Abstract
This paper presents the debate about Japanese management in a chronological order and puts forward a new definition of the concept. As a result of reviewing the literature, we distinguished four major periods of the debate: the birth of Japanese management concept (the 1950s and 1960s), the peak of popularity (the 1970s and 1980s), the criticism and appropriation period (the 1990s) and the period of dispersion (since 200). The main conclusion we have drawn from the review is that the current debate about Japanese management is extremely dispersed and requires a new unifying definition. We therefore propose a new, more flexible definition of Japanese management as a dynamic, multilevel and contingent concept.
This paper presents the debate about Japanese management in a chronological order and puts forward a new definition of the concept. As a result of reviewing the literature, we distinguished four major periods of the debate: the birth of Japanese management concept (the 1950s and 1960s), the peak of popularity (the 1970s and 1980s), the criticism and appropriation period (the 1990s) and the period of dispersion (since 200). The main conclusion we have drawn from the review is that the current debate about Japanese management is extremely dispersed and requires a new unifying definition. We therefore propose a new, more flexible definition of Japanese management as a dynamic, multilevel and contingent concept.
(DOWNLOAD)
