The Application of Organizational Learning Theory to Japanese and American Management

Country‐of‐origin, localization, or dominance effect? An empirical investigation of HRM practices in foreign subsidiaries

“…Fourth, according to C. Smith and Meiksins (1995, p. 243), the United States, Germany, and Japan are most frequently referred to as role models, "as they provide 'best practice' ideals from which other societies can borrow and learn." Fifth, the transfer of management practices between these three countries has been investigated rather comprehensively, resulting in findings that alternatively support the existence of all three effects (e.g., Gooderham, Nordhaug, & Ringdal, 1998;Lane, 1989;Lincoln & Kalleberg, 1990;Sullivan & Nonaka, 1986). However, even though the transfer of management practices between these countries has been the subject of much research, the mixed and contradicting results point to the need for a more comprehensive and systematic study of these effects.…”

The Japanese Management Theory Jungle-Revisited

“…Fourth, most questionnaire and interview-based research about Japanese management suffer from small sample sizes, though a few exceptions were discovered (for example, Darling, 1987;Ebrahimpour & Johnson, 1992;Lincoln, 1989;Sullivan & Nonaka, 1986). A fifth problem inherent in Japanese management, also characteristic of survey and interview based research, is the disinclination of the Japanese to reveal business related information to outside researchers.…”

“…By means of this process, knowledge that is communicable and consensual about internal action and environmental relationships can be shared (Nonaka & Johansson, 1985). A comparative study of organizational learning with Japanese and American senior managers, concludes that the learning of managers in Japanese firms is characterized by greater variety amplification by the senior managers than by their American counterparts (Sullivan & Nonaka, 1986) and was found by Rehfeld (1990) to be influenced by kaizen, or continuous improvement. Americans tend to terminate their interest in a project or process with the acknowledgement of goal achievement or results while the Japanese continue to reflect on and analyze a process long after the results are concluded (Rehfeld, 1990).…”

“…Accordingly, students of Japanese management have warned of the peril of making alliances with the Japanese (Morgan & Morgan, 1991;Prestowitz, 1988;Rehder, 1990;Reich & Mankin, 1986;Rosenbloom & Cusumano, 1987). These factors have led several theorists to cite organizational learning as a possible explanation for the differential managerial success of the Japanese as compared to Westerners (Sullivan & Nonaka, 1986;Kagono et al, 1985;Nonaka & Johansson, 1985;Rehfeld, 1990).…”

Diversity issues in adaptive modular systems

“…But, surely, the criticizing should not be overdone into destruction of exploration. • Higher level managers, if such exist in the system, could foster variety "by encouraging varied interests and points of view in organizational members; by generating lots of data; by calculating [i.e., providing] wide exposure of [lower-level] managers to the organization's environment; and by requiring the initial processing of data in an unstructured, equivocal manner" [8]. So, broadly speaking, the goal of the system designer or manager (or, possibly, of the system itself) would be to determine (or at least estimate), for all the important functionalities and for any given situation, the (near-)optimal levels of diversity of the relevant aspects of the system, and then increase or decrease the diversity accordingly.…”