ABSTRACT
In this part we turn to the activities of non-Japanese companies, and consider the influence of the Japanese model on their production procedures and employment practices in a variety of national settings. Much of the contemporary discussion of Japanization focuses on the extent to which elements of this model have been taken up outside the Japanese transplants, and on the circumstances which have influenced the selection and adaptation of those elements. However, it is important to recognize that the Japanese model (or rather the variant versions of it which have been deployed in the management literature) must contend not only with established ways of doing things but also with alternative models of work organization and employment, themselves drawing inspiration from distinctive patterns of innovation in particular regional or national arenas. Prominent examples would be those drawn from manufacturing in Germany or Sweden, or the model of flexible specialization inspired by developments in the ‘third’ Italy. Thus the debate about the adoption or adaptation of Japanese-inspired innovations is also a debate about alternative forms of work and employment relations; a debate which concerns both their competitive viability in changing economic conditions, and their attractions for employers, managers and different categories of workers.
