Premium
The Layering of Meso‐Level Institutional Effects on Employment Systems in Japan
Author(s) -
Morris Jonathan,
Delbridge Rick,
Endo Takahiro
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
british journal of industrial relations
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.665
H-Index - 70
eISSN - 1467-8543
pISSN - 0007-1080
DOI - 10.1111/bjir.12296
Subject(s) - seniority , dominance (genetics) , corporate governance , industrial relations , economics , variety (cybernetics) , competition (biology) , business , market economy , economic system , political science , management , biochemistry , chemistry , artificial intelligence , computer science , law , gene , ecology , biology
Japan's corporate governance and employment relations systems have been under considerable pressures to reform towards a more Anglo‐American model, against a back‐drop of intensified global competition and slow economic growth over two ‘lost’ decades. But what is the relationship between these systems, and specifically, how does corporate governance structure condition employment relations practice? This paper adopts the ‘Systems, Society, Dominance and Corporate (SSDC) effects’ framework in order to contextualize and evaluate the outcomes of these pressures, particularly in the period following the 2007–2008 global financial crisis. It reports case study data from various parts of the Japanese economy drawn from a series of firm‐based interviews and a variety of secondary sources. It is argued that there has been a strong degree of continuity in certain employment practices, such as lifetime employment, even in relatively new high technology firms, but that the pattern for other practices, such as seniority‐based pay, is more mixed with increasing differentiation between industries and individual organizations. We articulate a layered assessment of the varying SSDC effects at play in corporate Japan. This differentiation across industries and organizations is a function both of strategic choice (corporate effects) and also the increasing variation in the meso‐level institutional pressures that are experienced at organizational level; that is, the differentiation in the sources and nature of dominance effects that are relevant.