Difference between Japanese and American management. Comparative analysis of modern American and Japanese management models
Japanese management model was formed under the influence of two factors:
1. Creative development of foreign experience in the field of organization and management;
2. Consistent preservation of national traditions.
In connection with the above, the analysis of Japanese character traits is of interest. The most important of them: hard work, restraint and diplomacy, receptivity to new things, frugality.
Japan is characterized by a commitment to collective forms of labor organization (groupism). The collaborative nature of work requires managers to be able to get along with people. Life experience is also highly valued, and much attention is paid to the spiritual development of the individual.
The so-called doctrine of paternalism has become widespread in Japan. Paternalism (from the Latin paternus - fatherly, pater - father) is the doctrine of the “fatherly”, “charitable” attitude of entrepreneurs towards employed workers. Hence, there is a tendency towards democratic forms of interaction during work.
American management model is losing its leading position in the world, and recently has begun to acquire certain features of the Japanese model.
In many ways, the features of this model are due to the national characteristics of Americans: the ability to fight to the end, to assert their superiority and vitality. They emphasize their exclusivity, “God’s chosenness,” and strive to achieve quick and great success. They pay great attention to their work. For them characterized by struggle and leadership. Until recently, America was dominated by a one-man management style; firms were characterized by strict discipline and unquestioning obedience with purely external democracy.
Let us present a comparative description of the Japanese and American management models in the table.
European management model
In European countries, management systems are in many ways similar to the management principles of the American model.
A function such as “production organization” has been identified as the main one in ensuring labor productivity growth not only in the United States, but also in European countries.
Currently, the largest and oldest corporations have their offices in Europe. Their management methods are comparable to the American model, but for the most part this applies to small and simple industrial companies. European corporate management is somewhat different.
First, as in the corporate United States, as difficulties arise in coordinating actions, the size of the management apparatus increases.
Secondly, Europe is the first to be exposed to new technological trends and fashionable trends, including in management.
Third, as a result, European management is a mixture of American and Japanese management models, and these variations vary from country to country. Therefore, it is not entirely correct to speak unequivocally about European management as a specific, clearly formed model.
Comparative characteristics of Japanese and American management models
Russian management
Currently in Russia, management that meets international standards is in its infancy. How long the time gap in management levels is is characterized by the statement of Peter F. Drucker, an outstanding American scientist and practitioner in the field of management. In the summer of 2000, he wrote: “US enterprises and management 50 years ago were the same as Russian enterprises and management today.”
From a management point of view, there are three main management models in Russia:
The "common sense" model observed, especially in the last decade of the 20th century, in many organizations of the so-called “new Russians”. Most of these “managers” were previously anyone: engineers, economists, lawyers, programmers - just not management professionals. It’s good that business in those years was quite simple, management at the first stage of business development was also elementary. However, as organizations grew, “common sense” was no longer sufficient to replace managerial professionalism.
Model of "Western culture" represented by Western organizations from countries with mature market economies operating in the Russian market. One should not exaggerate the influence of Western management culture on Russian organizations, but one cannot fail to notice some traces of the influence. For example, a radical reconstruction of the technological base of management that has occurred in recent years. A modern manager is armed with personal computers, the latest communication systems, databases with remote access, various software, and the Internet. Along with this, many organizations have adopted the external attributes of Western management: elegance, politeness, good furniture. But things did not go beyond the external form and technological weapons. In recent years, advances towards Western technologies of corporate governance and intergroup interaction have accelerated. The management of countries with mature market economies has significantly influenced the form, technical side and has a significant impact on the culture of Russian management.
"MANAGEMENT IN HIGH-HIGH PRODUCTION"
UDC 669.713.7
E. N. Ivanchenko Scientific supervisor - A. V. Kukartsev Siberian State Aerospace University named after Academician M. F. Reshetnev, Krasnoyarsk
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF AMERICAN AND JAPANESE MANAGEMENT MODELS
Characteristics of the American management model
Modern American management as it currently exists is based on three historical premises:
1. Market availability.
2. Industrial method of organizing production.
3. Corporation as the main form of entrepreneurship.
American firms that use traditional hiring principles focus on specialized knowledge and skills. General criteria for personnel selection are: education, practical work experience, psychological compatibility, ability to work in a team.
