'I must recognize that man achieves the highest degree
of efficiency when he plays.
If someone says he works out of loyalty to the company,
he is a damned liar.'
of efficiency when he plays.
If someone says he works out of loyalty to the company,
he is a damned liar.'
----Soichiro Honda
Founder-millionaire
Honda Motor Co., Ltd.
Hunt Stevenson, in the movie GUNG HO (means to WORK TOGETHER) , needed to do some reflections before it was too late. His failure to do some actions would result in closure of Assan Motors, thereby leaving hundreds of American laborers unemployed.
According to Robert Heller, the author of the article EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT: TAKING RESPONSIBILITY, "How the boss behaves has a profound effect on how other managers perform - and thus on the performance of the entire outfit. That's a self-evident truth, acknowledged by most people. But few bosses acknowledge the corollary: that inferior performance is partly their fault."
Stevenson's task as the liason betweeen the Japanese managers and the American workers was to make his fellow Americans produce the desired results of the company managers/owners. He was actually after his own promotion so he did everything -- including lying and making tricks with the workers -- just to protect his own position in the company.
A lot of employee-manager problems were shown in the story. First, Which is the more logical thing-- to make the Japanese managers adjust to the American culture since their company is situated in American soil, or to make the American laborers practice `Japanese work ethic' because the company is basically owned and managed by Japanese?
In the movie, the Japanese were not happy with the works of the Americans. What the Japanese managers insisted was for the American laborers to "work the way Japanese work." So what exactly is a Japanese work ethic like?
According to Duncan Bartlett,"Many of Japan's employees are revered for their hard work and commitment - they rarely go on strike or take long holidays" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3720070.stm). This was also practiced by YOICHI Kawamoto, a Japanese businessman who died of heart attack due to overwork. In an article in Scotland on Sunday, Ryall mentioned that "Kawamoto regularly worked Saturday and the holidays to which he was supposed to be entitled. For him, like many of his peers in the business community, taking holidays is seen as a form of weakness and a betrayal of one’s colleagues." Also based on the article, it was mentioned that :
The second management conflict shown in the movie is on the question of How should workers be motivated in order for managers to get the `desired result'? Motivation, says Gemmy Allen is "the set of processes that moves a person toward a goal. Thus, motivated behaviors are voluntary choices controlled by the individual employee. The supervisor (motivator) wants to influence the factors that motivate employees to higher levels of productivity." It's not enought for the managers to dictate what the workers should do in order to reach the production quota. Instead, managers should find ways to `get the workers into working hard.'
There are several management theories that explain how managers can actually motivate employees. The most popular of these is MASLOW'S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS which focuses on five levels of needs: physiological, safety, esteem, social and self-actualization needs. Managers could inspire the employees to work depending on the needs level of each employee.
Another theory is called Alderfer's ERG which includes three categories of needs: existence, relatedness and growth. Existence involves the physical needs which has to be satisfied first before an employee looks for relatedness. Relatedness refers to an employee's social needs which is also seen as important in order to foster good working environment. Growth, on the other hand, gives importance on the employee's self promotion and improvement in the company. An employee that does not grow will soon perish so growth should be taken as a motivator.
Another management theory is the McClelland's Learned Needs. This divides motivation into three aspects: power, affiliation and achievement. Achievement is a motivator for a task-oriented employee while power motivates employees who are interested in being able to control a certain entity in the company. Likewise, affiliation can spell a difference in motivating employees. Affiliation refers to the interpersonal communication with the other people in the company.
Herzberg's Two-factor theory also explains how managers could possibly motivate employees. This theory focuses on two things: satisfaction and dissatisfaction. According to Frederick Herzberg, "Motivating employees is a two-step process. First provide hygienes and then motivators. One continuum ranges from no satisfaction to satisfaction. The other continuum ranges from dissatisfaction to no dissatisfaction" (http://ollie.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/4directing/motivatg/motivate.htm). Managers have to be aware that employees' satisfaction stems from several factors that must be well understood if the company aims for zero-failure work enviroment.
Founder-millionaire
Honda Motor Co., Ltd.
When a company fails, who should take the blame? When the workers complain, who should do some reflections, the management or the workers themselves?
Hunt Stevenson, in the movie GUNG HO (means to WORK TOGETHER) , needed to do some reflections before it was too late. His failure to do some actions would result in closure of Assan Motors, thereby leaving hundreds of American laborers unemployed.
