Difference in American and Japanese management style.

Ans. It is widely recognized that Japanese and American styles of business

management practice differ broadly across the range of supervisory style, decision-making, communications, management controls, and interdepartmental relations

Japanese American1) Japanese follows paternalism, which has sometimes been characterized as giving rise to "industrial feudalism,"

1) American follows individualism, which might more accurately be characterized as personalism

2) Japanese managers tend to stay with one company for their entire work career.

2) American managers, on the other hand, often use their overseas experience as basis for moving to another company that is looking to strengthen its international position.

3) Another interesting contrast is loyalty to the firm. Many Japanese managers stay with the firm because they believe it is wrong to accept a position with anyone else. They feel a strong bond of commitment to the company

3) American managers tend to have stronger loyalty to themselves than to the firm, and if a better job comes along they will take it.

4) The job security is the biggest difference. Japanese managers, in the main, are looked after by the firm. Their job are ensured, their salaries and benefits are guaranteed

4) on the other hand,Americans are more likely to be let go if the firm starts running into trouble

5) If business does slow down Japanese firm typically use this

5) In contrast, American firms cut back on training during poor

time to train their employees and prepare them for the expected economic upturn. In contrast, American firms cut back on training during poor economic times.

economic times.

6) Mangers experiences are limited they only know how their firm works, but the managers also gain a solid understanding of the inner workings of the firm’s international operations.

6) Mangers often use their overseas experience as basis for moving to another company that is looking to strengthen its international position.

2) Group think: Groupthink, a term coined by social psychologist Irving Janis (1972), occurs when a group makes faulty decisions because group pressures lead to a deterioration of “mental efficiency, reality testing, and moral judgment” . Groups affected by groupthink ignore alternatives and tend to take irrational actions that dehumanize other groups.  A group is especially vulnerable to groupthink when its members are similar in background, when the group is insulated from outside opinions, and when there are no clear rules for decision making. Janis has documented eight symptoms of groupthink: 

1. Illusion of invulnerability –Creates excessive optimism that encourages taking extreme risks.

2. Collective rationalization – Members discount warnings and do not reconsider their assumptions.

3. Belief in inherent morality – Members believes in the rightness of their cause and therefore ignores the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions.

4. Stereotyped views of out-groups – Negative views of “enemy” make effective responses to conflict seem unnecessary.

5. Direct pressure on dissenters – Members are under pressure not to express arguments against any of the group’s views.

6. Self-censorship – Doubts and deviations from the perceived group consensus are not expressed.

7. Illusion of unanimity – The majority view and judgments are assumed to be unanimous.

8. Self-appointed ‘mind guards’ – Members protect the group and the leader from information that is problematic or contradictory to the group’s cohesiveness, view, and/or decisions.

 When the above symptoms exist in a group that is trying to make a decision, there is a reasonable chance that groupthink will happen, although it is not necessarily so.  Groupthink occurs when groups are highly cohesive and when they are under considerable pressure to make a quality decision.  When pressures for unanimity seem overwhelming, members are less motivated to realistically appraise the alternative courses of action available to them.  These group pressures lead to carelessness and irrational thinking since groups experiencing groupthink fail to consider all alternatives and seek to maintain unanimity.  Decisions shaped by groupthink have low probability of achieving successful outcomes. 3)Risky shift:  There is an interesting phenomenon that occurs in groups and teams called 'risky shift'. What this means is that the the group collectively takes either higher- or lower-risk decisions than its members would individually take. This is surprising as one might reasonably expect some kind of average collective risk being taken.What appears to be happening here is that critical change is occurring in the personal perception of the transfer of risk, based on beliefs and concern for the group. Risk homeostasis says that we each have a preferred level of risk and will hence be relatively consistent in our risk-taking, yet what actually happens is that we assess risk based on perception more than reality, which means that the actual risk we may take on might vary significantly.  If I care about others in the group and seek to sustain group cohesion then I may feel responsible for the risk taken by other group members. I thus might personally take on the risk of others, increasing my felt risk and leading me to seek lower-risk decisions. If influential people or the majority of group members feel this way then group decisions will be less risky.On the other hand, if I feel that I am are sharing my personal risk with others (and hence lessening my personal risk-taking) then I will be more inclined to take

gung-ho high-risk decisions. Again, the extent to which this happens will depend on the dynamic of influence within the group.

