A Comparison of Contemporary Human Resource Management and Employment Relations Practices of Japanese and US Multinational Corporation Subsidiaries: Evidence from Four Countries
This paper compares Japanese and US multinational corporations (MNCs) on their deployment of human resource management (HRM) and employment relations (ER) practices within four countries. Debate about convergence is used to reconcile findings. The context is the shift from the dominance of the Japan...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Relations industrielles (Québec, Québec) Québec), 2019-10, Vol.74 (4), p.742-779 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 779 |
---|---|
container_issue | 4 |
container_start_page | 742 |
container_title | Relations industrielles (Québec, Québec) |
container_volume | 74 |
creator | Bartram, Timothy Adam, Duncan Edwards, Tony Jalette, Patrice Burgess, John Stanton, Pauline |
description | This paper compares Japanese and US multinational corporations (MNCs) on their deployment of human resource management (HRM) and employment relations (ER) practices within four countries. Debate about convergence is used to reconcile findings. The context is the shift from the dominance of the Japanese economy in the 1980s and early 1990s towards the renewed dominance of the US economy in more recent decades. We draw on data from representative, parallel surveys of MNCs operating in Canada, the UK, Spain and Australia to test a set of hypotheses examining similarities and differences between subsidiaries of Japanese and US MNCs in relation to management control across borders, remuneration, representation and worker involvement.
The findings demonstrate that, despite the pressures of globalization, and the partial movement away from traditional Japanese management practices in Japan, there are clear country of origin effects for Japanese and American MNCs. Results indicate that Japanese and US MNCs behave differently in terms of the control that they exercise, with Japanese firms exhibiting a greater tendency to use personal forms of control in their foreign subsidiaries and a lower tendency to use procedural forms of control. In terms of HRM practices, Japanese MNCs are distinctive in relation to pay systems. For example, they are less likely than their US counterparts to use performance-related pay and, more likely, to adopt non-union representative structures in subsidiaries.
In line with Kaufman (2016), we argue that the study’s findings provide evidence for the ‘converging divergence phenomenon’ in that both Japanese and US MNCs are adopting the most universal aspects of each other’s management practices and integrating them into their own unique systems of management in response to global market forces. We discuss the theoretical implications for the convergence and divergence of HRM and ER systems, and the development of such systems in Japanese and US MNC subsidiaries. |
doi_str_mv | 10.7202/1066833ar |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>erudit_JFNAL</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2714162354</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><eruid>1066833ar</eruid><jstor_id>26872959</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>1066833ar</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c261t-1ed619f2b800b8cac7d7f709ea5056ad6e8ea31937c496166d0b1779cbd886f03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kU1rFTEYhYMoeKld-APEgCsXo_m4kw935XJrlRalteBuyCTvSMpMMiaZQn-W_9DMvVpcuQqH83DOIS9CLyl5Jxlh7ykRQnFu0hO0oZLwRlGunqINIXzbcKm_P0enOfueMM4Fa5XYoF9neBen2SSfY8BxqCoUmOaYTHrAF8tkAr6GHJdkAV-ZYH7ABKFgExzeT_MYHw7yGkZTfAwZf03GFm8hr2GfzWwCZDjgtzf4ahmLDwfSjLUqrT2rwjdLn73zdQfkD3h_7x2E2jikOOHz2l7hJZTVfYGeDWbMcPrnPUG35_tvu4vm8svHT7uzy8YyQUtDwQmqB9YrQnpljZVODpJoMC1phXECFBhONZd2qwUVwpGeSqlt75QSA-En6M0xd07x5wK5dHd1R92dOybplgrG2-1_Kc60pJq1slJvj5RNMecEQzcnP9Uf7ijp1tN1j6er7Ksje5dLTI8gE0oy3erqvz76kBbnyz9JfxN-AzDpolk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2329719257</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>A Comparison of Contemporary Human Resource Management and Employment Relations Practices of Japanese and US Multinational Corporation Subsidiaries: Evidence from Four Countries</title><source>Jstor Journals Open Access</source><creator>Bartram, Timothy ; Adam, Duncan ; Edwards, Tony ; Jalette, Patrice ; Burgess, John ; Stanton, Pauline</creator><creatorcontrib>Bartram, Timothy ; Adam, Duncan ; Edwards, Tony ; Jalette, Patrice ; Burgess, John ; Stanton, Pauline</creatorcontrib><description>This paper compares Japanese and US multinational corporations (MNCs) on their deployment of human resource management (HRM) and employment relations (ER) practices within four countries. Debate about convergence is used to reconcile findings. The context is the shift from the dominance of the Japanese economy in the 1980s and early 1990s towards the renewed dominance of the US economy in more recent decades. We draw on data from representative, parallel surveys of MNCs operating in Canada, the UK, Spain and Australia to test a set of hypotheses examining similarities and differences between subsidiaries of Japanese and US MNCs in relation to management control across borders, remuneration, representation and worker involvement.
