Japanese business in Europe

Japanese companies in Europe say Brexit is their biggest worry for 2020

The annual Japan External Trade Relations Organisation (JETRO) survey of Japanese companies in Europe reveals that over 70% of Japanese companies expect their European operations to be profitable for the fifth year running, but concerns over an economic downturn in the region are higher than in previous years. Brexit came top of the list of management worries – selected by 56.5% of Japanese companies in Europe.

31% say Brexit has had a negative impact on their business so far, and 37.7% are expecting a negative impact in the future. 3.7% felt Brexit has had a positive impact on their business both now and will do in the future. A negative impact was felt by 54% of Japanese companies in the UK both now and in the future, with 2.1% of Japanese companies saying Brexit has had a positive impact and only 0.5% expecting it to have a positive impact in the future.

Brexit

More than half of the 842 companies who responded cited Brexit as their biggest management concern, outstripping the perennial headache of recruiting and retaining employees. Unsurprisingly the group that was most worried was the manufacturing sector in the UK – but the services sector in Ireland and the UK also ranked Brexit highly as a concern. Nearly 70% of Japanese companies in Poland and Portugal picked Brexit as a key issue – significantly higher than the average for Japanese companies across Europe.

54% of Germany based Japanese manufacturers chose Brexit as their primary concern, but interestingly, the non-manufacturing sector in Germany was even more concerned by Brexit (59%). For all groups, the short term disruption from a no deal Brexit was the main reason for concern and the second biggest issue was the future relationship of the UK and the EU.

Japanese companies in the UK were worried about the impact Brexit would have on the UK economy, a cheapening £ making imports more expensive, changes to the UK regulatory and legal environment and exports to non-UK EU. Japanese companies in non-UK EU countries were most worried about exports to the UK, but also the impact of Brexit on the UK economy and on the EU economy.

Around 90% of Japanese companies were concerned about disruption to logistics and customs processes between EU and UK, considerably higher than concerns about tariffs being imposed (65%).

Japanese companies in the UK focused on freedom of movement of their employees

The worries about UK regulatory and legal changes were mostly focused on changes to the freedom of movement of people between the UK and EU. Over 50% of Japanese companies in the UK said this was their main concern, particularly those in the services sector.

In terms of countermeasures – 22% said they had either implemented or were implementing their contingency plans – particularly regarding regulatory and legal changes. Compliance with the REACH regulations for the chemicals industry and setting up a new operation were most cited as steps taken. Around 12% of UK based Japanese companies have or are in the middle of reorganising their supply chain and logistics and 4.4% have or are in the middle of reviewing their manufacturing organisation and 2.4% have or are reviewing their R&D structure. The most frequently cited measure taken by Japanese companies in non-UK EU was to secure financial passporting into non-UK EU.

Relocation from UK to EU (but some purchasing functions coming to UK)

In terms of moving out of the UK, the survey found that 3 companies had moved their EU regional HQ completely out of the UK, to Germany, and 10 had partially moved out – 5 to Germany, 3 to the Netherlands and 2 to Luxembourg. In 2015 19 companies said they wanted to expand their regional coordination function in the UK, compared to only 2 in 2019. More companies were expanding their regional HQs in Germany, Netherlands, France and Spain.

3 companies had moved their sales coordination out of the UK, to Germany, Czech Republic and Poland, 4 had partially shifted it, to Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. 2 companies had moved all their manufacturing out of the UK – 1 to Poland and one to Japan. 1 had partially moved their manufacturing to Hungary. Only 1 company had moved their R&D out of the UK, to Switzerland. 4 companies had moved their procurement function from the UK to Czech Republic, Italy, Spain and one company had moved their procurement function to the UK, from Asia.

4 companies are investigating moving their regional HQ from the UK to Germany and Italy, 2 partially moving their HQ to France and Czech Republic. 3 companies are considering moving their sales coordination to Germany and Italy or partially to Germany, France or Belgium.

1 company is considering moving all manufacturing to Japan, and 9 companies are considering partial relocation to Hungary, Germany, Czech Republic, Romania, Japan or elsewhere in Europe. 2 companies are considering wholly or partially moving their R&D to Germany or elsewhere in Europe.

