Internal communications

Hitachi Rail’s CEO Alistair Dormer on Brexit, speeding up and the need to speak simple English

Hitachi’s rail business is only 5% of the whole group’s turnover, but is growing rapidly and moving from being “double domestic” to a truly global business. Overseas sales are now 83% of turnover, having been 28% of the business in 2012.

Nikkei Business interviewed Alistair Dormer (subscription only, in Japanese), the CEO of Hitachi Rail who is also a Senior Vice President and Executive Officer of the Hitachi Group about his four years as CEO – at a time when the railway business is undergoing major change, with Siemens and Alstom joining forces in Europe for their rail business.

Dormer talks about the importance of being able to scale multilaterally through M&A, with the acquisition of Ansaldo Breda and other companies, which resulted in acquiring customers across 27 countries – 26% of business is now in the UK, 17% in Japan, 10% in Asia Pacific. Hitachi Rail is also moving, like every technology business, into “solutions” adding a services side, including communication technology, software development, signalling systems and operations.

Speed up every aspect

Dormer says the most important thing for Hitachi Rail as a Japanese company was to speed up every aspect. “It is a strength of Hitachi as with other Japanese companies that business advances on a consensus basis, carefully harmonizing in-house planning and business negotiations with partners. This leads to stable quality standards and organizational cohesion, but it is also a weakness in that it takes too much time when you face global competition. The leader needs to be able to make quick decisions and communicate rapidly.”

Of course this is even more difficult when communication and decisions have to be made across long distances such as between the UK and Japan. So Dormer decided the best way was to move people around, to raise the frequency and density of communication. So there has been substantial exchange of people between the factory in Japan and manufacturing bases in UK and Italy.

If there is a substantial geographical and time distance, then people prefer not to have meetings about trivial things, but these details can later become obstacles. So having more regular interaction is necessary. Hitachi Rail thererefore also has regular video confererence and Dormer himself visits sites, holding meetings with 50-80 people to exchange opinions.

Only use simple English

With English as the common language, Dormer (as a native Brit) instituted a rule that only simple English should be used. “When native English speakers are talking, they speed up. It should be easy to say, “I don’t understand, I can’t follow what you’re saying”, but it’s difficult to do this in a teleconference or an important meeting. So then the meeting ends inconclusively and you find out later that people did not understand. So not only should you use simple English, but also I put in a process to confirm understanding after the meeting. The productivity of our meetings has greatly improved as a result”

Hitachi Rail has also introduced common standards across all countries for HR reviews, cost, engineering performance etc. “Each country, the UK and Italy and Japan, have different cultures and ways of doing things, so we did not force conformity, but respected each others’ cultures while working to Hitachi’s values as the common standard.”

Brexit – nobody knows what the future will hold

With regard to Brexit, Dormer says he is repeatedly asked about it, but at the moment there has been no change. “Hitachi has good relations with the UK government. All we can do is continue to ask that companies like us who have their regional base in the UK can continue to access the EU market as seamlessly as possible. There is no choice but to believe this. A transition period is being discussed, so it’s possible the environment will not change for the foreseeable future. However it is still a shock to me on a personal level that the UK made such a decision – even when we knew there was nothing to gain from leaving the EU. There are many people in our offices who were born in the European Union outside the UK, and they are worried. My priority is to reassure them, but the only thing I can say is that nobody knows what the future will hold.”

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。

Increased pressure felt by Japanese to speak English at work

36.3% of Japanese people responding to a Nikkei Business survey in November 2017 say that they have felt a dramatic increase in the need to communicate with non-Japanese people at work or because of work in the past few years. A further 32.1% have felt a gradual increase.

Only 18.9% say that English has become or may become the official or unofficial corporate language, however. 39.2% say there is a connection between performance and being able to speak English and a whopping 82.4% say they feel the need to improve their English speaking ability. The main reasons chosen for feeling this way are:

be able to do my job better (>70%)
improve my relationship network (>40%)
increase my career choices (>40%)
be able to work overseas (>30%)
improve my performance evaluations (<10%)
look as if I’m high potential (<10%)

The article makes an interesting point that those Japanese over 50 are actually quite good at English, often having worked overseas or been involved in export related jobs and benefitted from corporate budgets for English classes. Those in their 20s take it for granted that they need to be able to speak a good level of English, as this was important when they were on the graduate recruitment circuit.

So the generation that is suffering the most are those in their 30s and 40s, who did not have a chance to work overseas or study overseas in the Lost Decades of the 1990s and 2000s and also suffered from budget cutbacks on language training.