This principle may also explain a similar phenomenon that occurs in hierarchical management situations. Managers are responsible for a wider scope of activity than individuals, which they share out with their subordinates. But what happens to the perceived risk? For the manager to sustain their personal risk limit they have to either let go of the perception, truly transferring the risk to the subordinate, or otherwise act to reduce the risk in some way. Both of these approaches can become dysfunctional, resulting in what may be considered as poor management

So how can managers avoid these dilemmas? The first step is to recognize when they are happening. Real and perceived risks should be carefully differentiated. Understand also how individuals and groups (including yourself) behave around risk, with different responses outside preferred risk boundaries.

3)Social loafing: Social loafing describes the tendency of individuals to put forth less effort when they are part of a group. Because all members of the group are pooling their effort to achieve a common goal, each member of the group contributes less than they would if they were individually responsible. This is the tendency for people to perform worse on simple tasks, yet better at complex tasks when they are in the presence of others.This appears to be a direct contradiction to Social Facilitation, but can be explained by the differing circumstances in which it occurs. In particular, when we are working in a group, it can be easier to conceal laziness when working in a group of people who are working together.The key here is that the loafer is not worried about being evaluated. This can also be an attraction of being an acknowledge expert or in a position of authority: although it may take time to climb the mountain, you may be able to relax once you have got there.However, when we are being evaluated, such as when working on a team task, we will work hard to ensure nobody can criticize us for not pulling our weight.People who have less concern for groups are more likely to be social loafers, such as men and Western societies in general.

To avoid social loafing, make sure everyone in a group knows that they can easily be evaluated by others. If you are a social loafer, then by all means find work where nobody can point at you and say you are not pulling your weight.

QUE no 3.Why has it become imperative to learn to manage work-place diversity?What are the threats and challenges that it poses for the management in the current scenario.

Ans. Organizations have entered a new era characterized by rapid, dramatic and

turbulent changes. The accelerated pace of change has transformed how work is

performed by employees in diverse organizations. Change has truly become an

inherent and integral part of organizational life.

Several emerging trends are impacting organizational life. Of these emerging

trends, five will be examined: globalization, diversity, flexibility, flat, and

networks. These five emerging trends create tensions for organizational leaders

and employees as they go through waves of changes in their organizations. These

tensions present opportunities as well as threats, and if these tensions are not

managed well, they will result in dysfunctional and dire organizational outcomes

at the end of any change process

Workplace Diversity

The  dimensions of workplace diversity include, but are not limited to: age,

ethnicity, ancestry, gender, physical abilities/qualities, race, sexual orientation,

educational background, geographic location, income, marital status, military

experience, religious beliefs, parental status, and work experience.

The Challenges of Workplace Diversity

The future success of any organizations relies on the ability to manage a diverse

body of talent that can bring innovative ideas, perspectives and views to their

work. The challenge and problems faced of workplace diversity can be turned into

a strategic organizational asset if an organization is able to capitalize on this

melting pot of diverse talents. With the mixture of talents of diverse cultural

backgrounds, genders, ages and lifestyles, an organization can respond to business

opportunities more rapidly and creatively, especially in the global arena , which

must be one of the important organisational goals to be attained. More importantly,

if the organizational environment does not support diversity broadly, one risks

losing talent to competitors.

This is especially true for multinational companies ,  who have operations on a

global scale and employ people of different countries, ethical and cultural

backgrounds.

Thus, a HR manager needs to be mindful and may employ a 'Think Global, Act

Local' approach in most circumstances. With a population / the nation's strive

towards high technology and knowledge-based economy; foreign talents are lured

to share their expertise in these areas. Thus, many local HR managers have to

undergo cultural-based Human Resource Management training to further their

abilities to motivate a group of professional that are highly qualified but culturally

diverse. Furthermore, the  professional must assure the local professionals that

these foreign talents are not a threat to their career advancement . In many ways,

the effectiveness of workplace diversity management is dependent on the skilful

balancing act of the HR manager.

One of the main reasons for ineffective workplace diversity management is the

predisposition to pigeonhole employees, placing them in a different silo based on

their diversity profile . In the real world, diversity cannot be easily categorized and

those organizations that respond to human complexity by leveraging the talents of

a broad workforce will be the most effective in growing their businesses and their

customer base.

The Management of Workplace Diversity

In order to effectively manage workplace diversity,  a HR Manager needs to

change from an ethnocentric view ("our way is the best way") to a culturally

relative perspective ("let's take the best of a variety of ways"). This shift in

philosophy has to be ingrained in the managerial framework of the HR Manager in

his/her planning, organizing, leading and controlling of organizational resources.

There are several best practices that a HR manager can adopt in ensuring effective

management of workplace diversity in order to attain organizational goals.