According to Robert Heller, the author of the article EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT: TAKING RESPONSIBILITY, "How the boss behaves has a profound effect on how other managers perform - and thus on the performance of the entire outfit. That's a self-evident truth, acknowledged by most people. But few bosses acknowledge the corollary: that inferior performance is partly their fault."
Stevenson's task as the liason betweeen the Japanese managers and the American workers was to make his fellow Americans produce the desired results of the company managers/owners. He was actually after his own promotion so he did everything -- including lying and making tricks with the workers -- just to protect his own position in the company.
A lot of employee-manager problems were shown in the story. First, Which is the more logical thing-- to make the Japanese managers adjust to the American culture since their company is situated in American soil, or to make the American laborers practice `Japanese work ethic' because the company is basically owned and managed by Japanese?
In the movie, the Japanese were not happy with the works of the Americans. What the Japanese managers insisted was for the American laborers to "work the way Japanese work." So what exactly is a Japanese work ethic like?
According to Duncan Bartlett,"Many of Japan's employees are revered for their hard work and commitment - they rarely go on strike or take long holidays" (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3720070.stm). This was also practiced by YOICHI Kawamoto, a Japanese businessman who died of heart attack due to overwork. In an article in Scotland on Sunday, Ryall mentioned that "Kawamoto regularly worked Saturday and the holidays to which he was supposed to be entitled. For him, like many of his peers in the business community, taking holidays is seen as a form of weakness and a betrayal of one’s colleagues." Also based on the article, it was mentioned that :
Newly released karoshi figures from Japan’s Health,
Labour and Welfare Ministry, covering 2002,
show a record 317 deaths
that were directly attributable
to long hours in the office.
The previous record was 143,
set just the previous year.
Labour and Welfare Ministry, covering 2002,
show a record 317 deaths
that were directly attributable
to long hours in the office.
The previous record was 143,
set just the previous year.
In the movie Gung Ho, a Japanese manager was furious because he noticed that American workers come late and leave early -- which is very un-Japanese.
The second management conflict shown in the movie is on the question of How should workers be motivated in order for managers to get the `desired result'? Motivation, says Gemmy Allen is "the set of processes that moves a person toward a goal. Thus, motivated behaviors are voluntary choices controlled by the individual employee. The supervisor (motivator) wants to influence the factors that motivate employees to higher levels of productivity." It's not enought for the managers to dictate what the workers should do in order to reach the production quota. Instead, managers should find ways to `get the workers into working hard.'
There are several management theories that explain how managers can actually motivate employees. The most popular of these is MASLOW'S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS which focuses on five levels of needs: physiological, safety, esteem, social and self-actualization needs. Managers could inspire the employees to work depending on the needs level of each employee.
Another theory is called Alderfer's ERG which includes three categories of needs: existence, relatedness and growth. Existence involves the physical needs which has to be satisfied first before an employee looks for relatedness. Relatedness refers to an employee's social needs which is also seen as important in order to foster good working environment. Growth, on the other hand, gives importance on the employee's self promotion and improvement in the company. An employee that does not grow will soon perish so growth should be taken as a motivator.
Another management theory is the McClelland's Learned Needs. This divides motivation into three aspects: power, affiliation and achievement. Achievement is a motivator for a task-oriented employee while power motivates employees who are interested in being able to control a certain entity in the company. Likewise, affiliation can spell a difference in motivating employees. Affiliation refers to the interpersonal communication with the other people in the company.
Herzberg's Two-factor theory also explains how managers could possibly motivate employees. This theory focuses on two things: satisfaction and dissatisfaction. According to Frederick Herzberg, "Motivating employees is a two-step process. First provide hygienes and then motivators. One continuum ranges from no satisfaction to satisfaction. The other continuum ranges from dissatisfaction to no dissatisfaction" (http://ollie.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/4directing/motivatg/motivate.htm). Managers have to be aware that employees' satisfaction stems from several factors that must be well understood if the company aims for zero-failure work enviroment.
There are other management theories that may guide managers in their daily encounter with MOTIVATION and EMPLOYEES. But with all these guiding principles, why can't managers pick the best for their companies?
