PIJPSM 20,4

600

Japanese management and policing in the context of Japanese culture

Leanne Fiftal Alarid
University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri, USA, and

Hsiao-Ming Wang
Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas, USA
Introduction Police systems and laws which govern them strongly reflect the social context and culture in which they operate (Bayley, 1991; Black, 1976; Langworthy and Travis, 1994). Comparative police scholars have not been able to pinpoint whether low crime rates and successful crime prevention efforts by Japanese police are due to management techniques within the National Police organization itself or to cultural differences in society. In Forces of Order, Bayley (1991) emphasized Japans distinctly different culture from that of the USA. Fifty years ago, Japan was a defeated country in ruins with no capital for rebuilding. Japans emergence as a world economic leader is largely due to the efficiency inherent in Japanese culture (Hayashi, 1990; Kelley and Worthley, 1982; Sours, 1982) management practices (Taylor, 1993), and law enforcement (Miyazawa, 1992). At the same time, Japans uniqueness is shrouded in mystery, leaving police administrators wondering to what extent Japanese police institutions are embedded in Japanese culture. Studying foreign cultures helps people overcome parochialism and broaden their intellectual horizons (Bayley, 1991). However, individuals wishing to study Japanese police are hindered by language barriers, cultural differences and lack of first-hand information (Steinhoff, 1993). This paper will examine the impact of Japanese culture on Japanese management and police box operations to determine the extent to which Japanese police institutions are embedded in Japanese culture. To accomplish this objective, we first examine Ouchis Theory Z of corporate management. Ouchis Theory Z Most Americans are not familiar with the elements of Japanese management because few studies of Japanese management are available in English. In the late 1970s, American managers became concerned when the Japanese increased their importation of automobiles, electronics, and other products to the USA
Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategy and Management, Vol. 20 No. 4, 1997, pp. 600-608. MCB University Press, 1363-951X

The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions and Mr Matsuda Shuhei for sending literature on the National Police Agency.

(Komai, 1989, p. 1). It was not until the publication of Ouchis Theory Z (1981) that American managers obtained a clearer profile of Japanese management. Ouchi (1981, p. 58) summarized seven principles of Japanese management (Theory J) as: lifetime employment; slow evaluation and promotion; nonspecialized career paths; implicit control mechanisms; collective decision making; collective responsibility; and holistic concern. The most important characteristic of Japanese management was lifetime employment, which functioned as the cornerstone of Theory J. Japanese management contributed to the economic success of Japan, but Ouchi also recognized that Theory J could not be fully applied to American management because of cultural differences. Thus, Ouchi borrowed the following ideas from Theory J to create Theory Z: consensual decisions, infrequent appraisal, slow promotion, and comprehensive concern. Ouchi left individual responsibility unchanged because it was an important concept to American management. Along with the previously mentioned principles, Theory Z also included long term employment, moderately specialized career paths, and implicit/informal appraisal with explicit/formalized measures. Empirical research on Theory Z on three different managerial groups found that Japanese-American managers were more concerned with team effort, respect for authority, self-development, group appraisal, nepotism and longterm employment than were Caucasian-American managers (Kelly and Worthley, 1982, pp. 50-51). Japanese managerial techniques have not been without their share of criticisms. Japanese middle managers and supervisors reportedly used formal directives to rigidly control both corporate employees (Sullivan, 1992) and police detectives (Miyazawa, 1992). However, the majority of researchers perceived Japanese management as a distinct contribution to the harmony and loyalty of Japanese workers to the organization (Ozaki, 1991; Taylor, 1993; Woronoff, 1992). The driving force behind Japanese economic success may be found by examining Japanese management practices. Japanese management There are generally two methods of analyzing Japanese management: either by a universal/organizational or a historical/cultural process (Sours, 1982, p. 27). Supporters of the universal approach maintain Japanese management was created after the Second World War as an adaptation of American ideals, rather than developing from ancient Japanese values and customs (Ozaki, 1991). While people view Japanese management as unique in practice, quality control, industrial engineering, and in-house training can also be found abroad (Woronoff, 1992). For example, when Japanese engineers from the Toyota company visited American supermarkets, Toyota acquired the Kanban system, an inventory-control method (Ozaki, 1991). The second method of analyzing Japanese management is the cultural view. Historical supporters presumed the Japanese managerial system was an outgrowth and reflection of the Japanese historical experience, which molded a cultural tradition quite different from that of the West (Sours, 1982, p. 29).