The findings demonstrate that, despite the pressures of globalization, and the partial movement away from traditional Japanese management practices in Japan, there are clear country of origin effects for Japanese and American MNCs. Results indicate that Japanese and US MNCs behave differently in terms of the control that they exercise, with Japanese firms exhibiting a greater tendency to use personal forms of control in their foreign subsidiaries and a lower tendency to use procedural forms of control. In terms of HRM practices, Japanese MNCs are distinctive in relation to pay systems. For example, they are less likely than their US counterparts to use performance-related pay and, more likely, to adopt non-union representative structures in subsidiaries.
In line with Kaufman (2016), we argue that the study’s findings provide evidence for the ‘converging divergence phenomenon’ in that both Japanese and US MNCs are adopting the most universal aspects of each other’s management practices and integrating them into their own unique systems of management in response to global market forces. We discuss the theoretical implications for the convergence and divergence of HRM and ER systems, and the development of such systems in Japanese and US MNC subsidiaries.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0034-379X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1703-8138</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.7202/1066833ar</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Quebec: Département des relations industrielles de l’Université Laval</publisher><subject>Borders ; Compensation ; Convergence ; Country of origin ; Deployment ; Design ; Dominance ; Employee management relations ; Employment ; Employment practices ; Foreign investment ; Foreign subsidiaries ; Globalization ; Human resource management ; Human resources management ; Labor relations ; Market forces ; Multinational corporations ; Participation ; Performance management ; Performance related pay ; Personal control ; Resource management ; Subsidiaries ; Worker participation</subject><ispartof>Relations industrielles (Québec, Québec), 2019-10, Vol.74 (4), p.742-779</ispartof><rights>Tous droits réservés © Département des relations industrielles de l’Université Laval, 2019</rights><rights>DÉPARTEMENT DES RELATIONS INDUSTRIELLES, UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL</rights><rights>Copyright Universite Laval - Departement des Relations Industrielles Fall 2019</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c261t-1ed619f2b800b8cac7d7f709ea5056ad6e8ea31937c496166d0b1779cbd886f03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c261t-1ed619f2b800b8cac7d7f709ea5056ad6e8ea31937c496166d0b1779cbd886f03</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/26872959$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26872959$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,12826,25335,27325,27905,27906,33755,54505,54511,79318,79325</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/26872959$$EView_record_in_JSTOR$$FView_record_in_$$GJSTOR</linktorsrc></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bartram, Timothy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Adam, Duncan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Edwards, Tony</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jalette, Patrice</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burgess, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanton, Pauline</creatorcontrib><title>A Comparison of Contemporary Human Resource Management and Employment Relations Practices of Japanese and US Multinational Corporation Subsidiaries: Evidence from Four Countries</title><title>Relations industrielles (Québec, Québec)</title><description>This paper compares Japanese and US multinational corporations (MNCs) on their deployment of human resource management (HRM) and employment relations (ER) practices within four countries. Debate about convergence is used to reconcile findings. The context is the shift from the dominance of the Japanese economy in the 1980s and early 1990s towards the renewed dominance of the US economy in more recent decades. We draw on data from representative, parallel surveys of MNCs operating in Canada, the UK, Spain and Australia to test a set of hypotheses examining similarities and differences between subsidiaries of Japanese and US MNCs in relation to management control across borders, remuneration, representation and worker involvement.
The findings demonstrate that, despite the pressures of globalization, and the partial movement away from traditional Japanese management practices in Japan, there are clear country of origin effects for Japanese and American MNCs. Results indicate that Japanese and US MNCs behave differently in terms of the control that they exercise, with Japanese firms exhibiting a greater tendency to use personal forms of control in their foreign subsidiaries and a lower tendency to use procedural forms of control. In terms of HRM practices, Japanese MNCs are distinctive in relation to pay systems. For example, they are less likely than their US counterparts to use performance-related pay and, more likely, to adopt non-union representative structures in subsidiaries.
