Japanisation and just-in-time production in UK manufacturing

Japanisation

The idea of Japanisation has been around for at minimum the last three decades. Since approximately the 1980s the idea has been popularized among UK managers seeking to remain competitive and forward thinking in relation to management and industrial relations. A number of Japanese "transplant" manufacturing companies have entered the UK environment in recent years. These companies are characterized by their more liberalized management systems that traditional incorporate employee friendly practices. Many UK companies currently operating have attempted to emulate their success; some with great fervor and others less so. Those adopting the Japanese model in whole have proven more successful than those who have not. The lack of success of some companies in the UK has been attributed to the failure to adopt the system as a whole; these companies by and large have attempted to synergize traditional British methods, which have been described at the very best by employees as rigid and rule ridden.

The most common model of Japanese management involves a production system where employees are held accountable for their actions, to the same extent that supervisors or manager would be held accountable for the actions of all employees in a more Western or Americanized model. Employees working under such conditions are thought to invest more personal effort and worth into the company at large, in part because their actions affect their chances for success as much as the companies.

Japanisation is also characterized by the idea or proliferance of just in time management, where goods and services are provided on an as needed basis, further increasing productivity by reducing extraneous waste and inventory. The idea of Japanisation and its influence thus far in the UK realm are explored in greater detail below.

JAPANISATION CHARACTERIZED

Turnball notes that in the current state of employee relations, "all periods are characterized by elements of change and continuity" (Turnbull, 1994). The impact of new management techniques in the workforce of Britain, including changes represented in a broad sense as management based on the 'Japanese model' are being incorporated into aspects of manufacturing management (Delbridge, 1997).

Among the influences Japanisation has had on the manufacturing industry includes the idea of Just in time production or JIT. JIT is most commonly associated with Toyota, and similar manufacturers within the Japanese motor industry (Delbridge, 1998). This notion of management includes managing the "stocks and flow of material," and was spread in part via Japanese writers who published their work in English (Delbridge, 1998; Monden 1983; Ohno 1988). The Toyotal production system "became largely synonymous with JIT and 'Japanese' manufacturing management" (Delbridge, 1998).

A central feature of Japanese production involves the idea of just in time management (Wood, 1992). This package of techniques relies on "human and nonhuman resources" in the manufacturing process that all contribute to producing "high quality, competitively priced products with the minimum of wastage" (Beardwell, 1996). By nature manufacturing techniques relying on JIT principles must be incorporate technologically advanced production and manufacturing methods.

Taiichi Ohno is largely credited with discovering JIT, otherwise referred to as the "fundamental doctrine" of the Toyota production system, which dictates that production should aspire to "the total elimination of waste" (Delbridge, 1998; Ohno, 1988). The Japanese manufacturing model differed from the American version which was largely focused on mass production.

The Japanese model focuses on production driven by market requirements, "as information regarding demand pulls production through the processes" (Delbridge, 1998). This differs from a 'push' approach, which was traditionally used in British and American companies, where output plans are developed based on historical information and production is "decoupled from demand" (Delbridge, 1998).

Some have argued that the Japanese model is more effective because it emphasizes reliable production quality more so than traditional models, and couples well with the idea of total quality management, or TQM. Traditionally JIT production systems "dramatically increase the interdependencies between the actors involved in the production process (Oliver and Wilkinson, 1992). By demanding that all partners be involved in the supply and demand process, new criteria for excellence are established as everyone aspires to produce and manage successfully.

UK systems are also interested in TQM, an idea that traditionally Americans are credited with developing, but the Japanese are credited with actually implementing (Delbridge, 1998). The Japanese model has traditionally stressed the importance of managing quality in the workforce.

The Japanese model supports the combination of 'hard' and 'soft' management skills, which essentially combine process control with employee participation (Delbridge, 1998; Wilkinson, et. al, 1992). The Japanese economic model is often utilized due in large part to the success it has realized over the last two decades. According to Biggart and Hamilton, the Japanese model has been "the leading success story of the past two decades...the tremendous growth and economic development" (Biggart and Hamilton, 1997; Delbridge, 1998). The success of the Japanese economy has led to curiosity and interest particularly in the area of management practices within Japanese corporations, and it is these practices that are the most likely to be incorporated by UK corporations.

HISTORY OF JAPANISATION

The Japanese model first started making an impression during the 1960s and 1970s, but didn't spark extraordinary interest until the early 1980s, when many authors started placing a great emphasis on the natural intertwining of Japanese culture and traditions with management practices in business (Delbridge, 1998). Part of the spread of the Japanese model is due to literary translation of works written by Japanese engineers including Ohno and Shingo who paid particular emphasis to technical aspects of production (Delbridge, 1998). These author/engineers also emphasized the importance of combining technical and social aspects of manufacturing management.

By and large the Japanese model may be described as a combination of many facets of management, including but not limited to operations management, human resources management, human resources management and supply chain management (Delbridge, 1998). Employee involvement is also high on the list of important criteria in the Japanese model.

Many theorists have supported the notion that 'Japanisation' is possible in all industries and in all contexts, regardless of locality (Delbridge, 1998). This is certainly the philosophy adopted in the UK.

