Metaphors of Nissan
The public picture is shown a “family” image of Nissan, however this is not a realistic picture as the workers are motivated by force and the workers feel no personal involvement (there is no sense of warmth, no shared humanity). The organisation has become restricted by an image of false pretence, which is described by Gareth Morgan as “Psychic Prisons”. Due to the oppression of freedom of speech, the management and union are unaware of the root of personal issues of the workers and this may in future result in more dramatic rebellion such as strikes and in the long term create a loss for the company. Due to the mechanical operation of the company with a classical approach to management (Taylorism) there is also a great evidence of the Nissan organisation as a “Machine” (Gareth Morgan). There is a constant search for efficiency through the quality circles. Often experimenting in micro-motion study, as developed by Frank B. Gilbert (first we work one machine with our left hand, then another with the right; then we put one machine in front and another behind and work them simultaneously). This results in workers being homogeneous and destroying their individuality.
Union V’s Management
Looking at it from a “Unitarist” perspective, Nissan has a “Unitarist” approach. In the 50’s there was a change in the type of unions, from an independent union to a company union, which resulted in the unions working in the interest of management rather than the workers. The decisions became politically driven rather than based on logical decisions, as each strive to become the central power source (power culture). Decisions, which are in a usual case the responsibility of management, is often made by the union and when prevented from doing so, this has proven to be a case for revenge (in one case shutting down the Oppama assembly line for a week). Although initially there was a positive co-operation between management and the union, this begins to crumble (lately the intimate relationship between Nissan’s management and its union has become under strain). Fraser has acknowledged the consequences of such a union, and attempts to improve this were shunned by the Japanese labour leaders (told him-diplomatically–to mind his own business).
There is evidence of both Participant and Autocratic Management styles (Rensis Likert). Nissan shows evidence of Participant Management, through quality circles. Workers constantly strive for improvement of quality and efficiency, however Nissan is autocratic in that the management/union make final decisions based on the progress of the company without taking the welfare of the workers into account and the workers are committed to the organisation’s goals (Mayo). This in turn creates a feeling of hostility and discontent that does not appear on the surface, and there is evidence of more dependence and less individuality (White & Lippitt)
Kick the Dog Motivation
The main form of motivation within Nissan is forced (monitoring workers performance and attitudes, punishing dissent and boosting workers output). Although higher needs are being met, lower needs are being neglected (Maslow). Management is responsible for setting the objectives of the company to increase team performance (Richard Hackman), through quality circles, however punishment is the main form of motivation within Nissan (if you complain you loose), this in turn creates paranoia (I follow him ten paces behind). The results of this regimentation and forced motivation have had drastic consequences in the respect of the workers welfare, which includes a feeling of resentment (I won’t sell my soul). Through this forced method of motivation, health and safety issues are disregarded (a worker in tennis shoes and a baseball cap), to such an extent that an attempt of efficiency once resulted in a death.
There is a lack of communication flow between management/union and the workers, and although initially there was a communication flow between management and the union decision making has now been “limited to wage negotiations”. Although the quality circles enable input of the workers, the information is limited as the workers live in constant fear of punishment and therefore only express what would achieve the management’s objectives. Although these restrictions result in final decisions being made by management (Kaisern) the workers have been neglecting heath and safety to “risk their lives for the sake of production”. This has resulted in a slow movement of information due to the hierarchy and bureaucracy involved (machine bureaucracy) and the information given to the public is limited.
Suggestion for improvements in Management practice
The working conditions at Nissan are seen as unfavourable, as these include low wages “even by Japanese standards”, discrimination, critical heath and safety conditions within hostile conditions, punishment and instigated harassment or intimidation. Although the Workforce is motivated and is loyal it is done through forced motivation. The management have achieved a positive public picture through oppressing opponents views, increasing productivity and profits and providing workers with accommodation, job security and wage increases (for those that conform), however the way in which this is achieved is negative. This in turn may contribute to a future rebellion. This was first evident in the 60’s when students “brought demands for democracy into the factory”. Although unsuccessful at the time, new and more underground techniques are being used (underground newspaper but prints just 15 copies). Controlled by Nissan to a certain extent, by fear of discovery resulting in punishment and where union members attacked and hospitalised seven ex-workers of Nissan whilst distributing leaflets.
To improve the situation at Nissan, I would suggest various changes within the company. Most importantly is that the union is given less power and is divided from management. The management should be made responsible for increasing productivity and this should be complemented by the presence of a union that works in the interest of the workers thus meeting the higher needs of the workers (Herzberg). This would result in improved working conditions, less fear and paranoia on the workers part and reduce the hostility felt, therefore increasing the participation of a more realistic “Nissan Family”.
A further change may be made by removing the artificial status barriers to create a more realistic form of “harmonisation” and to restructure the work to allow individuals to undertake more meaningful roles and encourage greater individual responsibility for work, environment and health & safety.
Communication must also be improved upon in all directions, creating a more appropriate method of a “wheel communication”, without fear of being denigrated and by informing management of any suggested changes to be implemented which will reduce the risk of health and safety issues.
Wheel style communication
Further solutions could involve strategies suggested by Bernard Taylor. These would include stretching the goals, using strategies that are beneficial to all, and line managers must be given a structure to take change and be made accountable (lean organisation). Creating a new culture within the organisation, would be beneficial and a more appropriate culture would be a role culture, where the rules are made official, but excepting a certain degree of disorder (total innovation). In the sense of working cultures, the positives of eastern and western strategies could be combined, taking the Japanese time management and effective production, with a western union. A more structured performance management is required, to enable a sufficient increase of wages, depending not just on performance of individuals, but also taking into account the company success and disallowing dangerous situations through company policies which should be implemented. This would ensure that decision making is more efficient, which in turn will improve upon workers conditions and communication between all members of the company.
There are however certain possible limitations and restrictions to such changes. The Japanese culture/structure may prove difficult to implement, due to conservative views of management and the unions. Changes are most successful when seen as positive for all members of the company, and if the changes result in disagreement and conflict, this may prove to be time consuming to correct.
Bibliography
- Dave Beale, Driven by Datsun, Lawrence & Wishart, 1994
- Peter Wickens, The road to Nissan, Macmillan, 1992
- Gatley et al, Comparative Management, McGraw-Hill, 1996
- David Buchanan & Andrzej Huczynski, Organizational behaviour
- Gareth Morgan, Images of Organization, the executive edition, sage, 1998
- Carol Kennedy, Guide to the Management Gurus, Century, 1998
- G. A. Cole, Management Theory and Practice, third edition, DP Publications Ltd, 1991