Management styles convergence in East Asia
When comparing two types of management styles, we can find that there are two different forces pushing for convergence and differentiation. Regarding the convergence forces, we can see that they are the ones pushing for similarities, but it is important to have in mind that, convergence is not the same as homogeneous. This forces can help us to build relationships among the parties. On the other hand, we have the differentiation forces, pushing against homogenization, for instance we can say that national culture and other different management sytles are part of this forces. The differentiation forces can help us understand difficulties among the two parties.
During the class time, we had the chance to compare two types of management styles: The Japanese and Korean.
Japanese Management Style:
Not all japanese companies are alike but they do share some characteristics. Market share has been important to all japanese firms, because it is consistent with long term firm value maximization. The relationship with the suppliers are very important, they try to have a long term relationship with them in order to have close cooperation and coordination of the production process and the fast and flexible development of new products. Japanese firms consider consensus building and group loyalty as important principles, they also care about the relationships between management levels. They believe that finding the right kind of customer is the source of value in the Japanese customer contact. The conection between production and product design is essential in the company.
Zaibatsu: were the diversified family enterprises that rose to prominence in the Meji era, they gained position in the japanese economy with no exact parallel elsewhere by subsidies and a favorable tax policy, the government granted them a privileged position in japan's economic development process.
Korean
Management Style:
Korea was a japanese colony from 1910 to 1945 so they were strongly influenced by the japanese culture. Some authors belive that the organizational structures in Korea are exactly the same as the ones in Japan. Korea adopted Japan's economic development model during the 70s and 80s, the government intervened a lot in issues such as credit, foreign exchange rations and benefits in export growth, in consequence, the favored firms grew faster and diversified better, and the gap between large and small firms widened.
Chaebol: is a large conglomerate of family controlled firms of South Korea that are characterized because have strong ties with government agencies. They were not allowed to own banks. The government gave them special privileges so they grew larger, but sometimes, they couldn't grow not because they were not profitable but because they couldn't borrow vast funds.
The concept of Isomorphism is also important to mention, it refers to the adaptation to the environment ( local, international), you can't help getting influence and similarities from another companies because otherwise you will become isolated as the world is changing.
Explain the phenomenon of convergence in terms of management styles. What are the forces or factors pushing for convergence?
The phenomenon of convergence, mentioned earlier, refers to the similarities that companies can have in terms of management styles but is necessary to differentiate it from homogenization, because they are not the same, the last one refers to when the management styles are exactly the same, but in convergence they tend to be but there are some differentiation forces that keeps them from becoming the same.
The factors that push for convergence, can be growth and internationalization, in the way that, when a country starts a process of internationalization and in consequence starts experiencing growth, this country tends to adopt the management styles and techniques from other country that has successfully done it before, and that almost in all cases, is a country located in the same geographical region or continent, because, cultural similarities are other reason for convergence. Convergence can be seen easily in regional aspects rather than worldwide.
Isomorphism can be seen both as a cause and consequence of convergence, because companies and organisations feel the need to change as their needs are changing and the world is changing at the same time, because if they don't then they will be isolated. International competition is another force pushing for convergence because again, organisations will try to imitate and learn from the successful management styles that had led them to have a competitive advantage somehow.
In the case of Korean and Japanese management styles, do you think they tend to converge or diverge? Are they likely to converge to each other or to other management styles (Western, Asian, etc).
I do strongly believe that they tend to converge, even thought they have differentiation forces pushing against homogenization of management styles. They tend to converge for several reasons, first of all, Korea was a japanese colony, for that reason was strongly influenced by the japanese culture, so they have several similarities in that aspect. The reason why I think that they converge the most is because, Japan has proven to be very succesful in certain industries which are very important in Korea as well and they do compete in this industries, like for instance consumer electronics, automobiles, semi-conductors and shipbuildings. So if the management styles that had led Japan to success can be adapted into the Korean organisations, they could have thought that they would help them to achieve better results and to improve by learning from them.
They are alike to converge to each other at first, but with the time and as they will be getting more and more international and having contact in commercial terms with some more countries they might pick up the best from the management styles of every country (US, European countries) and they will try to have at the end a mix of the best from every countrie's management style. Still I think that the mix will be composed mainly of Korean's or Japanese's management styles because of their affinity in cultural terms.
