Pernille Rudlin - Rudlin Consulting

About Pernille Rudlin

Pernille Rudlin was brought up partly in Japan and partly in the UK. She is fluent in Japanese, and lived in Japan for 9 years.

She spent nearly a decade at Mitsubishi Corporation working in their London operations and Tokyo headquarters in sales and marketing and corporate planning and also including a stint in their International Human Resource Development Office.

More recently she had a global senior role as Director of External Relations, International Business, at Fujitsu, the leading Japanese information and communication technology company and the biggest Japanese employer in the UK, focusing on ensuring the company’s corporate messages in Japan reach the world outside.

Pernille Rudlin holds a B.A. with honours from Oxford University in Modern History and Economics and an M.B.A. from INSEAD and she is the author of several books and articles on cross cultural communications and business.

Since starting Japan Intercultural Consulting’s operations in Europe in 2004, Pernille has conducted seminars for Japanese and European companies in Belgium, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Switzerland, UAE, the UK and the USA, on Japanese cultural topics, post merger integration and on working with different European cultures.

Pernille is a non-executive director of Japan House London, an Associate of the Centre for Japanese Studies at the University of East Anglia and she is also a trustee of the Japan Society of the UK.

Find more about me on:

Here are my most recent posts

The Suntory revolutionary from Mitsubishi Corporation

Takeshi Niinami is probably the most famous alumnus of my alma mater, Mitsubishi Corporation. Born in 1959 and a graduate of Keio (as so many Mitsubishi ‘gentlemen’ are), he started off in sugar trading and after a Mitsubishi Corp sponsored MBA at Harvard, he was involved with the foundation of the Sodexo joint venture in Japan with MC, and then transferred to and ultimately ran the convenience store chain Lawson, which MC had acquired a majority share in.

He was lured to the family run Suntory in 2014 by the grandson of the founder, Nobutada Saji, and has been shaking the place up ever since, much to the consternation of many employees. The revolution was already underway, as Suntory had already announced its $16bn acquisition of US whisky maker Beam and the year before had acquired the UK brands Lucozade and Ribena from GlaxoSmithKline for $1.35bn and in 2009 acquired Orangina Schweppes for $1.97bn.

A former director who worked with him at Lawsons says “there are people who cannot keep up with him. He keeps coming up with new things, and then says do it within a year”. Niinami believes that Suntory will not be able to function well as a global company if it only promotes from within, so has appointed Vincent Ambrosino, formerly CFO of Pepsico Canada as an Executive Officer of Suntory Holdings, in charge of strategy, finance and accounting. He only joined Beam in 2013 as the CFO so this by Japanese standards was seen as meteoric rise to a top position.

Furthermore, Makiko Ono, one of the rare senior Japanese businesswomen in a major company, who had been involved with various collaborations with foreign companies as executive officer of Suntory Food & Beverages, has transferred to Suntory Holdings, to become the GM of global HR. Around 17 people from Suntory Holdings will be seconded to Beam Suntory, with the aim of improving global mobility. Niinami himself announced that he wants to hire more people from outside the company, “including those who have investment experience who were in trading companies” – hiring in his own image, in other words.

Suntory Holdings mid term plan has highly ambitious double digit targets for turnover and profit. It is unlikely this will be reached organically, says Toyo Keizai magazine. More M&A can be expected. Niinami is not likely to slow down.

For more content like this, subscribe to the free Rudlin Consulting Newsletter. 最新の在欧日系企業の状況については無料の月刊Rudlin Consulting ニューズレターにご登録ください。

What to do about the lack of global jinzai (competence) in Japan

I wholeheartedly agree with the recommendations (particularly the final one) in this Q&A from Professor Hiromi Maenaka of Akita International University, head of Global Studies program, on how Japanese can become more globally competent – summarised by me in English below:

Q: Why are there not many “global jinzai” (globally competent Japanese) in Japan?

A: It’s not just about English ability. At most Japanese schools, teaching focuses on how to answer questions to which there is a clear answer. But if I ask students who have just arrived at university why that answer is correct, they simply say “because I was taught that it was correct.” In real life there are few correct answers. Particularly overseas.

Q: Japanese companies are beginning to realise there is a shortage of global jinzai?

A: As more companies venture overseas, the majority of their production and demand is outside Japan. Acquisitions of and joint ventures with foreign companies have also increased. It has become necessary to work with people who have different nationalities and cultural backgrounds. So Japanese companies have become in urgent and multiple need of global jinzai.

Q: What kind of education is Akita International University providing to develop global jinzai?

A: Our students live alongside foreign students and study abroad on a solo basis. Through this experience, they lose their resistance to thinking and acting for themselves, discussing opinions with other people and making presentations in front of large groups. These are outcomes which companies also value, but there are problems.

Q: What kind of problems?

A: According to HR managers of companies which hire our graduates, compared to universities in the big cities, they seem “hot housed” and “disconnected from the real world”. Even if they are “global jinzai“, they cannot immediately make use of their abilities. I think companies might have to increase their provision of internships to counter this problem.

Q: Isn’t there an increase in opportunities to become “global jinzai” because of collaborations with foreign companies?

A: You have to debate with foreigners if you work with them. The problem for most is that most Japanese people have become used to a way of working whereby you don’t have to put your thoughts into words and feel comfortable in a world where you can communicate through ishin denshin (telepathy).

Q: How should we change?

A: You have to practice being able to say clearly what you think. Americans expect people to say clearly what they are thinking. Even if it is negative. Sometimes you even have to be prepared to have an argument.

Q: This might be bewildering for some people?

A: You have to try to find some common ground. Human emotions and the need to put yourself in someone else’s shoes are the same the world over. Also, the top executives of the company need to make the objective clear. Then employees will have this objective in common and can move forward together. Then both foreigners and Japanese can understand each other and collaborate.

Using Europe as a global pivot

One trend we have noticed in the past few years of observing Japanese companies in Europe is a move away from having global operations either directly managed by Japan HQ or via their US subsidiary. In fact there have been a few cases, usually following a major acquisition of a European company, where the Japan HQ pretty much delegates overseas management functions to the European executive team.

One such example is Asahi Glass. When it decided to set up operations in Brazil in 2013, Japan HQ made a decision to leave local management to their European managers, thereby hoping to avoid the three traps that, according to Nikkei Business, Japanese companies often fall into when entering overseas markets – 1) treating developing markets contemptuously 2) disciminatory hiring and HR practices 3) forcing the “Japanese Way” of doing things. The president of AGC Brazil is Italian – AGC reasoning that they are “both Latin cultures”.

The European team thoroughly investigated the local labour pool and came to the conclusion that there was a severe lack of high level skills, They decided to implement a brand new hiring and training system. Local media publicity attracted applications from 5371 people, which they whittled down to 600 through looking at educational attainment, and then after a written exam, this was further filtered down to 120 candidates.

These 120 candidates were sent on the Brazilian government SENSAI 3 month training scheme. Most continued working, participating in the course from 18:00 to 23:00 at night. Asahi Glass paid the training fees. Many dropped out because of the punishing schedule, and other participants were able to find jobs elsewhere, using the fact that they persisted to the end of the course to enhance their employability. In the end, Asahi Glass hired 33 people – 1% of the original applicants. Even though this may seem ineffecient, they repeated the process 4 times and were able to gather a workforce of 200 people before the factory began operations.

Around 100 of them were then sent to Europe, to factories in Italy, Hungary and France, for around 3 months. In the two years since the factory started operations, hardly anyone has left of their own accord. Some have become managers, and of the original European team of 13, only 7 remain. The Italian president expects that his successor will be Brazilian.

Nikkei Business magazine comments that Japanese companies are not as serious as they should be about hiring and developing people overseas, and that is why they are having problems hiring outside Japan. “Expatriates from Japan do their best, but does Japan HQ really give much priority to HR strategy?”

Why the refugee crisis might mean the end of the EU

When I recently asserted that Britain leaving the EU would result in many multinationals withdrawing their European headquarters from the UK, a British person of Greek origin claimed that the UK would be fine on its own. It would be better off without burdensome EU regulations enforced by a cabal, he said, and the UK is such an innovative country, companies would want to base themselves here whatever our European status.

Given the treatment of Greece by the European institutions recently, I suppose this view is not surprising. There have been many complaints in the UK too about too much European regulation. Often though, as in the case of an EU standard on the amount of noise a lawnmower can emit, these regulations were actually promoted by British officials because they benefited British manufacturers. For manufacturers in general, the comfort in setting up a factory anywhere in the EU is that by meeting these standards, their products will be approved to sell anywhere in the 28 countries of the EU.

If the UK were to leave the EU, it would no longer be able to influence these regulations, and yet would have to abide by them if it wanted to sell its products in its closest and biggest market. Fortunately, for British people like me who are pro-European, the new leader of the opposition Labour Party has just said that he would campaign to stay in the European Union in the forthcoming referendum (likely next year).

It is assumed that the Prime Minister David Cameron, in his negotiations with the EU member states, is trying to weaken the social charter of the European Union, which has brought about protection for employees in terms of working time, holidays, discrimination, etc. The Labour Party, as you can tell by the name, is strongly committed to supporting the rights of working people, so has decided to campaign for staying in the European Union, regardless of the deal Cameron reaches, by committing to reverse any social concessions gained, should Labour get back into power.

One of the key non-negotiables for the core European states such as France or Germany – which actually is one of the main reasons many British citizens oppose the European Union – is the free movement of people. To me, this is why the UK is as innovative as it is. There is plenty of evidence that diversity encourages innovation and London is without doubt one of the most diverse cities in Europe. If you locate your company in the London area, you can access an extraordinary range of nationalities, viewpoints and skills, all with English as the common language.

Unfortunately the current refugee crisis is weakening this commitment to the free movement of people and could even bring about the end of the European Union entirely. Instead of coming up with a coordinated solution, member countries are behaving like they have not remembered the lessons of the two World Wars we are currently commemorating.

This article originally appeared in Japanese in the Teikoku Databank News on 14th October 2015 and also appears in Pernille Rudlin’s new book “Shinrai: Japanese Corporate Integrity in a Disintegrating Europe” – available as a paperback and Kindle ebook on Amazon.

Fewer women on the boards of Japanese companies in Europe than in Japan

We’ve revised our Top 30 Japanese companies in Europe again. Where possible we have updated the number of employees, which means the Suntory Group is now in the Top 30 along with Konica Minolta (and Kao and Daiichi Sankyo are out). This time we wanted to take a look at the gender and nationality diversity on boards, both in Japan and Europe, and have discovered that there are actually fewer women on the boards of Japanese companies in Europe than in Japan.

Only two out of 19 (10%) of European headquarter boards of Japanese companies have women on them – Astellas and Suntory (the latter including Makiko Ono, an executive in Suntory Japan) and only 3 of the 14 (21%) UK based Japanese companies we looked at (in cases where the European HQ was not in the UK or there were separate European and UK companies in the UK) had women members – Lucite (subsidiary of Mitsubishi Chemical Holding/Mitsubishi Rayon), Komatsu and NTT Data. Komatsu UK’s female director is Keiko Fujiwara, who is the CEO of Komatsu Europe, in Belgium. This contrasts with 13 (43%) out of the Top 30 companies’ boards in Japan having women directors. In case you were wondering, only 6% of FTSE250 companies have no women on them.

4% of the Top 30 Japanese companies in Europe’s board members in Europe and/or the UK are female
6% of the Top 30 Japanese companies in Europe’s board members in Japan are female
8% of the Top 30 Japanese companies in Europe’s board members in Japan are non-Japanese
16% of the board members of the Top 100 listed Japanese companies in Japan are female
19.6% of FTSE250 board members are female

Around 62% of the members of European and UK boards of of the Top 30 Japanese companies are European, on average. Companies whose boards in the UK and Europe only had Japanese directors were Toshiba, Fast Retailing (Uniqlo), Fujifilm and Sharp. Sharp and Toshiba’s troubles are well known. Fast Retailing recently reported struggles in the US market and falling profits in Europe for Uniqlo, Comptoir des Cotonniers and Princess Tam Tam. Fujifilm has made a remarkable transformation from a B2C camera film to a B2B imaging company but the last set of quarterly results, issued last month were deemed “mixed”.

(Note: only main boards, not executive or supervisory boards were analysed, and company secretaries were excluded)

The full chart is here (highlighted means “above average) and can be downloaded here :Top 30 Japanese companies in Europe board diversity Nov 3 2015

Not-so-serious twenty-somethings make the best expats

So says Masato Hikita, director of Headwaters, a consultancy providing services to Japanese SMEs. Headwaters itself sends new graduate recruits off to Vietnam or Dubai for a month or so, to learn how to set up new businesses in foreign countries. The aim is to make them realise that what they assume is common sense in Japan is not necessarily so outside of Japan.

So whilst most Japanese think that “global jinzai” (global human resources) are probably fast track employees in their 30s or above, who speak fluent English, have overseas experience and a willingness to work overseas, Hikita argues that such people are way too good at being excellent in Japan. This means they will take responsibility for pushing forward with projects but also are good at consulting with their colleagues and juniors, are always bright and positive, and serious minded. Unfortunately this has the opposite effect overseas.

When such types go abroad, they want to achieve 100% perfection in their results. However overseas things never go smoothly. The star expat has a lot of pride, so tries their hardest, and puts all the burden on their own shoulders, worrying about how to fulfil headquarters’ expectations. But of course they only end up disappointing headquarters, the more they promise. The headquarters begins to believe that if their ace players can’t win overseas, then maybe they should give up on overseas expansion altogether.

A twenty-something employee will be under less pressure. If they mess up, it’s less of a cost, if they succeed then they’re lucky. Twenty somethings are happy to ask lots of questions, both locally and of Japan headquarters. That way they learn rather than trying to do everything by themselves, and also Japan headquarters become aware of how different things are overseas.

Hikita asked a Japanese person with long overseas experience what kind of employee makes the best expat, and the response was “someone who’s not so serious, who only half listens to what Japan HQ says”. That way, Japan HQ don’t have such high expectations – if 100 is the Japan benchmark, then 50 is good enough.

Finally, and I was relieved to see he did make this point, Japan HQ has to become more globalised itself, by having more non-Japanese employees working there. Again, easier said than done, as I know many European employees of Japanese companies are quite resistant to the idea of working in Japan, assuming that there will be long hours and many stresses on their families. Perhaps the same recipe applies – not so serious twenty somethings might be the place to start!

The Olympus scandal – has anything changed since then?

Unfortunately Michael Woodford did not answer the question in the title of the talk, which he gave to the Japan Society this week. It was pretty much the same talk I heard 3 years ago, only even more melodramatic and self dramatizing. But from what he said, I assume his answer would be that nothing has changed, if loyalty to seniors in Japanese companies continues as an excuse to cover up fraud. And certainly, with the recent frauds and cover ups in Toshiba, Asahi Kasei and Toyo Tire and Rubber, it’s hard not to worry that there is something rotten at the heart of Japanese corporate governance.

Woodford rather let his (understandably bitter) personal feelings towards former Olympus Chairman Kikukawa get in the way of two key points I felt. Firstly that Kikukawa was in turn covering up for his predecessor and his predecessor’s predecessor’s mistakes – it was not just about preserving his prestige and his (for a Japanese President surprisingly high) salary. So many Japanese corporate scandals turn out to have roots in previous generations, making it extremely difficult and perilous for successors to do anything about them, as the Japanese people sitting near me at the dinner afterwards pointed out. Secondly, that Kikukawa was able to get all the other directors and employees in the know to collude, not just out of their personal loyalty to him, but their fear that if the fraud was exposed, the consequences of the shame upon them and on Olympus would mean the end not only of their careers but of the company and all its 1000s of employees’ livelihoods.

