So with all this change in the national culture, there must be huge reflection of that in the way things happen at the workplace. Just like the household, there is a huge emphasis on the hierarchy and the respect you are expected to show to someone on a higher level then you. I think the lack of initiative they are able to show has a negative effect on the confidence of some staff members which leads to them not being able to socialise very well. So they prefer to work by themselves rather than in groups (Sinha and Sinha 1990). The companies in India, as expected use an autocratic style of management as it is more formal and shows the difference in authority between staff members and managers. (Budhwar and khatri 2001). The limited amount of decision making leads to gaining a promotion very hard for staff members. This can be one of the explanations as to why a change in management will usually be between family members for e.g. a father and son.
In Japan, they have a very different type of culture. The Japanese culture has not changed as much as the Indian culture did. They have used the same culture since ancient times. As Japan has such an eventful history, different parts of Japan are now in cohesion, everyone tries to get along. The people of Japan all look at each other as equal no matter who they are or what they do. I believe this reflects onto the Japanese companies. The culture of Japan also promotes long term commitment. As people contain long term friendships, staff are expected to have long term commitment to the workplace. (Changing the Japanese way, bbc2). All of this cohesion and equality is reflected onto the workplace as ouchis theory z explains. When a decision is to be made in a Japanese company there is a huge meeting that takes place. It can involve up to sixty to eighty people. There is not just a meeting between the managers, everyone who will be affected by the decision has to be involved in the decision making process. In some companies, the newest and youngest members are given the chance by managers to figure out the best solutions. This gives everyone the chance to be shown that their opinion counts. In another area where Japanese belief in building good relationships takes place is when new employees join the workplace. They are welcomed to the workplace as family members and are told how valuable they will be. The company also lets them know that they want to help them develop their different skills. There is more of independence in Japanese companies. Teams are able to solve their own problems and make decision without always having to involve the higher level managers. This shows initiative and skilful behaviour. This increases the chances of promotion.
The cultures of India and Japan differ from the countries in the west such as Britain, Germany and France. In Germany and Britain the managerial styles are different. These two countries are less autocratic; they promote the use of team work. They encourage people to help others out. They try to build good relationships which they believe are healthy for the workplace. This in turn then leads to staff members being motivated to perform better then when they are de-motivated (hofstede, 1983). This is a huge difference to the country of India where there is no motivation delivered by the managers. They hardly interact with the staff members. In France there is a similar type of leadership to India where the managers expect staff to know who is in charge, they command respect from the staff and this lets the staff know they are strong leaders. I think Japan differs from all of these western countries in the sense that they help motivate if the staff are willing to commit long term. All three of the western countries promote individualism, this means the staff members are allowed to have their own personal ambitions. This is probably the biggest difference between the countries from Asia and the western countries. India doesn’t give the staff members any chance of being individualistic which does not give them the need to set themselves ambitions. In Japan everything is done for the company so I think that being ambitious goes against your commitment for the company. In Japan suicides have occurred due to people believing they have not been loyal to their employers. The last difference I have found between the countries from Asia and the western countries is that of the need for qualifications to get the managerial jobs. In India it’s almost impossible to get the managerial job unless you’re a family member. There is no chance in India to display your skills to at least the chance to be a manager. In Japan they do encourage the staff to be independent so this does give them a chance for promotion. For managerial jobs in Britain, Germany and France the skills you have are a huge factor. You need to be educated as well as have interpersonal skills for e.g. the ability to communicate well.
In conclusion, there is clear evidence that in India the culture of country has had a huge impact on the culture of different business. The countries culture promotes respecting your elders and superiors. This has lead to staff not being able to be creative as all decisions are made by managers. In Japan there is less of an authoritarian managerial style, this is due to the countries culture of having cohesion. As the Japanese promote socialising and team work, staff can make their own decisions and put themselves in the position to show their skills. If you compare, Japan and India to the western countries you can see a difference. The western countries culture has always been that the most educated have the best paid jobs. Japan is similar to Britain and Germany in the sense that the manager aim to motivate as they believe good relationships is key to success. The French are like India where the hierarchy is everything and everyone must know who is in charge. In the western they promote staff to have their own goals and ambitions so they can set themselves targets and be successful whereas in India and Japan they don’t really promote it as much. In Japan everything is done for the company and in India the managers make every decision.
References
Budhwar P. And Khatri, N (2001a), Comparative human resource management n Britain and India: Empirical Study, International journal of Human resource Management 13(5) : 800-26
Changing the Japanese way Video (2002), Bubble Trouble, BBC 2, Bill Jones
Hofstede, G. (1983), “cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories” journal of international business studies, fall, pp 75-89
Hussain, A.S (1992), national culture of India, New Delhi: National Book Trust.
Sinha J B P and Kanungo R, (1997) ‘context sensitivity and balancing in Indian organization behaviour, International Journal of Psychology 32: 93-105
Sinha J B P and Sinha D (1990), ‘Role of Social Values in Indian Organizations, International journal of Psychology 25: 705 - 15