ASSIGNMENT

Assignment On Honda Case Study

Assignment On Honda Case Study

Task # 1

Mair (1994a) offers a preliminary assessment based on research at the initial HONDA engine plant. This paper incorporates further research at the car assembly plant. The first part examines the “received views” of organization at Honda in the management literature. The second part describes the operations management systems used at HONDA, including the roles played by production workers. Third, HONDA's organizational processes and employment frameworks are analysed. The implications of the HONDA case for the broader debates over “Japanization” are drawn out in the conclusions.

Two polar views have framed the debate. On the one hand, it has been argued that Japanese management systems cannot function effectively in the West - or that if they can, the workforce suffers - because they are culture-bound, exploitative, and would be resisted by trades unions. Japanese practice has been interpreted as classic “Theory X” management. On the other hand, Japanese management systems are said to offer Western production workers new opportunities for teamwork, self-expression and workplace democracy which should be grasped eagerly - here Japan is interpreted as classic “Theory Y” management.Debate over the transfer and adaption of industrial models prompted by the globalization of Japanese manufacturers continues to draw attention. Most discussion has concerned issues of work and employment relations, where the new multinationals have interacted most directly with host societies.

There is a “received view” of Honda in the management literature. In brief, Honda epitomizes the interpretation of Japanese practices as “Theory Y” management. Organization at Honda is said to be characterized by innovation, devolution of responsibility, and individualism, in stark contrast to the classical bureaucratic organization. Empirical research included three plant visits to HONDA and two further discussions with HONDA managers, amounting to 12 interviews with managerial staff, all European: four in general management, three in purchasing, two in production management, two in Hondaan resource management, and one in materials handling. Honda is generally not very open to external researchers, and the conclusions of this paper are therefore provisional. However, the analysis of HONDA has been aided by the author's research at Honda in the USA, Canada, Belgium and Germany, including interviews with senior Japanese managers (sales, general, R&D) and product development engineers, as well as North American and European managers across the range of management functions.

In new product development, for instance, emphasis is placed on the prominent role played by middle managers and junior engineers (Mito, 1990; Nonaka, 1988, 1991; Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995). Engineers at Honda learn from experience; Peters (1988, pp. 316-17) quotes Masaki Imai, author of Kaizen, to the effect that Honda has few PhDs on its staff. Garvin (1993, p. 80) cites Honda as a successful “learning organization”. This view parallels the “incrementalist” interpretation of Honda by strategy theorists (Mair, 1998b; Pascale, 1984).

Ohmae (1982, p. 220) also distinguishes Honda from the bureaucratic model, arguing that despite its size Honda has no organizational chart; indeed nobody externally knows how the company is organized except that it frequently employs ...