“Everyone has responsibility, but nobody can take responsibility” – the roots of nemawashi

One of the most practised concepts in Japanese business is nemawashi, often described as “Japanese style consensus building”. Sometimes explanations go further, getting into the word’s literal meaning- to dig around the roots of a tree in preparation for transplantation. When I talk about nemawashi in my training sessions, I try to create a more vivid image by pointing out that if you want to transplant a mature tree, just yanking the tree out of the ground by the trunk will kill it. The metaphor holds if the goal is to transplant a new idea in a Japanese company. If you were approach whoever you think has the decision making authority (‘the trunk’) and obtain only their approval, it is likely the decision would die in implementation, because you did not get the understanding or agreement of all the other people likely to be affected or interested (the roots).

Europeans do consensus too…

Europeans from consensus oriented national cultures like those of the Netherlands and Sweden, respond to this lesson by saying “well of course, we would always do this kind of consensus building anyway, it’s common sense.” In the Netherlands, consensus-based decision making is known as the polder model. Polders are low lying tracts of reclaimed land protected from the sea by dykes. In the past, all Dutch, regardless of whether they were peasants or noblemen, whether they lived on or near the polders, had to reach a consensus on how to protect them, and everyone had to be involved in carrying out the plan, otherwise all would suffer. Nowadays the word describes the kind of political consensus reached between government, the unions and business to adjust wages or social benefits or environmental protection.

…but it’s differently interpreted

Both Dutch and Japanese would therefore say they have a long history of consensus based decision making, but a study published in the Journal of Management Studies* concludes that “the concept of consensus is interpreted quite differently by Japanese and Dutch managers.” In Japanese companies, nemawashi is carried out through a series of informal, often one-on-one discussions, so that there is already a consensus when the meeting to discuss the “transplantation” is held. The meeting, then, is more about formally recognising the decision. In Dutch companies, the consensus is reached during a meeting, often through quite heated debate. Also, the Japanese managers demand a more complete consensus, whereby all agree, including other departments, whereas Dutch “appreciate the process of trying to reach consensus, but when a difference of opinion persists, the decision is taken by someone”.

This someone would therefore be expected to take responsibility for the decision, if things were to go wrong. In Japan, the view is that a comprehensive consensus is necessary to avoid putting the decision maker and the company at risk, and to preserve harmony and the employee loyalty. Given the time and care taken to get such a comprehensive consensus in Japan, once a decision is made, there is no turning back. To the Dutch, this is symptomatic of Japanese companies, where “everyone has responsibility, but nobody can take responsibility”.

*Comprehensiveness versus Pragmatism: Consensus at the Japanese-Dutch Interface, Niels G. Noorderhaven, Jos Benders and Arjan B. Keizer, Journal of Management Studies, 2007

This article by Pernille Rudlin originally appeared in the Nikkei Weekly. This and other articles are available as an e-book “Omoiyari: 6 Steps to Getting it Right with Japanese Customers”

Bending over backwards to be inclusive

I was discussing with a client recently the way accepted terminology keeps changing in the UK business world. Apparently “flexible working” is now being renamed “agile working”. “Agile” working is meant to have a wider definition than flexible working – the idea being that the focus should be on performance and outcomes, allowing maximum flexibility on the who, what, when and where of executing the work. “Flexible” usually (as it does in Japan) means flexibility on the hours worked and tends to be used when workplaces are trying to be family friendly towards women. “Agile” working implies it is a way of working for every employee.

The client’s own job title was another indicator of change – “head of diversity and inclusion”. Diversity has become a more commonly used word in Japan now, mainly to mean gender diversity, but increasingly companies are looking at other kinds of diversity such as nationality or sexuality. The reason that “inclusion” has been added to “diversity” in the UK is to ensure that companies don’t just focus on targets for diversity, but also how the corporate culture should change to ensure that people with different backgrounds to the mainstream do not feel excluded from decision making or promotion or the everyday conversations and meetings that are going on around them.

Sometimes I find myself thinking that all this emphasis on terminology is irritating and a distraction, but then I remember what it felt like to be a foreign employee in a Japanese company headquarters. I have no complaints about the way I was personally treated, but I regularly used to point out, when asked for my input into English language documents like the annual report – that it seemed alienating to people outside of Japan if employees were broken down into male/female, or Japan-employed and overseas-employed.

I knew why these categories existed – because at the time, 99.9% of females were in administrative track jobs, and 100% of men were in management track jobs – so this was a simple way of indicating the ratio of administrative versus line management/sales people in the workforce. The Japan-employed and overseas employment figures aligned with the Japan parent company-only and consolidated accounting methods.

