Over the last month, Toyota has been in the center of fierce criticism for the lack communication provided by the company. In the media, Toyota’s crisis management was described as inadequate and belated, as well as ineffective in explaining the problem. The company’s current customers along with other people are becoming increasingly suspicious of Toyota’s ability to remedy all car defects and distrustful of its safety policies. Even after a dense stream of apologies, the company’s attempt to win back the brand’s reliability has yet proved fruitless.
How could a company with such powerful manufacturing techniques and strong confidence in the quality of its products turn into a vivid example of bad management and sudden crash of reputation? I believe that a large part of the problem lies neither in the lack of attention by Toyota nor in its inability to accept the blame on time. The crisis comes from the collision of Japanese culture with its Western counterpart and from their failure to engage in an open dialogue. There are several reasons for that.
First, when Japan was introduced Confucianism in the 6th century, the country adopted a philosophy with strict hierarchical relationships, a structure that was later impregnated in the corporate governance. With a closed system of rigidly defined interaction among the staff, companies do not welcome the spread of negative news to “save the face” of those on the top of the pyramid. This behavior makes it complicated for the management to react quickly, thus hurting the business overall.
Second, the reluctance to show on public during crises roots in the concept of haji, or shame. It is a society where people strive to accomplish a task impeccably to save themselves of a possibility to explain a problem if something goes wrong. The lack of communication skills coupled with psychological stress make it almost impossible for them to express themselves clearly, leaving an impression of unwillingness to take responsibility. As a result, when introduced to the international community, Japanese are faced with misunderstanding and censure.
Third, collective action and preservation of harmonious relationships is vital in Japanese culture and is explained through the concept of wa, or harmony. The group’s progress and mutual consent are considered more important than an individual’s success. This notion is also reflected in Toyota’s corporate ideology based on the identity of views and clearly demonstrated by its executive board composed of 29 Japanese men and 0 foreigners.
This three cultural features can be the reasons of the company’s late response to the crisis, unconvincing explanation of the problem, and ineffective communication overall. It can also help us understand why Toyota chose to show a “stark, serious chiron[the letters on the screen],” as described by FOX Business, to express their apology during the Super Bowl 2010. Many think that not showing a face in the commercial is a sign of not assigning the blame. I, on the contrary, believe that what they meant is that all employees are partly responsible for the crisis and the blame is shared by everyone.
No comments:
Post a Comment