The impact of obesity on gym market
jhh19970724
project_83_xample_3_baces.docx_.pdf
University of Portsmouth
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
BA (Hons) Communication and English Studies
PROJECT
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR
CORPORATION A NEW CULTURE,
OR WITH THE CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF
THE UNITED STATES OR OF JAPAN?
Student Number:
Supervisor: William Forsyth
24 April, 2015
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A NEW
Contents
ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................................... 1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................... 2
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................... 3 2.1 DEFINITION OF CULTURE...................................................................................................................... 3 2.2 CATEGORIES OF CULTURES: NATIONAL CULTURE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ..... 4 2.3 GLOBALIZATION AND CULTURAL GLOBALIZATIONS .................................................................. 4
2.3.1 Cultural homogenization, heterogenization, and hybridization ....................................... 5 2.4 APPROACH FOR MANUFACTURERS.................................................................................................... 5 2.5 THE CULTURAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND JAPAN......................... 6
2.5.1 High-/ Low-context culture .............................................................................................................. 6 2.5.2 Time perceptions .................................................................................................................................. 7 2.5.3 Hofstede dimensions of culture ..................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY AND LIMITATION .........................................................12 3.1 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................... 12 3.2 LIMITATION ........................................................................................................................................... 12
CHAPTER 4. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION ........................................................................14 4.1 THE STRATEGY AND THE STRUCTURE OF TOYOTA ................................................................... 15 4.2 THE CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF TOYOTA, AND COMPARE AND CONTRAST WITH
THE CULTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE UNITED STATES AND JAPAN ................................. 16
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................19
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................................................20
APPENDICES ...................................................................................................................................... I APPENDIX I. THE FULL TABLE OF THE BASE CULTURE DATA FOR SIX DIMENSIONS OF CULTURE AS PRESENTED IN CULTURES AND ORGANIZATIONS 3RD EDITION 2010......................................................I
DECLARATION ................................................................................................................................. III
List of Table
Table 1. Summary of the compare and contrast of Hofstede cultural dimensions
of the United States and Japan…………………………………………………… 10
Table 2. Compare the culture of Toyota with the cultural characteristics of the
United States and Japan………………………………………………………….. 17
Graph 1. The six Hofstede dimensions of the United States and Japan.....……. 8
Figure 1. Relationships between strategy, structure, control and culture……..14
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 1
Abstract
This project focused on one research question – Is the culture of Toyota Motor
Corporation (Toyota) a new culture, or with the cultural characteristics of the United
States orof Japan? The literature review provided thorough perspectives on culture
and the cultural characteristics of the two countries. The research was done by taking
Toyota’s culture as an example to compare and contrast with the cultural
characteristics of the two countries to investigate whether it is a new culture. The
results showed that Toyota’s cultures contains the cultural characteristics of the two
national cultures, which tends to the American cultural characteristics.
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 2
Chapter 1. Introduction
The relation between culture and communication has been a topical scholarly study
for years. Research have suggested that creating a new culture, namely organizational
culture, could be more efficient and effective to cope with another existing culture
than by fitting into it. However, there is not much research on comparing new cultures
with the long existing cultures, for example, national cultures.
By reading relevant books and journals about culture and communication, I found that
the Toyota Motor Corporation (Toyota in short) has been mentioned for its successful
approach of production system. Besides, Toyota, as a Japanese-based corporation,
proved its approach is capable to be used worldwide, including the United States. As
some studies suggested that the cultures of the States and Japan differs greatly, I
would investigate whether Toyota’s culture is a new culture, a blend of the two
national cultures, or either one of the national cultures, and therefore led to its
success.
There are five chapters in the project, which are the introduction, literature review,
methodology and limitation, findings and discussion, and conclusion. In the following
chapter, a thorough research was done about culture and communication as the
literature review.
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 3
Chapter 2. Literature Review
People communicate in every bit of life, and communication is indivisible from
culture, according to Smith (1966; 1). In other words, generally speaking, every
language has a deep bond with its related culture (Dirven & Pütz, 1992).
Communication, including not only language but also non-verbal communication, is
the basic medium for human to maintain relationships (Wood, 2011, pp. 7-8; Smith,
1966, p.3). It may also be true in terms of business. Communication is inseparable
tothe success of an organization (American Psychological Association, 2014), and it
is in regards to the whole process of how people affect the minds ofeach other(Smith,
1966, p.15).However,within an international organization, misunderstanding may
commonly occur because people are most likely to ignore the cultural differences
between groups of employees, or branches from different geographicalareas (Ting-
Toomey, 2012, p.204).Thus, being aware of the existance of cultural differences is
crucial to achieving effectiveand efficient communication, whichis an important role
within organizations(Wood, 2011, p.9).
2.1 Definition of culture Somepeople might have an idea of the existence of cultural differences between
individuals(Janney & Arndt, 1992). However, ‘people’ is only a part of the whole
culture (Janney & Arndt, 1992), as Hofstede (2004) has emphasized that culture is a
system of a specific society/ community, and human is only a part of the system. The
meaning of culture, according to etymology,is about "collective customs and
achievements of a people" since the year of 1867(Harper, 2014). Also, according to
Hofstede (1980), a culture is “a collective programming of the mind which
distinguishes one group from another” (Jones, 2007). Therefore, culture could be
created, or “programmed”, for instance the culture within an organization. Culture, in
other words, is a combination of every single element people learnt since their born,
which allows cultures to be differentiated (Jones, 2007; Heatwole, n.d.).Furthermore,
Binsbergen (2003) suggested that one’s personality is a result of the effects of his/ her
cultural background. Attention needed to be paid that one’s personality is also only a
reflection of his/ her cultural background, instead of the representation of the whole of
that corresponding culture.
