American and Japanese style of management by Aijaz Aryan

1. Comparative Analysis Of
American And Japanese Style of
Management

2. Theory z is an approach based upon a combination of American and Japanese
management philosophies.
 Development of Theory z :
 In the 1970s and 1980s, many United States industries lost market share to
international competitors, particularly Japanese companies. Concerns about the
competitiveness of U. S. companies led some to examine Japanese management
practices for clues to the success enjoyed by many of their industries. This led to
many articles and books purporting to explain the success of Japanese companies. It
was in this atmosphere that Theory Z was introduced into the management lexicon.

3.  Theory z represents a humanistic approach to management. It is a
hybrid approach combining Japanese philosphies with US culture.
According to professor Ouchi theory Z organisations exhibit a strong
homogeneous set of cultural values that are similar to clan structure.
Clan structure is characterized by homogeneity of values, beliefs,
and objectives.

4.  It is based on ouchi’s theory Z approach.
1. Job security
2. Trust
3. Decision-Taking
4. Teamwork
5. Motivation and Target Setting

5.  Long term employment
 Consensual decision making
 Individual responsibility
 Slow evaluation and promotion
 Informal control with formalized measures
 Moderately specialized carrier path
 Holistic concern

6.  It has a mixed result. Some studies suggest that type Z organization
achieve benefits both in terms of employ satisfaction, motivation and
commitment as well as in terms of financial performance. Other
studies conclude that type Z organizations do not outperform other
organizations.

7. American Japanese
 PLANNING
• Primarily short term Primarily long term
orientation orientation
• Individual decision making collective decision making
• Decision flow from top to Decision flows upward
bottom and backward
• Fast decision making but slow decision making but
Slow implementation fast implementation

8.  ORGANISING
 American Japanese
 Individual responsibility Collective responsibility
 Emphasis on formal structure Emphasis on informal structure
 Common organisation culture Common organisation culture
lacking
 Organizational change by external Organizational change by internal
change agents change agents

9.  STAFFING
 American Japanese
 Short term employment Life long employment
 Rapid upward movement Slow upward movement
 Professionalism Loyalty to the organisation
 Specialized career General career
 Rewards based on individual Rewards based on group
performance
performance
 Substantial difference in pay Small difference in pay increase
increase

10.  American Japanese
 Individual motivation Group motivation
 Seperation of working and private Confluence of working and
private
life life
 Leader as a decision maker Leader as a group facilitator
 Top down communication Bottom up communication
 Emphasis on written communication Emphasis on face to face
communication
DIRECTING

11.  American Japanese
 Control by supervisor Control by peers
 Control of individual performance Control of group
performance
 Limited use quality control circle Extensive use of quality
control
circle
CONTROLLING

12. The typical Chinese management style can be summarized as parental
style of management.
 In China, the ideal boss is a “benevolent father”. He is a parent who
supervises his children on everything that need to be done. He
believes in discipline and attention to details and manages his
people at a micro level. He also spends lots of time caring for the
personal welfare of his employees and regards it as part of his job.

13.  PROS:
The Chinese style can be very efficient in carrying out critical
missions and get quick results. The direction is set at the top and role
of the employee is simply to execute. This saves time in negotiating
and brain storming.

14.  CONS:
The Chinese style generally discourages two-way communication and
ownership at the lower level coupling this with the group-oriented chinese
culture where goals and rewards are managed as a group versus
individuals, accountability can get fairly blurry. The parental style can also
used to “micro-managing” and can harbor di-motivation. Western
employees may feel that they are not fully trusted to manage their own
work.

15. Aijaz Ahmed Rather
I.K Gujral P.T University