Human resources

Does having more women managers help Japanese companies globalise?

The question of whether having more women managers would help Japanese companies to globalise was raised, but not discussed in depth due to time constraints, at a dinner I attended, hosted by a delegation to the UK from Japan Women’s Innovative Network – a Japanese non profit organisation. An impressively large number of younger women (70) had been sponsored by their companies to come to the UK for a week, visiting various UK companies such as British Telecom and AON, to study global leadership and diversity.

My view is yes, it does help Japanese companies to globalise if they have more (Japanese) women managers, for a couple of reasons. Firstly, it helps Japanese companies and corporate culture seem less “alien” to Western companies if there are more women in management positions in the headquarters, and secondly, because the adjustments Japanese companies will have to make in order to incorporate a more diverse Japanese workforce (gender or other diversity) will help them be more inclusive of “non-Japanese” diverse groups. Attitudes to overtime and working from home would be a couple of areas needing adjustment I would suggest.

On the first point, the question of the role of women in Japanese companies is frequently raised in the cultural awareness sessions we conduct in Europe for Japanese companies. Japan never does well in surveys of the position of women in society – see the most recent World Economic Forum Gender Gap report , placing Japan 114th out of 144 countries (updated for 2017). While you can question the methodology of such surveys, then along comes another one, conducted amongst Japanese women, showing that 1/3 of them want to be full time housewives.

Which leads me to point out in our training (and in the Advancing Gender Diversity day I spoke at for Hitachi’s European group companies – presentation on SlideShare here) that Confucian values remain strong in Japan – it’s not that women are seen as somehow less capable than men, more that there are expectations around the role they should fulfil in society.

Prime Minister Abe is trying to square a circle with Abenomics, by trying to raise the birthrate but at the same time encourage women to go back to work – aiming to have 30% of senior positions in all parts of society, by 2020, through improving childcare and parental leave. But with the amount of pressure on women to be good housewives and stalwarts of the Parent Teachers Association, no amount of improved childcare and leave is going to counteract this or compensate for both parents doing overtime until late at night.

Although the Japanese government can directly change the economy with the first and second arrow of Abenomics, through fiscal and monetary actions, the third arrow of structural reform requires nudging, or even shaming Japanese companies into doing the right thing – legislation alone will be hard to push through and even harder to enforce. So Abe launched in February the “Nadeshiko” * scheme, recognising firms which are making efforts to improve the working environment for women.

Firms given the Nadeshiko “brand” in February of this year include Kao, Nissan, Fast Retailing (Uniqlo) and Daikin. The scheme is not the only initiative taking place – various other surveys have been done of best places for women to work and the Hitachi Gender Diversity Day was partly inspired by the President of Hitachi, Hiroaki Nakanishi, declaring recently that the company aims to more than double the number of women managers by 2020.

Other recent surveys have named Benesse (no coincidence that the founder of Benesse is also the founder of J-WIN) as the most career friendly for women and companies such as Toshiba, KDDI, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ and NTT have all announced targets for women managers. The Nikkei group has also jumped on the bandwagon, with a seminar series aimed at aspiring women managers (and even has a magazine “Nikkei Woman” ) and published its ranking last year of best places for women to work, which put foreign companies at the top (IBM Japan, Procter & Gamble) along with 2 life insurance companies, Takashimaya department store, Daiwa Securities, Sony, Panasonic, Bank of Tokyo Mitsubishi UFJ, Fujitsu and Sharp.

* Nadeshiko is a type of pink danthius flower associated with women in Japan. It was adopted as a nickname by the women’s soccer team of Japan on its way to becoming the first Asian team to win the World Cup, in 2011.

The original version of this article was published in Japanese in the Teikoku Databank News in 2014. An English version of it appears in Pernille Rudlin’s new book “Shinrai: Japanese Corporate Integrity in a Disintegrating Europe” is available as a paperback and Kindle ebook on Amazon.

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。

The man who turned Hitachi around #5 – globalization of people

As well as the train business in the UK, the other case study that Takashi Kawamura, former President of Hitachi gives as a model of globalization is the data storage business, which was turned into a “solution” business rather than just selling Hitachi’s hardware. Kawamura says the person responsible for starting this change was the CEO of Hitachi Data Systems in the USA, Jack Domme. The key words which changed the business were “disaster recovery” and Domme hired people who weren’t just salesmen, but engineers, who could listen to customers and make proposals.

