Mainly in the U. S. business schools since 1970th, business ethics has been sophisticated by many researchers, but due to the pragmatic bias, lack in methodological investigations into the flames of reference. The purpose of this paper is to found empirical business ethics studies, focusing on the three interpretive approaches from the methodological point of view. Firstly a preparatory investigation is made about interpretivism illuminated from the 1990th's paradigm debate in the field of business ethics. Secondly a detail analysis is tried into the three interpretive approaches which are categorized by Habermas's understanding on hermeneutics. Through the preparatory investigation, the two streams will be found as theoretical premises of empirical business ethics studies. One is structural-functionalism and the other is interpretivism, which has been worthy of note but not been explored so much. Then the interpretive approaches are reviewed and clarified based on their evaluation standards about the validity and objectivity of interpretive process. According to Habermas's understanding, hermeneutic methods are categorized as follows, (1) hermeneutic objectivism (2) radical hermeneutics (3) hermeneutic reconstructionism. The respective types of social science research and business ethics studies are located in these three interpretive schemes. For instance, Baumhart's naive mass survey of the managers' morality is viewed as hermeneutic objectivism. As radical hermeneutics may be located Kondo's deconstructional study on workers' identity and the exploitative labour process. Lastly as cases of hermeneutic reconstructionism, the Kohlbergian approach into managers' moral judgements and the organizational moral ethos is discussed in detail. This paper concludes that critical business ethics is needed that interprets and exposes the ideological aspects of organizations, extending the ideal of the hermeneutic reconstructionism approach.

抄録全体を表示

New institutional economics has been growing remarkably in recent years. Neoclassical economics has been only devoted to the study of markets, and it has not been applied to the study of institutions or organizations themselves. New institutional economics, we can say, has emerged to bridge the gap between markets and organizations. But new institutional economics has developed more and more as an analysis of organizations using economical techniques. Williamson's intent was to analyze organizations by the logic of market; while on the contrary, Simon attempts to analyze both organizations and markets with the notion of altruism and identifications. But it is regrettable that, at present, we are not able to make any absolute assertion one way or the other about contents of any particular or methods of organization theorists. Recently we observe empirical studies continuing to increase in number. We may say that it is a matter of course. Because, on the system issues of how and why organizations themselves do or do not operate well, it is not possible to elucidate by armchair theory but by empirical observation of real organizational phenomena. But on the other hand, methodologies of the study of organization in economics are transaction cost economics, agency theory, property rights theory, and so on. These various approaches are in part an effort to establish an 'Economics of Organization'. Interchanges between organization theory and new institutional economics have already begun in Europe and the United States, mainly centering on discussions on bounded rationality. Such reciprocal discussions with scholars of organization theory as found in Europe and the United States are necessary in Japan. Simon's bounded rationality is selfevident and an obvious starting point on some issues in organization theory; therefore we haven't taken up the problem as the subject of discussion. But, it seems to be the most important point of real dialogue as to how Simon's 'altruism and identifications' will be accepted and developed within the framework of 'organizations and markets'.

抄録全体を表示

This paper concerns the causal relationships, "people percept first and then react after that" and "people act first and then recognize what they did". The implicit premise of all experimental psychology and cognitive psychology which were used to analyze the behavior of organizational members was the perception first, that is, people act after they think. Needless to say, major organizational theories such as rational decision making theory by March=Simon (1958) had the premise of the same causal relationship (cognition→action). K. E. Weick (1969) advocated the adverse causal relationship which was expressed by the famous phrase "How can I know what I think until what I say?" His retrospective sensemaking meant action first. That is, people could not recognize what they had done until they did it. He tried to show us the organizing process by depicting the interactions of organizational members who understood their context only with retrospective sensemaking subjectively. These two causal relationships (cognition→action and action→recognition) were informed by differences in methodology (positivist approach versus interpretive approach). The interpretive approach to organizational research exemplified by ethnography, phenomenology, and case studies have been gaining attention in recent years as an alternative to the more traditional positivist approach such as hypothesis testing, mathematical analysis. This study suggests that the perception first premise comes from the positivist position and the interpretive position, but the action first premise comes only from the interpretive position. Major organizational behavior theories have been categorized from such a point of view. In the last part of the paper, the second-order changes by organization members are discussed to show how to integrate positivist and interpretive approaches and how the relationships are associated with organizational change.

抄録全体を表示

In recent years, "stakeholder" came up for a point in dispute in the fields of management study. One field is "business and society" or "social issues in management" that employs social science approach. Another field is "business ethics" that employs normative ethics approach. This paper examines the recent developments of management studies concerning "stakeholder". The term "stakeholder" literally means those who hold one or some stakes for a game like a poker. R. E. Freeman observes that the term was meant to generalize the notion of "stockholder" as the only group to whom management needs to be responsible. Also, A. B. Carroll and A. K. Buchholtz propose four types of stakes, that is an interest, a share, a claim, and legal claim of ownership. A stakeholder, thus, is an individual or a group that has one or more of the various kinds of stakes in a business corporation. The stakeholder is classified mainly by means of three methods as follows. First, primary and secondary stakeholders (cf. A. B. Carroll; J. E. Post et al.). Second, core, strategic and environmental stakeholders (cf. A. B. Carroll and A. K. Buchholtz). Third, primary and secondary and social and nonsocial stakeholders (cf. D. Wheeler and M. Sillanpaa). The management studies concerning stakeholder have been called "stakeholder theory". The stakeholder theory is consisted of following statements by some leading authors. For example, K. E. Goodpaster distinguishes "stakeholder analysis" from "stakeholder synthesis". T. Donaldson and L. E. Preston suggest three models of the stakeholder theory: descriptive, instrumental and normative model, and conclude that these three models are managerial. T. M. Jones and A. C. Wicks attempt to harmonize two approaches to the stakeholder theory, the social science approach and normative ethics approach. The stakeholder theory provides basis for "stakeholder management" as practice. To put it briefly, the stakeholder management requires mangers to consider the stakes of stakeholders systematically. This paper contains the translation of "Principles of Stakeholder Management" into Japanese under the permission of the Clarkson Centre for Business Ethics.