Japanese management and policing 601

PIJPSM 20,4

602

Researchers found that Japanese-American managers were more concerned with team effort, respect for authority, self-development, group appraisal, nepotism and long-term employment than were Caucasian-American managers. Although both groups of managers were born in America and experienced similar economic, education and legal systems, Japanese-American managers held values more similar to Japanese culture (Kelly and Worthley, 1982). To moderate the contradiction of the universal and cultural approaches, Yamazaki (1985) recognized that since the late nineteenth century, Western culture influenced Japanese society. Japan borrowed the strengths of Western culture and merged them into their own culture for suitable purposes or occasions. If the universal approach is more applicable, Western managerial concepts would be assimilated into Japanese pluralistic culture. However, available evidence indicates Japanese management remains a product of Japanese culture. For this reason, the historical/cultural approach is most appropriate to explore how Japanese culture influences Japanese management. Cultural connection to Japanese management Central to the Japanese is the concept of groupism (Hayashi, 1990; Kanfman, 1975) Collective needs and goals of all employees are more important than individual needs in Japanese management. Groupism originated from old agricultural practices. In the wet paddy fields, harmonious group work was needed over specialized division of labor. Groupism pervaded in Japan along with the rise of the samurai (knight or warrior) class. The samurai believed that the group was supreme and the individuals welfare was relatively unimportant. The values of duty, benevolence, and tolerance created in the samurai class were transformed into Japanese employees respect for their managers and the idea of sacrificing individual needs for the sake of the corporation (Hayashi, 1990; Sours, 1992). The fundamental idea of groupism is ie or mura. Ie refers to household or family; while mura means a wider community. The idea of ie or mura molded the Japanese society as a concentric circle. In the core of this circle is the family, a basic ie; then the group, a larger ie, which may be a school class, a university, an employing company, or a political party; and, finally, the nation, the largest ie. Groupism among Japanese employees additionally influenced the structure of large corporations. Ouchi (1981, p. 18) noted the major firms in Japan were organized into a small number of groups called zaibatsus[1]. Each group consisted of such heterogeneous companies as trading, shipping, steel and insurance, clustered around a major bank. In effect, each zaibatsu was a large mura or ie. For the Japanese, the company is considered a second family. The management represents father or elder brothers and the employees are like children or younger siblings. Employees work hard and form the enterprise union to indicate their loyalty to the family. In return, large, private Japanese firms (constituting about 10 per cent of all Japanese businesses) practice lifetime employment to take care of their family members. This unique business

practice explained why Japanese firms preferred to train new employees (a new member of the family) over recruiting experienced individuals from outside companies. Seniority is woven into all aspects of Japanese society. Every Japanese has a keen sense of the order of the things, whether it be the ranking of companies, positions within a company, universities, countries, or restaurants (Taylor, 1993, p. 261). Juniors, regardless of gender, defer on all occasions and in all matters to their seniors. In the work place, employees are promoted on the basis of seniority rather than ability. The concept of seniority created a tightly organized and devoted work force, as the Japanese worker will undertake any task requested by his section chief (Kanfman, 1975, p. 15). In sum, Japanese management is a derivative of Japanese culture. The theme of Japanese culture is groupism which interrelates the two key concepts of ie and mura. These two ideas cast Japan as one big family, in which each member is required to sacrifice self-interest for the purpose of group welfare. Groupism contributes the values of hard working and cooperation and the practice of zaibatsu, a unique Japanese business group. The samurai heritage forms seniority, the basis of promotion and the primary reason for consensual decision in modern Japanese corporations. With these concepts in mind, we will synthesize Japanese culture and management in their application to the Japanese police in terms of groupism, seniority, and non-specialized career paths. Japanese police structure The first Japanese Police Bureau was established in 1874 under the Ministry of Home Affairs. The early organizational structure of 1947 closely resembled the Weberian paramilitary style of the German Police (Archambeault and Fenwick 1983, 1985). Like the Germans, Japanese police were reportedly oppressive and even instituted a thought control operation to blot out any thinking contrary to overt support of the regime in power (Kanfman, 1975, p. 17). After the Second World War, and in line with the occupation policies of the Allied Forces, the US assisted Japan in rebuilding its police systems as a decentralized democratic entity headed by the National Public Safety Commission. The reorganization reduced police efficiency so significantly, that by 1954, Japan enacted a Police Law to restructure the police appropriate to cultural needs (Hoffman, 1982; Kanfman, 1975). The Police Law used principles resembling Management Theory Z to rejuvenate a four-level centralized bureaucracy while maintaining a community service orientation. The first level was the National Public Safety Commission, which functioned as supervisor of the National Police Agency and to sustain political neutrality. The second level contained seven regional bureaus which supervise the Prefectural Police. As of July 1996, there were a total of 220,000 police officers (3 per cent female) and 30,000 civilian employees (43 per cent female) working for the Prefectural Police (National Police Agency 1996, p. 10). The Prefectural Police and Metropolitan Police Department in Tokyo are

