Японистика в България :: The Features of Japanese Management

Постинг

Обратно към блога | Предишен постинг | Следващ постинг

20.03.2009 18:12 - The Features of Japanese Management

Автор: bgjapanology Категория: Технологии

Прочетен: 734633 Коментари: 185 Гласове:

Dr. Nako Stefanov, Ph.D.

The implementation of modern management approaches is one of the decisive factors for winning competitive advantage in the current conditions of aggravating competition. The problem is what is the modern now in the field of business management. By our opinion the highest point here are so-called total systems. It means Total Quality Management, Total Productive Maintenance, Total Cost Down and Just in Time systems.

We witness the gradual global consolidation of these kinds of systems at world level. All they represent the Japanese management style. This style was created on the base of the experience of leading Japanese companies. The achievements of these companies provoked interest to the above-mentioned Total SYSTEMS.

Japanese management provokes us to characterise its distinctiveness and to interpret its success. Study of Japanese management is concerned with what is distinctive, and what is transferable. Because that the discussions are predominantly comparative. There are sceptics, who argue that the features of Japanese management had no relevance outside Japan and there is not possible to assimilate abroad since they originated in and reflected a profoundly different island society at the very edge of Asia.

But from organisation point of view it is possible to say that in Japanese management there are much more points, which are directed toward management rather than toward more general cultural or social issues. The latest practice in many countries from the East to the West, from South Korea to USA, where were introduced many methods, mechanisms, and approaches, born by Japanese management system, is bearing testimony to this argument.

In this field the experience, accumulated in the world, is of considerable significance. But such significance will be out of practical meaning without accurate catching of the essence of the situation in organizations throughout the world, as well as the leading tendencies in world management dynamic. Carrying out the task of successful implementation of the best practice in the world needs working conception, grounded on the benchmarking approach. Below I’d like to introduce kind of such conception, which is called “Conception of Management Dynamic – The Theory of the Management Revolutions”.

Management Dynamic and Japanese Management

Civilisations and Economic Organisation – First Steps

From the view of technological, socio-economic and cultural changes it is possible to talk about two great civilizations in mankind history and the emerging now of third civilization. The first one was the Agrarian civilization, the second is the Industrial civilization. Now the emerging third is the Post Industrial or Information civilization.

Keeping in mind that leading role for the development of each civilizations plays the economic organization let’s look at the type of inner-organizational relationships, which at most are interrelationships between the man, who manages the work in the organization and those, who execute the work. This kind of interrelationship we call “Model of management”(MM). From such point of view we have to say that in the time of the Agrarian civilization emerged two types of “MM”. The first one is the “Traditional MM”. The very essence of the “Traditional MM” is in the fact that the relationships are based on kinship, i.e. this is the family organization of work. The motivation for achievement of the organizational goals comes in natural way in this organization.

The second type is the “Management of the Direct Control”. Because of the simplicity of the work and the small organizational “volume” it is possible to control the work and those, who are executing it, by the means of direct observation and control. In such way the executing of the work is keeping at necessary level. Long time these two types of “MM” were sufficient for the progress of the mankind. The problems arose with the entering into the Industrial civilization. At first when the industrial organizations were still small it was possible to manage the work by the “Management of the Direct Control Model”. But when the big industrial organizations came into existence the situation changed.

The Organisation of Command-control structure (OCCS)

The kind of “Model of Management”, which was created at the time of emergence of the big industrial organizations (i.e. the first step or stage of management dynamic), is characterized by the following:

(1) Great organizational “volume”, multilayer managerial hierarchy and broad system of division of labor;

(2) But because of the non-systematic way of executing the management work there is low trace-ability of the organizational processes, especially in the case of individual work;

(3) Therefore the employee received compensation not for work done, i.e. according to the contribution to the organization, but according to the position, qualification and length of service, or as in the case of the blue collars according quantity of pieces or worked out days. As a result emerged so-called structure-differentiated leveling (SDL);

(4) Because the above-mentioned leveling the employees are not motivated to exert the maximum efforts in work. They know very well that more efforts do not mean more money or some other benefits.