14 companies in the UK are expecting to expand their high value added manufacturing in the UK, down from 25 in 2015 whereas 32 Japanese companies in Germany are expanding their high value added manufacturing. The Netherlands has become the third main host for Japanese high end manufacturing – 12 are expecting to expand their manufacturing there compared to only 2 in 2015.

12 companies are considering moving their procurement to Poland, Italy, Germany, Spain, the Netherlands, Asia or elsewhere in the EU. 3 companies are considering moving procurement to the UK from the EU, Poland, Portugal. 3 other companies are looking to move their procurement entirely out of Europe to countries such as South Korea or China.

The EPA is encouraging Japanese imports to EU

65.5% of Japanese companies who were importing from Japan to the EU and 53.1% of Japanese companies exporting to Japan from the EU said they were taking advantage of the EPA. Particularly notable were 80% of Japanese companies based in Italy (both importers and exporters) and 70% of Japanese companies in Spain. 62% of UK based Japanese companies were using the EPA to import from Japan (a lower proportion than Italy, Czech Republic, Spain, Poland, Belgium, Netherlands and Germany).

100% of Japanese companies in the logistics/warehousing, plastic components, rubber products sectors say they are using the EPA and over 70% of Japanese companies in the metal products, textiles, automotive parts, wholesalers, food and seafood processing sectors are using the EPA to import from Japan.

Sectors most making use of the EPA to export from the EU to Japan were the logistics/warehousing, automotive parts and wholesale sectors.

Overall, Japanese companies in the EU are importing 32.6% of their parts and raw materials (by value) from Japan, 1.2% up on the previous year – Japanese companies in Germany were importing the highest share of their procurement from Japan by value – 46.6%. Over 23% of Japanese companies in the EU expect to expand their procurement from Japan, particularly the services sector with 47.8% of wholesale and retail companies saying they will increase their purchases from Japan.

Economic outlook for Europe

Japanese manufacturers are however more pessimistic about prospects for 2020 than they were in 2019, with 36.7% expecting their profitability to worsen, compared to 26.6% expecting their profitability to improve. The causes differ from Western Europe to Eastern Europe – manufacturers in Western Europe expect falling demand to be the key factor whereas in Eastern Europe the primary concern is rising labour costs.

Around a third of Japanese companies are optimistic about the economic prospects in 2020 for the countries they are operating in, which is considerably down on the 57% who were optimistic for 2019 – this pessimism was particularly strong for Western European based manufacturing.

Hiring and retaining workers continues to be a headache for Japanese companies. This is especially an issue in Central and Eastern Europe and particularly at management level in Western Europe and at factory worker level in Central and Eastern Europe.

Around 50-55% of Japanese companies in Europe have or expect to maintain current employee levels – over a third have or expect to increase their workforce. 16% cut their workforce in the past year but only 11.3% expect to do so in 2020.

Strengthening selling to EU as a region

JETRO also sees evidence that Japanese companies are strengthening their approach to selling to the EU as a region, rather than individual countries. For the first time in their surveys, “The EU” outstripped Germany and Poland as the market that Japanese companies saw as the most promising for sales. Maybe this is another – psychological rather than regulatory – impact of the EPA.

Japanese companies say that strengthening their company’s brand, developing and strengthening the technical skills of their employees (particularly in Eastern Europe) and investing further in research and development are key to increasing sales in Europe.

So, as I have often said, Japanese companies are having to find ways to retain their integrity in a Europe and a world which is also dis-integrating, and Brexit is accelerating that process.

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。

Brexit update for Japanese companies

I’ve been avoiding writing about Brexit this past few months, partly because I felt I had nothing more to say. Similarly, Japanese companies have stopped issuing warnings. Many have already made and even implemented their plans for a worst-case scenario of a hard or no deal Brexit. I hear they have also been advised by the Japanese government to leave the talking to diplomats and politicians.

Companies in the UK have also gone silent. Some because they have been told by the Johnson regime that if they speak out, they will jeopardise government contracts. In financial services – Japanese firms included – alternative, approved EU entities have been set up. There is even the chance of making some money on the chaos that will probably arise in the currency, bond and stock markets.