In the movie Gung Ho, the American work force was promised an increase by Stevenson who made a deal with the managers of Assan Motors. The deal was that increase would be granted if the workers can produce 15,000 cars in a month. However, Stevenson lied to the workers. He told them that they only need to produce 13,000 cars. I think he lied because he knew in the first place that producing 15,000 cars in a month is nearly impossible. Many companies are doing this: setting conditions which they know, even at the beginning, that the employees won't attain in the given span of time. Perhaps, managers do this just to show that they are "motivating" employees to embrace higher standards.
In our school, for instance, the faculty was given a year to comply with the newly-introduced basis for merit increase. Among the set parameters is `interntional publication.' This suggests that faculty with publication in international journal gets a perfect score in that given criterion. However, the faculty finds this criterion too ideal. I bet the one who introduced this organizational change did not survey on the publishing practice in the school. How many faculty members have publication in various levels -- campus-wide, regional, national, and international? Or the management already knew that the faculty, as of now, is not ready for international publication so they included this in the criteria -- so that nobody gets a perfect score. Funny.
In the end, only the employees can tell what exactly motivates them and what turns them off. The management must be quick and alert in identifying them if they are to aim for success in the company.
Another point in the movie that is worth pondering on is: Is the employee's family a factor in his success or just a hindrance that could make him render less effort to the company?
According to a study by Fujimoto, some Japanese still espouse the traditional concept of Japanese of spending more time at work without any distraction from family. In general, Fujimoto concluded that:
In a study conducted by John W. Engel (1984) titled A COMPARISON OF JAPANESE AND AMERICAN WORK AND FAMILY VALUES, the following was established:
1. Japanese respondents, when compared with Americans, preferred large to small organizations, were more group oriented, more patriotic, more loyal to employer and family, and more desirous of leisure time.
2. Compared with Americans, Japanese respondents were more likely to believe that women's place should be in the home, that wives' or mothers' employment might be harmful to marriage or children, and that mothers should not work outside the home when there are children in the family.
3. By contrast, American respondents were more likely to believe that women could handle both home and career, that women should be free to choose whether they work outside the home or not, and that women should feel free to work despite husbands' feelings or the presence of children in the family.
It should also be noted from the movie that informal groups are important in an organization. The manager must know how to deal with informal group leaders. The manager's success depends, in a way, on how he deals with the cliques in the organization.
Also, it's a good idea to celebrate (as shown in the movie) for every triumph that comes in the employee's or manager's way. Financial or emotional success becomes more apparent with the "Hurrah!" and Yes!" that one gets from his colleagues.
Management style is not a matter of coincidence; it is definitely a well-thought-of strategy that one employs in order to achieve the desired results. As Steven R. Covey said, "Management is efficiency in climbing the ladder of success; leadership determines whether the ladder is leaning against the right wall."
References:
Allen, G. (1998). Modern Management. Supervision. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from http://ollie.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/4directing/motivatg/motivate.htm
Bartlett, D. (7 Oct. 2004). Japanese work ethic hides inefficiencies. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3720070.stm).
Engel, J (18 Oct. 1984). A Comparison of Japanese and American Work and Family Values. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED250618&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=eric_accno&accno=ED250618
Fujimoto, T (5 Oct. 12006). Preferences for Work and Family Time over Life Course in Japan. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Hilton San Francisco & Renaissance Parc 55 Hotel, San Francisco, CA. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p109214_index.html.
Heller, R. (8 July 2006). Effective Management: Taking Responsibility. Edward de Bono and Robert Helller's Thinking Managers. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from http://www.thinkingmanagers.com/management/effective-management.php .
Ryall, J (15 June 2003). Japan wakes up to fatal work ethic. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=660412003.
In the movie Gung Ho, the American work force was promised an increase by Stevenson who made a deal with the managers of Assan Motors. The deal was that increase would be granted if the workers can produce 15,000 cars in a month. However, Stevenson lied to the workers. He told them that they only need to produce 13,000 cars. I think he lied because he knew in the first place that producing 15,000 cars in a month is nearly impossible. Many companies are doing this: setting conditions which they know, even at the beginning, that the employees won't attain in the given span of time. Perhaps, managers do this just to show that they are "motivating" employees to embrace higher standards.
In our school, for instance, the faculty was given a year to comply with the newly-introduced basis for merit increase. Among the set parameters is `interntional publication.' This suggests that faculty with publication in international journal gets a perfect score in that given criterion. However, the faculty finds this criterion too ideal. I bet the one who introduced this organizational change did not survey on the publishing practice in the school. How many faculty members have publication in various levels -- campus-wide, regional, national, and international? Or the management already knew that the faculty, as of now, is not ready for international publication so they included this in the criteria -- so that nobody gets a perfect score. Funny.