(5) Since there are problems with motivation of the people, who execute the work, the easiest way is the implementation of so-called “Negative approach”, which became basic approach for managing the employees. According this approach if the employee demonstrates excellent achievement, because the lack of performance evaluation, as a rule this achievement will not be recognized and there will be not additional compensation. But if the performance is lower than some impalpable understanding of adequate performance level, there will be sanction in the form of lowering the compensation. So the employees are motivated to be not below this impalpable level.

(6) As a final result of the Negative approach so-called organizational culture of excuse is created. According to the unofficial rules of this culture the employees do not take risk at working place. They prefer not to solve the problems at working place, because to take solving the problem means to take risk. They more often prefer to excuse themselves that they have no relation to these problems.

All aspects of working life and work processes are influenced and dependent on this basic management system. Because that OCCS uses no more then 25-35% of the potential of it’s employees. The shortcomings of OCCS created the necessity of searching ways for improving the situation.

The Classical American Management or the Model of First Management Revolution

It is well known that F. W. TAYLOR made the first biggest step in the field of overcoming the stage of functioning of the organization as OCCS in USA. The essence of Taylor’s approach was the creation of so-called “Labor/Work/ Standard”. It means:

(1) Quantity and quality aspects of the work;

(2) Standard time;

(3) Standard method.

On the base of Labour standard became possible to measure, i.e. to evaluate

the performance of those, who execute the work. As a result it becomes possible to override the status-differentiated leveling in the company and to pay according not only to quantity, but also to quality, etc. From this point of view it has to be said that a base for higher motivation, was created. The situation at the working places changed. For the managers and for those, who execute the work, the common goals of increasing the achievement, the goals to attain the organizational aims emerged.

Later the nucleus of Taylor conception of Scientific management, i.e. the Work or Labor standard was developed further. Now it includes not only qualitative and quantitative aspects of one’s work, standard time and standard method, but also standard cost and standard safety. WS is used not only as basic criterion for evaluation of the work of the employees in manufacturing industry, but also in service. Key feature of Work standard is the measurement of the output, i.e. the results of each employee’s work. Because that we can call this system “result oriented”.

In conclusion we have to say that Taylor’s system became a base for the establishment of the model of the Classical American Management. The very fact, that this model ensures higher level of motivation of the mass of the people, who work in the companies, in comparison with the OCCS, determines it as Model of First Management Revolution. It is possible now to call it not only Classical American, but Classical Western model. Some-times it is called also “3-S” model from the words “simplification”, “standardization”, “specialization”. This type of Management Model uses 45-55% of the potential of the personnel involved.

The Japanese Management or the Model of Second Management Revolution

After W.W.II a new step was done in the field of the development of the economic organization. The priority belongs to Japan, which succeeded not only to copy the Classical American Management System, but also to create something new and more developed. It must be pointed out that in the late 40-s till the early 50-s the low organizational and manufacturing culture was serious problem for the Japanese companies. Among the Japanese firms in those days a phrase “yasukaroo, warukaroo”, i.e. “cheap, but bad”, concerning the quality of products, made by Japanese firms, was in broad circulation.

The first actions with the target of improving this situation were connected with the introduction of “Classical American Management”. American specialists like W. E. Deming and Dr. J. M. Juran were invited and the methods of statistical quality control were popularized. Through the Japanese Union of engineers and scientists (JUSE), created in 1946 and Japan Standardization association (1945) was fulfilled the forming of network, which unites the representatives of the practice (managers and entrepreneurs) and the representatives of the science in their efforts to improve at first the quality system.

