Shichihei Yamamoto is a famous Japanologist who has a background of Judaism. His work The Japanese and the Jews is read by many Japanese students as a text of cross-cultural study. In this essay I'd like to introduce another book written by him, entitled Qualifications of Leaders by quoting his idea.

In this book Shichihei Yamamoto argues about the difference between Japanese and Western Europe society (I don't know why he doesn't say "The West" but "Western Europe"). He says the most fundamental difference is whether there is a concept of 'contract' or not. The Western European organization stands on two principles, i.e. Hebrewism and Hellenism. From Hebrewism they've got the principle of 'contract' between human beings and God. Under the influence of Hellenism they always seek the geometric consistency.

He finds the origin of Japanese organization in Kamakura Period (A.D.1192 - 1334). In the periods before Kamakura, for example in Ritsuryo Period (A.D.645 - 1192), Japanese failed to implement the governmen organization of China. The organization based on Chinese way of thinking couldn't enroot in Japanese society. As an evidence he picks up an example. In Ritsuryo Period, the pirates from Korean Peninsula occupied the government office in Kyushu. Japanese court noble discussed how to fight back the office from Koreans for fifty days but concluded nothing. During the fruitless discussion Korean pirates went away. This episode shows the government organization imported from China didn't function at all.

In Kamakura Period Japanese feudal government made the fundamental law called Goseibai Shikimoku. Shichihei Yamamoto says this law is very strange because the law itself declares that it isn't based on any principles. Japanese don't care at all what kind of principles a law is based on, as long as the law functions well. As long as a rule works, we don't care its princple. This is Japanese perspective of rules. This thorough functionalism is the basis for any kind of Japanese organization, he says.

Yamamoto's argument goes as follows. This basis still survives in Japanese companies. Japanese employees are never satisfied with clearly defined responsibility. Japanese people find the reason of working in the mental satisfaction which comes from recognizing that we make contribution to the company. Japanese working ethics is based on the contribution to the company, not on the responsibility for calling. The life-time employment in Japan is not based on the contract but on the fidelity to the company considered as a community. Japanese companies have two aspects, community in a Western sense and organization which carries out a certain function. These two aspects cannot be separated in Japanese organization.

The government in Kamakura Period had neither authority, canon nor principles for governing Japan. For example, the leader of government was positioned in the third class below the Emperor and the noble families. In addition, the government had no system of law, they had only Goseibai Shikimoku. Inspite of these facts, the government could govern Japan for 130 years. Why could they do it?

Shichihei Yamamoto writes they governed Japan based on negotiation. Everything was determined by negotiation among all relevant persons. For example, there were many cases that several persons fight for the ownership of the same land. In such cases the government didn't judge based on the law. The government let the relevant persons negotiate and tried to minimize the complaint of both sides. The leader of the government never judged but just asked his subordinates, "How is the case going?"

Never decide, only ask how it's going. This is a typical Japanese management style. The diary of a general of Japanese navy tells us that during World War II the Emperor didn't make any decision but just always asked how things were going. Also in current Japanese companies the management rarely orders something directly to subordinates. Instead they ask, "How is that matter going? Is it all right?" By being asked like this, the subordinates can recognize what they should do next. Japanese management orders implicitly by asking.

Management by asking not by ordering comes from the fact that Japanese organizations have neither vision, mission, principles, common goals, centeral dogma nor any kind of center. Instead Japanese organization has a very strict border. For example, Edo feuderal government could survive thanks to national isolation policy. Japanese companies also have a strong consciousness of difference between internal and external. Both the isolation policy and the strong border line against the external are the strict frame for conserving the organization as a community.

There is a strict border but inside of it there is no center. This characteristic of Japanese organization comes from pantheism of Japan. Western monotheism assumes a linear evolution of organization based on a central principle, e.g. such a historical view as feudalism followed by capitalism which is followed by communism. But Japanese pantheism never assumes such a linear and step-by-step development.

Japanese don't admit any linear process because Japanese are lack of logic. Yamamoto's argument comes to how Japanese people communicated various thoughts and philosophy in its history. In Western Europe, even religious thinkings were communicated in logical form. On the contrary, Japanese communicated their thoughts by describing its image. Japanese are never persuaded by logic. Japanese learn something by its image. That's why Japanese often use the word image. For example, some person working for the nuclear electric power generation says that getting correct information about nuclear power plants is a completely different thing from supporting the nuclear power generation. Even if Japanese people are given enough information about nuclear power generation, Japanese are never persuaded it is safe.

Western European tradition since Middle Ages is to prove by logic, even regarding religious problems. Japanese tradition since Kamakura Period is to never believe anything proved by logic. Japanese tend to think that if something is clearly proved by logic, it might be false. Japanese believe the emotional perception rather than the logical argument.

That is because of Japanese pantheism. Pantheism never admits the only one God. It never admits the only one right argument. If someone claims that his argument is correct, Japanese think he has no right to claim his correctness because there are many gods, i.e. many possible correct arguments. Nobody can claim the only one principle, the only one vision, the only one strategy, or any kind of uniqueness in Japanese traditional thinking. There is no 'only-one' principle in Japan. As a result any kind of revolution can't happen in Japan. Without any principle there cannot happen any conflicts between different principles.

This is the first 30 pages of Shichihei Yamamoto's book, Qualifications of Leaders. The last point is important. Even if Japanese company define rules, the rules will be shelved, put aside. This means such rules cannot have any binding for employees. Anybody can interpret the rules as she likes. Even if foreigners try to enroot their principle in Japanese companies, we will shelve it, instead of resisting it. For foreingers Japanese look obedient to rules imported from outside, but the truth is that Japanese neglect them without showing neglecting. From western perspective, people have only two alternatives, obeying or resisting. But from Japanese perspective, there is a third way, just putting it aside.

These days Japanese try to abandon the traditional thinking and to adapt themselves to the Western way of thinking including that of management. But even regarding a few successful cases, for example Nissan, it is not sure that it is really because Japanese employees adapt themselves successfully to the leader's western management style. Since 1000 years ago, the basis of Japanese ethics of organization doesn't change. How can people claim it can change only in a decade?

Regarging Shichihei Yamamoto's works, The Japanese and the Jews is the only book available in English translation. If you'd like to read it, you can order from this page of Amazon.com. He wrote this book in his pen name, Isaiah Bendasan.