2. 外语
  3. Principles in Japanese Organizations During the 1970s and 1980s, American managers invested much time and money studying Jap

Principles in Japanese Organizations During the 1970s and 1980s, American managers invested much time and money studying Jap

admin2010-07-14  19
问题                           Principles in Japanese Organizations
    During the 1970s and 1980s, American managers invested much time and money studying Japanese approaches to management because of the fine quality of Japanese products and the general productivity of their organizations. While the American and Japanese cultures differ significantly in many ways, it is still possible to examine Jap0nese management and discover several relevant principles.
    Extensive studies of Japanese organizations have demonstrated that Japanese managers stress the following:
Bottom-up Initiative
    Japanese managers believe that change and initiative within an organization should come from those closest to the problem. So they elicit(引起) change from below. Top-level Japanese managers see their task as creating an atmosphere in which subordinates are motivated to seek better solutions.  The difference is that Western style decision-making proceeds mostly from top management and often does not consult middle management or the worker while in Japan, ideas can be created at the lowest levels, travel upward through an organization and have an impact on the eventual decision. This is "bottom up".
Top Management as Motivator
    Japanese managers do not view themselves as having all the answers. When a subordinate brings in a proposal, the manager neither accepts nor rejects it. Rather, he tactfully, politely asks questions, makes suggestions, and provides encouragement.
Middle Management as Impetus for and Shaper of Solutions
    In the Japanese system, junior (middle) managers are initiators who perceive problems and formulate tentative (尝试的) solutions in coordination with others. They are not functional specialists who carry out their boss’s directives.  Because so much emphasis is placed on coordination and integration,’ solutions to problems evolve more slowly, but they are known and understood by all those who have been a part of the solution generation process. Horizontal communication is stressed as essential to the coordination of problem-solving efforts.
Consensus(多数人的意见) as a Way of Making Decisions
    The Japanese are less inclined to think in terms of absolutes, that is, the solution (which is right) versus the alternatives (which are wrong). Rather, they recognize a range of alternatives, several of which might work and all of which possess advantages and disadvantages.  When a group makes a decision, all members become committed to the chosen solution.  From a Japanese perspective, that commitment, and the ensuing dedication toward working to make the solution successful, is probably more important than the objective quality of the decision. The Japanese have an interesting concept of consensus. Those who consent to a decision are not necessarily endorsing(签署) it. Rather, consent means that each person is satisfied that his point of view has been fairly heard, and although he or she may not wholly agree that the decision is the best one, he or she is willing to go along with it and even support it.
Concern for Employees’ Personal Well-being
    Japanese managers have a kind of paternalistic (家长试作风的) attitude toward their employees. Traditionally, Japanese organizations have offered their workers housing, extensive recreational facilities, and lifetime employment. The Japanese believe that it is impossible to divorce a worker’s personal and professional lives. Good managers express concern for workers as persons with homes and families as well as for the quality of the products the workers produce.  Managers typically work alongside their subordinates, counsel them regarding their personal lives, and encourage much peer interaction.
Advantage or Disadvantage
    It is interesting that principles that are considered, Joy many to be advantages of the Japanese system can also be viewed as problems, at least from an American perspective. There is a fine line between encouraging consensus and forcing it. When groups place too much emphasis on being agreeable and conforming to organizational expectations, poor quality decision making is a likely outcome. Moreover, the Japanese notion of taking care of employees can extend into an extreme form of paternalism with which few well-educated Americans would be comfortable. It is appropriate to protect children or others who cannot think for or look after themselves. But professionals hardly fall into these categories. Most Americans would prefer an organizational system that makes it possible for them to function as mature, intelligent human beings, responsible for their own security and well-being.
    Some authors have suggested that Japanese style management as adapted to American organizations is little more than a tool for even greater management control. An employee who has a life commitment to a particular organization, for instance, becomes vulnerable.  Since he does not perceive practical options, he is more likely to tolerate existing working conditions, even if he finds them unpleasant. The employee is also encouraged to become a generalist rather than a specialist. Thus, a person’s expertise in a particular area is rarely sufficiently developed so that the organization actually grows to depend on him or her as an irreplaceable employee.  Instead, substitutes are readily found.  Moreover, should an employee who has worked in this kind of organizational environment decide to abandon his commitment to this organization after a few years of working as a generalist, he would be poorly equipped to move into other American organizations since he would be competing with specialists.
Hardly Suited to American Organizations
    The body of research on Japanese organizations continues to grow. Recent research suggests that one cannot generalize about Japanese workers—that males and females, young and old, differ in their decision-making style and management preference. One study reported that Japanese workers were more passive than commonly thought, preferring to be persuaded of the value of a decision by their supervisor over making the decision themselves. However, a different study found that Japanese managers place afar greater emphasis on corporate participation and cooperation than their American counterparts. Thus, a consistent and coherent view of Japanese organizations does not yet exist.
    Like the other approaches to management, the Japanese approach is very interesting. In reminding us of the value of the individual, the need for consensus decision making, and the potential of motivating management, it has been extremely useful. It is not a panacea(万能药), however. Because of extreme differences between the Japanese and American cultures, some Japanese management practices are simply poorly suited to American organizations.
From a Japanese perspective, commitment and dedication are probably more important than the decision itself in a decision making process.
选项 A、Y
B、N
C、NG
答案A
解析 在Consensus as a Way of Making Decisions这一部分：“From a Japanese perspective，that commitment，and the ensuing dedication toward working to make the solution successful，is probably more important than the Objective quality of the decision．”从这里我们可以知道，在日本人看来，义务和对解决问题的奉献精神可能比决策本身客观效果的好坏更加重要。选项与文章是一致的。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/oG7K777K
0

大学英语六级

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)