American firms focus on the narrow specialization of managers, as well as engineers and scientists. American specialists, as a rule, are professional in a narrow field of knowledge and therefore their promotion through the management hierarchy occurs only vertically, which means that a financier will make a career only in this field. This limits the opportunities for advancement through management levels, which causes turnover.
management personnel, their transition from one company to another.
American management is characterized by a rigid management organization. It is most characterized by the desire to formalize managerial relations.
American management is characterized by the idea of the personal responsibility of the employee. The effectiveness of a particular manager is determined on the basis of whether he was able to personally achieve the goals that were set for him.
Features of the Japanese management model.
Japan plays a huge role on the world stage, everyone knows this. This country is an economic giant. Japan firmly holds the palm in the production of televisions, cars, etc. Toyota is the largest Japanese corporation.
One of the main reasons for Japan's rapid success is its human-centric management model.
Distinctive features of the Japanese character are economy and frugality. The Japanese system strives to create high-quality products.
The Japanese consider their human resources to be the main wealth of the country.
Criteria Japanese model American model
1. The nature of management decision-making Decision-making based on the principle of consensus Individual nature of decision-making
2. Responsibility Collective Individual
3. Management structure Non-standard, flexible Severely formalized
5. Organization of control Soft informal control Clearly formalized hard control procedure
7. Assessing the qualities of a leader Ability to coordinate actions and control Professionalism and initiative
8. Orientation of management Orientation of management towards the group, increased attention to the person Orientation of management towards the individual, attention to the person as a performer
9. Evaluation of personnel performance Achieving collective results Achieving individual results
10. Relations with subordinates Personal informal relations Formal relations
11. Career Promotion taking into account age, length of service and loyalty to the company Business career is predetermined by personal achievements
13. Remuneration Remuneration based on group performance, length of service Remuneration based on individual achievements
14. Duration of employment at the company Long-term employment of the manager at the company, lifelong employment Employment on a contractual, contractual basis, short-term employment
15. General principle of management “Bottom-Up” “Top-Bottom”
Comparative analysis of models
Current problems of aviation and astronautics. Socio-economic and humanities
The essence of Japanese management is people management. At the same time, the Japanese consider not one person (individual), but a group of people.
In addition, in Japan there is a tradition of subordination to the elder, whose position is approved by the group.
The Japanese worship work. They are often called “workaholics.”
Unlike workers in other countries, the Japanese do not strive to unconditionally fulfill rules, instructions and promises. The Japanese build relationships with their partners on the basis of trust.
In general, in Japan there are fewer complaints and claims against management for two main reasons: firstly, the Japanese worker does not feel oppressed, and secondly, he considers his work to be more important than rights or beliefs. The origins of this lie in the fact that managers of Japanese companies pay great attention to the welfare of their workers.
On March 11, 2011 at 14:46 local time (at 8:46 Moscow time) a major earthquake occurred, which resulted in a tsunami. This is the strongest earthquake in the known history of Japan.
Changes in the industrial sector. Nissan announced the shutdown of 4 of its factories. Hino, Toyota, Honda and Mitsubishi Motors have stopped production at all their factories in Japan. Sony has closed its industrial insulation tape plant. Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation's ethylene plant has stopped production. Toshiba announced the shutdown of 2 factories. It is impossible to transfer one management model to the economy of another country without taking into account its specific conditions and, above all, psychological and socio-cultural factors.
© Ivanchenko E. N., Kukartsev A. V., 2011
UDC 373.167.1
O. A. Lishutina, A. A. Paramonova Scientific supervisor - A. V. Kukartsev Siberian State Aerospace University named after Academician M. F. Reshetnev, Krasnoyarsk
MOTIVATION AND STIMULATION OF WORKERS IN THE INNOVATION FIELD
A brief description of the concept of motivation and its types is given. The methods of motivation characteristic of the innovation sphere in Russia are considered.
Successful innovation activity and its effectiveness are largely determined by the level of management of scientific personnel, qualifications and motivational behavior of employees. The mere presence of a plan and a formal management system does not guarantee that the goals of an innovation project will be achieved. It is necessary to motivate staff and make appropriate decisions in the light of changing circumstances. Planning, analysis and control create only the basis for the implementation of human activities. And in innovation, more than in any other area of industrial management, success depends on people.
