Purpose -This study aims to examine the cross-cultural differences in equity sensitivity between the USA and Japan. Design/methodology/approach -A sample of 390 Americans and 202 Japanese were surveyed to determine their equity sensitivities and how each group would likely respond to under-payment scenarios. Findings -The findings support the notion that the Japanese are in fact more entitled in their equity orientation than Americans. Furthermore, the Japanese were also significantly more likely to respond with overt actions to reduce their feelings of inequity. Research limitations/implications -Foremost among these limitations is the fact that the situation presented to the subjects was hypothetical rather than real. Since it would be considered unethical to manipulate subjects in real work settings a first person scenario approach was utilized consistent with other equity theory literature. While the scenario was easily identifiable by the student subjects, it is unknown if the findings from this research would apply to adults working in real world organizations.Practical implications -The results may have important implications for international human resource strategies and practices. Equity sensitivity may affect perceived value of rewards (compensation), promotion (selection), and motivation (performance management) all of which are critical issues in the effective management of human resources. This study illustrates that cross-cultural differences exist in regard to equity sensitivity and these differences may affect the efficacy of human resource strategies in global organizations. Originality/value -This paper offers a significant contribution to the literature on equity sensitivity by testing the theory in a cross-cultural setting.
While the use of Porter's generic strategies have been well documented inAmerica and Europe, no studies have assessed their use in Japan. This researchinvestigates if Japanese companies are indeed following Porter's genericstrategies or continuing to follow more traditional "Japanese" managementstrategies. Using a survey to operationalize Porter's generic strategies, Japanesemanagers were questioned about their firm's current strategic practices. Afactor analysis revealed Japanese firms are following only two strategies thatcould be identified as those of Porter. A cost leadership strategy was the mostfrequently used strategy, and the differentiation strategy was used the least.There was no evidence of organizations using a focus strategy. Interestingly,two additional strategies emerged that did not fit Porter's research but are inline with traditional Japanese strategies including a supply chain focus and atraining based strategy.
PurposeThe Japanese government is promoting a move towards a variety of generic business strategies based on the Porter Prize as a way to regain global competitiveness and end their long economic recession. The purpose of this paper is to report on the current state of Japanese business strategies to a practitioner audience based on the authors' previous academic‐oriented research.Design/methodology/approachA survey of 101 Japanese respondents was conducted to determine their relative use of Porter's generic business strategies. Examples of implementation are presented to illustrate use of the critical strategies.FindingsThe Japanese are using two of Porter's generic strategies, namely cost leadership and differentiation and they are using two variations of Porter's focus strategies.Research limitations/implicationsAs is typical with all survey research, the convenience sample of organizations used in this survey may not be representative of all Japanese organizations.Practical implicationsManagers, consultants and policy makers will gain insights into the impact national policy can have on corporate strategy. This understanding is important when conducting business in a global environment. More specifically, readers will gain a better understanding of how Japanese firms are presently implementing competitive strategies as a result of a Japanese national strategy to promote the use of Porter's generic strategies.Originality/valueThis article is a practitioner‐oriented translation of an academic research study. The value of the current article is to share findings with the practitioner community and present examples of strategic implementation to managers, consultants and policy makers in a less technical format than a typical academic journal.
eward practices play an important role in motivating employees to perform. Some reward practices are more effective than others in influencing performance. As summarized in Exhibit 1, most researchers agree that reward practices logically serve as motivators in shaping the behavior of employees and motivating them to perform at higher levels, and the use of proper rewards can culminate in improved firm performance at the organizational level.A previous study 1 investigated the degree to which a variety of reward practices can best be used to achieve organizational performance goals in American companies. Indeed, it found that the use of employee stock ownership plans (ESOPs), individual-based performance plans, regular expressions of appreciation by managers to their employees and customer satisfaction monitoring were significantly correlated with higher levels of organizational performance.With the growth of international business, the authors expanded the exploration of reward practices to other cultures. Japan has long been an important international business player but C o m p e n s a t i o n GLOBAL COMPENSATION Some reward practices are effective only within particular cultural norms.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.