It was traditionally thought that the subcontract company has the function as the reduction of labor cost and the employment adjustment by the low working conditions in the Japanese steel industry. However, as the outsourcing area came to gradually expand to the basic line after the end of 1960s, the relations with integrated steel producer and subcontract company was not able to consider for a simple hierarchical relationship. This paper analyzed an example of Company A to clarify the work shop management of a contemporary steel subcontracting company.
The collaboration with Company A and the integrated steel producer (B) became deeper, and company A adjust their productivity management to the Company B’s one. Not to mention the close connection of the top manager, the following notable action was carried out in order to push forward such a deep collaboration. Primarily it is the direct talks in the shop floor. Joint meetings are set up in each level, and an opportunity of the direct information sharing between associated organizations was created. Second it is the policy of improvement of relation between both company’s employees. They consciously increased the opportunities of the conversation of the both companies employee inside and outside the workplace. Relations with Company A and Company B are not only supply of work force and not the simple contract relations through the numerical value index. For Company A, it was demanded to contribute to steelworks through taking consideration into a strategy of Company B. In this meaning, a contextual skill about steelworks is required to Company A employee.
Based on the way of such collaboration, let’s consider a characteristic of the workshop management of Company A. Primarily, in the management of task, close coordination with Company B is main characteristic. Because the process of both companies links closely, Company B intend to intervene in activity of improvement investment and performance evaluation of Company A. Second, in contrast, in the management of human resource, Company A has discretion relatively. They have introduced a management system general in the big company according to organizational expanding. For example, Company A improves the facility and institution about training, enriches participation system such as QC or the improvement suggestion, and expands the opportunity of promotion of worker. The pay gap with Company B is in a tendency to reduction.
However, in the motivation management of the employee, Company A faced a problem peculiar to a subcontract company. An economic incentive systems were introduced to bring up contribution will to the whole steelworks of the employee, but such actions are still in a grope stage, and the influence to a personal wage was small. Rather what the analysis of this paper suggests is that multifaceted approach method is necessary; for example, enrichment of communication between employees, understanding of one’s role in the context of steelworks, and the sharing of problem of the workshop, and human resource development through the collaboration raise the contribution will to the steelworks of the subcontract company employee. From questioner’s survey, I was able to confirm the effectiveness of the policies mentioned above. Additionally I was able to confirm that the sharing of problem of the workshop, and human development through the collaboration raise the fellowship with Company B’s employee and it improves contribution will. The horizontal consciousness to be the fellow raises contribution will, and becomes a premise to functionalize various policies effectively. For the on-site subcontract case which the direct collaboration between production line organizations is necessary, it is suggested that the multifaceted policies included a view point of the social relations of the employees are necessary.