The management system can indicate the direction of effort, but the enthusiasm and energy with which movement in this direction will be made largely depends on the motives that guide the scientists and engineers involved in the development. Motivation is the motivation of a person to act in a specific, goal-directed way. There are internal and external motivation for activity. Internal motivation is determined by the content of contradictions and difficulties inherent in the problem being solved, by the internal logic of the development of science, which is manifested in the plans of the researcher. External motivation comes from other forms of his value orientations. These forms can be significant for the individual, but remain external in relation to the projects being developed and their results.
Important external motives for research work and innovative developments are to achieve recognition in the scientific world, establish one’s priority in the invention, and achieve a high level of competence. The basis for the effectiveness of creative work and its results are internal motives. Developing the motives necessary for effective performance of work is the most important psychological task of the head of a scientific unit.
The motivational behavior of employees lies within the framework of A. Maslow's theory of human needs. In accordance with this theory, primary, physiological needs are satisfied with the help of material goods and money. But money motivates only 30-50% of employees to take action. The main part is driven to action by more elevated needs: for knowledge, creativity, authority, recognition, achieving great goals, moral ideals, etc. These factors are often of decisive importance for scientists, developers, scientists.
In relation to Russia, a turning point occurs in the motivational attitudes and motivational behavior of scientists and material factors of motivation and material needs come to the fore. This situation, explained by the low level of remuneration of scientific and technical personnel and the transition to market relations, cannot but affect the forms and methods of personnel management in scientific and technical organizations. When managing
When considering management models, two types are usually distinguished: Japanese and American.
Japanese management model was formed under the influence of two factors:
- Creative development of foreign experience in the field of organization and management;
- Consistent preservation of national traditions.
In connection with the above, the analysis of Japanese character traits is of interest. The most important of them: hard work, restraint and diplomacy, receptivity to new things, frugality.
Japan is characterized by a commitment to collective forms of organization (groupism). The collaborative nature of the work requires the ability to get along with people. Life experience is also highly valued, and much attention is paid to the spiritual development of the individual.
The so-called doctrine of paternalism has become widespread in Japan. Paternalism (from the Latin paternus - fatherly, pater - father) is the doctrine of the “fatherly”, “charitable” attitude of entrepreneurs towards employed workers. Hence, there is a tendency towards democratic forms of interaction during work.
It is losing its leading position in the world, and recently it has begun to acquire certain features of the Japanese model.
In many ways, the features of this model are due to the national characteristics of Americans: the ability to fight to the end, to assert their superiority and vitality. They emphasize their exclusivity, “God’s chosenness,” and strive to achieve quick and great success. They pay great attention to their work. For them characterized by the struggle for. Until recently, America was dominated by a one-man management style; firms were characterized by strict discipline and unquestioning obedience with purely external democracy.
Let us present a comparative description of the Japanese and American management models in the table.
Characteristics |
||
Japanese management model |
American management model |
|
Dominant qualities of a business person |
Ability to work in a “team”, team orientation, refusal to stick out one’s own “I”, unwillingness to take risks |
Refusal of individualism, transition to collective forms, desire for calculated risks |
Criteria for promotion |
Life experience, good knowledge of production. Slow promotion |
Highly qualified and able to learn. Progression in positions occurs quickly. |
Professional competence |
Generalist specialists, special requirements and forms of advanced training: mandatory retraining; rotation of work place (position); written work reports. |
The tendency to move from narrow specialization to mastering several related specialties. Traditional forms of training and advanced training. |
Decision making process |
Bottom-up, decision-making based on consensus; The decision takes a long time to be made and is implemented quickly. |
Top-down, individual decision-making by the manager; accepted quickly, implemented slowly. |
Attitude of employees towards the company and work |
Lifetime employment, moving to another company is considered an unethical act. The main motives of employee behavior are characterized by socio-psychological factors (a sense of belonging to a team, etc.). |
Short-term hiring, frequent job changes depending on material benefits. The main motive is economic factors (money). |
Character carrying out innovation |
Evolutionary way |
Revolutionary way |
Form of business relationship |
Personal contacts based on mutual trust |
Contracts |
Management is carried out in a certain social context, which directly affects its character. It is obvious that national or continental cultures have different approaches to management. Many of the American and Japanese scientific concepts are very productive.
