Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis: Global Deployment of Social Productivity for Work Teams on Production Sites 9811614598, 9789811614590

Citation preview

Masahiro Nowatari

Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis Global Deployment of Social Productivity for Work Teams on Production Sites

Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis

Masahiro Nowatari

Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis Global Deployment of Social Productivity for Work Teams on Production Sites

123

Masahiro Nowatari Tamagawa University Yokohama, Kanagawa, Japan

ISBN 978-981-16-1459-0 ISBN 978-981-16-1460-6 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6

(eBook)

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

Prologue

Manufacturing production sites have many work teams, and their activities support productivity. Productivity evaluates the only aspect of the production system, and the evaluation of the social network as a sympathy existing in the work team is lacking. Management recognizes this social system as tacit knowledge and is not subject to control. It needs an overall strategy that gives a bird’s-eye view of both. A work team’s social network is the psychological behavior of human beings, especially the team as a group, and lacks a perspective on this and productivity altogether. It takes teamwork as a social system and changes tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge on cooperation, significantly contributing to society beyond the conventional approach. Moreover, it needs the perspective of social science on it, is essential to manage the relationship of this explicit knowledge on teamwork and productivity, and is a worldwide issue. The social system of the work team works on the production system and affects the team productivity. It is necessary to build productivity by both the social network and the production system, and this is “Social Productivity.” “Social productivity” has been verified through global deployment by social research and case studies and contributes to humankind’s welfare through the SDGs and ISO56000s as the innovation management system. Opportunity loss is large by ignoring the management for the social network of the work team. Work teams on production sites around the world are developing teamwork activities to make better products every day. The new management, including evaluating the work team’s social ability, reduces opportunity loss and dramatically improves conventional productivity. The work team’s social power confirms teamwork, which evaluates the social system, andproductive ability regarding team productivity, which evaluates the production systems. Team productivity has traditionally been implemented at production sites and not examined in this book. In all case studies, the indicators provided by the production management department were mainly used. The aim of management by both the social and production systems is social productivity based on sympathy. The power of their social abilities seeks social productivity in a broader sense beyond traditional productivity. It bases on CSR, ESG, and CSV, which seek social value in management activities. The goal is not to v

vi

Prologue

improve productivity by labor density and new capital investment, but to construct social productivity based on the work team’s social ability. Furthermore, it requires continuous spiral management by the PDCA cycle. Teamwork activities of work teams create collective value, generate mutual complementation based on the common good, self-organize the social system, and generate sympathy based on tacit knowledge. This activity generates theirs teamed up wisdom and improves their daily social ability through the manufacturing process as a team. Social science’s perspective improves the social abilities of work team members, enhancing companies and national power. Yokohama, Japan January 2021

Masahiro Nowatari Beyond the COVID-19

Contents

Part I

New Paradigm for Humankind’s Welfare

1

Social Productivity . . . . . . . . . 1 Social System . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Social Productivity . . . . . . . 3 Teamwork Process . . . . . . . . 4 Teamwork Management . . . . 5 Teamwork Appraisal Factors 6 Toward SDGs and IMS . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

5 5 6 9 10 11 21 24

2

Sympathy Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Pioneer’s Excellent Wisdom . . . . . . . . . 2 Sympathy Deployment Process . . . . . . . 3 Teamed up Wisdom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Teamed up Wisdom in Exercise . . . . . . 5 Confirmation of Sympathy Management References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

. . . . . . .

27 27 29 29 33 41 43

3

Confirmation of Sympathy . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Surveyed Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Social Productivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Sympathy in Japan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix: Appraisal of Teamwork in Japan . Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

47 47 48 52 56 59

4

Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Time Recorder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Women’s Inner Wear, Brassiere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

61 61 68

Part II

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . .

Activity in Japan

vii

viii

Contents

3 Car Seat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Car Chassis Frame . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Crane Truck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Time Recorder and Parking Equipment (Japan and USA) References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Part III

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

70 72 74 76 77

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

Activity in Overseas Country

5

Confirmation of Sympathy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Surveyed Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Sympathy in Overseas Country . . . . . . . . . Appendix: Appraisal of Teamwork in Overseas References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . .

81 81 83 87 90

6

Confirmation of Sympathy in Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Comparison Between Industries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Sympathy of Worldwide Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

91 91 95

7

Case Study in China . . . 1 Surveyed Plant . . . . . 2 Confirmation of TAF . 3 Social Productivity . . 4 Sympathy in China . . References . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. 97 . 97 . 99 . 101 . 105 . 108

8

Case Study in Malaysia . 1 Surveyed Plant . . . . . 2 Confirmation of TAF . 3 Social Productivity . . 4 Sympathy in Malaysia References . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

109 109 110 112 117 127

9

Case Study in Thailand . 1 Surveyed Plant . . . . . 2 Social Productivity . . 3 Fruit of Management . 4 Sympathy in Thailand Reference . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

129 129 130 135 137 140

10 Case Study in Vietnam . 1 Surveyed Plant . . . . . 2 Social Productivity . . 3 Fruit of Management . 4 Sympathy in Vietnam Reference . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

. . . . . .

141 141 142 148 150 153

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

Contents

Part IV

ix

Toward SDGs and ISO 56000s

11 Case Study in Global . . . 1 Sympathy in Japan . . . 2 Sympathy in Germany . 3 Sympathy in Malaysia . References . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

. . . . .

157 157 160 163 170

Epilogue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173

About the Author

Masahiro Nowatari Industrial Sociologist, Psychologist for Group Dynamics Ph.Ds in Psychology and Engineering, Professor Emeritus of Tamagawa University. e-mail: [email protected] Book: Masahiro Nowatari and others: “A New Paradigm: Industrial Teamwork Dynamics,” in Developing High Performance Work Teams, American Society for Training & Development (ASTD), 1999. Masahiro Nowatari, “Global Industrial Teamwork Dynamics,” Nakanishiya, 2012. (Japanese) Masahiro Nowatari, “Social System of Work Team on Production Line,—Global Deployment of Teamwork Research—”, Bunshin-do, 2017. (Japanese) Masahiro Nowatari, “Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis: Global Deployment of Social Productivity for Work Team on Production Site,” Springer Nature, 2021. Academic Membership: Japan Industrial Management Association (JIMA), Japanese Association of Industrial/Organization Psychology (JAIOP), Japan Academy of International Business Studies (JAIBS).

xi

Part I

New Paradigm for Humankind’s Welfare

SDGs aim at the welfare of humankind and ISO56000 aim to improve management efficiency and productivity by constructing an innovation management system that is deploying worldwide as social issues. Since the latter half of the twentieth century, teamwork research at production sites has struggled for the lone force. Still, in the twenty-first century, there is a movement to reconfirm the manufacturing production sites from the humanities and social sciences perspective. There are social capital activities, sympathy, co-creation, general wisdom/integrity, place, and the ethical industry as keywords. It points out the importance of intangible assets, such as wisdom and information. Teamwork has long been in tacit knowledge and out of the control of management. However, the work team has a social network called cooperation and develops daily activities through a self-organized social system. This book introduces a research journey for sympathy innovation for work teams at manufacturing production sites for about 50 years. It concretely grasps this invisible psychological activity, so the social system confirmed the existence of teamed up wisdom and mutual wisdom through experimental psychology and exercises and confirmed the influence on team results. These findings have confirmed the management of social productivity through case studies in Japan and overseas. Psychologists are not interested in manufacturing production sites, and management scholars have few practical activities for teams in human resource management. Thus, this field is unexplored, and this excavation brings excellent economic benefits. Besides, it has been a long time since the manufacturing industry has shifted to China and Southeast Asia from Japan and called the era of Asian dynamism. In these countries, manufacturing GDP will rise significantly in the future. Against Japan overlooks social productivity in the work team on the production site, after each country introduces it in the early stages of industrial society, it will make progress the country’s social abilities. Early research activity confirms the importance of mutual complementation, teamed up wisdom generation, and the team’s interaction which has a more substantial effect than individual ability on team productivity through experimental