As well as having a strong local leader heading the UK train business and HDS, Hitachi’s China elevator business is also headed up by a Chinese President. According to Kawamura, all these businesses have switched to being “solution” oriented, to compete with IBM, Siemens and GE – this could not have been done if they were led by Japanese “sheltering under the umbrella” of Hitachi.

3 of Hitachi’s 13 board members are non-Japanese. The executive officers are still all Japanese but Kawamura thinks this needs to change too, so that non-Japanese are heading up Hitachi’s business divisions. “If our European rail business expands, then it might be better to have a British person heading up our transport systems division. If diversity advances in this way, then there will be much more lively debates and innovation, and it will be easier to undertake structural reform”

Hitachi aims to reach an operating profit of 7% (from the current 4.7%) by FY 2015, to close in on Siemens. “What is needed to be a globally excellent company is speed” says Kawamura.

From 2011, around 1000 young employees are sent out each year to work overseas for a maximum of 3 months. This is 10 times more than previously, and represents about a quarter of each cohort. Kawamura says it is done not just because Hitachi can afford it, but to show that the company is serious about globalization and also to act as a wake up call to the young employees about how much further they have to go in order to speak English or other foreign languages fluently, and to create relationships with local customers.

Around 60% go to developing countries – Kawamura says they have to survive some tough challenges, which in some cases have really changed employees’ mindsets.

There are are also top down diversity initiatives to globalize people, through the governance of the company. In 2012 Kawamura increased the number of external directors from 4 to 7 out of the 13 board members, and raised the number of non-Japanese from 1 to 3 and this year added the first foreign female board director, Cynthia Carroll, formerly of Anglo American.

“This diversity should have an impact on the mindset of our employees, but the other effect is to liven up board meetings. Japanese board meetings usually do not have much debate or discussion – the decisions have already been made at the management committee or operational committee level. And in companies like Hitachi which are very vertical, executives do not comment on other business divisions – they feel they are not qualified to criticise.

So our board meetings have become extremely “frank”, actually I feel beaten up by them – they ask why we have not reached 5% operating profit, why such elite Japanese graduates don’t seem to be very motivated, why we are so mild and not competitive. We use simultaneous interpreters in the board meetings, so the comments come bouncing out at us in real time. It’s not just criticisms, but also new business ideas come out of these meetings – new technologies we should adopt or businesses we should collaborate with. We held one of our board meetings in India, to show we were serious about tripling our business there. We are thinking to hold our board meeting somewhere in the USA this year.

George Barclay, who was CEO of 3M is actually British, and the current CEO is Swedish. Although 3M is an American company, Americans are in the minority on the board. Barclay tells me that’s normal if you want to compete globally”

It will also help with structural reform. Hitachi has just completed a global database of 300,000 personnel. This will be used for unified appraisals and global mobility of staff. Kawamura would like to see more non-Japanese in Japan, in team leader or General Manager positions. Seniority based promotion will probably come to an end.

Kawamura finishes the series by saying that he was too old to be President, which is why he handed over to Nakanishi after a year. He sees the role of Presidency as an agent – if there is proper diversity, then the company and the management will be “smart” and “aggressive” and the President does not even need to be charismatic.

What it really means to lose your company laptop in Japan

Losing your company laptop can be a really big deal in corporate Japan. In one company I know, depending on the seriousness (how it happened, what kind of data was lost), the punishment ranges from pay cuts to demotion. The errant employee’s line manager may receive a similar penalty. And just to rub it in, the employee and the manager both get named and shamed in the HR bulletins circulated to all employees.

The information technology support team at this company’s UK subsidiary was approving of this policy, albeit half-jokingly. While sympathetic to the occasional accident or lapse, they were appalled by how badly people looked after their company laptops in terms of hygiene and care. They cited the case of one employee who had lost his laptop in a pub – three times.

There is no penalty in the UK subsidiary, other than the damage to professional pride and the inconvenience caused. Laptops are heavily encrypted, and as soon as a device is reported missing, the ability of the device to connect to the intranet is disabled. In terms of monetary loss, most laptops are written off quickly from the balance sheets anyway.