But it nonetheless made me feel like being female or “overseas” was a lower status. This has all changed now of course, as the distinction between administrative and management track lifetime employees in Japan has disappeared in many companies. With holding companies now being allowed in Japan, and changes in accounting methods, the parent vs consolidated accounting distinction for employees is also less meaningful than it used to be.

I still have Japanese clients consulting me about what to call their various categories of employees however. Some choose “rotating staff” to describe Japanese expatriates – but again this implies that anyone hired outside Japan has no chance of being posted elsewhere. One British employee complained to me about an email from Japan HQ which used the term “subordinate”. Even in British class ridden society, we prefer to call all employees “colleagues” or “team members”.

(This article first appeared in Japanese in the Teikoku Databank News in February 2016 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.)

“Like a marriage gone stale” – why is Japanese employee engagement so low?

Japanese salarymen are envied around the world – as Junko Okamoto, former Yomiuri journalist and Dentsu consultant and now CEO of Glocomm says – for not being fired no matter what they do or how little they do. So you would think this means they have a high degree of engagement towards their employers. But actually, no matter what survey you look at, Japanese tend to come lowest in terms of engagement and trust.

For example – in Gallup’s 2011-2012 global survey of 142 countries and 20,000 people:

Japan – 7% engaged, 69% not engaged, 24% actively disengaged
UK 17% engaged, 57% not engaged, 26% actively disengaged
France 9% engaged, 65% not engaged, 25% actively disengaged
Germany 15% engaged, 61% not engaged, 24% actively disengaged
USA 30% engaged, 52% not engaged, 18% actively disengaged

Japan’s percentages are not far off China, so maybe it’s an “Asian” thing, you might think. But another survey by Aon Hewitt looking just at Asia Pacific levels of engagement found that Japan – at 33% actively disengaged – had the lowest engagement score.

As Okamoto points out, there is no direct translation of “engagement” in Japanese and also, the Japanese may have a tendency to be understated and modest in such surveys. However, if the wording is framed differently, there is still seems to be a problem. Edelman issues a world trust survey every year of 28 countries, including the question of whether people trust their own company. Japan comes bottom on 40%, compared to 64% for the US, 57% for the UK, 29% for China, 83% for India – even lower than Russia on 48%.

There are many reasons you could list up for Japanese salarymen’s disengagement – and Okamoto does so:

Long working hours
Low or even decreasing take home pay
Rigid corporate culture – based on precedent, demerit/points off systems, emphasis on sheer doggedness
Seniority based promotion
Inappropriate assignment of people
Sexual harassment, power harassment, maternity harassment
Rigid compensation and HR systems (egalitarian to the point of unfairness or too strictly perfomance based)

Okamoto adds “friends foreign and Japanese who work for foreign companies often point out that Japanese companies force you to travel economy class even if you’re very senior, which would be unthinkable in their companies, or that foreign companies will incentivise their best people to stay, with money or motivational schemes.”

Employees of Japanese companies don’t understand what is being rewarded. They point to those who are slacking off and yet are paid the same. But even the slackers are unhappy, because they feel like the company is not making the best use of them. Japanese people seem to think that work should be a penance and that you become happy by working hard. Okamoto cites various Western researchers who say that you should first find out what makes you happy, and then you will succeed.

Okamoto’s conclusion, as is mine, is that Japanese companies are bad at communicating – to their staff as well as to the outside world. “Being hired by a Japanese company is like getting married. The company is your family or your home. And although the divorce rate has risen in Japan recently, it’s still lower than the USA. In Japan the view is that even if you hate the other person or don’t love them any more, there is a shared fate. However in the USA you either get a divorce or if you don’t want to get a divorce you put more effort in with gifts and words of love… Japanese companies and their employees are like a married couple who have forgotten each other’s good points and become stale.”

“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.

Hitachi – we’re not heavy, dull or ugly outside Japan

Hitachi is seen as inward looking, conservative and lacking in commercial sense by business people in Japan, but outside Japan it is seen as a motivating place to work, exciting and cool by employees of Hitachi’s overseas subsidiaries such as Hitachi Rail Europe and Hitachi Data Systems, according to Nikkei Business magazine.

Could this help change Hitachi domestically? Currently Hitachi has over 1000 employees with PhDs working for them in Japan, generating many patents, but this technical strength does not seem to be translating into sales. The improvement in profits is largely due to withdrawing from unprofitable businesses such as mobile phones and LCD screens and also the contributions from social innovation business overseas. It is not due to any ground breaking innovation in products or services. It is also seen as being self centred, and not often forming alliances with other companies.