Japanese management and policing 603

PIJPSM 20,4

604

further divided into district police stations, which constitute the third layer. The bottom layer consist of police boxes. As of April 1995, 1,261 district police stations supervised a total of 6,498 urban koban and 8,379 rural chuzaisho police boxes throughout the country (National Police Agency 1996, p. 5). Archambeault and Fenwick (1985, p. 3) succinctly encapsulate the contribution of Theory Z to the Japanese law enforcement structure as a whole:
Management Theory Z provides the consistency in structure and management processes which allows a national police force to be decentralized into a semi-autonomous neighborhood-centered system of fixed posts, referred to as kobans in urban areas and chuzaisho in rural sectors.

Groupism: the Koban and Chuzaisho The koban and chuzaisho system remains the backbone of Japans centralized police system. Consistent with the concept of groupism, urban police boxes play an important role in carrying out police affairs as a team, relative to the Japanese community. Japanese police are in continuous contact with beat residents, at a current ratio of one officer for 563 citizens (National Police Agency 1996, p. 10). In contrast to the team efforts of the koban, only one police officer is assigned to a chuzaisho. Officers reside in the police box with their families, assuming duties similar to koban officers. Although chuzaishos greatly outnumber kobans, urban kobans have more activity because nearly four-fifths of the Japanese population are concentrated in the city. Japans recent urbanization trend has caused an increase in the number of kobans, while chuzaishos are dwindling (Bayley, 1991). Japanese officers must interview every household on their beat twice a year to understand problems and changing neighborhood dynamics. Besides emergency response, officers also give directions, assist drunks, and mediate domestic disputes. Police scholars have observed that community-oriented policing as a philosophy in the USA is wholly institutionalized in Japan (Bayley, 1991). The career of a Japanese police officer is a lifetime commitment for both the officer and his family. Like all other occupations in Japan, the job itself dominates all other aspects of public and private life. Most urban police boxes operate on a three-shift system where officers are paid for a 44-hour weekly rotating schedule. Officers frequently volunteer to work more hours without pay to demonstrate loyalty to the organization. These extra hours worked may help explain why Japanese police have higher clearance rates than American police for most offenses. Seniority While groupism reduces the importance of the individual, seniority in Japanese policing refers to the emphasis on rank position within and between officers. Bayley (1991, p. 59-61) identifies particular protocol for speech, behavior, and customs for work-related meetings. In order to decrease the social distance between officers of different ranks, Japanese superiors make themselves more physically accessible to subordinates.

Each koban is headed by a police sergeant or higher ranking officer who is considerably the single most important officer in the police box. Sergeants are directly accountable for the actions of their subordinates, but are not overly concerned with sharing the responsibility (Bayley, 1991). The effect of shaming and disgrace remains a pervasive part of the Japanese culture to effectively control misconduct (Braithwaite, 1989). Thus, middle managers frequently defer their authority to the patrol officer without losing respect over subordinates. Non-specialized career paths Non-specialized career paths are directly related to achieving rank through a nine-tier promotional system[2]. Attaining rank within the department differs greatly between first-liner and elite officers (Parker, 1984). Most first-liner officers (80 per cent of the force) work in police boxes for the duration of their career. First-liners are transferred among the bottom level positions with salary increases every six months and regular promotions based on seniority rather than on meritorious behavior. Nearly every first-liner officer with a good record will be assured of retirement at the rank of sergeant or above due to a 1973 policy which allows promotions without an examination (Bayley, 1991). Elite officers graduate from Tokyo Universitys law department, and enter the system as an assistant inspector, one rank above sergeant. Elite officers do not stay in the koban for long; they are quickly promoted to upper-middle positions. For example, a police superintendent of the traffic division might have had a prior position as assistant superintendent at the public security division. This superintendents future position might be instructor at the National Police Academy (National Police Agency, 1996). In 1991, a concerted effort was made to increase the number of senior police officers. As of 1996, however, there were 566 officers out of 220,000 total who held a rank of Senior Superintendent (sixth level) or above (National Police Agency, 1996, p. 10). In sum, three common characteristics exist between police box operations relative to the practices of Japanese corporations. First, groupism produces devotion, camaraderie, and frequent overtime without extra pay as indications of company loyalty. Second, seniority serves as the basis of promotion and salary increases. Senior officers make all decisions and give instructions, but frequently defer to their subordinates. Finally, non-specialized career paths can be applied to educated Elite officers, who are transferred among different divisions within the system. Discussion Japanese management continues to attract worldwide attention because of its success, efficiency, and humanistic quality. Ouchis Theory Z was the first work that introduced Japanese management to America. Although some critics interpret Japanese management as control tactics within police organizations (Miyazawa, 1992), most practitioners consider Japanese management qualities as a salient resource for organizational goals. Some Japanese management ideas, such as improving police-community relations within police

