Japanese management
Japanese management and decision-making techniques have shown a great deal of success in recent years. In
contrast with the American style, Japanese management places more focus on the people within the organization
than on the organization itself. Also in contrast with the American way, Japanese decision-making is considered to be
a responsibility of the group rather than that of a single individual. One area in which these factors have had
particularly strong success is that of long-term planning. Because of the managerial concern for people, the average
Japanese employee is hired for a lifetime. In addition, because they share the communal interests of the group as a
whole, Japanese managers tend to work on goals which emphasize the long-term growth of their companies. This
way of thinking is sharply contrasted with that of most managers in the United States. As noted by one
commentator, American managers generally suffer from "too much short-term thinking." This helps explain why
many Japanese firms grow and prosper over the years while many of their U.S. counterparts are experiencing failure
within the first few years of operation.
Japanese management has been described as having a "holistic concern for people." All aspects of the employees'
lives, both on and off the job, are taken into consideration during long-term planning by management. The Western
approach to planning is quite different.
Whereas Japanese managers are concerned with the "soft S's" (sizing interdependence, collaboration, and
cooperation." Directly prior to the modernization which occurred in the twentieth century, Japan was primarily a
farming society. Successfully operating a farm requires a great deal of cooperation and group loyalty. In addition,
such cooperation was important for the mutual protection of the group against outside invaders. Zimmerman notes:
"Certain elements of the old community structure have persisted to the present day, the most important and basic of
which is the famous Japanese sense of commitment to the group." This group loyalty has profoundly influenced the
modern Japanese way of thinking and, by extension, the Japanese style of management. Most Japanese managers
are baffled by the individualism of their American colleagues. The dog-eat-dog attitude which is characteristic of the
American businessman sharply contrasts the Japanese idea of a group working together for its mutual benefit. The
contrasts that exists between the American and Japanese ways of thinking are strongly influenced by the differences
in the languages of the two nations. In this regard, American managers often do not understand why Japanese
decision-making is so slow and why it so often lacks definit
Japanese management
Japanese management and decision-making techniques have shown a great deal of success in recent years. In
contrast with the American style, Japanese management places more focus on the people within the organization
than on the organization itself. Also in contrast with the American way, Japanese decision-making is considered to be
a responsibility of the group rather than that of a single individual. One area in which these factors have had
particularly strong success is that of long-term planning. Because of the managerial concern for people, the average
Japanese employee is hired for a lifetime. In addition, because they share the communal interests of the group as a
whole, Japanese managers tend to work on goals which emphasize the long-term growth of their companies. This
way of thinking is sharply contrasted with that of most managers in the United States. As noted by one
commentator, American managers generally suffer from "too much short-term thinking." This helps explain why
many Japanese firms grow and prosper over the years while many of their U.S. counterparts are experiencing failure
within the first few years of operation.
Japanese management has been described as having a "holistic concern for people." All aspects of the employees'
lives, both on and off the job, are taken into consideration during long-term planning by management. The Western
approach to planning is quite different.
Whereas Japanese managers are concerned with the "soft S's" (sizing interdependence, collaboration, and
cooperation." Directly prior to the modernization which occurred in the twentieth century, Japan was primarily a
Japanese management
Japanese management and decision-making techniques have shown a great deal of success in recent years. In
contrast with the American style, Japanese management places more focus on the people within the organization
than on the organization itself. Also in contrast with the American way, Japanese decision-making is considered to be
a responsibility of the group rather than that of a single individual. One area in which these factors have had
particularly strong success is that of long-term planning. Because of the managerial concern for people, the average
Japanese employee is hired for a lifetime. In addition, because they share the communal interests of the group as a
whole, Japanese managers tend to work on goals which emphasize the long-term growth of their companies. This
way of thinking is sharply contrasted with that of most managers in the United States. As noted by one
commentator, American managers generally suffer from "too much short-term thinking." This helps explain why
many Japanese firms grow and prosper over the years while many of their U.S. counterparts are experiencing failure
within the first few years of operation.
Japanese management has been described as having a "holistic concern for people." All aspects of the employees'
lives, both on and off the job, are taken into consideration during long-term planning by management. The Western
approach to planning is quite different.