In line with Kaufman (2016), we argue that the study’s findings provide evidence for the ‘converging divergence phenomenon’ in that both Japanese and US MNCs are adopting the most universal aspects of each other’s management practices and integrating them into their own unique systems of management in response to global market forces. We discuss the theoretical implications for the convergence and divergence of HRM and ER systems, and the development of such systems in Japanese and US MNC subsidiaries.</description><subject>Borders</subject><subject>Compensation</subject><subject>Convergence</subject><subject>Country of origin</subject><subject>Deployment</subject><subject>Design</subject><subject>Dominance</subject><subject>Employee management relations</subject><subject>Employment</subject><subject>Employment practices</subject><subject>Foreign investment</subject><subject>Foreign subsidiaries</subject><subject>Globalization</subject><subject>Human resource management</subject><subject>Human resources management</subject><subject>Labor relations</subject><subject>Market forces</subject><subject>Multinational corporations</subject><subject>Participation</subject><subject>Performance management</subject><subject>Performance related pay</subject><subject>Personal control</subject><subject>Resource management</subject><subject>Subsidiaries</subject><subject>Worker participation</subject><issn>0034-379X</issn><issn>1703-8138</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>BHHNA</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kU1rFTEYhYMoeKld-APEgCsXo_m4kw935XJrlRalteBuyCTvSMpMMiaZQn-W_9DMvVpcuQqH83DOIS9CLyl5Jxlh7ykRQnFu0hO0oZLwRlGunqINIXzbcKm_P0enOfueMM4Fa5XYoF9neBen2SSfY8BxqCoUmOaYTHrAF8tkAr6GHJdkAV-ZYH7ABKFgExzeT_MYHw7yGkZTfAwZf03GFm8hr2GfzWwCZDjgtzf4ahmLDwfSjLUqrT2rwjdLn73zdQfkD3h_7x2E2jikOOHz2l7hJZTVfYGeDWbMcPrnPUG35_tvu4vm8svHT7uzy8YyQUtDwQmqB9YrQnpljZVODpJoMC1phXECFBhONZd2qwUVwpGeSqlt75QSA-En6M0xd07x5wK5dHd1R92dOybplgrG2-1_Kc60pJq1slJvj5RNMecEQzcnP9Uf7ijp1tN1j6er7Ksje5dLTI8gE0oy3erqvz76kBbnyz9JfxN-AzDpolk</recordid><startdate>20191001</startdate><enddate>20191001</enddate><creator>Bartram, Timothy</creator><creator>Adam, Duncan</creator><creator>Edwards, Tony</creator><creator>Jalette, Patrice</creator><creator>Burgess, John</creator><creator>Stanton, Pauline</creator><general>Département des relations industrielles de l’Université Laval</general><general>Départment des Relations Industrielles, Université Laval</general><general>Universite Laval - Departement des Relations Industrielles</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4S-</scope><scope>7U4</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>8FQ</scope><scope>8FV</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BHHNA</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DPSOV</scope><scope>DWI</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HEHIP</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>KC-</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M2L</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>WZK</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20191001</creationdate><title>A Comparison of Contemporary Human Resource Management and Employment Relations Practices of Japanese and US Multinational Corporation Subsidiaries: Evidence from Four Countries</title><author>Bartram, Timothy ; Adam, Duncan ; Edwards, Tony ; Jalette, Patrice ; Burgess, John ; Stanton, Pauline</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c261t-1ed619f2b800b8cac7d7f709ea5056ad6e8ea31937c496166d0b1779cbd886f03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Borders</topic><topic>Compensation</topic><topic>Convergence</topic><topic>Country of origin</topic><topic>Deployment</topic><topic>Design</topic><topic>Dominance</topic><topic>Employee management relations</topic><topic>Employment</topic><topic>Employment practices</topic><topic>Foreign investment</topic><topic>Foreign subsidiaries</topic><topic>Globalization</topic><topic>Human resource management</topic><topic>Human resources management</topic><topic>Labor relations</topic><topic>Market forces</topic><topic>Multinational corporations</topic><topic>Participation</topic><topic>Performance management</topic><topic>Performance related pay</topic><topic>Personal control</topic><topic>Resource management</topic><topic>Subsidiaries</topic><topic>Worker participation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bartram, Timothy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Adam, Duncan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Edwards, Tony</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jalette, Patrice</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Burgess, John</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Stanton, Pauline</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>BPIR.com Limited</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (pre-2017)</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database</collection><collection>Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Politics