It is still impossible to make any confident predictions about what will happen. Maybe it is true that Boris Johnson will, at the very last minute, blame the EU for not offering a fresh deal, then ask the EU for an extension to Article 50 in order to have a general election. He would be hoping to fight this on a populist campaign and win a more substantial majority. Then he can ask the EU for a new deal, confident as Mrs May was not, that he has a majority in parliament to approve it – or a no deal if the EU will not offer any concessions.

The problem is that the deal offered to Mrs May was as good as could be expected given her red lines of an end to the freedom of movement of people, no jurisdiction over the UK by the European Court of Justice and no customs union with the EU. It is hard to imagine a Johnson government erasing any of those red lines.

Johnson’s main aim appears to be to remove the Northern Ireland border “backstop” that in effect keeps Northern Ireland inside the EU if no solution to keeping the border open with the Republic of Ireland is found. Perhaps there could be a fudge whereby the backstop is removed from the Withdrawal Agreement and put into the Political Declaration – meaning it is to be negotiated later – which would probably also require a longer transition period than the current two years.

So Japanese companies in the UK may find that after a tumultuous few months, the UK remains in a transition period for several years – technically not in the EU, but all conditions remaining the same, while negotiations drag on, ending in a hard Brexit.

In which case what Japanese companies have already done remains the best solution – manufacturers adjust supply chains to circumvent the UK, financial services companies keep most of their staff in the UK but have substantial presence in the EU too. And those Japanese IT, infrastructure and outsourcing companies who have recently been investing in the UK should stay quiet, in the hope of getting government contracts to assist with whatever new systems Brexit brings.

This article by Pernille Rudlin originally appeared in Japanese in the Teikoku Databank News, 11 September 2019

Japanese corporate integrity in a disintegrating Europe

I’ve made a screencast (12 minutes with captions – ably edited by my son) of my keynote speech at a Dutch Embassy event for Japanese companies on a clipper ship on the Thames last month. It looks at the challenges facing Japanese companies trying to build their employer brands in a disintegrating Europe. I explain how difficult is is for Japanese companies to build ‘virtual trust’ across Europe when they are used to implicit communication, sticking to Japanese processes and working as homogenous, Japanese speaking teams huddled into one office.

I introduce the five competencies Japanese companies and their employees need to build trust across cultures – ability to communicate, understanding mutual interests, respecting European and Japanese processes and regulations, being reliable and accountable and having a shared vision and values. You can also find them in my book “Shinrai: Japanese Corporate Integrity in a Disintegrating Europe” available as a paperback and Kindle ebook on Amazon.

I love Japan but I don’t want to work in a Japanese company

I’ve done a screencast (around 11 minutes long) of my talk at the Centre People Appointments HR seminar earlier this year, on why people love Japan, but don’t want to work for a Japanese company, and what Japanese companies can do about it.

If you want to know more about working in a Japanese company, you can find our Japan Intercultural Consulting e-learning modules on Teachable, starting from £39 https://japan-intercultural-emea.teachable.com/

No sacred cows for NEC’s President Niino

I was reminiscing a couple of days’ ago with a Japanese business person about how in the 1990s there was a Silicon Glen in Scotland hosting many Japanese electronics and semiconductor factories, including NEC’s semiconductor plant in Livingston. After the IT bubble burst in 2000, most of these plants disappeared, including NEC’s. Silicon Glen has remade itself, focusing more on software and semiconductor design and development. NEC has also reinvigorated its presence in the UK with the acquisition of Northgate Public Services in 2018.

NEC is not out of the woods yet, however. In a tough interview in the Nikkei Business, President Niino seems willing to slaughter several sacred cows and even commits to taking responsibility (presumably by resigning) if his revival plan to FY 2020 does not succeed.

He said he was open to merging with rival Fujitsu, even if it meant the NEC name disappeared. I certainly recognised from his descriptions some similar characteristics in the way they operate.

NEC, like Fujitsu, was part of the so-called Den Den Family, where stable, dependable business came from government contracts from what is now NTT. “Customers would make very stringent requests of us and we would always try to respond with the best possible technical solutions, and deliver 100%. This is an important quality, but you cannot survive globally just on this”.

