any overt conflict.
Israelis see conflict as a valid form of day to day communications.
An Israeli can go out of a meeting thinking he was just being told "yes", while he was given a glaring "no" delivered in the All-American-speak.
This is interesting to me, because you hear the same thing when discussing Japanese vs American culture, with the Americans being the more direct ones in that comparison.
I wonder what happens when Israelis work with Japanese people.
Born-bred NY-expat Israeli here, working for a West Coast Big Tech company.
New York (probably all US East) and Israeli cultures are fairly analogous. In just 3 extra timezones, West Coast workplace culture is light years away.
Many of my Israeli colleagues have no patience for the soft-pedaled corporate standard double talk (which they would call "PC"), and think that all US workplaces are like this. They have a hard time believing that my NY experience was just like our local Tel Aviv office.
an old coworker of mine used to see conflict as a good thing because it means people are invested in whatever is being discussed.
I tend to agree with him.
I've heard this a lot, tended to practice it, and have one divorce to show for it.
I come from a family of direct argumentative people. Many people do not, and this style of communication will shut them down, leading to suffering and ultimately only one side being heard. I'm more ambivalent about the value of directness now.
I don't think it's so controversial to claim that different cultures have different default communication styles.
Israelis aren't the only ones who tend to be more direct than the average Californian. I usually appreciate it: corporate speech tends to dance around the point a bit, and bluntness saves time and clarifies where people stand. That said, I can also understand how some people would be taken aback or intimidated by excessive bluntness, especially from a superior.
Yep this is true. California (and if we are being honest, liberal) types will do anything and everything to avoid any kind of conflict. I can't stand it.
Israelis are straight to the point without the typical American BS. I have been on a conference call with Israelis and Americans and every 15 seconds the Israelis would go on mute to complain how stupid the Americans sounded. They were speaking a lot but effectively saying nothing of value.
With the caveat that this is my experience only, Israelis are more blunt, direct and often openly critical vs Americans, especially Californians. They're often right and all the ones I've worked with have been very smart, but the way a message is communicated is sometimes more important than the message itself.
I think that in this global age people think that the notion of intercultural communication issues has gone away, but IMO it still exists.