Perhaps then the strict policy in Japan is not due solely to concrete concerns about security and financial loss, but more due to fears of reputational loss. In Japan the laptop may well be handed in, but probably to the police, or directly to the company concerned, so quite a few people will get to hear about it, at worst even the media or a customer.

An employee of a famous Japanese company is like a member of a family. If they do something wrong in public, the whole family looks bad for not having brought up their children properly. Older brothers or sisters (the line managers) are scolded for not keeping a better eye on their younger siblings. The symbolic punishment is to have pocket money taken away for a few weeks but the real punishment is the damage done to your reputation within the family – being known as the careless one, or the stupid one, who let the family down.

The UK IT support team and I speculated as to how the “bring your own device” trend might impact the way people treat their laptops. If it is your own computer, tablet or mobile phone, paid for with your own money, then maybe you will treat it with more care.

But I get the impression that big-name brand companies in Japan are reluctant to accept flexible practices such as working from home, and “bring your own device” is not going to help. Even with the best security and encryption, the reputational damage of an employee losing a laptop that might contain confidential customer data is too severe to risk.

To use the family analogy again, even if the son bought the football with his own money, and it only hit the neighbour’s window without breaking it, the neighbour is still going to complain.

This article originally appeared in the Nikkei Weekly

Japanese companies should try treating foreign acquisitions not as lodgers but adopted sons

There has been a 33% drop in the number of overseas acquisitions by Japanese companies in the first quarter of this year compared to the last year. I view this as a temporary blip because of the weakening yen. However, recently announced corporate reshuffles show that senior executives are being asked to step down early if they are perceived to have been responsible for the failure of major overseas acquisitions. So there may be an element of “once bitten, twice shy”.

The most recent quarterly survey of 148 leading Japanese companies by The Nikkei indicates there is still an appetite for acquisition. Of the executives polled, 42.6% said they wanted to acquire companies both domestically and abroad, with North America and Europe being the favoured overseas destinations.

One way these executives could do a better job of acquiring overseas companies is to be conscious of the fact that Japanese companies behave like traditional Japanese families – and adapt their acquisition and integration processes accordingly. For example, Japanese families, even to this day, adopt son-in-laws, who take on the family name and become the heir, especially if there is a family business at stake.

Japanese companies seem reluctant to use the “adopted son-in-law” model for their overseas acquisitions. Sometimes the acquisition is more like a marriage – a long courtship of holding an equity stake in a large foreign company and then a final consummation some years later. And like a marriage, this approach requires effort and commitment on both sides, through thick and thin, to build a new family, with a new set of values and customs.

A more prevalent model seems to be treating the acquired overseas company like a lodger in the house, rather than a member of the family. So long as the lodger behaves, with no loud music late at night, and pays the rent on time, they are left to their own devices.

Initially North American and European companies may welcome this approach. They are allowed to continue as before, with plenty of autonomy and not much interference. However, like a lodger, they start to feel isolated from the family activities, and wonder whether they should be looking to move out to better lodgings. Or they may hit financial difficulties and stop paying the rent, at which point the Japanese landlord cracks down hard.

When North American and European companies acquire other companies, some attention is at least nominally paid to the cultural aspects, but the main focus is on integration or imposition of systems, structures, policies and targets. The acquired company is usually left in no doubt as to how they are going to have to adapt to the new parent, well before the ink is dry on the purchase agreement.

If Japanese companies do not feel comfortable with this clinical approach, then a lot more thought needs to go into how exactly their new overseas subsidiary can be a true adopted son and heir – or spouse.

This article by Pernille Rudlin first appeared in the April 22nd 2013 edition of The Nikkei Weekly and also appears in Pernille Rudlin’s new book “Shinrai: Japanese Corporate Integrity in a Disintegrating Europe” which is available as a paperback and Kindle ebook on Amazon.

Why it matters if Japanese businesspeople are bad at English

The former President of Microsoft Japan, Makoto Naruke, wrote a best seller entitled “90% of Japanese don’t need to speak English” provocatively asserting that learning English was a waste of time and money, no graduate from an international school has succeeded in business, business English conversation is easy and if you’re an idiot, being able to speak English isn’t going to help.

There’s obvious truth in the last point, and Tejun Shin, formerly of Morgan Stanley, now running his own fund and a microfinance not-for-profit Living in Peace doesn’t deny that 90% of Japanese don’t need English in their jobs, but points out in the Nikkei Online(Japanese) that it’s still a big problem that the 10% of Japanese who do need English for their work are pretty awful at English too.

