A CRITICAL

EVALUATION OF THE
VIEW THAT JAPANESE
HRM STRATEGIES
CANNOT BE
TRANSFERRED TO
THE UK
RATIONALE
• There has been some concern about the extent to which models and
practices of HRM are capable of being transferred from one country
to another.

• This work is designed to explore and understand human resource

management (HRM) practices in the UK and Japan (countries that
have very different societal and cultural characteristics) from a Multi
national company perspective.
 AIM AND OBJECTIVES
• The aim of this assignment is to evaluate the difficulty in transferring HRM
strategies from Japan to the United Kingdom.
To achieve this aim, the following objectives have been set
• To critically assess the literature on Japanese HRM and their HRM practices.
• To understand and compare the appraisal, reward systems and nature of
HRM in Japan and the United Kingdom
• To analyse cultural factors that affect the transfer of HRM strategies from
Japan to the UK
• Conclude on the above objectives and figure out how this HRM Transfer
difficulty can be managed
REFERENCES
• For this topic, the main source of literature used were academic
literature such as peer reviewed articles and books.
• These literature specifically assessed the HRM strategies in both
countries whist analysing difficulty in transferring the strategy from
one country to another.
• Mitu et. al. (2018) discussed the Comparative Management of Human
Resources between both countries whist proferring solutions that can
make it function.
• Moriguchi (2017) talked about the Japanese style HRM and its
Historical origins.
CHALLENGES
• The difficulty in transferring HRM strategies from Japan to UK has been
attributed to various reasons such as distinctive socio-cultural background.
• Cultural diversity exists and affects how people act on the organization.
Judging our cultural differences can lead to inappropriate attitudes and
behaviors, undesirable when seeking to conclude business with foreign
partners.
• Other reasons include differing business system models, contrast in
economic strength & institutional framework, job flexibility, capital
financial market vs credit-based fundamental market, external labour vs
internal labour, communication, laid-back state vs active state, political
factors, distinctive employment policies amongst others.