Japanese management and policing 605

PIJPSM 20,4

606

organizations, came from the USA. Ironically, contemporary Japan is not without its problems. Recent urbanization and increased congestion has partially deteriorated police-community relations by increasing workload demands on beat officers (Ames, 1981; Parker, 1984). To compile urban area problems further, land for new police boxes in the city are expensive and recent personnel shortages is causing coverage problems in the already thinly spread police force (Bayley, 1991). To combat some of these problems, satellite kobans and automobiles (mobile koban) are staffed as needed as a form of temporary police service. A recurrent theme throughout is that both Japanese management and police remain a product of Japanese culture. But how can principles of Japanese management and Japanese police be applied to the philosophy of community policing in other countries? Bayley (1994, pp. 105-14) labeled community-oriented policing efforts with the acronym CAMPS, which stands for consultation, adaptation, mobilization, and problem-solving. To a large extent, there is no consensus on what community policing is (is not) in the USA, nor have any systematic efforts been conducted to evaluate police effectiveness using community policing tactics. Like large business corporations of America, certain elements of management Theory Z can be applied to police administration in the USA (Archambeault and Fenwick, 1983). Owing to cultural impediments to change, some management theory principles will be more successful and useful in American policing than others. In specific, two elements from Management Theory Z that apply to community policing are individual responsibility and decentralization. First, Ouchi (1981) recognized individual responsibility as an important concept to American culture. In terms of its application to community policing consultation and mobilization of the community, individual responsibility lies with both the officer and the the community to return to the concept of neighborhood ownership and pride. A key assumption is that community policing cannot succeed without significant community involvement. Evaluations of neighborhood watch programs, operation ID programs and educating the public about home security precautions have not proved to be effective at reducing property crimes over the long term (Rosenbaum, 1987). We feel the problem may not lie with the program, but with the lack of community involvement over the long term. Officers at every level in the department must genuinely accept the idea that crime prevention and service functions are just as important as law enforcement. Second, community member, must also be committed in realizing their essential role in crime prevention, particularly in high-crime neighborhoods. Second, a systematic concern of police administration and management in the USA is the dominant model of policing, which for the most part is currently a professional efficiency, Weberian model overlaid by elements of community policing. Many police departments publicly report they are doing community policing but their organizational structure and mission remains unchanged. It is ironic that the National Police Agency in Japan is more decentralized than