Fig. 1 Towards sympathy innovaion on work team

2 Part I: New Paradigm for Humankind’s Welfare

Part I: New Paradigm for Humankind’s Welfare

3

psychology. This phenomenon is a watershed for practical activities in industrial society. Also, it extracts Teamwork Appraisal Factors (TAF) for the teamwork awareness of the work team from the Japanese manufacturing industry. Furthermore, it has made up an evaluation system, the relationship between awareness of TAF and team productivity, and has launched the domestic analysis model as ITD (Industrial Teamwork Dynamics) and expanded it for the overseas model as GITD (Global Industrial Teamwork Dynamics). After that, through the social survey in Japan and overseas, teamwork in the work team has been established as a social system, suggesting social productivity and teamwork management. After confirming the activities’ background, it introduces compelling cases obtained from Japan’s practical activities in the latter half of the twentieth century and overseas after the twenty-first century. Research activities started in the latter half of the 1970s are classified into the following three stages. It shows the movement of sympathy innovation in the work team at the production site (Fig. 1) (Nowatari, 2012; 2017). a. Phase I: 1980’s early*1990’s early/Discovery of Sympathy Extraction of Teamwork Appraisal Factors and Confirmation of Teamed up Wisdom b. Phase II: 1980’s latter*2000’s latter/Discovery of Social System Construction of Social System and Teamwork Management (ITD, GITD) c. Phase III: 2000’s latter*/Discovery of Social Productivity Toward Sympathy Management with SDGs and IMS.

Chapter 1

Social Productivity

1 Social System A team is a collection of individuals. In the atmosphere of social value creation to achieve social goals, a social canopy is arisen at the initial stage and strengthens into a social network through daily activities. Finally, strong mutual sympathy within a team establishes a social system and the work team at the manufacturing production site. The production site regards this as teamwork. However, at present, it is a tacit knowledge and without management. Reconstructing teamwork from tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge means making an appraisal system, and it is of great significance to manage (Fig. 1). The production system mainly evaluates the work team productivity under the current situation. However, the work team has a leader, and members have a social system called teamwork and supports team productivity. Management by this social system reduces opportunity loss. Social productivity as the new direction based on sympathy evaluates social and production systems (Fig. 2).

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_1

5

6

1 Social Productivity

Fig. 1 Social system in work team

Fig. 2 Image of social productivity

2 Social Productivity Group Dynamics in social psychology is useful as an approach to the teamwork of work teams. Steiner proposes a model in which group process within a team influences team productivity by converting the input into output (Steiner, 1972). In the current situation, work teams or teamwork are out of management as tacit knowledge or social chaos and is situation management. Therefore the work team

2 Social Productivity

7

Fig. 3 Social productivity/new paradigm of management (NPM)

has to control chaos and the system. It remembers Taylor s scientific management, which is described later. Team productivity is only an evaluation of the production system as explicit knowledge (Fig. 3a). It has to regard the group process as sympathy and to convert teamwork from tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge as one social system. Management should perform by both the social system and the production system. There is no tacit knowledge here. The government can only act explicit knowledge as a system and evaluate team productivity as social productivity. It means that management views the perspective of social science (Fig. 3b). Social productivity is evaluated based on both the social system and the production system. The social system assesses the social ability required to achieve the work team s production goals. The evaluation criterion is sympathy based on mutual complementation and evaluates each question item s awareness of the teamwork appraisal factors (TAF) described later. On the other hand, productive ability evaluates the work capacity required to achieve the work team s production goals. The evaluation standard is team productivity based on the production system, which uses indicators from each company and utilizes them (Table 1). It must reaffirm that the social system contributes significantly to the productivity from behind in the conventional production system. Social productivity consists of both a social system and a production system. This social productivity is a mainly psychological approach without requiring new capital investment. Both systems develop improvement effects in daily activities, but the production system has to be gradually improved by regular capital investment and updating the production system. On the other hand, in the social system, a similar gradual improvement is expected by educational guidance based on regular awareness surveys (Fig. 4).

