Human Resource Management in the Japanese Financial Institution Abroad: The Case of the London Office
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8543.1993.tb00402.x |
| Author | Carolyn L. Evans |
| Date | 01 September 1993 |
| Published date | 01 September 1993 |
British Journal
of
Industrial Relations
31:3
Sept
1993
0007-1080
Human Resource Management in the
Japanese Financial Institution Abroad:
The
Case
of
the London Office
Carolyn
L.
Evans
Abstract
The evidence on human resource management in overseas ofices
of
Japanese
multinational service-sector firm is far less abundant than that for manufac-
turing firms. Existing studies describe employment practices that vary, both
betweenfirms and over time. To supplement the existing body
of
evidence, the
present study investigates employment practices at two Japanese financial
services firms
in
the City
of
London through the use
of
interviews and
questionnaire surveys. It focuses
on
those facets
of
the ‘Japanese’ manage-
ment system that may be considered fundamental characteristics: recruitment
and selection procedures, training methods, pay and promotion policies,
employmentsecurity, company culture, and the position
of
workers within the
overall organization. The study considers the implications
of
changes over
time within the two firms when viewed
in
the context
of
the existing evidence;
such comparison suggests that both corporate strategy and human resource
management policy in Japanese financial organizations may have changed
during the
1980s.
1.
Introduction
During the 1980s, researchers gathered much evidence on the use
of
Japanese employment methods in Japanese firms overseas (Dunning 1986;
Oliver and Wilkinson 1988; Saso 1990; Trevor 1983,1988; White and Trevor
1983). Most studies have focused on companies in the manufacturing sector
and on blue-collar workers within those firms. In recent years, however,
Japanese service-sector firms have become increasingly ‘global’, as has the
sector itself (Porter 1989: Ch. 6). Financial services firms, in particular, have
been establishing a higher profile in international markets.’ Despite the
subsequent presence
of
Japanese service-sector firms in overseas labour
Carolyn Evans is a first-year doctoral student at Harvard University in Cambridge,
Massachusetts.
348
markets, few studies address the human resource management
(HRM)
policies and practices
of
these firms.
This paper presents evidence on the use
of
Japanese employment
methods with a white-collar work-force by describing case studies of the
London branches of two Japanese financial services firms, a bank (Sangin)
and a securities firm (Kensha).2 It considers specific employment practices,
employee attitudes and the position of local workers in the local and global
corporate structure.
Brirish JournuI
of
Induslriul
Relutions
Methods
of
Investigation
The methods of investigation included interviews with two executives at
each firm, one Japanese and one British, a survey of professional-grade
employees at the securities firm,3 and an analysis
of
information contained
in company brochures and personnel documents. In both cases, the two
interviewees were upper-level managers in either the personnel
or
the
‘general affairs’ departments. Interviews were conducted in Japanese
or
English, depending on the nationality of the individual. The study focused
on those facets
of
the ‘Japanese’ management system that may be
considered fundamental characteristics: recruitment and selection pro-
cedures, training methods, pay and promotion policies, employment
security, company culture, and the position
of
workers within the overall
organization. These aspects are described more extensively in the section
that follows.
2.
Past
evidence
Many authors have described the nature and use
of
Japanese employment
techniques in large firms in Japan (Cole
1979;
Dore
1973;
Duser
1990;
Rohlen
1974).
The large-company management ‘system’ usually described
includes recruitment of recent graduates, in-company training, seniority-
based wage increases and promotion, ‘lifetime’ employment, and consensus
decision-making. These different aspects represent integral parts
of
a system
that acts to tie the worker to the firm, to familiarize him
or
her with its goals
and operations, and to lead to some form
of
commitment to the employment
relationship on the part of both worker and company (Lincoln and
Kalleberg
1990).
For
example, the recruitment and selection process helps the company to
identify those with the sort of attitude and personal qualities that will enable
them to
fit
in at the firm and make a commitment to it. In the home
environment, recent graduates are recruited in order to have workers who
are capable of loyalty and unsullied by experience with other firms. The
training process allows the individual to acquire knowledge of various
aspects of the company, thus conceivably creating a sense
of
identification
with the firm as a whole. Instruction on the company history, philosophy and
To continue reading
Request your trial