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 4
2.2 Categories of cultures: National culture and Organizational culture Culture although is a combination of almost every daily elements, it could be mainly
divided into two categories: National cultures, and Organizational cultures (Hofstede
& Fink, 2007, p.15). National culture, according to the interview of Hofstede by Fink
(2007; 15), it is in regards to the basic values of people that they have learnt since
childhood, and those values are too natural to be conscious of (Hofstede, Hofstede, &
Minkov, 2010, p.384). Therefore, it might also be called as the “rooted values”
(Hofstede & Fink, 2007, p.15). On the other hand, organizational culture is about the
means of working acquired during adulthood (Hofstede & Fink, 2007, p.15). When
people changed to a new working place, they could learn about the organizational
culture of the department/ company. No matter it is either national or organizational
culture, when people have the first few contacts with the new culture, they would
probably experience communication problems, for instance cultural conflicts or
culture shock, or both, in personal experience. These kinds of problems are possibly
because of the ignorance of the existance of cultural differences between groups of
people (Ting-Toomey, 2012, p.204).
2.3Globalization and cultural globalizations From the previous paragraphs, people would probably face different types of
communicative problems due to the lack of understanding when having contacts with
unfamiliar cultures. Some people may question that how could people from different
parts of the world cooperate with each other, and work for large-scale organizations.
With reference to Buchan et al. (2009; 4138), globalization might be a crucial element
in constructing nowadays large-scale cooperation. It is because globalization might
lessen ones’ social distance with others who are physically and geographically distant
in their own perception (Buchan et al., 2009, p.4141). Globalizationcan mean a
process of exchanging information, business and cultural ideas around the world in a
remarkably fast pace; the connections of each part of the world therefore increased
(British Boardcasting Corporation, 2014). On the cultural side, there are three types of
cultural globalization suggested, which are cultural homogenization (Buchen et al.,
2009, p.4138; Jones, 2007; Bird & Fang, 2009), cultural heterogenization (Buchen et
al., 2009, p.4138; Embong, 2011, p.18), and cultural hybridization (Embong, 2011,
p.18).
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 5
2.3.1 Cultural homogenization, heterogenization, and hybridization
First of all, for cultural homogenization, as suggested by Jones (2007), and Bird and
Fang (2009), globalization and technology have now changed our way of thinking and
therefore start to merge cultures into one single world culture. National cultures may
also diminish as a result of rapid information exchange(Bird & Fang, 2009). This is
one part of cultural globalization(Embong, 2011, p.17).
Secondly, the other part of cultural globalization, according to Embong (2011; 18), is
cultural heterogenization, which is the opposite of homogenization; or some may call
it as polarization (Holton, 2000, p.140).In other words, there would be more and more
diverse cultures in the world, and also reinforce the unity of a nation. For example, it
is happening in Scotland and Quebec (Buchan et al., 2009, p.4138).
From the two paragraphs above, we can observe that there has been a debate over
whether globalization would promote the development of cultures. Some people
provided a new standpoint about the effects of globalization on cultures:
Hybridization(Embong, 2011, p.18). It means thatcultural fusions occur because of
the introduction of between cultures(Embong, 2011, p.18; Holton, 2000, p.140).
However, we have to pay attention to a fact that neither cultural homogenization,
cultural heterogenization, nor cultural hybridization is the sole cultural globalizing
phenomenon that is now happening in the world. According to Buchan et al. (2009;
4138), both cultural homogenization and cultural heterogenization are under process.
They mentioned that, on the one hand, for the Basque, Scots, and Quebecois, cultural
heterogenization is more likely to be the mainstream idea among the society. On the
other hand, for the American from the United States, for example, are more in favour
of cultural homogenization thandistinguishing one and another (Buchen et al., 2009,
p. 4138).
2.4Approach for manufacturers Some people may wonder that if it is hard to judge whether to be globalized, what
approaches cooperation should take in order to expand the business worldwide.
Organization culture, especially to manufacturers, seems to be more productive and
powerful than the national cultures that they belong to (Naor, Linderman,
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 6
&Schroeder, 2009, p.194). In other words, manufacturers should create their own
organizational cultures for effective and efficient production.According to Evans and
Lindsay (2005), “Toyota proved that its approaches can work everywhere and became
a global manufacturer” (Naor, Linderman, & Schroeder, 2009, p.202).With reference
to the OICA survey (2012), Toyota Motor Corporation (Toyota in short) was listed as
the first manufacturer in the world.As of March 2014, Toyota has had close to
340,000 employees around the world (Toyota, 2015b). As a Japanese-based company,
it is able to expand the business worldwide, including the North America and Europe
(Toyota, 2015a).This motivated me to have a further study about its global
approaches. I would like to investigate that how did the corporation managed to do so
since there have been a number of sayings about the enormous differences between
the culture of the United States and of Japan (Ting-Toomey, 2012).