8 Table 1 Management factor of social productivity in work team

Fig. 4 Activity of social productivity

1 Social Productivity

3 Teamwork Process

9

3 Teamwork Process The work team is on a psychological occasion and is what does develop things there. The work team performs up a given team task utilizing their team resources. This performance is the teamwork process, and the team task and team resources actively coordinate. As a result, it decides team productivity. Social sympathy means sympathy that work team members have social cohesiveness within a work team, which the respondent quickly understands. TAF has two categories, task orientation as work force-oriented and people orientation as cohesive force-oriented toward productivity (for details, see 5. Teamwork Appraisal Factors). Furthermore, it leads to subsequent teamwork management (Fig. 5). Here, it describes the social background of the teamwork process. Natural science pursues productivity centered on engineering, statistics, and industrial engineering; supports production systems; and contributes to innovation in manufacturing technology and management technology. On the other hand, human social science is a field that explores the value of the labor of work teams centered on sociology, economics, business administration, social capital, and social psychology, and conventional management lacks this perspective. Based on these findings, it is necessary to upgrade the social system to the production system level and construct power at the same level. The social productivity based on both the social system and the production system contributes to humankind s welfare advocated by the SDGs. It is a new perspective aimed at creating social value for the work team (Fig. 6).

Fig. 5 Teamwork process in work team

10

1 Social Productivity

Fig. 6 Background of social productivity to teamwork process

4 Teamwork Management Teamwork awareness evaluates the work team s social system as sympathy, and team productivity assesses the production system. For more understanding, each work team sets on the two axes of the social system and the production system in the workshop or plant, based on the coordinate origin as the average value of both. The two axes have four quadrants, from quadrant I (teamwork awareness/higher, team productivity/higher) to quadrant IV (teamwork awareness/higher, team productivity/lower). It compares teamwork awareness between work teams in quadrant II to IV and work teams in quadrant I as a benchmark. Teamwork management is educational guidance for each work team in the quadrants II to IV, and performing and developing for the lower awareness factor and the question items composed it, leading to the improvement of social productivity (Fig. 7).

5 Teamwork Appraisal Factors

11

Fig. 7 Teamwork management deployment

5 Teamwork Appraisal Factors According to the survey object s view, social research must prepare more understanding of the questionnaire s content to obtain an accurate answer from respondents. Creating this questionnaire clarifies purpose such as what you want to know and what you want to do with the obtained results in the management. It is necessary to have enthusiastic discussions with the parties concerned, focusing on the following contents. These clarifications bring about the concreteness of the questionnaire and an understandable result. Management is developed spirally through hypothesis verification.

12

1 Social Productivity

a. b. c. d.

Does the relationship clear to SDGs and ISO56000s? Do geopolitical factors take including, that is, religion, national wealth, etc.? What is the social ability of the work team? How far the scope of activities included workshops, plants, the whole company, etc.? What is the teamwork we think? What is the ideal form of teamwork? What do you expect from teamwork? How to understand the outcomes of the relationship between teamwork and team productivity?

e. f. g. h.

It confirms that the team has a social activity as conversations and psychological interactions within the team, and it affects team productivity more than individual ability. Furthermore, individual wisdom generates teamed up wisdom and mutual wisdom, and that wisdom exerts team effectiveness. Constructing this social productivity phenomenon sets up a questionnaire to understand teamwork as a social system in the production site s real work team. These questionnaires use knowledge of human social science and natural science. In management, the work team s sympathy from tacit knowledge to explicit knowledge must be transformed from chaos to the system. Idealism and abstract theory cannot manage the production site. As a management tool, teamwork demands to set a questionnaire that reflects social productivity based on drawing general wisdom/integrity and future management issues. Constructing a questionnaire for confirming teamwork is created through literature research and discussions with leaders and managers at production sites. After that, each questionnaire is stratified according to the content s similarity and summarized as a factor. Furthermore, these factors set up the group integrative determinants (GID) as a tentative model for evaluating the hypothesis. In this analyzing process, the questionnaires make to narrow down from more than 200 to 102 finally (Fig. 8). A national survey conducts GID, and analysis is performed based on the actual data obtained. After the relationship among GID is clarified, GID are modified. This step is nearly essential in the social sciences. A nationwide social survey on plants in all manufacturing industries of companies listed up on the Tokyo Stock Exchange has been conducted and an awareness survey on teamwork for leader and member (subordinate) belonging to the work team is also conducted. It stratifies the work teams according to team size, S: 27 people, M: 813 people, and L: 1480 people including leader. Moreover, it performs principal component analysis (PCA) for leaders and members in every three sizes. Since GID are twenty determinants, it is possible to analyze the 20th principal component. But, Cumulative Contribution Ratio (CCR) has sufficient information value only from first to five principal components. The factor loading value (FLV) of the first principal component is the largest, and CCR is approximately 40% for leaders and members in every three sizes. Besides, CCR until the second principal component is around 50% for each with sufficient