Niino thinks there were many reasons for the halving of NEC’s turnover since 2000. They had relied on introducing new technology in areas such as semiconductors, PCs and mobile phones, but once these became volume businesses with many newcomers, spending far more on R&D, NEC was no longer able to compete.

Niino is focusing on profit targets rather than turnover and sees NEC’s future strength as being in “safer cities” – using AI and software development rather than hardware. Clearly China will be a major competitor in this, but I guess NEC and other Japanese suppliers will be preferred by many who might view China as a threat.

Niino has brought in an HR director from Microsoft Japan to shake up the HR system. He has appointed 31 “change agents” and made evaluations more visible, and the distinction between specialists and managers more clear. Corporate officers on the board have all been asked to step down temporarily and then are being rehired on 1 year contracts. “I won’t be firing them if they don’t meet targets within one year, but if they miss two years’ running, it might be that they are better off working outside NEC”. As Niino is himself a Corporate Officer, no wonder he has to commit to taking personal responsibility for any failure too.

Brexit and Japanese jobs in the UK – growing by acquisition or “new” jobs?

Those looking for “despite Brexit” good news may be reassured that employment in the UK by the biggest Japanese companies has grown by 22% since 2014/5, right in line with the growth in Japanese jobs across Europe, Middle East and Africa (EMEA). About a quarter of the 750,000 people we estimate work for Japanese companies in the region are working in the UK, and so far there is no obvious divergence between the UK and the rest of EMEA in terms of overall job growth.

Big ticket acquisitions are the main driver of Japanese growth in the UK

But as we pointed out in previous posts looking at the trends across Europe, a distinction needs to be made between “new jobs” created in EMEA by Japanese greenfield investment, and investments which are acquisitions of existing jobs. Eastern Europe is the beneficiary of the former, particularly for the automotive sector, whereas the UK has been the target of the latter with big ticket acquisitions like SoftBank acquiring ARM, Mitsui Sumitomo acquiring Amlin, Sumitomo Rubber acquiring Micheldever, and NEC acquiring Northgate Public Services as well as Outsourcing acquiring various staffing and outsourcing companies.

Where are the “new jobs”?

These acquisitions account for the new entrants to the Top 30 ranking we have compiled below. They push out Fujifilm, Sumitomo Corporation, Japan Tobacco (who shut their factory in Northern Ireland last year) and Toshiba. The original Top 30 in 2014/5 have grown a more modest 10% if the acquisitive newcomers are not included. One of the highest climbers from the original 2014/5 ranking is the main Japanese creator of new jobs in the UK- Hitachi – in particular via their rail manufacturing and assembly plant at Newton Aycliffe.

There has not been a decline in automotive sector jobs in the UK – yet – however. In fact quite the reverse – there has been some growth in jobs in all three of the big Japanese car companies. But the trend is clear, as pointed out in previous posts, that even without Brexit, the drift of investment and jobs in the automotive sector is eastwards and to Africa. It’s easy to see how British people in those areas where Japanese automotive supply chains are active could blame the EU for job losses. Even though there actually weren’t that many EU grants enabling Japanese companies to transfer production from the UK to Eastern Europe – despite the rumours – merely by being members of the Single Market, and having lower labour costs, Eastern European countries are an obvious destination for new manufacturing investment.

Will Japan’s investment in the UK services sector be Brexit proof?

The investment in the UK by Japanese companies over the past three years has largely been through acquisitions in the services sector. This is not surprising, as services are 80% of the UK’s GDP and the UK’s comparative advantage in the region. It is also relatively Brexit proof in the sense that services sector investment will not be directly affected by any supply chain disruptions. Clearly if the UK economy takes a hit from Brexit, however, this will dampen demand for services. There has also been a shift of regional headquarters away from the UK by Panasonic and Sony and others, and of financial services companies, but as yet this has not hit UK jobs.

Eastern Europe has also been attractive to Japanese companies for business process outsourcing. Although Fujitsu is still – just – the top employer in the UK, employee numbers have dropped 29% – and there are now 13,000 people working for its service centres in Poland. NTT and its subsidiary NTT Data has also shot up the Top 30 both for the UK and the EMEA region – again through acquisitions – and has decided to base its new global ex-Japan headquarters in the UK.