The fact that Olympus survived is actually a vindication of Woodford’s approach, of public confession and resignations. But he is so insistent on making himself out to be a martyr, abused by “uncle” Kikukawa and threatened by yakuza, who nonetheless loves Japan (he kept insisting), that he rather lost the governance argument in all the embroidery of his story.

I asked him at the dinner afterwards if, rather than be a lone crusader, he had tried to get any of the Olympus directors that he says he knew as friends for 30 years or his other corporate friends in Japan (he was alerted to the fraud by a Japanese senior executive in another company) to advise him what to do, even work with him to get the problem sorted, but he said they all told him to shut up. Actually, I felt a sneaking sympathy towards them by the end of the evening.

The Rebirth of the Japanese Office Lady

About 20 years’ ago I wrote an article proclaiming the death of the Japanese Office Lady (OL). The company I was working at, along with many other Japanese companies at the time, had stopped hiring new graduates into the so-called “administrative” track, abolished the OL uniform, and encouraged existing OLs to transfer across to a management track. Future administrative needs would be filled by temporary agency workers.

I was quite pleased about these developments, as the old OL system offended my feminist sensibilities. The companies themselves had ended the OL system more for financial reasons. OLs were meant to join at age 20 or 22 and only stay in the company until their mid twenties, when it was expected they would leave to get married. In the meantime, they cleaned the desks, emptied the bins, made tea for the team, answered the phones and processed the team’s paperwork. By the mid 1990s, however, it became clear that more and more OLs were staying in the company into their late 30s, and due to the seniority-based pay scale, were being paid well over the odds for such basic administrative tasks.

A tough decade followed, for every young Japanese leaving university and trying to find a job, but especially for Japanese women who did not want to join a temping agency. Many joined foreign companies and some braved the management track of mainstream Japanese companies. It was tough for the women who were still in the administrative track too. They often ended up being paid less, as the quasi-management track they had been forced onto was not as seniority based as the administrative track they had been on. Almost all of them were working harder than ever before, as they were now having to manage teams of temporary staff. They had to train a constant stream of new temps, check their work and take the rap for any mistakes the temps made.

I was initially surprised to hear that the administrative track is now being reintroduced at my former company. Apparently the mistakes being made by temps and the strain on the remaining ex-OLs (many of whom who have now taken early retirement) are having a significant impact on the business.

On reflection, it should not have been a surprise. When I conducted a series of customer satisfaction survey interviews with Japanese companies last month, more often than not, the female administrative staff had also been invited to meet with me, and their (mostly male) managers were very careful to ask for their opinion and comments. The Japanese customers expected their criticisms of the administrative capabilities of the supplier company to be taken seriously. Administrative mistakes are not trivial in Japan. Not only are they seen as an indication that there may be problems elsewhere, but there is a view that a small slip can have major consequences.

I was being snobbish in viewing administrative tasks as demeaning, and declaring that it is sexist if women are assigned to such tasks. I doubt I am alone in this prejudice. I wonder how many Western companies would invite their secretaries to participate in customer satisfaction survey meetings.

“It’s a black hole. We send information to Japan and never get anything back”

One of the German consultants on our team in Europe is a Toyota Production System expert. I asked her what she recommends to mixed Japanese and European teams in the companies she advises, if they are not communicating well. To my surprise, instead of talking about concepts and processes such as gembashugi (going to the place where the work is happening) or visualisation, she replied that first of all she gets them to agree on a vision for the team.

I discussed in previous articles in this series that in order for Japan headquarters to coordinate effectively with their European subsidiaries, they need first of all to look at the people concerned, and make sure there are clearly understood counterparts, madoguchi (window into an organisation) and tantousha (person in charge).

It may seem that the obvious next step is to set up communication processes between these people, but I think my German colleague is right, that without a vision for the end goal of this communication, many of these processes will become ineffective or die out.
For example, a British company I advise, who have a subsidiary in Japan, told me that they hold regular global teleconferences for certain business and research areas. However they recently discovered that the representative from one of the teams in Japan merely attends the teleconference and does not share what was learned with the rest of their team members. Clearly the Japanese representative does not see the value in cascading further what they heard.