Management schools in the USA and Japan are currently leading in the world and are considered in other countries as a kind of standard for management development.
There are certain similarities between them:
they focus on enhancing the human factor (using, however, various forms and methods), constant innovation, and the disaggregation of large enterprises;
they focus on the development and implementation of long-term strategic plans for the development of the enterprise.
At the same time, despite the external similarity, these two models have features determined by the specifics of their socio-economic development.
The first difference between the models lies in the attitude of public consciousness. The basis of the American system of government is the principle of individualism.
That is, the understanding that managers are, first of all, individuals who have certain interests and their own opinions about personal needs.
In the USA, the emphasis is on a bright personality who can improve the organization's activities. Japan is characterized by a traditional orientation of social consciousness towards collectivism. Managers focus on the group and the organization as a whole. In Japan, the employee's personal merits are fully attributed to the merits of the company (although this is now changing), which is not the case in the United States.
The methods of decision making in the American and Japanese models of organizational management are also different:
In Japanese companies, no one would think of challenging the boss’s decision after the decision has been made. But until this moment, due to collegiality, managers hold meetings with their subordinates, at which they can discuss the proposal and criticize it. The Japanese have the time and opportunity to convince management that an idea is right or wrong. But after the decision has been made, whether you were for it or against it, you must carry out this decision.
In large corporations with American management, the corporate structure “pushes” unique people to the top who are ready to take responsibility and risk, since there is no one to consult with. At every level, they have the final say. Even without being geniuses, they accumulate decision-making experience, since the final decision is always made by the leader.
When the head of a company is weak in himself, then collegiality plays its positive role, then one can hope for the stability of the system. And the structure of Japanese corporations is stable. Moreover, it is stable in relation to the personal qualities of each specific manager. For example, a person received a specific position for which he does not quite fit, and then the collegial system will help him. It's not even about him - the main thing is that the system will survive. Unfortunately, there is also a negative aspect to this, since a lot of time is spent on all kinds of meetings. Until the solution becomes obvious to everyone, it will be sucked in. This is one of the reasons why Japanese work so long. As you know, in Japan they work on Saturdays and even Sundays. The effectiveness of time use must be assessed by results.
Achievement is measured by individual (in the US) or collective (in Japan) performance.
In American companies, responsibility for failure lies with the person who failed to complete the task. In Japanese companies, responsibility is collective. They will never allow themselves to let the group down, otherwise they will “lose face” in front of their colleagues.
As for control, Japanese firms also exercise collective control and it is informal. In America, the manager personally controls the actions of his subordinates, and the control structure is strictly formalized.
Representative of the GENERAL company in Russia: “Russian companies often make one mistake - they do not give any authority to their employees, but try to ask them strictly. This is quite common in Russia. But in Japan, it’s the other way around, where the employee is given great powers, and as long as the employee does everything normally, fulfills the plan, there is no demand from him at all. That is, he can do everything as he sees fit. They begin to call him on the carpet only when problems begin with the implementation of the plan.
And in this case they ask: “What are you doing, how are you doing it?” This is the fundamental difference.”
In American companies, there are strict management structures with certain functions, there is a strict delineation of responsibilities, and a strict job description. A step to the right, a step to the left is not welcomed by management. And vice versa, if they suddenly start demanding something from you beyond the norm, then you can refuse or ask for a review of the working conditions in order to formalize it.
In Japan, more flexible management structures are used, created and eliminated as specific tasks are completed. In Japanese companies, this situation is played out differently.
A soft transformation may occur when some of the employee’s responsibilities are taken away or, conversely, something is added. Moreover, this does not correlate with salary or bonuses. Of course, a certain level of wages, which is correlated and aligned with the market, depends on your responsibilities and how you work.
Relationship between leader and subordinate. In Japan they are informal. In the USA, there are formal relationships with subordinates.