They are:

Planning a Mentoring Program - One of the best ways to handle workplace

diversity issues is through initiating a Diversity Mentoring Program. This could

entail involving different departmental managers in a mentoring program to coach

and provide feedback to employees who are different from them. In order for the

program to run successfully, it is wise to provide practical training for these

managers or seek help from consultants and experts in this field. Usually, such a

program will encourage organization's members to air their opinions and learn how

to resolve conflicts due to their diversity. More importantly, the purpose of a

Diversity Mentoring Program seeks to encourage members to move beyond their

own cultural frame of reference to recognize and take full advantage of the

productivity potential inherent in a diverse population.

Organizing Talents Strategically - Many companies are now realizing the

advantages of a diverse workplace. As more and more companies are going global

in their market expansions either physically or virtually (for example, E-

commerce-related companies), there is a necessity to employ diverse talents to

understand the various niches of the market. For example, when China was

opening up its markets and exporting their products globally in the late 1980s, the

Chinese companies (such as China's electronic giants such as Haier) were seeking

the marketing expertise of Singaporeans. This is because Singapore's marketing

talents were able to understand the local China markets relatively well (almost

75% of Singaporeans are of Chinese descent) and as well as being attuned to the

markets in the West due to Singapore's open economic policies and English

language abilities.

With this trend in place, a HR Manager must be able to organize the pool of

diverse talents strategically for the organization. He/She must consider how a

diverse workforce can enable the company to attain new markets and other

organizational goals in order to harness the full potential of workplace diversity.

An organization that sees the existence of a diverse workforce as an organizational

asset rather than a liability would indirectly help the organization to positively take

in its stride some of the less positive aspects of workforce diversity.

Leading the Talk - A HR Manager needs to advocate a diverse workforce by

making diversity evident at all organizational levels. Otherwise, some employees

will quickly conclude that there is no future for them in the company. As the HR

Manager, it is pertinent to show respect for diversity issues and promote clear and

positive responses to them. He/She must also show a high level of commitment

and be able to resolve issues of workplace diversity in an ethical and responsible

manner.

Control and Measure Results - A HR Manager must conduct regular organizational

assessments on issues like pay, benefits, work environment, management and

promotional opportunities to assess the progress over the long term. There is also a

need to develop appropriate measuring tools to measure the impact of diversity

initiatives at the organization through organization-wide feedback surveys and

other methods. Without proper control and evaluation, some of these diversity

initiatives may just fizzle out, without resolving any real problems that may surface

due to workplace diversity.

Motivational Approaches

Workplace motivation can be defined as the influence that makes us do things to

achieve organizational goals: this is a result of our individual needs being satisfied

(or met) so that we are motivated to complete organizational tasks effectively. As

these needs vary from person to person, an organization must be able to utilize

different motivational tools to encourage their employees to put in the required

effort and increase productivity for the company.

Threats and challenges occurs in management are following

o Acceleration of processes (faster reporting, shorter planning cycles, fast close) across all existing PM processes is the major improvement priority. 

o Creation of better links between strategy management and other PM processes is the major integration priority.

o PM processes are becoming more complex, with more people involved and an in-creasing number of tools used. 

o This requires careful management. It is important to better align IT and business so they share a common vision of performance management.

o Companies do increasingly use more specialized software tools to automate their PM processes, as opposed to using basic spreadsheet tools such as Excel.

There is an increasing need for integrated technology platforms that allow

companies to manage performance across the different PM processes.

1. Question no 1) Give reasons as to why you joined a favorite group other than your family.?

Ans

i. Other group gives me more freedom to grow than my family.ii. In my family member will give me spoon feeding but in other group I

will do work on my own.iii. I will get experience of the real wolrd.if i join my family business then

less exposure will be given.iv. And some time we work according to your dreams and passion if i am

passionate about any company then i try my level best to join that group.

v. And I want to join my family business after some experience so that I will not be a fresher for them and I am able to give opinion.

Theory X and theory Y

McGregor argued that the conventional approach to managing was based on three

major propositions, which he called Theory X:

1. Management is responsible for organizing the elements of productive

enterprise-money, materials, equipment, and people-in the interests of

economic ends.

2. With respect to people, this is a process of directing their efforts, motivating

them, controlling their actions, and modifying their behavior to fit the needs

of the organization.

3. Without this active intervention by management, people would be passive-

even resistant-to organizational needs. They must therefore be persuaded,

rewarded, punished, and controlled. Their activities must be directed.

Management's task was thus simply getting things done through other

people.

According to McGregor, these tenets of management are based on less explicit

assumptions about human nature. The first of these assumptions is that individuals

do not like to work and will avoid it if possible. A further assumption is that

human beings do not want responsibility and desire explicit direction.