Similarly, the Japanese expatriates at a Japanese manufacturer in the UK told me they all send weekly hokoku (1 pager reports) back to Japan (in Japanese of course), but when in the past they tried to get the British managers involved, the British soon lost interest, seeing it as an additional bureaucratic burden. “It’s a black hole”, one of the British managers told me. “We send information to Japan but never get anything back”. Again, they could not see the benefit to being involved in the communication process. In both this case and the previous case, employees need to feel they are getting information back in return for their input, which is relevant to their jobs.

Many Japanese companies say they have a vision, but in my experience these are often too vague to be actionable. By actionable, I mean that the vision has enough substance that you can make decisions based on it. Most visions for Japanese B2B manufacturers can be summarised as “contributing to society through innovation” which is actionable to some extent, but means that the company cannot really differentiate itself from its competitors who are saying the same thing. So customers also cannot see the benefit of choosing one supplier over another.

The vision that the company, and the teams within the company have should be differentiated from its competitors, and be actionable. The benefit to behaving in accordance with the vision has to be clear and understood by employees. Once that is in place, the processes for communication and compliance between the headquarters and its subsidiaries will almost take care of themselves.

This article was originally published in Japanese in the Teikoku Databank News and also appears in Pernille Rudlin’s new book “Shinrai: Japanese Corporate Integrity in a Disintegrating Europe” – available as a paperback and Kindle ebook on Amazon.

If you can’t find a counterpart in Japan HQ, you might need a window

I concluded in my previous article that Japanese headquarters looking to coordinate effectively with their European subsidiaries needed to consider “people” in addition to having clear communication processes and ensuring there are shared vision and values about how the company should behave.

In the past, many multinationals, not only Japanese companies, relied on a network of expatriate staff to disseminate corporate culture and keep the headquarters informed about what was happening abroad.

Now, Japanese companies are finding that they do not have enough ‘global jinzai’ (globally experienced personnel) at senior levels who are capable of managing their overseas operations, so are having to rely on locally hired senior executives.

These locally hired senior executives often become very frustrated if the communication processes are not clear, and the values and vision are not shared. They find themselves answering the same questions over and over again from multiple divisions in Japan and begin to feel they are not trusted. They are unable to make decisions or propose change and yet do not know who in Japan to ask for support or how to ask them.

This problem does not occur so frequently in Western multinationals because the compliance, authorisation and reporting processes are usually made very clear from the moment a company is acquired or set up. Also, the organisation of people tends to be similar across most Western companies. It’s therefore easy for a manager in an overseas subsidiary to work out who their counterpart is, or who the key decision maker might be.

In the European marketing department of one of the Japanese companies I worked for, we had a proposal that needed us to identify and build relationships with many different people in Japan to gain support. In a Western company this would have been easy – there would have been a marketing department, headed by a senior executive (probably EVP level) in the headquarters who would have responsibility for the strategy, vision and brand of the company.

However in this Japanese company there was no recognisable marketing department. The corporate brand office was more like the compliance part of the PR department – checking that the logo was used correctly. The advertising department simply did whatever each business unit told it to. There was a corporate strategy department but it did not seem to have any relation to the kind of marketing strategy that Europeans are used to.

I hesitate to say that my conclusion is that Japanese companies have to reorganise their headquarters along Western lines in order to succeed globally, but I do recommend that plenty of attention is given to finding counterparts and making it explicit what the tantousha (person in charge of the daily work) and madoguchi (window into an organisation, single point of contact) concepts mean, and identifying who those people should be in the headquarters. This should help reduce the burden of requests going to the local managers and help them build trusting relationships with key people in Japan. Once that is done, attention can be paid to shared values and communication processes.

This article was originally published in Japanese in the Teikoku Databank News and appears in Pernille Rudlin’s new book “Shinrai: Japanese Corporate Integrity in a Disintegrating Europe” – available as a paperback and Kindle ebook on Amazon.

Archives