Infrastructure, energy, transport should be the future for Japanese jobs in the UK

The UK’s strength as a global services provider will not disappear overnight, however hard the Brexit. But it’s hard to imagine how the kinds of secure, high quality automotive manufacturing jobs that those who voted for Brexit might have wanted to see return to the UK will come back, however soft the Brexit. The potential sunlit upland is in infrastructure – energy and transport. These sectors were needing investment regardless of whether the UK is in or out of the EU and are not so reliant on just in time supply chains across the region. Transport, environment and energy are areas where cooperation and financing on an EU-wide basis makes business and environmental sense though. But unfortunately Brexit has provided a distraction that has resulted in Hitachi freezing its Horizon nuclear power projects in Wales and Gloucestershire from lack of government financial support, and the recently called review of HS2 must also be giving Hitachi’s rail business and other Japanese executives cause for concern. Risk averse Japanese companies are not going to want to make multi million investments in infrastructure projects in a country which is politically unstable and unreliable.

Free pdf of Top 30 largest Japanese employers in UK

FREE DOWNLOAD

Send download link to:

The successes and failures of Japan’s era of big overseas acquisitions

The era of Japan’s big overseas acquisitions began with domestic mega M&As in the 1990s according to Nikkei Business magazine. Following the bursting of Japan’s economic bubble in 1990, a wave of M&As happened in the financial sector, giving birth to Mizuho from Fuji Bank, Daiichi Kangyo and the Industrial Bank of Japan and Sumitomo Bank and Sakura Bank producing SMBC. In the steel sector with NKK merging with Kawasaki Steel and becoming JFE and in the pharmaceuticals sector with Yamanouchi and Fujisawa merged to become Astellas.

The key concept for these M&As in the 1990s was “restructuring” – to rationalise the back office and integrate R&D. Then in the second half of the 2000s came a wave of overseas acquisitions, to counter the business impact of the shrinking, ageing population of Japan by growing overseas but also to benefit from further restructuring and rationalisation.

Mega overseas acquisitions of the 2000s

In 2007 Japan Tobacco acquired the UK’s Gallaher from RJR, becoming the third biggest tobacco company in the world. In 2006 SoftBank acquired Vodafone Japan and then the US company Sprint Nextel, then British ARM Holdings in 2016. Takeda acquired US Millennium Pharmaceuticals in 2008, then Swiss Nycomed in 2011, with the biggest M&A ever by a Japanese company, acquiring Ireland’s Shire in 2019.

“Growing overseas means the development of our human resources has become an urgent necessity” said the President of Takeda in 2006, Yasuchika Hasegawa. Hasegawa was seen as “an alien from outerspace” for his dry, rational management style, arising from many years working in the USA. Although Takeda had been the biggest pharmaceutical company in Japan for some years, it only ranked around 17 in the world before its acquisition spree and urgently needed to find new drug development sources. It felt it was lagging competitors.

The need for global management skills

Hasegawa decided to globalise the company internally by recruiting a foreign successor to himself in 2014 – Christophe Weber from GlaxoSmithKline. Three out of the seven current Takeda directors are not Japanese.

Japan Tobacco‘s managers sent overseas after the Gallaher acquisition found themselves caught between overseas executives determined to defend their patch with rational, logical arguments about productivity, logistics and profitability. After years of painful discussion, it was agreed to close the factory in Northern Ireland. Even now, says Masamichi Terabatake, the current President of Japan Tobacco, a Japan based executive needs to be prepared to travel around the world regularly to discuss strategy with local executives. “You need to keep global staff motivated. Investment and marketing cannot be left vague, they have to be quantitative so they can be transparently discussed. That’s probably why executives in the West are a bit younger!” he says.

NSG acquired UK’s Pilkington in 2006, becoming heavily indebted to do so. From being very domestic, it became a company whose sales were 80% overseas. Unfortunately this proved to be terrible timing as the automotive and architectural glass market crashed after the Lehman Shock.

Many of the acquirers also struggled because they did not have managers with experience of managing overseas businesses. As Nikkei Business magazine says, mega M&A means mega complexity for which plenty of preparation and a high level of management know-how, with the ability to spread this know-how horizontally and vertically is needed for success. It’s still not clear how far Japanese companies have progressed in this.

