There are three basic concepts with reference to Theory Z. These are the collective work ethic, trust and loyalty (Crocker, Chiu, & Charney 1984, p. 34). When this is related to the workplace environment in an organization, it translates into teamwork, the combining of individual and organizational goals, collective decision making, group sacrifice during times of adversity, and inherent group control of each employee. Theory Z management is practiced in many organizations in the world, including in the United States. In the United States, major organizations that practice Theory Z workplace environments include IBM, Procter and Gamble, Intel, and Hewlett-Packard (Crocker, Chiu, & Charney 1984, p.
34). 26In Japanese workplace environments, both leaders and junior employees are motivated by a feeling of commitment to be working as part of a greater whole (that is the Japanese organization for which they are working) (Koontz & Weihrich, 2006, p. 65). In addition, employees seek for responsibility and always strive for opportunities to develop and advance in their organization. Moreover, employees in the workplace are self-satisfied when they make contributions to the success of their organization through teamwork.
Consequently, in return for their long-term commitment to their organization (which promises to provide job security) the worker develops strong bonds of faithfulness and loyalty to their employers (Morgan, 1998, p. 114). In general Japanese employees are usually motivated to work for a single organization their entire lifetime (Koontz & Weihrich, 2006, p. 65). 26There is diverse information on Japanese workplace culture. Clegg (1990) studied Japanese cultural specificity based on the importance of culture of “consensus” or “groupism” in the workplace (quoted by Kōno & Clegg, 1998, p.
360). According to the same source, Japanese workers are sometimes depicted as uniquely consensual and quiescent. Nevertheless, it is not difficult through options to the record, to illustrate how misplaced the historical picture of Japanese workers is, which can also be viewed to be uniquely conformist (Kōno & Clegg, 1998, p. 360). Although there has been plenty of conflict in the past, an attempt to explain the typical “quietism” behaviour of the Japanese in the workplace will be very vital in the face of an empirically counterfactual record (Kōno & Clegg, 1998).
Nonetheless, at the same time, there is sufficient evidence to demonstrate the fact that “groupism” or “conformism” indeed does play an important role in contemporary Japanese organizations (Kōno & Clegg, 1998, p. 360). 27Among the Japanese, it is common for an organization’s members in the workplace to accept the hierarchical nature of their work settings but they as well seek to improve this position within them. However, the struggle to improve any one’s status is not an individual struggle but one that is expressed collectively through the obligations as well as relationships, and the various dependencies in the workplace that one shares with colleagues at work (Kōno & Clegg, 1998, p.
361). So in the Japanese context, the struggle to rise to the top position is a collective one, that is, to better the collective state of affairs rather than to have one individual better of at the expense of others. This can be likened to a zero-sum player within the whole (Kōno & Clegg, 1998, p. 361). 27