2.5The cultural differences between the United States and Japan
2.5.1 High-/ Low-context culture
In the book Communicating Across Culture (Ting-Toomey, 2012, p.101), Japan is
classified as a relatively high-context culture, and the United States as a relatively
low-context culture.
For the definition of high-/ low-context culture, according to the book Beyond Culture
(1989), Hall divided culture into two main categories – High-context culture and Low-
context culture (pp.85-116). Hall (1989) described the high- and low-context cultures
as a continuum because of the differences between their communication styles (p.91).
The high ones are placed at the one end of the continuum, and the low ones are placed
at the other end (Hall, 1989, p.91).
On the one hand, people from the high ones, in most of the cases, communicating
with others mainly through the information in the physical context, or the information
that are internalized (Hall, 1989, p.91). In another words, only a small amount of
messages are expressed in any explicit, direct ways (Hall, 1989, p.91; Ting-Toomey,
2012, p.101). On the other hand, people from low-context cultures would prefer an
opposite communication style (Hall, 1989, p.91), which is to communicate to
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 7
othersthrough explicit, direct messages, rather than implicitly(Hall, 1989, p.91; Ting-
Toomey, 2012, p.101).
2.5.2 Time perceptions
The cultural differences between countries also concern the differences of time
perceptions. According to Trompenaars and Hampden-Turner (2013; 111), American
and Japanese are the examples of monochronic people and polychronic people
respectively.
Hall (1983) said that there are two extreme types of task scheduling behavior, which
are the M-time (monochronism), and the P-time (polychronism) (Usunier, 2005,
p.178). For monochronic people, they usually do one thing at a time, and would tend
to work according to planned schedules (Usunier, 2005, p.178). On the other hand, for
polychronic people, they would prefer to do several tasks at the same time, and tend
to accept changes to planned schedules (Usunier, 2005, p.178). Generally speaking,
Americans are the typical M-time people while the Japanese, for example, are the
typical P-time people (Usunier, 2005). For the American, “time is money” while the
Japanese would like to spend their time to build relationships with others (Usunier,
2005).
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 8
2.5.3Hofstede dimensions of culture
Graph 1. The six Hofstede dimensions of the United States and Japan (Hofstede,
2014)(see Appendix I)
According to Hofstede (2010), there are six cultural dimensions listed as follow:
a) Power distance (PDI) (from small to large) (p.31)
b) Collectivism versus individualism (IDV) (or individualism) (p.31)
c) Femininity versus masculinity (MAS) (or masculinity) (p.31)
d) Uncertainty avoidance (UAI) (from weak to strong) (p.31)
e) Long term orientation (LTO) (from short to long)
f) Indulgence (IND) (from strict to loose)
For the first dimensions power distance, it is about the degree of acceptance and
expectation towards power inequality of the people having less power in the
society(Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010, pp.60-62). With a higher mark means a
higher acceptance, and vice versa. From the above graph, we were able to observe
that the acceptance of power inequality in Japan is higher than that in the United
States. In other words, the American from the United States would be more likely to
reject a hierarchical system, and to strive for equality instead.
54
46
95 92
88
4240
91
62
46
26
68
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Hofstede Cultural diemensions
Japan
U.S.A.
PDI IDV MAS UAI LTO IND
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 9
Secondly, for the dimension Collectivism versus individualism, it concerns the
preference of people to be responsible for the others or extended family without
questions, or to beresponsible only for themselves or immediate family
respectively(Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010, pp.90-92). From the previous
graph, there was a remarkably noticeable difference between the two countries: the
United States tends to be an individualistic country while Japan tends to be a
collectivistic one.
For the third dimension, femininity versus masculinity, it concerns thegenders’
images. For a masculine country, they would tend to emphasize menon being strong,
successful, or authoritative, and to have competition with each other, and female
figures represents weak and modest; while people from a feminine country would
tend to emphasize the importance of both men and women being considerate,
cooperative, or modest, and to work on achieving consensus (Hofstede, Hofstede, &
Minkov, 2010, pp.139-140). From the graph, it is shown that there was an enormous
difference between the level of masculinity in Japan and the United States, in which
Japan scored 95 while the States scored 62. In other words, Japan tends to emphasize
competitions and achievement of powerfulness, whereas the United States is more
likely to emphasize cooperation with people and consensus.
For the fourth dimension, uncertainty avoidance, it concerns the extent that the people
of the country would have a strong feeling of being uncomforted when facing
ambiguity and uncertainty(Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010, pp.188-189). From
the graph, Japan scored 92 in this dimension while the United States scored almost 50
lower than it. It means that Japanese would most likely to be feeling uncomfortable
when having unpredictable future, whereas the American from the United States
would be much confident in handling rapid changes.
For the fifth dimension, long term orientation, it concerns “thefostering of virtues
related to the past and present” while short term orientation, the opposite of long
term orientation, is related to the future achievements (Hofstede, Hofstede, &
Minkov, 2010, pp.239-240). From the above graph, it is shown that Japan scored
nearly 60 marks more than that of the United States. It means that Japan is a country
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 10
that would have its focus on the effects of the past on the present and future while the
States would focus on the future planning.