抄録全体を表示

Recently there have been lots of discussions about functions that would be enabled by taking the pure holding company system. However, it is said that other systems such as "company-form company system" also substitute for these functions. Then, we have a question whether there are any special functions that are given only by taking the pure holding company system. In this paper, we compare the functions of pure holding company system to those of "company-form company system" which became famous by adopted in Sony co. ltd. in 1994 and examine whether there are any difference between the functions that are given by each system. To be concrete, we employ an event study approach using stock exchange market reactions. This reaction is measured by stock price change when companies announce the information of planing or adopting the above systems. As a result, we reach two findings. First of all, the less performance of their parent companies are, the higher value stock market put on both systems. In fact, after the announcement, these companies' stock price goes high. This result shows that the market regards that both systems are useful to urge their parent companies to restructure their low business fields. Second, to the group to be the pure holding companies system, the less performance of parent companies compare to consolidate performance, the higher value stock market put on. On the other hand, there is no significant reaction like that to the group which will be the company-form companies. Then, it shows that the market regards that adopting the pure holding company system will not only improve a parent company's performance but also urge to restructure in all companies which belong to the group. It is clear that this is a crucial different function in both systems.

抄録全体を表示

After the bubble economy, many people have asserted the breakdown of seniority system. But another main pillar of Japanese style management, lifetime employment is having remained without big change. Since these two are complementary institutions, there is an inconsistency, if one system would be change. In this paper, to be gaining competitive advantage the author discussed the problem of the subsequence Japanese style management and proposed policy to realize new one. Under the global competition, for gaining competitive advantage the Japanese firms have to realize the fit between strategy and management style and to create some value. Each case needs to develop the intentions of employee. To gain the long-term advantage, the outcomes of individual must be non-imitable or difficult to imitate from competitor. Thinking about this from viewpoint of employment, the firm would develop human resources rather than recruit someone from external labor market. Because other company have a chance to get similar resources to exploit these labor market. And if the firms recommend the developing the intentions of employee, they would have to exclude the lifetime employment with seniority system. Then the author suggests the security of employment enhancing the intentions of employee. This system affirms the discussion about practice of long-term employment and responds the demerit of lifetime employment. Under this system, high performer will be able to move to other company, and any knowledge that is source of non-imitableness will not be accumulated in the firm. Then the firm has to cultivate the new type commitment what is based on management of developing individual intention, empowerment. To verify that relation I attempted correlation analysis, and I have some positive correlations about the factors of the degree of between empowerment and self-commitment.

抄録全体を表示

Temporary transfer (Shukko) is a popular human resource management policy among Japanese corporations. It is an employee transfer from a corporation to its subsidiary. It has an advantage not to generate unemployment. It has been mainly done for middle-aged white-collar employees. But the number of Shukko for young white-collar employees increases. It is significant for human resource management policy of Japanese corporations. However, little attention has been given to it. Therefore, this paper discusses the significance of Shukko for young white-collar employees. I reviewed several researches about Shukko and introduced four cases of Shukko for young white-collar employees. The cases are the result of interview with managers for human resource management department. The following results were obtained: Shukko for young white-collar employees mainly aims for human resource development. Corporations try to remove the uneasiness young white-collar employees have. It is whether their performance in their Shukko period is appraised fairly and they can fit their new job after their Shukko period. From what has been discussed above, it is concluded that Shukko for young whitecollar employees has great significance for human resource management policy in Japanese corporations. First, Shukko for young white-collar employees makes opportunities they experience jobs necessary to be executives. Second, Shukko for young white-collar employees provides corporations with a means to break executives of a habit which they did not take the responsibility of management, because young employees adapt themselves to new situation. Third, young white-collar employees experience management of subsidiary enables them to manage corporate groups effectively. Fourth, Shukko makes opportunities for young white-collar employees to get their employability earlier. Fifth, Shukko for young white-collar employees trains talented entrepreneurs and can revitalize corporate groups.

抄録全体を表示

In recent years, some literature have pointed out that Japanese automobile-manufacturers buy most components from multiple suppliers and component-suppliers in turn sell a certain type of components to multiple competing automobile-manufactures. So, we should view manufacturer-supplier relationships as part of "network form", rather than as merely dyadic relations. But, for the most part, existing literature has mostly discussed Japanese manufacturer-supplier relationships from the view of automobile-manufactures, and more or less tended to ignore the management of suppliers that have their multiple range of customers. In this paper, we discuss about what is the critical difficulties of the management of suppliers that sell their components to multiple customers, and we emphasize the importance of the research from the view of "auto-component suppliers' mass-customization management". And then, based on a few case studies, we suggest that the most critical things to that strategies' success are "mind switching" of the auto-component suppliers. We mean that auto-component suppliers have to change their mind, from the ones which is "to do just as customers' request is the best way", but to the ones which is "to present best QCD by way of standardization of the core system (i. e. products, development processes, production processes, delivery processes, etc.) among products for multiple customers is the best things for automobile-manufactures".

抄録全体を表示