Toyotism and Brahminism. Employee relations difficulties in establishing lean manufacturing in India
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/01425451311287871 |
| Pages | 200-221 |
| Published date | 28 December 2012 |
| Date | 28 December 2012 |
| Author | Saji K. Mathew,Robert Jones |
| Subject Matter | HR & organizational behaviour |
Toyotism and Brahminism
Employee relations difficulties in
establishing lean manufacturing in India
Saji K. Mathew and Robert Jones
Faculty of Business and Enterprise,
Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Australia
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to analyse the cross-cultural reasons underlying the extreme
industrial unrest experienced during the first seven years of Toyota’s operations in India.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper employs a case study approach using data obtained
from 30 personal interviews, field notes, observations, and internet media sources.
Findings – The paper reports how Toyotism shares three common features with Brahminism –
renunciation, performance, and perfection – and how antipathy towards the manner in which these
features were implemented in India caused significant resistance amongst the production workforce.
Research limitations/implications – The paper has implications for academics and practitioners
in helping to understand how employee relations, unrest and antagonism towards lean manufacturing
practices are closely related to cross-cultural issues prevalent in host countries.
Originality/value – The concept of Brahmanism in Indian employee relations is under-researched
in comparison with other aspects of Indian culture and antipathy towards the concept as a source of
resistance to the implementation of lean systems needs to be better understood.
Keywords India, Lean production, Employees relations, Employees attitudes, Toyota,
Lean manufacturing, Brahminism, Toyota production system
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to analyse the cross-cultural reas ons underlying
the extreme industrial unrest experienced during the first seven years of Toyota’s
operations in India between 1999 and 2006. India is a multi-religious, multi-lingual,
multi-ethnic, and multi-political land characterised by diversity and contras t (Engfer,
2003). The religious make-up of India comprises 80 per cent Hindus, 10 per cent
Muslims, and the rest Christians, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains, and other minor religions.
Religion plays a major role in all walks of Indian life and culture (Sahay and Walsham,
1997). Being the ancient and majority religion, Hinduism exerts a significant influence
in the lives of Indians, and is regarded as a way of life rather than a precise religion
(Dhruvarajan, 1993). The root of the collective orientation of Indian society could be
traced to Hindu philosophy that defines man as a composition of his immediate family
as well as the society to which he belongs (Radhakrishnan, 1922).
The most important aspect of Hindu religion is its caste system. Accordingly
every Hindu is born into one of the four castes, Brahmin (priestly class), Kshatriya
(the warriors), Vysya (the business class), or Sudra (the menial workers). The caste
system has a hierarchical structure with Brahmins at the top and Sudras at the bottom.
Besides hierarchy, the caste system also serves as a form of in-group collectivism
in which members of the same caste are apna (in-group) wh ereas others are paraya
(out-group) (Sinha and Kanungo, 1997).
It is argued that the adoption of socialism after independence in 1947 was to
preserve values and practices based on Hindu virtues of contentment, absence of
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0142-5455.htm
Employee Relations
Vol. 35 No. 2, 2013
pp. 200-221
rEmeraldGroup Publishing Limited
0142-5455
DOI 10.1108/01425451311287871
200
ER
35,2
desire, and stability as opposed to capitalist perspectives of striving for success
and unlimited consumption (Saha, 1992). It is also argued that Indian industry has
inherited the features of Indian society (Venkata-Ratnam and Chandra, 1996), with
strong values attached to traditional beliefs, customs, and practices ( Jain, 1991).
The traits of religion are reflected in the nature, attitude, and identity of the Indian
workforce. In the politically volatile situation prevalent in India, even a simple offence
has the potential to flare up into a communal riot. Considering these challenges, Davis
et al. (2006) have cautioned that the country is by no means an easy management
system. Therefore, there exist considerable challenges for multinational companies in
terms of managing the Indian workforce (Rao, 2007).
It is against this background that we analyse the industrial unrest within the Toyota
Motor Corporation (TMC) which entered the Indian automobile industry in 1997 and
commenced production in late 1999. The plant is situated in the township of Bidadi
near the southern city of Bangalore in the State of Kar nataka. The operation took the
form of a joint venture with the local Kirloskar family group of companies, already well
known in India for manufacturing a range of engineering and agricu ltural products.
TMC was the driving force in the joint venture, known as Toyota Kirloskar Motors
(TKM), with Kirloskar providing the benefit of its local knowledge and influence. TMC
established the joint venture in order to gain entry to the large Indian market. By the
end of the 1990s TMC had its eyes firmly on the prize of becoming the largest
automobile producer in the world, an achievement eventually reached in 2007. The
immense potential of the Indian market was an obvious attraction for TMC and
a major component of its long-term worldwide growth aspirations. However, TMC was
a late entrant into the Indian market, most noticeably trailing behind Suzuki which had
established itself in India many years earlier and had captured a large market share in
the passenger car segment (Bhargava and Seetha, 2010). India was also a late entrant
for TMC in terms of its own global expansion, having already established a major
presence in North America, South America, Europe, Australia, and Asia. Not that TMC
was a stranger to India. It had launched a previous foray into the country in 1983 but
this venture had not proved a success and the company withdrew after a few years.
TMC had formed a joint venture with the local Delhi Cloth Mills (called DCM Toyota)
and commissioned a plant in Uttar Pradesh in north India to manufacture and
distribute light commercial vehicles. TMC wanted to take the joint venture at a slow
patient pace to ensure the indoctrination of good quality processes into the production
process. However, DCM was keen to move at a faster pace and pressured TMC to
introduce more models. Relations within the joint venture became strained. DCM
initiated talks with the Korean company Daewoo. As a consequence, TMC ended the
relationship and withdrew from India, leaving DCM to form a new joint venture with
Daewoo operating in the existing plant.
Subsequent to the liberalisation of the previously socialist-inspired Indian economy,
the inflow of inward foreign investment has generated debate around the new politics
of production (D’Costa, 2005). The post-independence Indian economy (1947-1991) was
dominated by a protectionist mentality where large, inefficient government-owned
companies provided employment for large numbers of people. Employers were seen as
paternalistic in attitude and the company was regarded as an extension of the family,
where “superiors” provided wisdom, nurture, and protection (Sanyal, 2008; Sinha,
2004). The massive inflow of foreign investment has radically impacted this traditional
view of work and the workplace (Das, 2002). Globalisation is seen as introducing
a new hegemony into India where political colonisation imposed by foreigners is seen
201
Toyotism and
Brahminism
To continue reading
Request your trial