When comparing two types of management styles, we can find that there are two different forces pushing for convergence and differentiation. Regarding the convergence forces, we can see that they are the ones pushing for similarities, but it is important to have in mind that, convergence is not the same as homogeneous. This forces can help us to build relationships among the parties. On the other hand, we have the differentiation forces, pushing against homogenization, for instance we can say that national culture and other different management sytles are part of this forces. The differentiation forces can help us understand difficulties among the two parties.
During the class time, we had the chance to compare two types of management styles: The Japanese and Korean.
Japanese Management Style:
Not all japanese companies are alike but they do share some characteristics. Market share has been important to all japanese firms, because it is consistent with long term firm value maximization. The relationship with the suppliers are very important, they try to have a long term relationship with them in order to have close cooperation and coordination of the production process and the fast and flexible development of new products. Japanese firms consider consensus building and group loyalty as important principles, they also care about the relationships between management levels. They believe that finding the right kind of customer is the source of value in the Japanese customer contact. The conection between production and product design is essential in the company.
Zaibatsu: were the diversified family enterprises that rose to prominence in the Meji era, they gained position in the japanese economy with no exact parallel elsewhere by subsidies and a favorable tax policy, the government granted them a privileged position in japan's economic development process.
Korean
Management Style:Korea was a japanese colony from 1910 to 1945 so they were strongly influenced by the japanese culture. Some authors belive that the organizational structures in Korea are exactly the same as the ones in Japan. Korea adopted Japan's economic development model during the 70s and 80s, the government intervened a lot in issues such as credit, foreign exchange rations and benefits in export growth, in consequence, the favored firms grew faster and diversified better, and the gap between large and small firms widened.
Chaebol: is a large conglomerate of family controlled firms of South Korea that are characterized because have strong ties with government agencies. They were not allowed to own banks. The government gave them special privileges so they grew larger, but sometimes, they couldn't grow not because they were not profitable but because they couldn't borrow vast funds.
The concept of Isomorphism is also important to mention, it refers to the adaptation to the environment ( local, international), you can't help getting influence and similarities from another companies because otherwise you will become isolated as the world is changing.
Explain the phenomenon of convergence in terms of management styles. What are the forces or factors pushing for convergence?
The phenomenon of convergence, mentioned earlier, refers to the similarities that companies can have in terms of management styles but is necessary to differentiate it from homogenization, because they are not the same, the last one refers to when the management styles are exactly the same, but in convergence they tend to be but there are some differentiation forces that keeps them from becoming the same.
The factors that push for convergence, can be growth and internationalization, in the way that, when a country starts a process of internationalization and in consequence starts experiencing growth, this country tends to adopt the management styles and techniques from other country that has successfully done it before, and that almost in all cases, is a country located in the same geographical region or continent, because, cultural similarities are other reason for convergence. Convergence can be seen easily in regional aspects rather than worldwide.
Isomorphism can be seen both as a cause and consequence of convergence, because companies and organisations feel the need to change as their needs are changing and the world is changing at the same time, because if they don't then they will be isolated. International competition is another force pushing for convergence because again, organisations will try to imitate and learn from the successful management styles that had led them to have a competitive advantage somehow.
In the case of Korean and Japanese management styles, do you think they tend to converge or diverge? Are they likely to converge to each other or to other management styles (Western, Asian, etc).
I do strongly believe that they tend to converge, even thought they have differentiation forces pushing against homogenization of management styles. They tend to converge for several reasons, first of all, Korea was a japanese colony, for that reason was strongly influenced by the japanese culture, so they have several similarities in that aspect. The reason why I think that they converge the most is because, Japan has proven to be very succesful in certain industries which are very important in Korea as well and they do compete in this industries, like for instance consumer electronics, automobiles, semi-conductors and shipbuildings. So if the management styles that had led Japan to success can be adapted into the Korean organisations, they could have thought that they would help them to achieve better results and to improve by learning from them.
They are alike to converge to each other at first, but with the time and as they will be getting more and more international and having contact in commercial terms with some more countries they might pick up the best from the management styles of every country (US, European countries) and they will try to have at the end a mix of the best from every countrie's management style. Still I think that the mix will be composed mainly of Korean's or Japanese's management styles because of their affinity in cultural terms.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario