Search results

This article is concerned with three key approaches to the implications of Japanese involvement in the UK. It is argued that the paradigms of the so‐called Japanization and lean production schools are inadequate to the task of resolving the sociological implications of Japanese investment and that by contrast what is needed is a critical social relations approach. This will be concerned with the processes of social exclusion implied by new forms of work organization together with the roles of employee collective organizations and identities in these processes.

In the late 1980s, the idea of Japanization dominated debates about the restructuring of production, work and industrial relations in this country. There was, of course, some evidence to support the Japanization thesis; yet, even at the time of the strongest influence, there were indications that it did not describe what was happening very well. It now seems much more plausible to argue that British manufacturing companies were on a distinctive trajectory of development, which has only passing similarities to Japanese patterns of organization.

The Japanization debate in the UK has moved considerably since first mooted in 1987. On the one hand academics ‐ advocates as well as sceptics ‐ have questioned its continued usefulness as an analytical framework. On the other, there has been greater sophistication, refinement and clarity on what is being studied, and particularly surrounding aspects of the transferability of the Japanese model. This paper reports on a study of production supervisors in Japanese transplants in the UK, and data from emulating or comparable non‐Japanese owned organizations. It also draws on comparative data from Japan and North America. The study focuses on two industries ‐ consumer electronics and autos ‐ and uses a variety of methodologies.

The Japanisation of British industry has been much debated. This paper speculates on the role of the UK management accountant as a barrier to the adoption of Japanese management accounting techniques, highlighting professional and cultural differences which could make UK management accountants reluctant converts to Japanisation. Such a reluctance in a key functional area might, in turn, hinder the importation of closely related Japanese production techniques, adversely affecting the competitiveness of UK manufacturing.

In this article “Japanisation” is used as a shorthand term for the diffusion of Japanese management systems and practices, whether this be via Japanese direct investment overseas or the emulation of such systems and practices in non‐Japanese organisations. Based on the philosophies of total quality control (TQC) and just‐in‐time (JIT) produc‐tion, the Japanese organisational form has been held up as a new “paradigm” which challenges the logic of tradi‐tional Western production regimes (Aoki 1987; Oliver and Wilkinson 1988a) and has crucial implications for both intra‐ and inter‐organisational structures and relations of power and control (Wilkinson and Oliver 1989).

The issues and dilemmas facing companies, their unions and their workers as they attempt to emulate Japanese‐style production practices are discussed. Using the case of Ford UK as an example, the causes and effects of the 1988 strike and the withdrawal from the proposed electronics plant at Dundee are explored. Major obstacles to the successful introduction of practices such as just‐in‐time production are identified; however, once implemented these practices carry significant implications for unions and workers.

The 1980s has been viewed as a period of considerable change in industrial relations. The transformation of the global market and new style management practices have raised important questions regarding the extent and character of continuities and discontinuities. Much emphasis has been placed on managerial initiatives although the substance of change has remained relatively unexplored. Much of the focus of change in terms of sophisticated management has underestimated the continuing indeterminancy of management in practice. The importance of trade union responses, including the role of employees, cannot be easily deduced from a focus upon the mechanisms of change. Considers some of the questions arising out of the new paradigms of managerial change in terms of institutional reform, human resource management and Japanization.

In recent years, there has been much talk about the impact of Japanese labour relations practices on UK operations. Whilst there are an increasing number of Japanese companies now operating in this country, it is hard to establish whether their influence has extended beyond these particular workplaces. The term “Japanisation” is used warily, requiring careful scrutiny.

This paper reports the findings of a study into 12 UK and nine Japanese automotive component plants. Compared to the UK plants, the Japanese plants showed a 60 per cent superiority on productivity and a 9:1 superiority in quality. Detailed examination of work structures on the shopfloor revealed that UK plants devolve more responsibility to operators for activities such as quality monitoring and improvement, work allocation and work pace determination than the Japanese plants do. This implies that key aspects of the Japanese model may have been misrepresented in the Japanization debate.

This article reports on a new strategy for labour control in a British carpet factory, brought about under the pressure of the recession. The key characteristics of this approach have a number of similarities with the Japanese model of labour relations. Quality circles are the only overtly Japanese feature at the company, although the new economic and political conditions within Britain may have created the conditions for the absorption of Japanese values and ideas.