CASE STUDY

Nippon CTV is an example of a Japanese owned factory that is located in the southern portion of England. The factory employs 1,000 people. Recently the factory was the subject of a research study on the shop floor where a majority of the workers are women. There are eight assembly lines operating out of the panel shop, each of which uses an automatic conveyor to carry panels to operators working from their stations (Delbridge, 1997). The assembly teams are run by a team leader, who is responsible for handling any issues which might affect performance including quality control and disciplinary issues (Delbridge, 1997).

No formal job descriptions exist for plant management; rather each member of the organisation at Nippon is expected to do "whatever is necessary to maintain production at the designated levels of efficiency and quality" (Delbridge, 1997). Few external interruptions affect the daily work schedule at the plant; rather the plant is able to deliver its finished products with regular stability well in advance of production schedules on many occasions (Delbridge, 1997). The plant has also been recognized for its reliable quality and delivery from suppliers (Delbridge, 1997). Problem prevention and "first time right" concepts are critical to the success of operations (Delbridge, 1997).

Management provides team leaders with support in the way of uniform responses and formal negotiations related to established rules (Delbridge, 1997). Whereas in traditional corporations managers are held accountable for the actions of their teams, at Nippon the opposite is true; every individual and every worker from production line on up is held accountable for their actions and the quality of product that they produce (Delbridge, 1997). The performance of any one individual at any point in time is publicly displayed.

CURRENT TRENDS

As of late January 1993 there were 167 Japanese manufacturers working out of the UK, of which employed more than 50,000 British workers (Beardwell, 1996; AJEI, 1992). Often these companies have been hailed as the "vanguard of employers" that are now implementing new industrial relations and manufacturing management practices modeled after the Japan style within the UK (Beardwell, 1996; Basset, 1986; IRS, 1990).

Management techniques developed by the Japanese have been adopted by many UK companies, in part to compete with Japanese competitors, and in part to improve productivity and efficiency (Beardwell, 1996). Contemporary management practices and trends within the UK may be characterized as "Japanised" by nature.

Japanisation" within the UK has been described in various ways. It has been described as operating at two levels, as either a "process or impact" related to investment or as "attempts of British companies to emulate Japanese Practices" (Beardwell, 1996). Ackroyd et. al (1988) perhaps presented the best definition in which he refers to Japanisation as a "mediated" form of management (Beardwell, 1996). Ackroyd claims that "mediated" Japanisation refers to British companies that adopt Japanese practices with the thought that Japanese companies traditionally have honored higher standards of quality and performance (Beardwell, 1996).

Copying these practices is done as a means of providing a tool with which UK managers can emulate these standards. Japanisation in this form may be used as a mechanism through which companies may force changes in production methods and working practices, with a workforce that traditionally "goes along" with the practice with the belief that the company will only survive fierce competition if it meets its competitors with identical practices (Beardwell, 1996).

Many have argued that this practice is not a means of emulation, but rather a means of increasing the flexibility of workers in order to improve productivity and "maintain production levels with much reduced workforces" (Beardwell, 1996).

Ackroyd also describes a type of Japanisation which is referred to as "full or permeated" where Britain is seen as mirroring Japan's economic an social structure, such that investment and marketing practices are one in the same (Beardwell, 1996). What Japanisation does offer British manufacturing companies is an "alternative production system" wherein employee relations take on a new meaning and significance (Beardwell, 1996).

Japanisation at heart involves improving employee relations practices, which are aimed at improving employee attitudes toward work, behaviours and overall work performance (Turnbull, 1986; Wickens, 1987; Beardwell, 1996). By improving employee performance, one may argue that the performance of the company and overall productivity are also improved (Beardwell, 1996).

A study by White and Trevor showed that Japanese transplants to the UK foster employee relations by creating a "stable workforce with a high level of commitment to the company" (Beardwell, 1996). Japanese transplants have also been characterized as being cooperative and more willing to accept change, extremely "unwilling to enter into strikes or other forms of conflict" and also noted for putting the company's best interest above personal interest, thus doing whatever is necessary to ensure the best outcome for the team rather than the individual (Beardwell, 1996). Such effort is said to foster a more unified and "easy" climate in which to work, and in which management changes can occur (Beardwell, 1996).

CURRENT UK MODEL OF Management

RENCO is a UK company in the electronics sector currently described as representative of "direct Japanisation" (Beardwell, 1996). The company may be classified as a large batch manufacturer, meaning that it produces several models of the same product along several different assembly lines (Beardwell, 1996). Most recently the corporation was divided into the following work areas: a main assembly area, a press-weld area, and a subassembly area (Beardwell, 1996).

The work environment at RENCO offered employees at the time of analysis an employee relations package that incorporated "harmonized terms and conditions of employment, flexibility, training, communications structures and briefings" (Beardwell, 1996). The company also encouraged workers to be actively involved in issues related to production and quality issues. The agreement workers had entered into with the electricians' union included a non-strike clause, typical of the Japanese style or model of management (Beardwell, 1996).