The sixth dimension, indulgence, concerns thenatural desires of human to have fun
and enjoy life(Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010, pp.280-281). The opposite of
indulgence is restraint, which means that people would self-regulate their desires and
hope of enjoying life because of strict social norms (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov,
2010, p.281). From the graph, it is shown that there is an noticeable difference
between the preference of indulgence: Japanese would prefer to restrict themselves to
enjoy life than the American from the United States do.
The following is a summary of the cultural differences between the States and Japan.
To conclude, it is likely to say that Japan is a collectivistic country with its people
who would probably prefer to compete with one and another, to avoid uncertainty, to
link history to the present and future, and to restrict themselves from indulgence of
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 11
desires. In contrast, the United States is most likely anindividualistic country with its
people who would possibly emphasize the cooperation with others, to handle
uncertainty with confidence, to have their future well planned, and to enjoy their lives
as a human natural desire.
From all the above, I therefore took the global approaches of Toyota on its
manufacturing aspect as a case study to compare its cultural characteristics and the
cultural characteristics of the United States and Japan to investigate that whether the
culture of Toyota is a new culture, a blend of the two national cultures, or belongs
either one national culture.
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 12
Chapter 3. Methodology and Limitation
The purpose of this chapter is to illustrate the method used in the project, and evaluate
it as the discussion of the limitations of the project.
3.1 Methodology In this project, I would investigate that whetherToyota as an international businessis
rejecting national culture and creating a new culture of effective organization. The
culture is not determined by geographical or national factors, but solely by efficiency
or effectiveness factors. The research is mainly done from the information by books,
which are related to the generalizations about the differences between the two
national cultures (the culture of the United States and of Japan).
For the method, I would look at one example – Toyota Production System, and would
beidentifying its cultural characteristics. Then, I would compare those characteristics
with the cultural characteristics of the two nationalities involved: US and Japanto see
if Toyota’s culture is
a) a blend,
b) one or the other;
c) something new.
3.2 Limitation In this project, as mentioned in the section of methodology, the cultural characteristics
of the United States and Japan were used in the project to compare and contrast with
the organizational culture of Toyota. There are three limitations may need to put into
consideration, which are the overgeneralization of national cultures, the way of
presenting the cultural characteristics of the two countries,and the misconception of
defining one culture.
Firstly, for the cultural characteristics of both countries, the United States and Japan,
might be generalized and unified respectively as a whole in the references for
effectiveness in understanding a country through reading (Naor, Linderman, &
Schroeder, 2009, p.202). When people need to put theory into practice, they have to
beware that there is in fact the presence of sub-cultures within each national
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 13
culture(Naor, Linderman, & Schroeder, 2009, p.202). Generalizing a culture is only
for the first step to understand.
Secondly, the information about the cultural characteristics of both the United States
and Japan are presented in term of numbers and graphs. The data were from the
Hofstede Web Site. I used the graph of the six Hofstede dimensions to compare and
contrast the two national cultures of United States and Japan, in which the differences
were presented in numbers. Some people argued that culture itself should not be
presented in a quantitative approach; it is instead immeasurable(Jones, 2007, pp.5-6;
McSweeney, 2002). We should thus be more careful of interpreting the information
given.
Thirdly, culture is not absolutely separable from one and another. The culture of
Toyota could be a mixture of any cultures beside the two countries. It is difficult to
determine that the culture is solely from one culture or another under the influence of
globalization as mentioned in Literature Review (see p.4). As a result, the culture
could only be determine as a culture tends to be the culture of the United States or
Japan since there might be other possible answers.
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 14
Chapter 4. Findings and Discussion
As Hofstede (2010; 371- 372) stated that “strategies are carried out via the existing
structure and control system, and their outcome is modified by the organization’s
culture – and all four of these elements influence each other.” Therefore, by
examining and studying the structure and the strategies of the organization, we are
likely able to understand its organizational culture behind the operation. As a result, in
the following section, I would first examine the strategy and the structure of the
production system of Toyota, then have a further investigation into its behind cultural
concepts.
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 15
4.1 The strategy and the structure of Toyota According to Monden’s book Toyota Production System: An Integrated Approach to
Just-In-Time (2012), there were four key conceptual strategies of the success of the
Toyota manufacturing management. Those are listed as the following (pp. 7-8):
a) Just-in-time system (JIT) (p.7)
b) Autonomation (p.7)
c) Flexible workforce (Shojinka in Japanese) (p.8)
d) Creative thinking or inventive ideas (Seiko in Japanese) (p.8)
For Just-in-time(JIT) system, it was originally introduced by Japan in the 1980s
(Naor, Linderman, & Schroeder, 2009, p.202). The JIT system iss about the
synchronization of diverse operations for relative small-scale production, which is a
set of production management techniques(Wasa & Shiba, 2004, p.323). It requires a
Kan-ban system, in whichKan-ban means tag-like cards in Japanese, to maintain the
accuracy of the JIT system (Monden, 2012, p.9), and as a method to have all the
process linked up (Monden, 2012, p.47; Wasa&Shiba, 2004, p.323). People would
have to provide the information about their work on the Kan-ban, and pass it to the
person that is responsible for the next process after finishing one’s own duties
(Monden, 2012). This strategy is used to reinforce the accuracy of the production line
(Wasa&Shiba, 2004, p.323).