Rudlin Consulting has assisted many European companies acquired by a Japanese parent. Please contact Pernille Rudlin for further details.

The enduring Japanese family firm

I attended a Japan Society talk last month on shinise (Japanese family firms) – given by academics Innan Sasaki and Davide Ravasi. Sasaki and Ravasi argued that shinise have survived over 100 years, by keeping small and focused on traditional crafts like sweet making, sake brewing, and textiles. They are very much embedded in the society and community in which they operate – the highest concentration is in Japan’s old capital, Kyoto. In return for their commitment to the local community, they gain a social status and support from the community. They are meant to have a higher moral purpose than pure profit and therefore do not seek to take risks and grow much beyond their current geography and sector – which means they are more resilient to external economic shocks. When downturns happen locally, they survive through the strength of local support. This contrasts with what Sasaki and Ravasi call “instrumental” firms, who exist for a purely economic purpose.

Even large Japanese multinationals behave like Kyoto shinise

Listening to their descriptions of shinise‘s motivations and behaviours, I realised they were very similar to the way I describe bigger, multinational Japanese firms in my seminars. Even though Japanese multinationals have taken the risk to expand overseas, and are often no longer owned by the founding family, the ethos of having a higher moral purpose than shareholder value, of corporate contribution to society and strong risk aversion to ensure longevity still endures.

And like the shinise, the darker side is the sacrifices needed to be regarded as a proper member of the family firm and the difficulty of becoming a senior manager if you were not born into it – or at least recruited straight from university like Japanese headquarter permanent staff.

Nikkei Business magazine had a feature last month on family firms in Japan showcasing research that family owned firms in Japan perform better than non-family owned firms in terms of Return on Assets. “They don’t hold on to unnecessary assets” says Professor Yasuhiro Ochiai of Shizuoka University.

Japanese family owned multinationals that have performed well

DMG Mori is still owned by the Mori family and has been particularly active recently in M&A overseas since the current Mori took over as President in 1999, most notably in their merger with German machine tool manufacturer DMG. Apparently quite a few of DMG Mori’s employees come from the wider “family” of customers and suppliers.

Of course the most famous Japanese company still managed by a founding family member is Toyota. However the current President Akio Toyoda is adamant that the company name is Toyota, the family name is Toyoda, and Toyota is not a Toyoda family company, “it’s everyone’s company.”

Those that are listed on the Tokyo Stock Exchange and also active in Europe were:

Suntory (Torii family – founded by Shinjiro Torii in 1899) – chairman is from the founding family.
Aisin (automotive parts maker in the Toyota group founded in 1949 – chairman is part of the Toyoda founding family)
Shimano (Founded 1921, president is a Shimano)
DIC (Dainippon Ink) founded in 1908 by Kijiro Kawamura, a Kawamura is on the board of directors

And how to avoid toxic family rows

It’s not all joy in a family of course. Nikkei Business also looks at the family rows that have affected the performance of companies like Idemitsu (petroleum company) founding family shareholders fighting a merger with Showa Shell and the rebellion against founding family member Yoichiro Ushioda and chairman by executives of LIXIL (owners of German bathroom fittings company Grohe).

Nikkei Business’s prescription for avoiding trouble is:

Frequent communication between family members
Treat family members who are employees the same way as other employees in terms of company regulations
Don’t withhold information for family only, be transparent in management
Don’t appoint a successor from the family if there is noone suitable
Keep family assets and company assets separate
When there is a generation changeover, keep criticisms to yourself
Avoid too many family members as employees
Ensure a structure is in place to stop family members going rogue

For more on what being a “family” means for Japanese firms and the non-Japanese employees that work for them, this was one of my most popular articles in recent years.

4 cultures of controlling overseas subsidiaries

[playht_player width=”100%” height=”175″ voice=”Lily”]During a recent trip to Japan I visited Amazon’s offices to have lunch with an acquaintance who has been working there for 1 year and 3 months. He told me that Amazon has expanded so rapidly this past year that he is now in the upper half of a chart which shows all employees ranked by their length of time working for the company.