RENCO human resources or personnel management staff was dedicated to enabling employees to break past the idea of "them vs. us" and acknowledging the idea that all employees are equals (Beardwell, 1996). The company held onto the idea that employees would actively seek out long-term employment because the structure of employee relations at the company was structured in such a manner that would create feelings of equality and cooperation among employees. Employees were made to feel that their organization was "our company" rather than a separate entity from employees (Beardwell, 1996).

During the time of observation the company employed JIT production and supply practices. The corporation's success relied in part upon the ability of suppliers to deliver "quality components by the date requested" (Beardwell, 1996). More than one hundred and eighty employees at the company, non-managerial employees, were invited to fill out a workforce questionnaire which measured employee's notions of company practices. Respondents indicated that they were dissatisfied with the unions performance; more than 80% of respondents indicated that they "disagreed to some extent that communication between workers and management was good at the company" (Beardwell, 1996).

Respondents also stated that they felt weakened by the no-strike clause in the union agreement, with more than 65% of respondents claiming that the union was "too co-operative with management" (Beardwell, 1996). Part of the trouble however, seems to lie in the fact that a majority of respondents cited the belief that the purpose of the union was to invest in collective interests and not let management "gain any advantage over the workforce" (Beardwell, 1996).

In a true collaborative, Japanese modeled workforce, both employees and managers would likely be less concerned about one group gaining an advantage, and more concerned with developing practices that would benefit the overall corporate and employee goals.

The results of this study actually reveal that a majority of employees currently working within the UK are so used to traditional union roles, that they now expect to play a traditional role, and subsequently expect their union to play a traditionally representational role, one that "necessitates an adversarial and low-trust relationship with management" (Beardwell, 1996).

This study does not indicate that the Japanisation model will fail or is a failure in UK companies; rather it suggests that employees and corporations are so used to operating in a contemporary fashion, that adversarial relationships between management and staff are in essence, ingrained into the idealisms and belief systems of employees and managers.

It would appear at the outset that employees are not entirely committed to the idea of fostering team groups and an overall team environments. Important to note is the fact that RENCO employed both Japanese style and local style management techniques, therefore it has been characterized as having a "dual management structure" (Beardwell, 1996). A majority of middle management positions were in fact, occupied by British managers who were accustomed to the "low trust" and "adversarial" management style traditionally associated with major manufacturing corporations within the UK.

The approach to communication therefore, at best might be described as unenthusiastic, and at worst as "hostile" (Beardwell, 1996). True adoption of the Japanese style of management would involve greater effort on the part of management to incorporate the team philosophy into employee/employer working relationships.

Among the problems inherent in this model were the application of stringent rules by middle managers and strict "regimentation" of the work environment as described by employees, which ultimately resulted in a "harsh, unfair style" (Beardwell, 1996). Some employees felt that traditional British management styles still permeated many practices. These British attitudes were reflected in statements made by employees such as: "They're not looking for co-operation, they believe that bawling you out and using threats is more effective and far quicker" (Beardwell, 1996).

True improvement at RENCO or any other corporation looking to incorporate the idealisms of Japanisation involves the ability of management to actively and effectively foster a cooperative environment, where employees are adequately represented within the governing body of authority. Managers must truly exhibit a "spirit of trust and cooperation," a spirit which must underlie the Company's new style and management practices (Beardwell, 1996).

CONCLUSIONS

Even where new industrial practices modeled after the Japanese model of management are said to be in place within the UK, much work still has to be done to improve employee relations and satisfaction within UK corporations, as evidenced by RENCO corporation. Problems within the current management system can be attributed to some extend to problems "resulting form dual management structures" that may be in place (Beardwell, 1996). Such structures promote not only the new idealisms and management model presented by Japanese managers, but also traditional British systems that promote harsh and unrelenting, uncommunicative and uncooperative management styles.

Employees seek out guidance and interaction in an effort to foster success in any corporations. Employee attitudes and behavior have been positively influenced by Japanisation, a style that promotes the idea of shared responsibility, shared communication and shared rewards. A majority of British companies are now entering into collaborative agreements with employees in an attempt to promote Japanese management idealisms. Such efforts must not be made simply on paper only however, but must become entrenched in traditional management systems to be truly effective.

As evidenced by employee studies and questionnaires, employees are actively interested in management styles that incorporate employee best interests, ideas and activities. The ability of UK corporations to remain competitive in an ever increasingly competitive market is contingent upon their ability to adopt proactive employee relations programs modeled after Japanese systems.

A major and systemic problem identified among a plethora of Western or UK style companies has been low employee morale and commitment. The solution to this problem has been identified in part, as part of the new industrial relations management program. This program, currently being infused throughout many UK companies, involves collaborating with employees to foster a sense of "we" rather than the sense of "us vs. them" related to management style. The incorporation of JIT production and supplier demand processes is also critical to the successful implementation of the Japan model within the UK.

The process of Japanisation has been ongoing for several years, starting in earnest at about the late 1980s. Currently many companies in the UK are adopting such principles in an effort to reduce production disruptions and enhance employee/employer communications. Such improvements ultimately are thought to be necessary as a means of improving overall productivity and promotion.