Secondly, for the autonomation, it is another fundamental elements for maintaining
the production of the corporation (Monden, 2012, pp.6-7). This is a Japanese-English
word, which is Ji-do-ka in Japanese, means an “autonomous defects control” in
English in a vague sense(Monden, 2012, p.7). To other companies, this word only
means that it is an “intelligent automation”; In Toyota, it means that the system
involves skilled workers to enhance the system (Monden, 2012, p.165).Most of the
Japanese companies implement this strategy with machines; however, Toyota rejected
it by emphasizing the “humanized automation” (Wasa&Shiba, 2004, pp.335-336).
Thirdly, about the flexible workforce (shojinkain Japanese), it means that the number
of workers might vary according to the demands (Monden, 2012, p.8). On top of this,
I found that there was an “improvement activities by small groups and suggestion
system” worth being mentioned (Monden, 2012, p.8). It is used to diminish
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 16
workforce, and thus enhance the work morale (Monden, 2012, p.8), which is close to
the purpose of the implementation of flexible workforce.
Moreover, for the concept of creative thinking or inventive ideas (seikoin Japanese),
Toyota took the opinions of their staffs in a serious manner (Monden, 2012, p.8). The
corporation would accept and consider their ideas, and adapt those into practice if
possible (Monden, 2012, p.8). Toyota (2015) also added that they would like to
provide a “fairly flat organizational culture” by putting people into small groups and
teams as mentioned before so as to provide “greater flexibility and effective
communication”.These strategies were said to be an important role in continuous
improvement of the company.
4.2 The cultural characteristics of Toyota, and compare and contrast with
the cultural characteristics of the United States and Japan From the previous section, there are mainly four types of strategies used in the
production system, which are Just-in-time system (JIT), autonomation, flexible
workforce, and creative thinking or inventive ideas.There would be Japanese cultural
characteristics in these strategies and concepts in some extent as they were mainly
originated in Japan. First of all, I woulduse the concepts of high-context culture and
low-context cultureby Hall (1990) to examine the cultural characteristics of Toyota.
After that, I would compare and contrast its characteristics to those of the United
States and of Japan by Hofstede cultural dimensions to determine whether it is a new
culture, a blend of the two national cultures or either one of it.
First of all, as mentioned in the Literature Review 2.6.1 (see p.6), people from high-
and low-context cultures would tend to use implicit, indirect, and explicit, direct
communication style respectively. Generally, Japanese would prefer implicit
communication; however, this was not effective and efficient enough when
comparing to that of the American way. For the communication style of Toyota, they
encouragedstaff to express their opinions and ideas in small groups. This style, in my
opinion, could be an improved version of Japanese way. Since for people from high-
context culture, it is difficult to suddenly express opinions in a lecture hall. Due to the
close environment, discussing in small groups would not embarrass anyone, and could
also encourage the interaction of both people from high- and low-context cultures by
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 17
building relationships. To the culture of Toyota, it was still not as direct as the
American way, yet not as implicit as that of Japan.
Secondly, according to the concepts of monochronism and polychronism (refer to
Literature Review 2.6.2 in p.7), the United States and Japan are the typical examples
of the two concepts respectively. In the previous section, JIT system and the Kan-ban
used in Toyota were to ensure that the flow of the production line is on the right track.
The JIT system required a high accuracy of time, which is a presentation of
monochronism that tends to work according to planned schedules. This was greatly
differed from the general Japanese culture that time is flexible and changes to planned
schedules are acceptable. It is more likely closed to the American “time= money”
concept.
In the following parts, I would like to use three of the six Hofstede cultural
dimensions, namely power distance, collectivism, masculinity, to have a further
compare and contrast with the cultural characteristics of the United States and that of
Japan. A table was used to illustrate the result.
Firstly, for the power distance dimension, the culture of Toyota tends to have the
characteristic of the United States. Toyota promoted a “fairly flat organizational
culture” as mentioned. In other words, staff of Toyota would expect a relatively equal
environment instead of a hierarchical culture, which implied a lower power distance
within the culture.
Secondly, for the collectivism dimension, the culture of Toyota tends to have the
characteristic of Japan. Toyotapromoted the Kan-ban system to support the JIT
system. By that staff are all responsible for the continuity of the production system
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 18
and for the company’s sales. This is close to the Japanese cultural characteristics that
Japanese people would be responsible for a group rather than one’s own.
Thirdly, for the masculinity dimension, the Toyota’s culture tends to have the
American cultural characteristics. As mentioned, Toyota promoted a flat organization
structure, and staff would be invited to express ideas and opinions for continuous
improvement of the company. This emphasized the cooperation between people, and
to work on achieving consensus for the benefits of the company. As a result, the
Toyota’s culture on this aspect is closer to the cultural characteristics of the States
than that of Japan.
To conclude, the Toyota’s culture contains the cultural characteristics of both the
United States and Japan, which however tends to the culture of the States.
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 19
Chapter 5. Conclusion
From the previous chapter, it is shown that the culture of Toyota contains the cultural
characteristics of both the United States and Japan. In some sense, this is a new
culture since the differences of the cultures of the States and Japan have been
mentioned as a great contrast. Toyota successfully created a culture which is able to
adapt the excellence of the two cultures, and therefore succeed in the globalizing
world.
