American versus Japanese business culture and competition values

¶ … Americans would support the notion that free and fair competition is necessary for a company to be successful, and perhaps to a lesser degree that attempts by major parties to cooperate usually end in a win/lose scenario, with one person the winner and the other the loser. However, these ideas are not necessary for an effective capitalist economy to function. Japan provides one examples of this, as in Japan, loyalty and collaboration within an organization are seen as keys to the business' long-term success. Working in teams, playing by the rules, and minimizing horizontal competition (with a strict respect for vertical or top-down authority) are seen as the keys of company prosperity ("Japan: Core Cultural Concepts 2006, Cultures at Work).

A secure sense of role and rank minimizes conflict. The negative possibilities of collusion, a Japanese person would say, are less likely when people know their place in a hierarchy of seniority. So long as people uphold a common objective, people do not need to be constantly looking over their shoulder in fear of being overtaken by a competitor ("Japan: Core Cultural Concepts 2006, Cultures at Work).

Question

An American would strongly disagree with the idea that cooperation among stakeholders is the supreme value an organization must uphold, because this shared aim makes companies fiercely competitive towards outsiders. Instead, an American would stress the need within the organization to keep employees continually 'on their toes or always looking over their shoulders at the person in the cubicle beside them, so the workers will produce better and more remarkable and innovative results. Competition in America is seen as the fuel of excellence. Americans believe that all company must stay ahead of their competition by sustaining competition between employees. This is because America might be thought of as a low-context culture, where people tend to be very direct and behave similarly towards workplace colleagues, rather than constantly think of the specific relationship they are in, regarding their colleagues vs. A competitor from the outside. A company one is competing against today might be where one works tomorrow, in America, where employee loyalty is less valued. "Generally, Western cultures tend to gravitate toward low-context starting points, while Eastern and Southern cultures tend to use high-context communication," so a nation such as Saudi Arabia or Thailand, for example, would stress the need for an organization to speak the same language, and to minimize conflict through respect and deference within the organization so the organization could be cohesively united against outsiders (LeBaron, 2003).

Question

America strongly values individualistic leadership, where a single leader is the chief devisor of a strategy. Americans also trust individual autonomy, so the subordinates are trusted and individually empowered in their role to fulfill the leader's vision and address customer needs. However, a nation such as Japan that is less individualistic would prefer more hands-on managerial leadership in achieving an objective. A subordinate taking the lead would be frowned upon, and deviating from the leader's set mission and the organization's stated objectives, even if it was successful, would be seen as hostile and possibly an act of insubordination and arrogance ("Japan: Core Cultural Concepts 2006, Cultures at Work).