Additionally, individuals are assumed to put their individual concerns above that

of the organization for which they work and to resist change, valuing security

more than other considerations at work. Finally, human beings are assumed to be

easily manipulated and controlled. McGregor contended that both the classical and

human relations approaches to management depended this same set of

assumptions. He called the first style of management "hard" and identified its

methods as close supervision, tight controls, and coercion.

The hard style of management led to restriction of output, mutual distrust,

unionism, and even sabotage. McGregor called the second style of management

"soft" and identified its methods as permissiveness and need satisfaction.

McGregor suggested that the soft style of management often led to managers'

failure to perform their managerial role. He also pointed out that employees often

take advantage of an overly permissive manager by demanding more but

performing at lower levels.

McGregor drew upon the work of Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) to explain why

Theory X assumptions led to ineffective management. Maslow had proposed that

man's needs are arranged in levels, with physical and safety needs at the bottom of

the needs hierarchy and social, ego, and self-actualization needs at upper levels of

the hierarchy. Maslow's basic point was that once a need is met, it no longer

motivates behavior; thus, only unmet needs are motivational. McGregor argued

that most employees already had their physical and safety needs met and that the

motivational emphasis had shifted to the social, ego, and self-actualization needs.

Therefore, management had to provide opportunities for these upper-level needs to

be met in the workplace, or employees would not be satisfied or motivated in their

jobs.

Such opportunities could be provided by allowing employees to participate in

decision making, by redesigning jobs to make them more challenging, or by

emphasizing good work group relations, among other things. According to

McGregor, neither the hard style of management based on the classical school nor

the soft style of management inspired by the human relations movement were

sufficient to motivate employees. Thus, he proposed a different set of assumptions

about human nature as it pertains to the workplace.

McGregor put forth these assumptions, which he believed could lead to more

effective management of people in the organization, under the rubric of Theory Y.

The major propositions of Theory Y include the following:

1. Management is responsible for organizing the elements of productive

enterprise-money, materials, equipment, and people in the interests of

economic ends.

2. People are not by nature passive or resistant to organizational needs. They

have become so as a result of experience in organizations.

3. The motivation, potential for development, capacity for assuming

responsibility, and readiness to direct behavior toward organizational goals

are all present in people-management does not put them there. It is a

responsibility of management to make it possible for people to recognize and

develop these human characteristics for themselves.

4. The essential task of management is to arrange organizational conditions and

methods of operation so that people can achieve their own goals by directing

their efforts toward organizational objectives.

Thus, Theory Y has at its core the assumption that the physical and mental effort

involved in work is natural and that individuals actively seek to engage in work. It

also assumes that close supervision and the threat of punishment are not the only

means or even the best means for inducing employees to exert productive effort.

Instead, if given the opportunity, employees will display self-motivation to put

forth the effort necessary to achieve the organization's goals. Thus, avoiding

responsibility is not an inherent quality of human nature; individuals will actually

seek it out under the proper conditions. Theory Y also assumes that the ability to

be innovative and creative exists among a large, rather than a small segment of the

population. Finally, it assumes that rather than valuing security above all other

rewards associated with work, individuals desire rewards that satisfy their self-

esteem and self-actualization needs.

Although McGregor did not believe that it was possible to create a completely

Theory Y-type organization in the 1950s, he did believe that Theory Y

assumptions would lead to more effective management. He identified several

approaches to management that he felt were consistent with the precepts of Theory

Y. These included decentralization of decision-making authority, delegation, job

enlargement, and participative management. Job enrichment programs that began

in the 1960s and 1970s also were consistent with the assumptions of Theory Y.

Theory Z

Japanese consensus management style based on the assumptions that (1) employees want to build cooperative relationships with their employers, peers, and other employees in the firm; for this they (2) require high degree of support in the form of secure employment and facilities for development of multiple skills through training and job rotation, (3) they value family life, culture and traditions, and social institutions as much as material success, (4) they have well-developed sense of dedication, moral obligations, and self-discipline, and (5) they can make collective decisions through consensus. Introduced by the author William Ouchi (born 1943) in his book 'Theory Z.'

He identifies seven major characteristics of Japanese organizations: lifetime employment, slow evaluation and promotion of employees, non-specialized career paths, implicit control mechanism, collective decision making, collective responsibility, and wholistic concern (building a complete relationship between employer and employee, including concerning with employee's non-work, personal

and family, matters). He asserts that these characteristics are not true of a typical American organization. In his later book, The M-Form Society, Ouchi (1984) elaborates on harmonious relationships in Japan among financial institutions, industrial organizations, labor, and government to develop industrial strategy. He argues that integrated planning at the societal level is responsible for Japanese success. Although Ouchi's Theory Z has become very popular, his research methodology has been criticized because of his small sample size and limited interviews and observations.