He also told me that almost all the non-Japanese people working there were, like him, locally hired and that there were hardly any expatriate staff from the US headquarters. I therefore wondered how Amazon HQ could control a subsidiary which is growing so rapidly without any expatriate managers to keep monitor it.

Amazon also tries to minimize the number of processes and procedures it has, in order to maintain the speedy, fast to market, start up mentality it had when it first began over twenty years’ ago.

The 3 usual ways to control overseas operations

In the various multinationals and their subsidiaries I have worked in or with, you can usually find three types of headquarter control. American, sales focused companies tend to control their subsidiaries by setting numerical targets. If the subsidiary employees and managers hit the targets, they get bonuses, if they miss them, they get fired. Many multinationals who are not American in origin use these systems because numbers are easy for everyone to understand, regardless of language.

Another way of managing subsidiaries which both European and American multinationals also use is to ensure compliance through having strong regulations, processes and systems, and clear hierarchical chains of command, so everyone knows who has responsibility and authority for each part of the business.

A third way, which is more common among Japanese companies and also companies such as the German Mittelstand, family owned companies, is “control by the family” – in other words members of the headquarters family are sent out to subsidiaries to monitor what is going on and promote the corporate culture.

Amazon’s way

My Amazon contact explained that Amazon ensures its employees behave in compliance with Amazon’s core values by having a very rigorous hiring process. Candidates are interviewed several times by multiple employees and asked questions about past experiences, to reveal what kind of mindset they have.

I can imagine, however, that it is difficult for Japanese companies to use this method if their overseas subsidiaries were the result of an acquisition, or if the company has already been operating overseas for several decades. There will already be a substantial legacy of staff who may have rather different values and behaviours to those of the Japanese headquarters.

It would also be a mistake, and damaging to the benefits of having diverse, localised operations that are close to their customers, to impose too rigid a set of behaviours and values on all overseas employees.

Nonetheless, I strongly recommend that Japanese companies who are about to acquire or set up operations overseas ensure they have a clear, globally understandable company mission and values (rinen) and hire or promote their overseas employees accordingly.

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.

No Japanese visitors please, we’re busy, say Estonian start ups

Estonian e-residency was something I considered for my business as a possible Brexit contingency plan. It wouldn’t have helped me keep my EU citizenship, but I could at least run the European side of the business from Estonia, and have a euro bank account for invoicing in euros. In the end I decided to ask my German partner to take over the euro business, but I was very tempted, having had an enjoyable business trip there a couple of years’ ago, combined with a holiday.

I wrote a couple of articles about Estonia and e-residency for a Japanese magazine after that, and it would seem the word has got out to Japanese businesses about Estonia’s digital economy as according to Kota Alex Saito, co- founder of SetGo, an e-residency business in Estonia, he is constantly having to field enquiries from Japanese businesses wanting to visit start ups there.

The dreaded hyoukei houmon

The Estonia Briefing Centre says that 146 groups of 1135 Japanese people visited Estonia in 2018, the second biggest grouping after Germany. However, as Saito points out, very few of them actually then start businesses or invest in Estonia or bring Estonian business to Japan. It is more what the Japanese call 表敬訪問 (hyoukei houmon – usually translated as “courtesy call”).

For Estonian start ups, it is more of a discourtesy to give up your time to show round groups of visitors, and get nothing in return except maybe some rice crackers. As Saito says, they are expecting visits to lead to some sort of business proposition, so “let’s keep in touch” is really not a good enough result. Hyoukei houmon were the bane of my life when I worked for Mitsubishi Corporation in London too – trying to persuade busy European executives that meeting Japanese “missions” would not be a waste of their time.

A difference in scale and mindset

For the Japanese visitors, the main point seems to be simply to see the petrie dish of a digital economy. But as Saito says, Estonia only has a population of 1.3 million, so trying to scale that up by 100 times to a Japanese scale is not a simple process. Furthermore, Estonia has a highly transparent system of data on companies, government and people, so e-government is less feared. There is a big difference in mindset that Japan could learn from, but may find hard to imitate.

Saito gives advice which I often give in my seminars to Japanese and Europeans working together – make the purpose of your meeting clear, do your research beforehand, make sure there are action points at the end that you follow up on.

Category: Japanese business in Europe