most smaller, local level departments in the USA. Further, Weberian-style management is considered ineffective and obsolete with most corporate managers, yet it remains widely used in public-sector organizations such as police departments. Whereas the Weberian model emphasizes individualism and social distance from coworkers and the public at large, the decentralized managerial system in Japan encourages delegation of responsibility, increasing the social distance between superiors and subordinates, and engaging in social activities outside of work while maintaining deserved respect in the workplace. Although the Japanese police are known for their crime prevention efforts in their relationship with the community, Japanese beat cops are not engaged in a formal process of problem-solving inherent in many community-oriented philosophies (Bayley 1991, 1994). The reason for this is the formal institutionalization of community policing in Japan which is not significantly altered by a change in upper administration, as in the USA. Crime prevention is a function equivalent in importance to criminal investigation, security, and order maintenance functions. It is clear that Japanese police organizations should not be neglected by American police administrators who are committed to the philosophy of community or neighborhood-oriented policing as the dominant model of law enforcement. Perhaps the only recourse for effective and lasting change toward a community policing model can be found in Das (1990, p. 216) perception of what Bayley would say:
Unless American society is prepared to modify familiar and prized habits and customs, no reform of the police in America in regard to a formidable list of features is possible. These features include armament, role, mechanism of accountability, relations with the rest of the criminal justice system, cooperation by the public, morale, use of force, incidence of misbehavior, and scale of organization. Notes 1. The pre-war zaibatsu were to be dissolved during the Allied occupation. Although the contemporary keiretsu manifests many of the same characteristics as its parent company, many zaibatsus quickly took back their former names when the occupation officially ended (Woronoff, 1982). 2. The rank of the Japanese police are from top to bottom: superintendent general (Keishisokan), superintendent supervisor (Keishikan), chief superintendent (Keishicho), senior superintendent (Keishisei), superintendent (Keishi), police inspector (Keibu), assistant police inspector (Keibuho), police sergeant (Junsabucho), senior police officer (Junsacho) and police officer (Junsa) (National Police Agency, 1996). For a thorough discussion of Japanese administration and operations, see Ames (1981), Bayley (1991), Miyazawa (1992), and Parker (1984). References Ames, W. (1981), Police and Community in Japan, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. Archambeault, W.G. and Fenwick, C.R. (1983), A comparative analysis of Japanese and American police organizational management model: the evolution of a military bureaucracy to a Theory Z organization, Police Studies, Vol. 6, pp. 3-11. Archambeault, W.G. and Fenwick, C.R. (1985), Differential effects of police organizational management in a cultural context: comparative analysis of South Korean, Japanese and American law enforcement, Police Studies, Vol. 8, pp. 1-12.

Japanese management and policing 607

PIJPSM 20,4

608

Bayley, D.H. (1991), Forces of Order: Policing Modern Japan, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA. Bayley, D.H. (1994), Police for the Future, Oxford University Press, New York, NY. Black, D. (1976), The Behavior of Law, Academic Press, New York, NY. Braithwaite, J. (1989), Crime, Shame, and Reintegration, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA. Das, D.K. (1990), Review essay: the work of David H. Bayley, Justice Quarterly, Vol. 7, pp. 20921. Hayashi, S. (1990), Culture and Management in Japan, University of Tokyo Press, Tokyo. Hoffman, V.J. (1982), The development of modern police agencies in the Republic of Korea and Japan: a paradox, Police Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 3-16. Kanfman, C. (1975), Tokyo: One City Where Crime Doesnt Pay, The Citizens Crime Commission of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA. Kelly, L. and Worthley, R. (1982), Japanese management and cultural determinism, in Lee, S.M. and Schwendiman, G. (Eds), Japanese Management: Cultural and Environmental Considerations, Quorum Books, Westport, CT, pp. 39-52. Komai, H. (1989), Japanese Management Overseas: Experiences in the United States and Thailand, Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo. Langworthy, R. and Travis, L.F. (1994), Policing in America: A Balance of Forces, Macmillan, New York, NY. Miyazawa, S. (1992), Policing in Japan: A Study on Making Crime, State University of New York Press, New York, NY. National Police Agency (1996), The Police of Japan 1996, National Police Agency, Tokyo, Japan. Ouchi, W. (1981), Theory Z: How American Business Can Meet the Japanese Challenge, AddisonWesley, Reading, MA. Ozaki, R. (1991), The Japanese Enterprise: System as World Model, Kodan Sha International, New York, NY. Parker, L.C. (1984), The Japanese Police System Today: An American Perspective, Kodan Sha International, New York, NY. Rosenbaum, D.P. (1987), The theory and research behind neighborhood watch: is it a sound fear and crime reduction strategy? Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 33, pp. 103-34. Sours, M.H. (1982), The influence of the Japanese culture on the Japanese management system, in Lee, S.M. and Schwendiman, G. (Eds), Japanese Management: Cultural and Environmental Considerations, Quorum Books, Westport, CT, pp. 27-38. Steinhoff, P.G. (1993), Pursuing the Japanese police, Law and Society Review, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 827-50. Sullivan, J.J. (1992), Invasion of the Salaryman: The Japanese Business Presence in America. Praeger, Westport, CT. Taylor, S. (1993), Japan, in Peterson, R.B. (Ed.), Managers and National Culture: A Global Perspective, Quorum Books, Westport, CT, pp. 257-86. Woronoff, J. (1992), The Japanese Management Mystique: The Reality Behind the Myth, Probus, Chicago, IL. Yamazaki, M. (1985), The impact of Japanese culture on management, in Thurow, L.C. (Ed.), The Management Challenge: Japanese Views, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.