(4,387 words)
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 20
Bibliography
American Psychological Association. (2014). The Role of Communication. Retrieved
December 4, 2014, from American Psychological Association: Center for
Organizational Excellence:
http://www.apaexcellence.org/resources/creatingahealthyworkplace/theroleofc
ommunication/
Binsbegen, W. (2003). 'Cultures do not exist': Exploding self-evidences in the
investigation of interculturality. Münster: LIT.
Bird, A., & Fang, T. (2009, July 30). Editorial: Cross Cultural Management in the
Age of Globalization. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management,
9(2), 139-143.
British Boardcasting Corporation. (2014). Geography: Globalization. Retrieved
December 4, 2014, from BBC School:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/geography/globalisation/globalisati
on_rev1.shtml
Buchan, N. R., Grimalda, G., Wilson, R., Brewer, M., Fatas, E., & Foddy, M. (2009,
March 17). Globalization and human cooperation. Proceeding of the National
Academy of Science of the United States of America, 4138-4142.
Dirven, R., & Pütz, M. (1992). Intecultural Communication. In H. Pürschel,
Intercultural communication : proceedings of the 17th International L.A.U.D.
Symposium (pp. 1-32). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Embong, A. R. (2011). The Question Of Culture, Identity And Globalisation: An
Unending Debate. Kajian Malaysia, 11-22.
Ghauri, P. N., & Usunier, J.-C. (2005). International Business Negotiations (2nd
Edition ed.). United Kingdom: Elsevier.
Hall, E. T. (1989). Beyond Culture. United States of America: Anchor Books.
Harper, D. (2014). Culture. Retrieved December 3, 2014, from Online Etymology
Dictionary: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=culture
Hofstede, G. (2004, February). An interview with Geert Hofstede. (M. H. Hoppe,
Interviewer)
Hofstede, G. (2014). Dimension Data Matrix. Retrieved April 23, 2015, from Geert
Hofstede: http://www.geerthofstede.eu/dimension-data-matrix
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 21
Hofstede, G., & Fink, G. (2007). Culture: organisations, peronsalities and nations.
Gerhard Fink interviews Geert Hofstede. European J. International
Management, 1, 14-22.
Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and Organizations:
Software of the Mind: Intercultural cooperation and its importance for
survival. United States of America: McGraw-Hill.
Holton, R. (2000, July 1). Globalization's Cultural Consequences. The ANNALS of the
American Academy of Political and Social Science, 570(1), 140-152.
Janney, R. W., & Arndt, H. (1992). Interpersonal Dimension of Intercultural
Communication. In H. Pürschel, Intercultural communication : proceedings of
the 17th International L.A.U.D. Symposium. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Jones, M. (2007). Hofstede - Culturally questionable? Oxford Business & Economics
Conference. Oxford: Oxford University.
McSweeney, B. (2002, January 1). Hofstede's model of national cultural differences
and their consequences: A triumph of faith - a failure of analysis. Human
Relaions, 89-118.
Monden, Y. (2012). Toyota Production System: An Integrated Approach to Just-In-
Time. United States of America: CRC Press.
Naor, M., Linderman, K., & Schroeder, R. (2009). The globalization of operations in
Eastern and Western countires: Unpacking the relationship between national
and organizational culture and its impact on manufaturing performance.
Journal of Operations Management, 194-205.
Pürschel, H. (1994). Intercultural communication : proceedings of the 17th
International L.A.U.D. Symposium. (E. Bartsch, P. Franklin, U. Schmitz, & S.
Vandermeeren, Eds.) Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Smith, A. G. (1966). Communication and Culture. Oregon: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
Ting-Toomey, S. (2012). Communicating across cultures. Guilford Press.
Toyota. (2015a). Company Profile. Retrieved April 22, 2015, from Toyota Global
Web Site: http://www.toyota-global.com/company/profile/overview/pdf/
companyprofile.pdf
Toyota. (2015b). Overview. Retrieved April 22, 2015, from Toyota Global Web Site:
http://www.toyota-global.com/company/profile/overview/
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A 22
Toyota Motor Corporation. (n.d.). About Us - Our Culture. Retrieved April 23, 2015,
from Toyota UK: http://recruitment.toyotauk.com/about-us/our-
culture.jsp#.VTk0OEJxSF5
Trompenaars, F., & Hampden-Turner, C. (2013). Riding the waves of culture:
Understanding diversity in global business. United Kingdom: Nicholas
Brealey Publishing.
Wasa, K., & Shiba, T. (2004). The Evolution of the 'Japanese Production System':
Indigenous Influences and American Impact. In J. Zeitlin, & G. Herrigel,
Americanization and its limits (pp. 316-339). New York: Oxford University
Press.
Wood, J. T. (2011). Communication Mosaics: An Introduction to the Field of
Communication, Sixth Edition. Boston, USA: Wadsworth.
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A i
Appendices
Appendix I. The full table of the base culture data for six dimensions of culture
as presented in Cultures and Organizations 3rd edition 2010(Hofstede, Dimension
Data Matrix, 2014).
