Articles
A Study on Education and Training for the Supervisors of Japanese Manufactures in Thailand: In Comparison with Japan's Case
1999 Volume 8 Issue 1 Pages 49-64
Details
1999 Volume 8 Issue 1 Pages 49-64
This paper clarifies the education and training for first-line supervisors and their consequent attained ability in Japanese manufacturers in Thailand and, concentrating on the case of machine workshops. And it also compares Thailand's case with Japan's case. The aim of this analysis is to obtain some implications for improving supervisors' ability in Thailand.
After the introduction, previous researches on supervisors are reviewed, especially in relation to the introduction of “lean production system”. The next section deals with supervisors' ability and the way of training them in Japan. In the context of the comparison between mass and lean production systems, high productivity of Japanese supervisors has been explained by the fact that they are in charge of production control. Production control is executed on the basis of problem-solving ability (PSA) among others. In addition, PSA is classified into two different types, which consist of 1) directly-in-charge type of PSA and 2) management type of PSA. As for education and training in order to develop these PSAs, it is important for employees to get involved with managerial and engineering jobs.
After dealing with Japan's case, the paper examines Thailand's case, particularly in Japanese affiliated manufacturers, based on questionnaire and field survey. The result shows that directly-in-charge type of PSA has been learned well comparatively. However, the tasks which necessitate management type of PSA are not delegated to supervisors, which is dissimilar to Japan's case. In addition, Thai supervisors don't have the experience of managerial and engineering jobs.
This fact means that the “ceiling” of ability formation lies between two types of PSA. The next step should be to explain the reason for this difference, and it could be possible by focusing their contrasting ways of training supervisors. However, more research is necessary on the causal relationship between the way of training and the consequent attained ability, since this survey result is not sufficient.