He demolishes various assumptions made that Japanese have nothing to worry about, showing that even amongst 19 Asian countries Japan comes second from bottom after Cambodia on English ability scores and that amongst 15 OECD countries where English is not the native language, Japan is bottom in English ability. Even something that I often assert, that Japanese are better at reading than speaking or writing English, turns out to be wrong.

He gives a couple of excellent reasons that I had not articulated myself for why poor English ability is an issue for Japanese employees.

Firstly, that it will lead to the Galapagosisation of the mind (Galapagos syndrome is often used to describe products which are developed purely for the Japanese market, so like a Galapagos turtle, cannot survive outside that particular environnment). Without input of “world knowledge” – from the internet or TED talks etc – which is inevitably in English, thoughts become entirely inward looking and idea creation incestuous.

Secondly, for leaders in particular, English ability is a must, not only so that they can form alliances with overseas companies to develop business, but also – and this was the real aha moment for me – so that English speaking talent feels comfortable working for them. This is so true – if you are a high flier, you wouldn’t want to work in a company where you have little chance of getting your views heard by the top executives.

Career paths in Japanese companies in Europe

I asked one of the two partners of a local firm of accountants whether he was getting lots of job applications from recently made redundant accountants from the big accounting firms. He said he was, but he had to be careful about hiring such people as his firm cannot offer the career path that the big firms can. “People who are used to big companies get frustrated and quit when they realise there is not much potential for meaningful promotion with us,” he said.

It reminded me of the situation I often see in Japanese companies in Europe. Partly because of the fragmented nature of Europe, unlike the USA, many Japanese companies find the best structure is to have a small office in each country with one or two expatriate Japanese staff in each one. The locally hired staff often have interesting and varied jobs because the small office has to cover a variety of functions and businesses. However there is not much of a vertical structure in terms of people for them to “manage” if they are promoted to a management position.

How, then, should such Japanese companies retain and motivate good quality local staff? The accountancy firm partner said what he did was offer good salaries, excellent benefits and plenty of training. This may not be sufficient to satisfy ambitious people, however, so I have a couple of other suggestions specifically for Japanese companies in Europe.

One is to try to create a pan-European structure so that locally hired staff can have some status within that structure, not just their local one. It may not be possible to have actual job roles like “European Sales Director” but a human network could be created, through pan European meetings and training. Then people can keep in touch afterwards by using an intranet to put their profiles on and exchange information through blogs or wikis. Through getting to know each other and sharing expertise, the high flying staff will begin to gain unofficial status and recognition. People might also become less reluctant about the idea of moving to another location or to take on a “pan European” role, once they know more about other colleagues in other European operations and what they do.

The other way Japanese companies can motivate their ambitious staff is to give them opportunities to improve their status within their profession. This might not seem to the Japanese management as being much of an issue. Many Japanese employees feel they have enough status professionally because their company is so well known and respected in Japan. But often such companies are not at all famous outside of Japan. The kind of opportunities I have in mind are, for example, joining professional associations, gaining professional qualifications, speaking at conferences, writing articles for trade journals etc.

If Japanese companies can support their locally hired staff in gaining recognition and respect inside and outside their companies, they may have more success in retaining motivated, ambitious employees.

The original version of this article was published in Japanese in the Teikoku Databank News and can also be found in “Shinrai: Japanese Corporate Integrity in a Disintegrating Europe” available as a paperback and Kindle ebook on Amazon.

Why some Japanese people prefer British customer service!

I described in my previous article how when a customer in the UK is facing a service sector employee, he or she is usually facing 150 years of social class resentment, a loss of pride in manual labour and no sense that the company that person is working for has any care for employee well being or duty to the customer or society as a whole. Consequently, it is hard to inspire employees with a strong, positive customer service culture in the UK.

There are some exceptions to this. The most well known exception is the John Lewis Partnership, which includes the John Lewis department stores and Waitrose supermarket chain. As the name implies, the company is a partnership, which means that all 69,000 employees are also owners of the company, and are known as “Partners” rather than “employees” or “staff”. The founder, John Spedan Lewis’ vision was of employee co-ownership with “the happiness of Partners as the ultimate purpose”. Partners share in the profit of the company through bonuses – in 2007 this was 18% of total salary, for every person regardless of their position in the company. Five out of thirteen board directors are elected by the staff.

