Because of the success of Japanese companies in Japan, many American companies have implemented a Japanese system of human resource management. By copying Japan, they hope to increase productivity and worker satisfaction. Although a few companies in America have been successful, many companies are finding problems transferring the Japanese style. In the future, I expect an immediate increase in the number of American firms using Japanese style because of its initial appealing nature; however, because of great cultural differences, this style will not succeed in the long run, and a decrease will follow.

At first glance, it may appear that the Japanese style team concept allows for a better, more involved work environment. In the auto industry, teams in Japan have proven to provide a sense of loyalty and pride to the company because workers feel the power of peer pressure rather than a direct form of management. Team members can help others get out of trouble if they get behind and they rotate jobs in order to decrease monotony. Though all of this may sound great, American social barriers often stand in the way of making the team concept a complete success in the United States.

For example, if one team member seems to have more trouble keeping up in a factory system, other members of this team may have feelings of resentment toward that particular worker. Japanese policy also includes a strict absenteeism policy that increases pressure from team members. If a team member is out, usually the team leader must take his or her place, creating greater strains on those who may need the team leader’s assistance. Japanese cultural traits, such as homogeneity, familism, and loyalty reduce these feelings in Japan. Though teams may create an initial good feeling in America, cultural conditions and expectations will prevent its long-term success.

A popular component of the Japanese system is the principle of kaizen, which means continuous improvement and the reduction of waste. To most companies, this practice sounds ideal because it results in higher productivity and less wasted time. The product and service will constantly be improved as changes are made. Yet there is a side of kaizen that makes it difficult to implement in American societies: kaizen puts an enormous amount of stress and pressure on workers and the organization. The constant push for efficiency can result in the loss of individuality, which occurs because the worker is unable to socialize with those around and there is no room for creativity.

In order for everything to get done at high quality, workers must often work very long hours. Employees are sometimes required to work overtime on extremely short notice, which can result in feelings of anger toward the company. Americans tend to want to keep work separate from family life, and unexpected overtime could take away from family plans. Though kaizen is beneficial to the company, it does not take into account the feelings of the individual, which is important to most Americans.

Seniority and job security are also important aspects of the Japanese system. Workers in Japan go into a job knowing that their elders will have the better positions. If they perform well, their chance for seniority will come along later, as they will probably still be with the same company because of great job security. Japan is able to offer this security because the companies obtain guarantees from banks. In America, companies rely heavily on the stock market, which is highly variable and provides little security, resulting in heavy layoffs.

Also, use of the Japanese seniority system would likely cause young college graduates in America to feel tension toward elders because as recent graduates, they feel that they have the competitive edge, knowing the best new, efficient ways to run businesses. Despite this system’s overwhelming success in Japan, cultural differences will produce a barrier preventing the achievement of the Japanese system in America.

Although the complete implementation of Japanese style management and human relations would likely be unsuccessful in America because of cultural differences, certain aspects of it may contribute to America’s future success in world competition. The transfer of some Japanese aspects, such as worker participation in decision making, would likely provide some improvement to American firms without disturbing cultural traditions.

Yet other aspects will be less likely to transfer; for example long-term loyalty, because Americans like to be happy at work. Those who are unsatisfied will willingly switch jobs to achieve happiness. Perhaps the answer to the debate over the transferability of the Japanese system is to implement only the ideas that mesh well with American culture. Even if an increase in the use of the entire system occurs initially, it is likely that upon realization of cultural differences, its use will decrease greatly in the distant future.

RESOURCES

Berggren, Christian. "Lean Production-- The End of History?" Work, Employment, and Society, Vol. 7, No. 2 (June 1993): 163-188.

Brown, Clair, and Michael Reich. "When Does Union Management Cooperation Work? A Look at NUMMI and GM-Van Nuys." California Management Review, Vol. 31, No. 4, (Summer 1989): 26-44.

Chinoy, Eli. "On the Line." Automobile Workers and the American Dream. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press, 1992: 135-152.

Dedoussis, Vagelis. "Simply a Question of Cultural Barriers? The Search for New Perspectives in the transfer of Japanese Management Practices." Journal of Management Studies, Vol.32, No. 6 (Nov. 1995): 731-746.

Graham, Laurie. "Inside a Japanese Transplant: A Critical Perspective." Work and Occupations, Vol. 20, No. 2 (May 1993): 147-173.

Kaizen. 1998. The Kaizen Institute. (http://www.kaizen-institue.com).

Kinney, Martin, and Richard Florida. "Transplant Industries: Autos and Electronics." Journal of Management Studies, Vol. 32, No. 6 (Nov. 1995): 789-803.

Rehder, Robert, and Marta Medaris Smith. "NUMMI: Teamwork in Action." New Management, Vol. 4, No. 2 (Fall, 1986): 47-49.

Wagner, Tom. "Toyota’s Okuda on Catching up With Ford." Business Week Jun 15 1998: 58.