But the massive introduction of western, especially American methods and systems was not enough for upgrading the competitiveness of Japanese export products, because the main market of Japanese industrial goods became the very competitive market of USA. The simple coping of foreign experience is very useful, but it is “two blade-sided knife”, because to copy means always to run after. From the middle of 50-s to the middle of 60-s in Japan began development of own conceptions and ways, represented by the “Total Quality Control System”. In that period the network of measures, structures and mechanisms oriented toward fulfillment of “Management revolution” on individual company’s level was in full work. We must not forgive the Role of Japan Productivity Centre, created in 1955, as well as other organizations. In every prefecture with the support of the state and local administrations experimental laboratories for quality control were established. It became possible for all companies to give their products for checking if they meet the requirements of Japan Industrial Standards (JIS). Various kinds of measures were fulfilled like control of export goods so that nothing to harm the image of the country on foreign markets.

As a result through this flexible network of various institutions, corporation etc. the Model of Japanese management was gradually established. It is created not by destroying the previous stage, i.e. the Classical American management, but is upgraded on it. In it’s very essence it is an integrated system, called in Japan “The System of 3-T”. The name comes from the first letter of the English words for:

(1) Total Quality Management;

(2) Total Productive Maintenance;

(3) Toyota System, i.e. the Japanese name for “Just in time system”.

Now it is possible to speak about 4 or even 5 T, because the including of such systems like Total Cost Down (Reduction) and Total Quality Environment. This model in certain sense has to be taken as opposite to the classical western model of the “3-S System”. Why? The total systems become possible thanks to a network of management approaches and organisational mechanisms. The key mechanisms and approaches are the following:

· Group approaches, fully expressed by the so-called Small group activities (SGA) and some other kind of groups. SGA means systematic activities of small groups in the frames of structural units, which deal with the problems in work. For example such kind of group are the famous Quality Circles. In practice this kind of activities becomes practical type of management participation;

· Pro-active management approach – it means management, which is oriented toward continuous improvement in the organisation as well as toward improvement of the interrelationships with other organisations;

· Positive approach –it means not emphasis on sanctions in case of some irregularities made by the employees, but accent on some kind of stimulation in case of excellent work and achievements. It is very well expressed by such slogan as “Ni-do to dasanai”, which means that for the first time the mistake is not considered mistake, but it has not happened for second time.

· Process-oriented approach, which means that the management is concerned not with the results as itself, but with the result as process, i.e. if you want good result you have to create good process ;

For better understanding the features, essence and meaning of Japanese management we will try to give the following explanation. The so-called “Organisational Man”, i.e. the man in an organisation has get three kind of potential as contribution to the achievement of organisational goals:

· Physical;

· Mental;

· Creative.

As a rule the first and the second potentials are limited in certain time

framework. The third one is without any limitations. Vice versa, as more the creative potential is used as more it is expanding and becoming biger and biger. It is possible to say that the strength of Japanese management is in it capability of using in full force the creative potential of the employees. This is the final result of all above-mentioned approaches like the group, the pro-active, the positive and the process approaches.Thank to all these approaches 80-90% of the potential of the personnel is used.

We have to say that this using of human creativity at work, so well done by the Japanese management, is a matter of great importance. This new approach toward the “Organisational Man” returns the real meaning of human labour, which was lost during the Development of Industrial Epoch in the framework of the big organisations. It creates new system of work motivation, unknown till the time of it’s implementation in the big organisations. From this point of view it is possible to determine the System, created by the Japanese Management as Model of the Second Management Revolution. It is necessary to point out that in spite of the fact that this Management Model was established in the framework of the indigenous national culture of Japan it main nucleus goes out of the natioanl framework of the country of the Rising Sun. Like it’s predecessor - the Classical American Management System the Model of the Japanese management has universal features, which are making it world possesion.

In the last reckoning the Japanese management means management actions on the base of the clear understanding of the organisation as human, not material phenomenon, which is the key for understanding its success.

Нагоре

Тагове: Management, japanese,

Гласувай:

Подобни постинги

edu management
Time management
Japanese Style of Firm Management – Begi...

Прочелите постинга прочетоха и:

Следващ постинг

Предишен постинг

Развитие и същност на Японския модел за фирмено управление.

Страдателният залог в съвременния японски език –

Коментари

1. анонимен - harms of masturbating
07.10.2011 09:10

WOW!!! Nice Post!Kind Regards