It is very common to hear from expat leaders here about their frustrations with leading teams in Japan. They get all of their direct reports together in a meeting room to work through some issues and reach some decisions. All goes according to plan, just like at home. Weeks roll by and then the penny drops that things that were agreed to in the meeting are not happening. “Why is it so hard to get people who are being paid good money to do their job?”, they ask me.
One reason is that some of the people in the meeting room looked like they were in agreement because they don’t want to single themselves out as disagreeing with the boss in a public forum. They keep a low profile and choose not to execute on a piece of work they think is a bad idea. The Japanese methodology is the exact opposite.
Before the meeting, the boss checks in with the key people about this idea they have and gets input and feedback. Once these consultations have taken place and any necessary adjustments have been made, then the meeting is called. The attendees rubber stamp the decision and then get busy making it a reality, with great haste and no resistance. Which is better? Well, in Japan, the nemawashi or groundwork method works very well because this is how things have been done around here for thousands of years.
For leaders, the preferred follower is both independent and highly engaged. They know what to do and think about what they are doing, adding in extras without waiting around for the boss to tell them how to do things. Another variety of follower, which by the way, is very common in Japan, is the dependent variety who are engaged, but need a lot of guidance. Part of the reason here is that everyone is highly risk averse. The safest course of action is to do extremely well what the boss asks for, but don’t take any initiative. In this way, the buck stops with the boss and if things go pear-shaped, then there is no blow back on the staff member.
The more problematic types are the dependent staff who are disengaged. In Japan, in big companies, the staff advancement method is based on age and stage, rather than outputs. This breeds a uniformity which is easy to control but which does not generate great results. They do their job at the minimum and that is it. They do what they are told, but no more.
The much, much more worrying variety is the independent staff who is disengaged. They are unhappy working for you, are capable, but are not aligned with your direction. Maybe they think you are a dill and not adding any value here in Japan and the sooner you get on a plane and buzz off to your next posting, the better. They can be internal bomb throwers sabotaging you.
As the leader we have many power plays we can utilize to get the team to follow us. The obvious one is the three strips on the sleeve which says “I am the Boss, got it!”. This authority power is backed up by the machine and gives us access to money and decision making. Most staff get it and will respect the position even when they have doubts about the incumbent.
Expert power is a strong one because we show we bring firepower to the team and the operation. People realise we have a lot of expertise they don’t possess and we are adding value to everyone’s efforts. This type of authority is hard to push back on.
Reward power makes a lot of sense because we can facilitate pay rises, promotions, bonuses, study trips to cool brand name universities, choice projects, etc. In Japanese we have the ame (飴) and the muchi (鞭) – the sweeties and the whip – this would be the sweets part.
Role model power is also effective. We are the very model of a modern leader; we tick all the boxes. We are skilled professionally and also with working with all different types of people and are excellent in communication. We are a star who no one can deny.
The other power play is coercive power. Those independent, disengaged saboteur staff may need a dose of this one. If they don’t want to be part of the team, then go and we will help them out the door. Very few staff need to experience our coercive power, so we are talking about the exceptions here.
The point is there are many ways we can engage our staff and have them want to follow us willingly. A good place to start is to determine which of these categories each of the followers fits into it. Then we can arrange the power structure which is the best fit for that person. Leading everyone in the same way is how amateurs approach it. The professionals lead people one by one, with total customisation.
