COMPARISON AND CONTRAST OF THE US MANAGEMENT STYLE AND THE JAPANESE MANAGEMENT STYLE
Most Americans are not familiar with the elements of Japanese management because few studies of Japanese management are available in English. In the late 1970s, American managers became concerned when the Japanese increased their importation of automobiles, electronics, and other products to the USA (1989). It was not until the publication of Theory Z (1981) that American managers obtained a clearer profile of Japanese management.
(1981) summarized seven principles of Japanese management (Theory J) as: lifetime employment; slow evaluation and promotion; non-specialized career paths; implicit control mechanisms; collective decision making; collective responsibility; and holistic concern.
The most important characteristic of Japanese management was lifetime employment, which functioned as the cornerstone of Theory J. Japanese management contributed to the economic success of Japan, but also recognized that Theory J could not be fully applied to American management because of cultural differences. Thus, Ouchi borrowed the following ideas from Theory J to create Theory Z: consensual decisions, infrequent appraisal, slow promotion, and comprehensive concern. Ouchi left individual responsibility unchanged because it was an important concept to American management.
Japanese management continues to attract worldwide attention because of its success, efficiency, and humanistic quality. Ouchi’s Theory Z was the first work that introduced Japanese management to America. Although some critics interpret Japanese management as control tactics within police organizations (1992), most practitioners consider Japanese management qualities as a salient resource for organizational goals. One of the most telling examples of the vast differences in culture is the existence of many Japanese-language words involving obligation, duty, perseverance, etc., which lack American counterparts. "Girl," in Japanese means duty or obligation, ranging from obligation from gratitude for a favor to the duty of revenge. Most Japanese feel an intense obligation to do good work and to remain loyal - hence the existence of lifetime employment("shushin koyou") for many. The Japanese also believe in the separate but related ideas of "gaman suru" (to persevere, even under hardship), "michi" (a path to mastery that involves specialization, continuity, and authority), and "kaizen"(continuous, gradual improvement).(6) These ideas, along with many others, are central to Japanese culture ( 1995).
Much has been written about the differences in attitudes toward work between Japanese and American workers, with the implication that the Japanese have a much higher work ethic. Japanese management deals with each employee as a person rather than a worker. This concern tends to go beyond the job and the paycheck. Most of the work force is on a six day schedule (Harper, 1998). The work ethic is at an all time high.
(1989) reviewed the good and bad points of American management. He found both positive and negative management practices, but generally found positives in that Americans are willing to change, informal, frank, direct, aggressive, and materially oriented. He found the negatives to be a short-term substance, and an overemphasis on scientific and rational planning. American businesses have begun to follow Japanese practices and are now much more concerned with employee satisfaction (1992). American management used to use more punishment so that workers did what they were supposed to do. However, over the years, there has seen a shift from coercion to motivation as a way of getting employees to perform at satisfactory levels.
Because the Japanese value group values, commitment, trust, and hard work, Japanese managers do not need to monitor their workers in the same way that American managers need to monitor American employees. However, Japanese firms that operate in the United States do not follow the traditional Japanese managerial style and that they take into account the culture within which they operate. Even more attention should be given to cultural context so that management styles could be tailored to meet the aspects of each business environment. It has been found that Japanese styles could not be fully integrated into American plants, even in Japanese-owned firms (1995). The Japanese, like many others, have found the need to adapt their management styles to the culture.
0 comments:
Post a Comment