Japanese Companies in Germany: A Case Study in Cross‐Cultural Management

Abstract

From a series of qualitative interviews with Japanese managers and German managers and workers in thirty-one Japanese-owned companies in the Dusseldorf region of western Germany, this article discusses differences in cultural patterns and organizational styles between the German and Japanese employees and the problems these pose for communication, cooperation, and morale. First, we deal with cultural contrasts: language issues, interpersonal styles (personability and politeness), and norms regarding the taking of responsibility. Second, we examine the impact on cross-nationality relations of established organizational practice: for example, German specialism vs. Japanese generalism; direct and vertical vs. indirect and incremental decision making. We also discuss efforts by these firms to find compromise systems that would meet the needs and interests of both sides. The third focus is the reactions of Japanese companies in North Rhine-Westphalia to German unions, works councils, and codetermination regulations. In the labor view, Japanese firms overall do no better or worse than comparable German firms.Japanese direct investment in Western economies is concentrated in North America and the United Kingdom. In consequence, a rich journalistic and scholarly literature examines the Japanese experience in the Anglo-American countries, the management styles and organization structures of the subsidiaries, and the relations between the Japanese management and the local workforce (see, e.g

Differences in Individualistic and Collectivistic Tendencies among College Students in Japan and the United States

“…In his seminal empirical study of IBM workers around the world, Hofstede (1980; see also Hofstede and Hofstede, 2004) reported that the United States scored 91 (ranked the first out of 39 countries) on his individualism index (51 is the average score), while Japan received a lower score of 46 (ranked the 22nd). Therefore, as the Japanese economy came to challenge American economic dominance by the 1980s, one key to differing management styles between Western and Japanese corporations could be found with the more collectivistic orientation of Japanese employees (for example, see Kalleberg, 1985, 1990;Lincoln et al, 1995). Since Hofstede's original formulation and research, others have modified his basic idea.…”

Post-merger Integration - Management of Intercultural Differences between a Japanese Corporation and a German Hidden Champion

“…The Japanese communication is full of "the ritual gestures of deference and humility (bowing); the verb endings and forms of address that vary with the status of the parties and the formality of the occasion; the frequent insertion in normal speech of apologetic expressions (e.g. surnimasen すみません)" [25]. In contrast, the Japanese reluctance to say 'no' in order to avoid confrontation does bother German associates, as they expect a direct communication style.…”

“…Germans seem to appreciate the idea of egalitarianism across all vertical levels, but the structures and systems in place tend to provide leaders with more power than their subordinates would like to. Also slower decision-taking processes accompanied with the typical Japanese consensus seeking at Y indicate a flatter hierarchy and thus, lower power distance as in many other Asian countries, as there is no one manager who can make the decision on his/her own [25].…”

“…Many of the Japanese secondment associates and rotational managers from middle level, do not speak well English and Germans almost never speak Japanese. It is embarrassing for Japanese managers to show their lack of language competence before the team and thus, they restrict their communication to other Japanese, which often leads to a communication barrier [25].…”

“…Conflicts may be created, when the Japanese expatriates are placed above more experienced German managers. Japanese managers might interpret German managers' boasting from own international experience as an insult or a direct threat to their hierarchical position [25].…”