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A ii
IS THE CULTURE OF TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION A iii
Declaration
I hereby declare that that this Independent Project is substantially my own work and that all
relevant attributions have been made.
Sign:____________________________________
Student No.:______________________________
Date:____________________________________
LITERATURE REVIEW (DECEMBER)
Project Draft Literature Review Feedback Form
Student Number: Mark: 69
This is extremely good. You should be aiming at a first. You need to be more careful over
your definitions. Some concepts need closer definition. Some paragraphs need organising
better.
Criterion Y/N Comments
Provisional title – is this clear and suitable? Y
Project topic
- Is it relevant to your course of study?
- Is it focussed on one or more countries other than your own?
- Is it feasible in practice?
Y
?
Y
Are ideas organised logically? Y
Are all in-text citations included? Y
Is the bibliography complete?
Is it in APA 6th ed. format?
Y
Y
Sources:
- Are they sufficiently varied?
- Are they relevant to the topic area?
- Are they sufficiently up to date?
- Do they collectively give a balanced view?
Y
Y
Y
Y
Literature review
- Is there evidence of background reading on related theories
and current/past research/studies?
- Is there good relevance to the topic?
- Does the review logically lead-in to specified research
question(s)/Project aims?
- Are all statements fully supported?
Y
Y
Y/N
Y
The general enquiry is
clear but not what
material you want to
study or what the
research questions are.
Is there a copy of the poster materials?
Does it correspond with the draft?
Y
Y
Has an electronic copy been submitted both to Moodle and
Turnitin?
Y/N
First Marker: Will Forsyth Date: 09/01/2015
Second Marker: Felicity Hughes
LITERATURE REVIEW (DECEMBER)
THE EFFECTS OF TECHNOLOGY AND GLOBALIZATION
ON COMMUNICATION WITHIN INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION
(Literature Review – 5 December, 14)
University of Portsmouth
BA (Hons) Communication and English Studies
William Forsyth
5 December, 14
LITERATURE REVIEW (DECEMBER)
Literature Review
People communicate in every bit of life, and communication is indivisible from culture,
according to Smith (1966; 1). In other words, generally speaking, every language has a deep
bond with its related culture(Dirven & Pütz, 1992). Communication, including not only
language but also verbal and non-verbal communication, is the basic medium for human to
maintain relationships (Wood, 2011, pp. 7-8; Smith, 1966, p.3). It may also be true in terms
of business. Communication is inseparable to the success of an organization (American
Psychological Association, 2014). And it is about the whole process of how people affect the
minds of one and another (Smith, 1966, p.15). However, within an international organization,
misunderstanding may commonly occur because of the cultural differences between groups
of employees, or branches from different geographic areas. Thus, the effectiveness and
efficiency of communication are playing important roles within organizations (Wood, 2011,
p.9).
Some may mistakenly have an idea of the existence of cultural differences between
individuals (Janney & Arndt, 1992). However, ‘people’ is only a part of the whole culture
(Janney & Arndt, 1992), as Hofstede (2004) has emphasized that culture is a system of a
specific society/ community, and human is only a part of the system. The meaning of culture,
according to etymology, is about "collective customs and achievements of a people" since the
year of 1867 (Harper, 2014). Also, according to Hofstede (1980), a culture is “a collective
programming of the mind which distinguishes one group from another” (Jones, 2007).
Therefore, culture could be created, or “programmed”, for instance the culture within an
organization. Culture, in other words, is a combination of every single element people learnt
from since their born, which allows cultures to be differentiated from one and another (Jones,
2007; Heatwole, n.d.). Furthermore, Binsbergen (2003) pointed out that one’s personality is a
result of the effects of his/ her cultural background. Attention needed to be paid that one’s
personality is also only a reflection of his/ her cultural background, instead of the
representation of the whole of that corresponding culture.
However, people usually perceive the world in the ways they learnt from their cultures, and
deem that human are supposed to behave universally; this is the reason of the occurrence of
“cultural conflicts” (Hofstede & Fink, 2007; Steers, Sanchez-Runde, & Nardon, 2010, pp. 51-
52 & 367-369). The “cultural conflicts” mentioned above is in fact the misunderstandings of
behaviour of individuals because of assumptions or prejudices, instead of cultural differences
(Steers, Sanchez-Runde, & Nardon, 2010, pp. 46 & 237-238). What is more, since one
language is strongly bonded to a one specific culture, when people express themselves in the
second language, they might have a chance to give a wrong perception as a result of
unintentional mistakes made during conversation(Dirven & Pütz, 1992, p.16-17; Janney &
Arndt, 1992, p.34-35).
Culture although is a combination of almost every daily elements, it could be mainly divided
into two categories: National cultures, and organizational cultures (Hofstede & Fink, 2007,
p.15). National culture, according to the interview of Hofstede by Fink (2007; 15), it is about
the values of people learnt during childhood, and organizational culture is about the means of
working learnt during adulthood. Therefore, when people changed to a new working place,
they could learn the organizational culture of the department/ company. But when it comes to
moving to a new environment, or immigration, it would be much difficult, and would take
much more time for people to adapt because of the cultural differences between the “rooted
values” (Hofstede & Fink, 2007, p.15) and the first-exposed new values (Wood, 2011,
p.172). It is also called as the “cultural shock” (Steers, Sanchez-Runde, & Nardon, 2010,
Commented [WF1]: this is language
Commented [WF2]: ??