Whereas Japanese managers are concerned with the "soft S's" (sizing interdependence, collaboration, and
cooperation." Directly prior to the modernization which occurred in the twentieth century, Japan was primarily a
farming society. Successfully operating a farm requires a great deal of cooperation and group loyalty. In addition,
such cooperation was important for the mutual protection of the group against outside invaders. Zimmerman notes:
"Certain elements of the old community structure have persisted to the present day, the most important and basic of
which is the famous Japanese sense of commitment to the group." This group loyalty has profoundly influenced the
modern Japanese way of thinking and, by extension, the Japanese style of management. Most Japanese managers
are baffled by the individualism of their American colleagues. The dog-eat-dog attitude which is characteristic of the
American businessman sharply contrasts the Japanese idea of a group working together for its mutual benefit. The
contrasts that exists between the American and Japanese ways of thinking are strongly influenced by the differences
in the languages of the two nations. In this regard, American managers often do not understand why Japanese
decision-making is so slow and why it so often lacks definit
farming society. Successfully operating a farm requires a great deal of cooperation and group loyalty. In addition,
such cooperation was important for the mutual protection of the group against outside invaders. Zimmerman notes:
"Certain elements of the old community structure have persisted to the present day, the most important and basic of
which is the famous Japanese sense of commitment to the group." This group loyalty has profoundly influenced the
modern Japanese way of thinking and, by extension, the Japanese style of management. Most Japanese managers
are baffled by the individualism of their American colleagues. The dog-eat-dog attitude which is characteristic of the
American businessman sharply contrasts the Japanese idea of a group working together for its mutual benefit. The
contrasts that exists between the American and Japanese ways of thinking are strongly influenced by the differences
in the languages of the two nations. In this regard, American managers often do not understand why Japanese
decision-making is so slow and why it so often lacks definit
DifferenceThe purpose of this paper is to examine Japanese and American management styles, especially as they
relate to the automobile industry. We will discuss and compare management theories, strategy, structure, staff, skills,
systems, promotions, career incentives and the like. Most important, we will examine the roads traveled by each
country in getting where they are today, look at how Japan has virtually won the "automobile war," and take a look
at Japanese manufacturing operations in the United States, where American on-site managers and labor have been
forced to adapt to Japanese manufacturing methods.
The power of both the work ethic and good management is particularly evident in Japan. The domestic auto industry
likes to explain the success of the Japanese in the U.S. market solely as a factor of lower price. A Toyota or Nissan
car theoretically contains $1,500 worth of free features when compared to the price of an American automobile.
While essentially correct, the argument avoids one vital issue: market price is a component of function. If Japanese
cars did not perform, they could not be given away. Early Japanese imports were weak, uninspired copies of
Japanese management
Japanese management and decision-making techniques have shown a great deal of success in recent years. In
contrast with the American style, Japanese management places more focus on the people within the organization
than on the organization itself. Also in contrast with the American way, Japanese decision-making is considered to be
a responsibility of the group rather than that of a single individual. One area in which these factors have had
particularly strong success is that of long-term planning. Because of the managerial concern for people, the average
Japanese employee is hired for a lifetime. In addition, because they share the communal interests of the group as a
whole, Japanese managers tend to work on goals which emphasize the long-term growth of their companies. This
way of thinking is sharply contrasted with that of most managers in the United States. As noted by one
commentator, American managers generally suffer from "too much short-term thinking." This helps explain why
many Japanese firms grow and prosper over the years while many of their U.S. counterparts are experiencing failure
within the first few years of operation.
Japanese management has been described as having a "holistic concern for people." All aspects of the employees'
lives, both on and off the job, are taken into consideration during long-term planning by management. The Western
approach to planning is quite different.
Whereas Japanese managers are concerned with the "soft S's" (sizing interdependence, collaboration, and
cooperation." Directly prior to the modernization which occurred in the twentieth century, Japan was primarily a
farming society. Successfully operating a farm requires a great deal of cooperation and group loyalty. In addition,
such cooperation was important for the mutual protection of the group against outside invaders. Zimmerman notes:
"Certain elements of the old community structure have persisted to the present day, the most important and basic of
which is the famous Japanese sense of commitment to the group." This group loyalty has profoundly influenced the
modern Japanese way of thinking and, by extension, the Japanese style of management. Most Japanese managers
are baffled by the individualism of their American colleagues. The dog-eat-dog attitude which is characteristic of the
American businessman sharply contrasts the Japanese idea of a group working together for its mutual benefit. The
contrasts that exists between the American and Japanese ways of thinking are strongly influenced by the differences
in the languages of the two nations. In this regard, American managers often do not understand why Japanese
decision-making is so slow and why it so often lacks definit
outmoded English designs, and while cheap, they did not sell well. As soon as they were upgraded to fill the needs of
the American market, the Japanese "car" miracle began (Meyer, 1989, pp. 52-53).
The Japanese had no serious automobile industry until the 1960's. The first car was built in Japan in 1902, but
...
ith much the same suddenness. In 1973, at age sixtysix, he retired along with his partner, Fujisawa, and left the
company in the hands of younger men. Honda appointed as his successor forty-five-year-old Kiyoshi Kawashima,
who was both an engineer and the former manager of the company's racing program. As he grew older, Honda
never lost his enthusiasm for radical change. Many of his senior managers are men in their early thirties who share
his enthusiasm for egalitarian teamwork. His executives and line workers, all of whom wear the same white Honda
overalls, fight for the same parking places and eat together in the same cafeterias (Toy, 1988, pp. 90-96). It was
Honda who defied conventional Japanese thinking and built the first factory on American soil in Marysville, Ohio. His
associates believed that the American laborer, embroiled in union politics and handicapped by a sloppy work ethic,
could not meet Japanese standards of quality. Honda thought otherwise. At first, the Marysville factory manufactured
motorcycles on a limited basis. But the results were so encouraging that production was raised to 60,000 units a year
and some models were even exported. Honda was prompted to expand the facility to produce automobil
...