I am sure this company structure explains their ability to maintain high customer service standards and I would like to think it also explains why the company has weathered the current recession pretty well. The Partners do not feel demeaned by serving people, they believe in what the company is doing and feel they are equal in social status to the customers.

It is this inferiority complex that people in UK service sector jobs have that poisons the customer service they provide. If the customer is able to show that they do not hold themselves superior to the person providing the service, then it is possible to get friendly, if not always competent, service in the UK.

I noticed that when I discussed customer service in the UK with a group of Japanese residents recently, it was the youngest residents, who had been waiters or shop assistants in Japan and in the UK, who felt the most positive about British customer service culture, as they felt they were treated better by British customers than they had been in Japan when they had done similar jobs.

In Japan, historical Confucian influences mean that there is more acceptance of unequal power relationships and different status in society, without there being any implication that the person with the lower status is somehow a worse human being, worthy of contempt. It can mean that the person with the lower status is not treated in a very friendly or equal way, however, and is expected to be deferential and respectful.

Along with deference and respect , Confucianism also emphasises performing the correct rituals and observing etiquette, and this has a visibly positive impact on the conduct of customer service. This emphasis on etiquette links up with a “monozukuri” of customer service in Japan which seems to be lacking in the UK, as I will examine in the next article.

This article originally appeared in Japanese in the Eikoku News Digest

Sumo or Judo: how Japanese firms embrace or exclude diverse staff

I miss not being able to see the hatsu basho (January sumo tournament) that is now under way in Tokyo, as they don’t show sumo on the television here in the U.K. anymore. It would be great if Harumafuji, the new Mongolian second ranked ozeki, does well*, but it seems this year will be another challenging one for sumo’s credibility, particularly in the way it deals with the foreign rikishi wrestler.

When I was still working at my Japanese company in Japan, trying to develop and implement policies to improve the career opportunities for our “foreign rikishi,” in other words our non-Japanese employees, we had many discussions about what we nicknamed “sumo vs. judo” problem.

The sumo vs judo problem

In a “sumo” company such as ours, the traditional view was that in order to become a senior manager, you needed to join the company (the “sumo stable” or beya) at an early age and spend several years doing menial jobs, pouring the beer for everyone and living in a company dorm.

The sumo equivalent would be cleaning out the sumo beya stable, making chanko nabe stew and undergoing grueling training. So if any foreigner wanted to become a manager, that was fine, but they had to have undergone the same process as other Japanese employees.

Learning the “kata” – knowing the form

As for training, this was mostly on the job, learning from your seniors, as indeed in sumo, where the kata, or form of sumo, is learned by observing others rather than through any formal guidance or manuals. In fact, there weren’t many manuals or formal appraisal processes at all in our company. People just “knew” how to behave and what was expected of them.

For many Japanese companies, this changed in the 1990s. This was partly due to the restructuring needed to deal with the slowing down of Japanese economic growth, but also a recognition that the Japanese company had to become more diverse, not only in terms of nationalities, but in the gender and career background of its staff. It was not only the foreigners that objected to being treated like sumo, but other Japanese people, particularly in the younger generations. Also, the vagueness and lack of transparency often led to cover-ups, verging on what could be deemed corrupt practices.

No point in forcing conformity to the Japanese way on diversity

If you force diverse groups of people to conform to one mysterious way that can only be learned through many years’ apprenticeship, a way most easily learned by a group who share one particular cultural background, then those who deviate from this norm will find that, despite their best efforts, they are only a pale imitation of the mainstream group.

In other words, if you want all employees to behave like traditional Japanese salarymen, then hiring people from nontraditional groups is pointless, because they end up being unhappy, fake Japanese salarymen, or, more likely, quit.

My colleagues and I contrasted sumo with judo, which is also a Japanese origin sport, and has much of the same Japanese ethos regarding the importance of kata and diligence through practice, but is much more transparent in its rules and its teaching methods, a prerequisite, I assume, for it becoming an official Olympic sport for the 1964 Tokyo Olympics. I have to say though: I find sumo more charming and fascinating than judo.

* Unfortunately he didn’t. He made a majority of wins 8 to7, and did better in the March tournament that has just ended – 10 wins to 5 losses.