Commented [WF3]: meaning?
Commented [WF4]: not clear
Commented [WF5]: I do not think you have explained the ‘cultural conflicts’ in enough detail to be able to make this claim.
Commented [WF6]: it depends: Indian English & US English?
Commented [WF7]: Have you changed topic? What is the relationship between national/organizational cultures and rooted/new values? What is the difference between culture and values?
Commented [WF8]: culture?
LITERATURE REVIEW (DECEMBER)
p.16). In this research project, I would like to put my focus on the aspects of national
cultures, as this has a higher relativity with languages and communication, and, which is hard
to be re-generated, or be created within a short period of time.
Globalizationmeans a process of exchanging information, business and cultural ideas around
the world in a remarkably fast pace; the connections of each part of the world therefore
increased (British Boardcasting Corporation, 2014). In this project, when it is about
“technology”, I would mainly focus on the use of and the development of Internet and mobile
technology due to the broadness of the term “technology”. As suggested by Jones (2007), and
Bird and Fang (2009), globalization and technology have now changed our way of thinking,
or even started to merge cultures into one single world culture. This also means that national
cultures may diminish as a result of rapid information exchange (Bird & Fang, 2009). In
other words, it may therefore cause cultural homogenization, which is one part of cultural
globalization (Embong, 2011, p.17). And the other part of cultural globalization, according to
Embong (2011; 18), is cultural heterogenization, which is the opposite of homogenization; or
some may call it as polarization (Holton, 2000, p.140). There has been a debate over whether
globalization would promote the development of cultures around the world or not, and some
provided a new standpoint about the effects of globalization on cultures: Hybridization
(Embong, 2011, p.18). It means cultural fusions occur because of the introduction of between
cultures (Embong, 2011, p.18; Holton, 2000, p.140).
To conclude, I would like to do a research on whether the means of communication would be
homogenized at the same time with cultural homogenization or not, under the effects of
technology and globalization. And, therefore, investigate the result of globalization would
benefit, or bring drawbacks to the communication within an international organization.
Commented [WF9]: ?
Commented [WF10]: ?
Commented [WF11]: We really need a new section here, possibly with a section heading, and a sentence explaining the topic change and your aims.
Commented [WF12]: can mean
Commented [WF13]: The ideas, sequencing & organization needs work.
LITERATURE REVIEW (DECEMBER)
Bibliography
American Psychological Association. (2014). The Role of Communication. Retrieved December 4, 2014, from American Psychological Association: Center for Organizational Excellence: http://www.apaexcellence.org/resources/creatingahealthyworkplace/theroleof communication/
Binsbegen, W. (2003). 'Cultures do not exist': Exploding self-evidences in the investigation of interculturality. Münster: LIT.
Bird, A., & Fang, T. (2009). Editorial: Cross Cultural Management in the Age of Globalization. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 9 (2), 139-143.
British Boardcasting Corporation. (2014). Geography: Globalization. Retrieved December 4, 2014, from BBC School: http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/geography/globalisation/globalisat ion_rev1.shtml
Dirven, R., & Pütz, M. (1992). Intecultural Communication. In H. Pürschel, Intercultural communication : proceedings of the 17th International L.A.U.D. Symposium (pp. 1- 32). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Embong, A. R. (2011). The Question Of Culture, Identity And Globalisation: An Unending Debate. Kajian Malaysia , 11-22.
Harper, D. (2014). Culture. Retrieved December 3, 2014, from Online Etymology Dictionary: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=culture
Heatwole, C.A. (n.d.). Culture: A Geographical Perspective, World Communities: What Is a
Culture?. University of the State of New York & New York State Education
Department. Retrieved on 17 November 2014, from
http://www.p12.nysed.gov/ciai/socst/grade3/geograph.html.
Hofstede, G. (2004, February). An inter view with Geert Hofstede. (M. H. Hoppe, Interviewer)
Hofstede, G., & Fink, G. (2007). Culture: organisations, peronsalities and nations. Gerhard Fink interviews Geert Hofstede. European J. International Management, 1, 14-22.
Holton, R. (2000). Globalization's Cultural Consequences. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 570 (1), 140-152.
Janney, R. W., & Arndt, H. (1992). Interpersonal Dimension of Intercultural Communication. In H. Pürschel, Intercultural communication : proceedings of the 17th International L.A.U.D. Symposium. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Jones, M. (2007). Hofstede - Culturally questionable? Oxford Business & Economics Conference. Oxford: Oxford University.
Oliveira, M. d. (2013). Multicultural Environments and Their Challenges to Crisis Communication. Journal of Business Communcation .
Pürschel, H. (1994). Intercultural communication : proceedings of the 17th International L.A.U.D. Symposium. (E. Bartsch, P. Franklin, U. Schmitz, & S. Vandermeeren, Eds.) Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Smith, A. G. (1966). Communication and Culture. Oregon: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Steers, R. M., Sanchez-Runde, C. J., & Nardon, L. (2010). Management Across Cultures:
Challenges and Strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Wood, J. T. (2011). Communication Mosaics: An Introduction to the Field of
Communication, Sixth Edition. Boston, USA: Wadsworth.
