Japanese Work Culture Vs Indian Work Culture

This Article compares and contrasts the decision making processes used by India and Japan who represent one of the two powerful countries of Asia. First part of the discussion comments on the nuances of decision making in Japan and India. However, the second part questions the capability of rules in enabling quicker outcomes.

Social fabric of any culture is shaped by their history which in turn influences the way different countries or cultures conduct their businesses. The Japanese are generally known for being quick decision makers. They choose to involve all the possible stakeholders who can contribute or may be affected by the final outcome. The same approach is visible in their professional engagements too where Participative Management, involving both management and workers alike, is practiced. With Sony, Hitachi, Toyota and Suzuki being household names across the world, many believe their culture is the secret of their competitive advantage in the Automobile and the Consumer Electronics arena. Since everyone is part of the consensual decision making process, to improve quality, workers and management work together in quality circles and all of them are involved in the continuous struggle to improve all aspects of the self and of the company.

On the other hand, Historical evidence in India propounded by the Varna System, wherein the roles and responsibilities were defined according to the varna/caste of an individual – Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shudra, corroborates individual decision making. There are clearly laid down rules for the tasks and duties of an individual whether be it in family or in any social groups. Traces of this can be found out in the ancient scriptures of Manusmriti as well as one of the all time great book on Economics and Politics – Arthashastra where Kautilya examines the role of a King. On the social front, Indians believe in Karta, the eldest of the family, who is responsible for major decisions. Rest all chores are defined for individuals as per their ability and societal constraints. This is manifested in one becoming the right person for the right job. Outcome is perfect job done within an optimal time.

As is evident from the above discussion, both styles have their merits and demerits. If in Japanese method the workers feel like partners in the business, the Indian system promotes role based growth. Also, if the Japanese way invites lots of overheads in terms of cost and time, the Indian method hampers innovativeness and experimentation.

Before we move further, there is also a need to question our assumptions. A rule based system is easily scalable and replicable but not without its limitations. While rules may enable smooth transition from one state to another, they may not necessarily be the fastest way to the desired outcome.

‘Every coin has 2 sides to it’ and effective decision making is no exception. To every positive integer on the number line, there is a corresponding negative integer too. Thus, I conclude, that there is no universally applicable way to most effective decision making and sustainable decisions are a function of specific problem’s constraints.