The goals of the company are individual for different companies, but a general trend can be traced in America and Japan. In the USA, this is the growth of the company's profits and dividends to individual investors; in the Japanese management model, it is ensuring the growth of profits and the welfare of all employees of the company.
Recruitment and personnel policy. The Japanese model of organization management widely uses the labor of university and school graduates, retraining and training within the company, on the job. Japanese companies pay for training. The content of the work changes as the transition to the production of new products and the use of new technology occurs, so retraining is necessary. New hires typically attend lectures and receive on-the-job training. The most important task is to instill the corporate philosophy and technical skills.
The duration of training varies from company to company, but most often ranges from three to eight months.
In America, workers are hired on the labor market through a network of universities, business schools, etc. The focus is on an individual, personal career.
Regarding remuneration and promotion in the models we are considering, enterprises have different policies. In Japanese, this is, of course, promotion based on length of service and pay depending on age and length of service in the company (the so-called equalizing salary).
Organization of production and labor. In Japan, the following principles apply on this issue: the main attention is paid to the workshop - the lower level of production; a “just in time” (Kanban) system is used without creating inventories and interoperational backlogs. The work of quality groups (circles) and the implementation of strict quality control at all stages of the production process by all employees of the company.
Responsibilities between employees are not strictly distributed, as already mentioned; employees perform different types of work depending on the situation; The motto is “act according to the situation.”
In the USA, the focus is not on production, but on adaptation to the external environment. Employees act on the basis of strict execution of job descriptions. Pay rates are strictly determined depending on the position, work performed and qualifications.
Salaries are set in accordance with supply and demand in the labor market.
Recently, American corporations have begun to introduce innovations that have led Japanese firms to significant success. However, not all management methods used in Japan take root on American soil. This refers to the system of long-term or “lifelong employment” of workers, the formation of funds to meet the needs of workers through deductions from the profits of the company, etc.
Stimulating employees. In Japan, if the financial situation is favorable, bonuses are paid twice a year (two to three months' salary each time). Payments and benefits are provided from social funds: partial or full payment for housing, expenses for medical insurance and services, contributions to pension funds, transportation to work by company transport, organization of collective recreation, etc.
In America, employee incentives are significantly lower than in Japan, although the income of the president of a large American corporation is on average three times higher than that of the president of a Japanese company.
Each of the organizational management models we have considered has its pros and cons for a particular culture, a particular country. It is impossible to transfer one management model to the economy of another country without taking into account its specific conditions and, above all, psychological and socio-cultural factors.
Conclusion
1) American management has made significant contributions to the theory and practice of management. Experience in management and planning in US firms and corporations, taking into account specific conditions and specifics, can be used in practice in large Russian holdings, corporations and joint-stock companies.
2) The Japanese management model also significantly influenced the theory and practice of management. Firstly, it is a set of forms and methods of personnel management used in leading Japanese companies and ensuring increased productivity of hired personnel. This is the hiring system, remuneration, incentive system and methods, professional training and advanced training; secondly, the methodology and practice of making and implementing management decisions; thirdly, a system of organizational and managerial measures used to increase labor productivity, production efficiency and product quality. Japanese managers have developed a specific management mechanism that makes more active use of the “human factor” in management, directing the hidden creative capabilities of employees to maximize profits.
3) Currently, a new Russian model of economic management is being formed, and each of its success or failure affects the standard of living of the population. New terms and a new understanding of the role of those involved in management are being formed. In other words, the image of a modern entrepreneur is beginning to take shape - a person who owns property, uses hired labor, and takes on the functions of strategic management in order to obtain maximum profit. A new type of leader must rely on universal ethical values, master theory, technology and the art of influencing people around him, and be open to innovation and everything new.
Bibliography:
Imai M. - Kaizen: the key to the success of Japanese companies / Moscow 2006.
Kuritsyn A.N. - Secrets of effective work: experience of the USA and Japan / Moscow, 2001.
Dokuchaev M.V. - ECO // Problems of corporate governance in the USA, 2004 N1.
Klyuchko V.N. - Management in Russia and abroad // Corporate governance in Japan: features, models and development trends, 2006 N2.
Yurlov S., Levitsky P., Bregadze K. - The art of management // Seven “samurai”, 2004 N4-5.