In the rail business however, Hitachi has taken the biggest share of rolling stock orders through to 2019 in the UK. Hitachi first opened an office in the UK for its rail business in 1999, with just one expatriate staffing it. It is now seen as the most powerful train supplier in Europe, according to an executive from Virgin Trains. It has had to completely overhaul its designs however, to cope with the UK’s old fragile railway bridges. Procurement specs for everything from engines, radiators and pumps were reviewed and the body used as much aluminium as possible to lighten the weight. “We were able to use all the expertise we had developed in Japan” says Koji Wagatsuma of Hitachi Rail Europe. “Hitachi’s strength is not just IT, but that we know the operational side of various industries really well”, says Shinya Mitsudomi, CSO of Hitachi Rail Europe.

The other secret of Hitachi Rail’s success is “true delegation”, says the Nikkei. Instead of relying on history and performance within the company, Hitachi has given responsibility to those who know the market best. There is a big difference between the UK and Japanese rail markets, in that the risks taken by the supplier in bids are much greater. It is necessary to guarantee how many people would be needed to run the system per year, and what the lifecycle cost will be.

Alistair Dormer, the CEO, has clearly been a driving force in Hitachi Rail’s success. He likes to hold regular town hall meetings, where he consistently promotes the company’s mission and vision. Ted Yamada, head of HR at Hitachi Rail Europe says “to hire the best people, it’s not just about the remuneration, but to make sure they can get a feel of the kind of company they are working for.” Not only the CEO but also the chairman of Hitachi in Japan, Hiroaki Nakanishi, is a good story teller. As I repeatedly point out in my training sessions, because most Japanese companies are the “family” type, storytelling and parent figures are far more important in giving direction than targets or strategies or policies or structures.

A further feature that Nikkei Business picks up on, is that Hitachi is beginning to pull together virtual company structures, most notably for Hitachi Data Systems. We were moving towards that when I was at Fujitsu – I think IT companies are probably best suited to this kind of organisation – where services have to be provided globally so it makes sense to have teams and hierarchies which span several regions. It does mean a lot of travel to work well – one Hitachi Data Systems director says he has 56 Japan entry stamps on his American passport. Conversely, Japanese engineers travel regularly to the UK and the US.

The feature finishes with an interview with Hiroaki Nakanishi, who comes up with a few punchy quotes. Asked about the impact of Hitachi putting non-Japanese at the top of various regions, he says it has an instant effect on the mindset of the Japanese employees, who now realise that they have to persuade a foreigner of their ideas, so all the “Japanese only” methods they have used in the past will not work. Consequently, decision making and execution have speeded up. Everything in the value chain from marketing to sales, development to production and after sales service have to be overseas. So it’s not possible for Japanese to be seconded abroad and manage everything. Most of the executives are local, non-Japanese. “Before now, Japanese companies would build a factory overseas, but just transfer manufacturing knowhow, and then when it was completed, the head of manufacturing in Japan would fly over and play lots of golf. That’s just no longer feasible.” Since Jack Domme took over at HDS, objectives have been set for individual employees and decision making has become more transparent. HDS is now well regarded by others as a company which would be an enjoyable challenge to work for. “Starting small and growing big is just fooling yourself – there are no dreams or hope in that. People with ambitions will not join such a company” says Nakanishi. “We are still a Japanese company, and so there will be some parts which are difficult for non-Japanese to understand, so not being Japanese might be a bit of a handicap” but maybe no more than Siemens is a German company, or GE is American, Nakanishi adds.

Japanese companies demand too much perfection

Okada Hyogo, senior manager at Microsoft in Singapore, sports what is known in Japanese as the ‘Regent style’ hairdo – apparently named after Regent Street in London, but usually known in the UK as a DA. He is photographed with his quiff, leather jacket and sunglasses for a recent interview with Diamond Online. He has written various articles for the magazine, including one entitled ‘60% is good enough’. The impact of Microsoft on his thinking is clear, in the way he recommends Japanese companies also adopt the “patch” mentality he saw in software development. “Aim for what is feasible, not the best”, was his lesson from his time working for Accenture in the USA.

He echoes a point I often make in my seminars about the Japanese pursuit of perfectionism, which is that the 80/20 rule kicks in when it comes to costs of making an effort. It can take 80% of effort, resources and time to achieve the final 10 or 20% to reach 100% perfection.

This might work in Japan where it is normal to work through the night to achieve “the best” but of course this kind of behaviour is not so well accepted outside of Japan. As Okada says, in some cultures a person who works late is regarded as someone who is not self disciplined. “They have a much stronger sense of priorities than the Japanese do.”