In the end, only the employees can tell what exactly motivates them and what turns them off. The management must be quick and alert in identifying them if they are to aim for success in the company.
Another point in the movie that is worth pondering on is: Is the employee's family a factor in his success or just a hindrance that could make him render less effort to the company?
According to a study by Fujimoto, some Japanese still espouse the traditional concept of Japanese of spending more time at work without any distraction from family. In general, Fujimoto concluded that:
An analysis of data collected among 3800 automotive workers
in Japan show that the majority of workers, regardless
of their age and job type, prefer that they proportionately
allocate their time to work and non-work domains of life.
Yet, many of the respondents still espouse the traditional
male model of occupational career, in which the same proportion
of time is constantly allocated to paid work across all stages
of life. Results indicate that Japanese workers,
in general, feel it is important that they strike balance
between employment and their life outside of it.
But at the same time they show a strong preference for working
constantly without any major career disruptions between ages 20
and 60, then reducing drastically work time after job retirement
at age 60.
in Japan show that the majority of workers, regardless
of their age and job type, prefer that they proportionately
allocate their time to work and non-work domains of life.
Yet, many of the respondents still espouse the traditional
male model of occupational career, in which the same proportion
of time is constantly allocated to paid work across all stages
of life. Results indicate that Japanese workers,
in general, feel it is important that they strike balance
between employment and their life outside of it.
But at the same time they show a strong preference for working
constantly without any major career disruptions between ages 20
and 60, then reducing drastically work time after job retirement
at age 60.
In a study conducted by John W. Engel (1984) titled A COMPARISON OF JAPANESE AND AMERICAN WORK AND FAMILY VALUES, the following was established:
1. Japanese respondents, when compared with Americans, preferred large to small organizations, were more group oriented, more patriotic, more loyal to employer and family, and more desirous of leisure time.
2. Compared with Americans, Japanese respondents were more likely to believe that women's place should be in the home, that wives' or mothers' employment might be harmful to marriage or children, and that mothers should not work outside the home when there are children in the family.
3. By contrast, American respondents were more likely to believe that women could handle both home and career, that women should be free to choose whether they work outside the home or not, and that women should feel free to work despite husbands' feelings or the presence of children in the family.
It should also be noted from the movie that informal groups are important in an organization. The manager must know how to deal with informal group leaders. The manager's success depends, in a way, on how he deals with the cliques in the organization.
Also, it's a good idea to celebrate (as shown in the movie) for every triumph that comes in the employee's or manager's way. Financial or emotional success becomes more apparent with the "Hurrah!" and Yes!" that one gets from his colleagues.
Management style is not a matter of coincidence; it is definitely a well-thought-of strategy that one employs in order to achieve the desired results. As Steven R. Covey said, "Management is efficiency in climbing the ladder of success; leadership determines whether the ladder is leaning against the right wall."
References:
Allen, G. (1998). Modern Management. Supervision. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from http://ollie.dcccd.edu/mgmt1374/book_contents/4directing/motivatg/motivate.htm
Bartlett, D. (7 Oct. 2004). Japanese work ethic hides inefficiencies. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3720070.stm).
Engel, J (18 Oct. 1984). A Comparison of Japanese and American Work and Family Values. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/custom/portlets/recordDetails/detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED250618&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=eric_accno&accno=ED250618
Fujimoto, T (5 Oct. 12006). Preferences for Work and Family Time over Life Course in Japan. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Hilton San Francisco & Renaissance Parc 55 Hotel, San Francisco, CA. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from http://www.allacademic.com/meta/p109214_index.html.
Heller, R (6 July 2006). Managers. Edward de Bono and Robert Heller's Thinking Managers. Retrieved Sept.16,2007 from http://www.thinkingmanagers.com/business-management/managers.php.
Heller, R. (8 July 2006). Effective Management: Taking Responsibility. Edward de Bono and Robert Helller's Thinking Managers. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from http://www.thinkingmanagers.com/management/effective-management.php .
Ryall, J (15 June 2003). Japan wakes up to fatal work ethic. Retrieved Sept. 16, 2007 from http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=660412003.
Comments