AMERICAN MANAGEMENT VS. JAPANESE MANAGEMENT

Dissimilarities. American Management (AM) highly differs from Japanese Management (JM).

©  AM reflects a formal and political model. This stresses that there is a hierarchical structure influenced by power and authority in their organizations. The one on the top is responsible for decision making and dictating the subordinates to follow what was ordered. Thus, decisions are made quickly and clearly but its implementation takes time. Hiring their employees is based on their field of expertise and their promotion is based on individual’s performance which results to job insecurity within the organization. There is also a frequent change of companies. AM is primarily short-term orientation. On the other hand, JM replicates collegial/subjective model. Japanese organization leaders tend to consult the body hence decision making is slow. But having consensus in preparing and making decisions results to fast implementations processes. The decision flow is from the bottom-to-top and back. There is a collective responsibility and accountability among the members of the organizations. Japanese workers have rotations of jobs within the company. Therefore, there is a slow promotion through ranks and evaluation of long-term performance is considered. Mostly in large companies, JM renders to its body a lifetime of employment thus training and professional development is also a long term investment. As a result, loyalty to the company is produced. Harmony is in the air for JM, there are no insecurities within the company because they are all managed equally. Furthermore, this management is for long term orientation.

Similarities. American Management (AM) has a handful of likeness to Japanese Management (JM).

©  These two management styles also have similarities. Both have goals, decision making processes and nature of structure. AM and JM’s goals are within their preferred future of their organization. In a management, processes such us negotiations and decision making are crucial that is why it can be lost. The nature of structure for the two kinds of managements is both have leaders who govern the organization.