“Japanese are lacking individual ‘core values’. At Microsoft we have 6 core values upon which we base our daily work. They are ‘Willingness to take on big challenges’,’Integrity’, ‘Openness’, ‘Constructive self criticism’, ‘Accountability’ and ‘Passion’.” Akiyama Susumu, the interviewer and President of Principle Consulting Group responds that it helps to define your own core values if you interact with people who are different to you.

As for being able to speak English, Okada believes it’s not enough by itself – an open and forward looking mindset is needed. “You need to be interested in the other person, and be prepared to engage in discussion.” Akiyama says it’s tempting to become silent if someone else in the meeting speaks better English than you do”. Okada responds that he got over his own English complex when his boss said “you already speak English. What’s important is knowing what you want to say, and how you want to progress the discussion.” Okada’s recommendation, to those who are not confident about their English is to get to a meeting 10 minutes early and greet the other participants as they arrive with “nice to meet you!” or “Good morning!” – that way you get warmed up for communicating and also you ensure that you have a presence at the meeting.

Even in teleconferences he recommends getting a question in early like “when can I expect to finish this meeting?” as a warm up, otherwise you end up not saying anything. For presentations he uses physical warm ups like a few squat thrusts and also practicing his “Rs”.

Another tip for meetings is to get near the whiteboard and offer to write up the agenda and minutes on it. “That way you look intelligent and hardworking!”

He also recommends saying “Let me finish” and using your hands to signal this. “Japanese tend to preface their requests too much”.

He finishes by saying that Japanese companies don’t have a very good image in Singapore as employers, and this has an effect on the brand too. Japanese employers are seen as only promoting Japanese people, and demanding a lot of unpaid overtime. Products have too many unnecessary features which only appeal to Japanese, rather as Japanese companies unthinkingly promote uniquely Japanese ways of working – such as chourei (daily morning team meetings). There is not one Japanese company in the Singapore Top 100 employers chosen by students.

The two-way role of the Japanese expatriate employee

A French manager complained to us recently that when he attends meetings of the European management team (mostly Japanese expatriates based in the Netherlands, where the European headquarters is), he finds out that the decisions have already been made, without his input.

This is a comment we have received frequently over the past 12 years of working with Japanese companies in Europe. I hoped the situation would have improved, as Japanese affiliates localise, and more Europeans are in senior positions, but what seems to have happened is that the communication gap between the senior Europeans and the remaining Japanese expatriates has actually widened, and the senior Europeans feel very cut off from any decision making that happens in Japan headquarters.

I recommend to the European managers a three step plan to improve relations and communications: 1. People, 2. Process and 3. Particulars. For ‘People’, they need to build relationships with Japanese colleagues, in Europe and in Japan headquarters. There are obstacles to this – travel expense and rapid rotation of Japanese expatriates. But mutual trust is necessary if Europeans are to be including in the nemawashi process.

By ‘Process’, I mean the nemawashi (decision making) process needs to be made more explicit and transparent and the purpose of meetings (information exchange or discussion or decisions) needs to be clarified. And for ‘Particulars’, the European managers need understand the kind of detail and data needed to reassure risk averse executives in Japan.

But this is only half the picture. The Japanese expatriates must accept that their job is not simply to report back to Japan headquarters what is happening in the European subsidiaries. They need to communicate the Japan headquarters’ corporate culture, decisions and strategy, and find ways to get European staff feel involved and have a sense of belonging to the wider company.

For Japanese expatriate staff I recommend 1. Debate, 2.Distil and 3.Disseminate. Europeans love to debate – it makes them feel valued, and it is an opportunity to convince them of the direction the company must take, by explaining the background and logic to what is coming out of Japan.

‘Distil’ means to be clear, precise and concise about what the strategy, corporate culture or decision is. It must be “actionable” – so it can be the touchstone for deciding how to act in a business situation.

‘Disseminate’ means to take practical steps to make sure that the strategy, corporate culture or decision is communicated to all parts of the European network. This may need to be through cascading information through the correct chains of command if the company is a traditional hierarchical Continental European organisation. Or it could be through workshops, to enable people to have a sense of ownership, and understand how the strategy or corporate culture applies to their daily work. Or it could be through more meetings – but hopefully this time, if ‘debate’ and ‘distillation’ have already happened, the meeting attendees will feel more involved and accepting of the outcomes.

This article originally appeared in Japanese in the Teikoku Databank News

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.

Category: Internal communications