This article by Pernille Rudlin originally appeared in the Nikkei Weekly.

Subtle factors that motivate workers differ in Japan and the West

Every time a Japanese company acquires a Western company, there is a concern about how the Japanese organization will deal with the “high risk, high reward” culture that is prevalent not only in the financial industry but across many Western business sectors.

Actually, Japanese multinationals have been dealing with this issue for some years, and the solution has usually been to pay the local market rate. It does, of course, result in some anomalies. Presidents of Japanese blue-chip companies are paid only around 10-20 times the salary of the lowest paid worker, whereas at Fortune 500 CEO can earn anywhere from 300-500 times a junior employee’s salary.

So it may turn out that the Japanese president is earning significantly less than the foreign directors reporting to him from the acquired company. Lower down the ranks, more junior Japanese find that when they are posted overseas, they are having to manage locally hired hotshots who are earning salaries and bonuses that add up to the equivalent of an extra zero on the end of a normal Japanese expat salary.

Many Japanese working for foreign banks and consultancies in Japan have also been making 10 times the average salary in Japan. Of course, Japanese on traditional salary packages can comfort themselves with the thought that they have more secure jobs, especially given what has been happening recently. But I think there is a danger in oversimplifying this risk/reward trade-off.

Knowing that you won’t be laid off when times get tough, or conversely that you are being paid handsomely, is not sufficient for most people, Japanese or Western, to feel completely fulfilled and motivated in their work. These factors may ensure people stay in their jobs but not that they perform those jobs to the best of their abilities.

High salaries and bonuses are in some ways proxies for the things that really motivate people to work. Being paid well should indicate that an employee is doing something that has had a major impact on the company. It should also reflect the employee’s authority and responsibility to make an impact. Getting quick raises should show that one’s career is advancing and that one’s skills and capabilities are developing.

These are all drivers of engagement – pride and motivation in work – for people working in Western companies. Surveys show that the drivers of engagement for Japanese people working in Japanese companies are subtly different. Career advancement opportunities and ability to make an impact are important, but so are other factors – immediate personal relationships, having input to department decisions, and having a manager who understands what motivates each employee and who has good relationships with them.

All people, regardless of nationality, want to feel recognized for making a positive difference in the world through their work. For many Japanese, the traditional way to do this has been through becoming a longtime respected member of a major company. For many Westerners, this route does not exist, so impact on society has to be more visibly rewarded through pay or status.

Japanese and Western companies need to avoid two extremes when trying to combine corporate cultures. Paying people well but not giving them the authority to make an impact and advance their careers will eventually lead Westerners to leave a company. Offering lifetime employment but without good, enduring personal relationships and mutual respect may mean that although Japanese employees stay, their morale is low.

This article by Pernille Rudlin originally appeared in the Nikkei Weekly.

This article appears in Pernille Rudlin’s latest book “Shinrai: Japanese Corporate Integrity in a Disintegrating Europe” available as a paperback and Kindle ebook on Amazon.

Japanese companies giving Office Ladies another look

About 15 years ago I wrote an article proclaiming the death of the Japanese “office lady,” or OL. The company I was working at, along with many other Japanese companies at the time, had stopped hiring new graduates and placing them on the so-called administrative track. They abolished the OL uniform and encouraged existing OLs to cross over to a management track.

Future administrative needs would be filled by temporary contract workers. I was quite pleased about these developments, as the OL system offended my feminist sensibilities. The companies themselves had ended the system more for financial reasons. OLs were meant to join companies when they were around 20-22 and only stay at the company until their mid-20s, when it was expected they would leave to get married.

In the meantime, they cleaned desks, emptied bins, made tea for the team, answered 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, especially for young university graduates trying to find a job and even more so for Japanese women who did not want to join a temp agency. Many joined foreign companies and some braved the management track of mainstream Japanese companies.

The years were also tough for the women who had been on the administrative track. 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 have since 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 opinions and comments.

The customers I interviewed 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. Indeed, I wonder how many Western companies would invite their secretaries to participate in customer satisfaction survey meetings?

This is the seventeenth article in a series by Pernille Rudlin, European Representative of Japan Intercultural Consulting, appearing in the 25th August 2008 edition of the Nikkei Weekly.

Category: Human resources