Comparative Management

In Selected Countries

Presented By:Nitika Gupta15-MBA-07

Presented to: Prof. Keshav

Sharma

References

• MANAGEMENT- A Global Perspective by Harold Koontz, (page 97-479 ) 11th edition

• Comparative and Multinational Management by Simcha Ronen , (page 20-60,187-190)

• The Cultural Paradigm by Prof. Neelu Rohmetra• Introduction To Management (ICFAI material) • Industrial Management @ Heinz Weihrich<

www.usfca.edu/fac-staff/weihrich/docs/management_practices.pdf>

• Industrial Management,Vol.34,Issue 5(sep/oct 1992):p 29

• “Toshiba” Global Strategic Management Case Studies On Fortune 500 Companies,Transworld University,Volume VI

Comparative Comparative management…….management…….

• Goal • Approaches

The Universalistic Approach

The Economic Cluster Approach

The Cultural Cluster Approach

Comparative ManagementComparative ManagementModelsModels

Farmer and Richman Model

Negandhi and Prasad Model

Greet Hofstede Study…….

Planning

in

different countries

United States Japanese ChinesePrimarily short term orientation

Long-term orientation

Long-term and short-termorientation (5-year plan andannual plan)

Individualdecision-making

Collective decisionMaking (ring) withconsensus

Decision-making by committees.At the top often individual

Involvement of few people inmaking & “selling: the decision topeople with Divergent values

Involvement of manypeople in preparing andmaking the decision

Top-down-participation atlower levels

Decisions are initiated atthe top and flow down

Decision flow frombottom-to-top and back

Top-down-initiated at thetop

Fast decision-making; slowImplementation requiringcompromise, often resulting inSub optimal decisions

Slow decision-making;Fast implementation ofthe decision

Slow decision-making /Slow implementation.(Now changing)

Organising

in

Different Countries

United States Japanese ChineseIndividual responsibilityand accountability

Collective responsibilityand accountability

Collective and individualresponsibility

Clarity and specificity ofDecision responsibility

Ambiguity of decisionresponsibility

Attempts to introduce the“factory responsibilitysystem”

Formal bureaucraticOrganizational structure

Informal organizationstructure

Formal bureaucraticOrganization structure

Lack of commonorganization culture;identification withprofession rather thanwith company

Well-known commonorganization culture andphilosophy; competitivespirit toward otherenterprises

Identification with thecompany but nocompetitive spirit

Staffing

in

different countries

United States Japanese ChinesePeople hired out of schoolsand from other companies; frequent company changes

Young people hired out of school; hardly any mobility ofPeople among companies

Most hired from school, fewerfrom other companies

Rapid advancement highlydesired and Demanded

Slow promotion through theRanks

Slow promotion, but regular salary increase

Loyalty to the profession

Loyalty to the company

Lack of loyalty to bothCompany And profession

Frequent performanceevaluation for new employees

Very infrequent formalPerformance evaluations for new young) employees

Infrequent performance review(usually once a year)

Appraisal of short-termresults Promotions basedprimarily on individualperformance

Appraisal of long-termperformance

5-year plan, otherwise short-term targets

Leading

in

Different Countries

United States Japanese ChineseLeader acts as decision-makerand head of group

Leader acting as socialfacilitator and groupMember

Leader as the head of the group(committees)

Directive style (strong, firm,determined)

Paternalistic style Directive. Parent-child relations(in TA terms)

Often divergent values;Individualism sometimeshinders cooperation

Common values facilitating cooperation

Common values. Emphasis onharmony

Face-to-face confrontationcommon; emphasis on clarity

Avoidance of confrontation,Sometimes leading toambiguities; emphasis onHarmony

Avoidance of confrontation

Communication primarily topdown

Bottom-up communication

Communication top-down

Controlling

in

Different Countries

United States Japanese Chinese

Control by superior

Control by peers

Control by group leader (superior)

Control focus on individual performance

Control focus on group performance

Primary control by groups-but also By individuals

Fix blame Saving face Try to save face

Limited use of quality control circles

Extensive use of quality control circles

Limited use of quality control

Corporate exampleJapanese company

• Toshiba –The Japanese company with a difference

• Lifelong employment• Long working hours• Rigid pay ladder• Great emphasis on safety

procedures etc.

Corporate exampleTheory Z organization

• Samsung• It uses theory Z to become a living

organization > Employment > Collective decision making > Authority and responsibility > Evaluation > Specialized career path• Other Korean companies like Lucky

Goldstar, Hyundai, Daewoo and Samyang.

Corporate exampleU.S. organization

• IBM

• Intel

• Hewlett-Packard

• Eastman Kodak

Conclusion………..

THANK YOU

ANY QUERIES!!!!!!!!!!!WELCOMED……….