TABLE 1 - COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF MANAGEMENT MODELS
Comparison criterion |
American management model |
Japanese management model |
German (European) management model | |
States using the model |
USA, UK |
Japan |
Germany, Netherlands, Canada, Australia, France, Belgium | |
General characteristics |
A significant number of individual shareholders, independent and not related to the company's activities. The developed legislative framework determines the rights and obligations of participants |
A significant number of banks and companies are among the corporation's shareholders. |
Banks participate as long-term shareholders and representatives are elected to the board of directors. Bank financing is preferable to equity financing. | |
Key participants |
Managers, directors, shareholders, exchanges, government |
Key bank and financial-industrial network, board, government |
Banks, corporations | |
Shareholding structure |
Institutional investors (USA - 60%, UK - 65%), individual investors - 20% |
Insurance companies - 50%, foreign investors - 5%, corporations - 25%. |
Banks - 30%, corporations - 45%, pension funds - 3%, individual shareholders - 4% | |
Representation in management (board of directors) |
Insiders (persons working for the company or closely associated with it) Outsiders (persons not directly associated with the corporation) Number from 13 to 15 people. |
Entirely from internal participants. The state may name its representative. |
Number - up to 50 people. | |
Bicameral board of directors: supervisory board (representatives of workers and shareholders) and board. The number of members of the supervisory board from 9 to 20 people is established by law. |
Information transparency requirements |
Quarterly report, annual report, including information about directors, the number of shares they hold, salaries, information about shareholders owning more than 5% of shares, information and mergers and acquisitions. |
A semi-annual report providing information on the capital structure, board of directors, information on proposed mergers, amendments to the charter. The corporation's 10 largest shareholders are reported. | |
Semi-annual report showing capital structure, shareholders with 5% or more shares, information on possible mergers and acquisitions. |
Election of directors, appointment of auditors, issue of shares, mergers, acquisitions, amendments to the charter. |
Payment of dividends, election of directors, amendments to the charter, mergers, acquisitions. |
Distribution of income, ratification of decisions of the supervisory board and the board, elections of the supervisory board | |
Relationships and interests of participants |
Shareholders may exercise their voting rights by mail or proxy without being present at the shareholders meeting. |
Corporations are interested in long-term and affiliated shareholders. Annual meetings of shareholders are formal in nature. |
Most German corporation shares are bearer shares. Banks, with the consent of shareholders, dispose of votes at their own discretion. There is no possibility of absentee voting, mandatory presence of the shareholder at the meeting or transfer of this right to the bank. |
TABLE 2 - COMPARISON OF AMERICAN AND JAPANESE MANAGEMENT MODELS
Japanese management model |
American management model | |
1. Management decisions are made collectively. 2. Collective responsibility. 3. Non-standard, flexible management structure. 4. Informal organization of control. 5. Collective control. 6. Slow employee performance evaluation and career growth. 7. The main quality of a leader is the ability to coordinate actions and control. 8. Orientation of actions towards the group. 9. Assessment of management to achieve harmony in the team and collective results. 10. Personal informal relationships with subordinates. 11. Promotion based on seniority and length of service. 12. Training of universal type managers. 13. Remuneration based on group performance and length of service. 14. Long-term employment of the manager in the company. |
1. Individual nature of decision making. 2. Individual responsibility. 3. Strictly formalized management structure. 4. A clearly formalized control procedure. 5. Individual control 6. Quick assessment of work results, accelerated promotion. 7. The main quality of a leader is professionalism and initiative. 8. Orientation of management towards the individual. 9. Management assessment based on individual results. 10. Formal relations with subordinates. 11. Business career is determined by personal results. 12. Highly specialized managers. 13. Remuneration based on individual achievements. 14. Hiring for a short period. |
TABLE 3 The main characteristics of the status of a group in the management system and their use in various cultures of the national economy
Group work as a goal |
Group work as a means |
Way of life |
The path to rationalization |
Natural behavior |
Implemented Behavior |
Habit |
Consciousness |
Efficiency |
Performance |
Quality and/or way to do better |
A way to do it cheaper |
Sugray L.A., 14 in his article “Modern management and national traditions” says that the Japanese created their system in the 19th century, looking at the USA and Europe, and built capitalism that was not based on Western ideology. They played to their strengths - a high savings rate, an elite government bureaucracy, a partnership system of business relations and a socially homogeneous society. In addition, they developed traditional views that prioritize personal relationships and mutual obligations over rights. The peculiarity is that Americans perceive the state as an obstacle to the development of their own business, while the Japanese work side by side with the state. The government in Japan plays a more active role in relation to the private sector than in the United States.
The Japanese and American management models are significantly different from each other, they have opposite features, principles, etc. For a better understanding of this topic, I made a comparative analysis of these two areas.
Japanese control system |
American management system |
The focus is on the organization and the group |
The bet is on a bright personality |
Based on the principle of collectivism |
Based on the principle of individualism |
Flexible structure |
Rigid structure |
The main socio-psychological factor |
Main economic factor |
A sense of internal duty and subordination of one’s interests to the team prevails |
Moral and psychological prohibitions prevail |
Staff is the highest value |
In case of a crisis, some staff are fired |
Employees, in addition to their functional responsibilities, try to do the most useful for the organization |
Employees perform directly their functional duties |
Lifetime employment |
Change jobs every few years (contract basis) |
Making decisions based on consensus |
Decision making is individual |
Responsibility is collective |
Responsibility is individual |
Flexible management |
Formal management |
Collective control |
Individual control of the manager |
Softinformalized control |
Strict control procedure |
Slow career growth |
Fast career growth |
The manager must coordinate actions and control |
Professionalism and initiative are valued in a leader |
The effectiveness of activities (achievements) is of a collective nature |
The effectiveness of activities (achievements) is individual in nature |
Informal relationships with subordinates |
Formal relations with subordinates |
Career growth based on length of service, age (horizontal) |
Career growth based on personal achievements (vertical) |
General working principle “Bottom-Up” |
General principle of work “Top-Down” |
Fuzzy boundaries of powers and responsibilities |
Clear boundaries of powers and responsibilities |
Continuous professional development without interruption from production |
Periodic off-the-job training |
Universal leaders |
Highly specialized managers |
Group orientation |
People-oriented |
Another major difference lies in the management organization itself. In American enterprises, official and production responsibilities are strictly delineated, and their use is controlled by a superior person, so workers and employees are aware of a limited range of issues, the implementation of which they are entrusted with. At Japanese enterprises, responsibility for many important issues of production activity rests with personnel who constantly improve their skills. Thus, management in the USA is “hierarchical”, while in Japan it is “universal”.
At present, as Kurbanov R.V. notes, 8 in his article “On the mutual influence and interpenetration of national management models (using the example of the USA and Japan)” at the time of general processes of integration of the World economy, the mutual influence of the economies of different countries is so strong that it is possible talk about the ever-accelerating process of convergence of national management models. Moreover, Japanese and American management models actually have much in common. Both of them use, in essence, the experience of IBM Corporation, starting from the post-war period. We must not lose sight of labor laws, antitrust laws, models of demilitarization and democratization of Japanese society, imposed on Japan by the United States after its defeat in World War II. They largely determined and conditioned the most important features of today's Japanese management system, putting pressure on the system of lifelong employment and paternalism.
An interesting point is that Japanese companies that enter the American market do not introduce their principles, features, and management rules, but adapt them to the requirements typical of typical American employees. Those companies that are joint ventures between Japan and America have an American management style with minimal innovations and the introduction of features of the Japanese management model into the personnel management process. In addition, there are many companies in the United States that were formed in American conditions, but nevertheless have many of the characteristic features of Japanese companies.
Like Japanese firms, these companies tend to employ people for very long periods of time, sometimes for life, although this is not officially mentioned anywhere. Often, this is due to the nature of the company’s activities, where skills and abilities come only with experience, assessment of business qualities takes a long time, promotion is slow, and therefore lifelong hiring is relevant here. In such companies, as in Japanese firms, employees “travel” from department to department during their working lives, performing a variety of functions.
Thus, a comparative analysis of two management models - Japanese and American - shows that the role of management largely depends on psychological and socio-cultural factors that are specific to each country.