Collection</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Sociology Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Politics Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Political Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Sociology Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Sociological Abstracts (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>Relations industrielles (Québec, Québec)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bartram, Timothy</au><au>Adam, Duncan</au><au>Edwards, Tony</au><au>Jalette, Patrice</au><au>Burgess, John</au><au>Stanton, Pauline</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>A Comparison of Contemporary Human Resource Management and Employment Relations Practices of Japanese and US Multinational Corporation Subsidiaries: Evidence from Four Countries</atitle><jtitle>Relations industrielles (Québec, Québec)</jtitle><date>2019-10-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>74</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>742</spage><epage>779</epage><pages>742-779</pages><issn>0034-379X</issn><eissn>1703-8138</eissn><abstract>This paper compares Japanese and US multinational corporations (MNCs) on their deployment of human resource management (HRM) and employment relations (ER) practices within four countries. Debate about convergence is used to reconcile findings. The context is the shift from the dominance of the Japanese economy in the 1980s and early 1990s towards the renewed dominance of the US economy in more recent decades. We draw on data from representative, parallel surveys of MNCs operating in Canada, the UK, Spain and Australia to test a set of hypotheses examining similarities and differences between subsidiaries of Japanese and US MNCs in relation to management control across borders, remuneration, representation and worker involvement.
The findings demonstrate that, despite the pressures of globalization, and the partial movement away from traditional Japanese management practices in Japan, there are clear country of origin effects for Japanese and American MNCs. Results indicate that Japanese and US MNCs behave differently in terms of the control that they exercise, with Japanese firms exhibiting a greater tendency to use personal forms of control in their foreign subsidiaries and a lower tendency to use procedural forms of control. In terms of HRM practices, Japanese MNCs are distinctive in relation to pay systems. For example, they are less likely than their US counterparts to use performance-related pay and, more likely, to adopt non-union representative structures in subsidiaries.
In line with Kaufman (2016), we argue that the study’s findings provide evidence for the ‘converging divergence phenomenon’ in that both Japanese and US MNCs are adopting the most universal aspects of each other’s management practices and integrating them into their own unique systems of management in response to global market forces. We discuss the theoretical implications for the convergence and divergence of HRM and ER systems, and the development of such systems in Japanese and US MNC subsidiaries.</abstract><cop>Quebec</cop><pub>Département des relations industrielles de l’Université Laval</pub><doi>10.7202/1066833ar</doi><tpages>38</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
identifier | ISSN: 0034-379X |
ispartof | Relations industrielles (Québec, Québec), 2019-10, Vol.74 (4), p.742-779 |
issn | 0034-379X 1703-8138 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2714162354 |
source | Jstor Journals Open Access |
subjects | Borders Compensation Convergence Country of origin Deployment Design Dominance Employee management relations Employment Employment practices Foreign investment Foreign subsidiaries Globalization Human resource management Human resources management Labor relations Market forces Multinational corporations Participation Performance management Performance related pay Personal control Resource management Subsidiaries Worker participation |
title | A Comparison of Contemporary Human Resource Management and Employment Relations Practices of Japanese and US Multinational Corporation Subsidiaries: Evidence from Four Countries |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-21T05%3A39%3A48IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-erudit_JFNAL&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=A%20Comparison%20of%20Contemporary%20Human%20Resource%20Management%20and%20Employment%20Relations%20Practices%20of%20Japanese%20and%20US%20Multinational%20Corporation%20Subsidiaries:%20Evidence%20from%20Four%20Countries&rft.jtitle=Relations%20industrielles%20(Qu%C3%A9bec,%20Qu%C3%A9bec)&rft.au=Bartram,%20Timothy&rft.date=2019-10-01&rft.volume=74&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=742&rft.epage=779&rft.pages=742-779&rft.issn=0034-379X&rft.eissn=1703-8138&rft_id=info:doi/10.7202/1066833ar&rft_dat=%3Cerudit_JFNAL%3E1066833ar%3C/erudit_JFNAL%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2329719257&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_eruid=1066833ar&rft_jstor_id=26872959&rfr_iscdi=true |