5 Teamwork Appraisal Factors

13

Fig. 8 Group integrative determinants (GID) as hypothesis model

information value. The thick figure with a dark background in the table means the most considerable loading value until V principal component. They are candidate factors for confirming awareness of teamwork (Table 2a, b). Next, it extracts the factors showing the maximum FLV in the first principal component from GID, and it names them as the temporary teamwork appraisal factors (T-TAF). The second principal component can group into task orientation (TO) as work force-oriented, and people orientation (PO) as cohesive force-oriented that compose teamwork toward productivity. This naming is based on the content of the questionnaires. Since TO and PO are conflicting approaches in teamwork activities, the sign shows positive and niegative symbols. The background of the negative sign factor is dark in the table. Some factors are mixed in the contradictory oriented factor group by the respondents awareness, but it is no problem for smaller FLV. It stipulates that teamwork is composed of TO and PO, but both orientations mix in reality. Each factor s order is arranged and corresponds to the teamwork appraisal factors (TAF) on the left side, and it extracts a final set of TAF from GID (Table 3a, b). The above process shows (Fig. 9a–c). Also, the outline of the TAF currently used is shown (Fig. 9d, e). Besides, it introduces the latest version of the questionnaire and TAF. TAF is stratified into TO and PO, which support team productivity, and are composed of 6

Table 2 Factor loading value matrices of group integrative determinants (GID)/(Principal component analysis)

(continued)

14 1 Social Productivity

Table 2 (continued)

5 Teamwork Appraisal Factors

15

Table 3 Arrangement to teamwork appraisal factors (TAF) from temporary-teamwork appraisal factors (T-TAF)

(continued)

16 1 Social Productivity

Table 3 (continued)

5 Teamwork Appraisal Factors

17

Fig. 9 Setting process to teamwork appraisal factors (TAF)

18 1 Social Productivity

5 Teamwork Appraisal Factors

Fig. 10 Questionnaire in teamwork appraisal factors (TAF)/real used in case study

19

20

Fig. 10 (continued)

1 Social Productivity

5 Teamwork Appraisal Factors

21

Table 4 Questionnaire and teamwork appraisal factors (TAF)

factors and 30 questionnaires, respectively, and are 12 factors and 60 questionnaires in total. TAF has been extracted by evaluating fairly teamwork in Japan and worldwide production site (Fig. 10, Table 4) (Nowatari, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1991a, 1991b, 1992a, 1992b, 1994; Nowatari and Aswad 1993).

6 Toward SDGs and IMS Social productivity aims to upgrade the social abilities of the work team, leader, and member. Practicing team task with recognizing sympathy creates new labor value and contributes to the welfare of humankind. It mainly corresponds to the Goal 8. Decent Work and Economic Growth of the SDGs. It will expand globally at production sites (Fig. 11). The SDGs social productivity approach must first develop thoughts into concrete concepts and transform them into systems that evaluate the concrete ideas. This embodied system must set an evaluation index to the activity, and management must be practice according to this index. New view of teamwork contributes to set up Management Innovation System in Society and Organization (Fig. 12).

22

1 Social Productivity

Resource: United Nations, Department of Public Information

Fig. 11 Sustainable development goals (SDGs)

Fig. 12 Sympathy management toward SDGs No. 8 Decent work and economic growth for work team on production site

6 Toward SDGs and IMS 23

24

1 Social Productivity

References Nowatari, M. (1988). Survey on awareness of group work leaders. Journal of JIMA, 39(5), 337343. Nowatari, M. (1989). Relationship among group integrative determinants for group work, based on rate of leader s direct work in his total work. Japanese Association of Industrial & Organizational Psychology Journal (J. JAIOP), 3(1), 717. Nowatari, M. (1990). Relationship among group integrative determinants for group work, relationship by every group size model and extraction of teamwork determinants from group integrative determinants through principal component regression. Journal of JIMA, 41(3), 153164. Nowatari, M. (1991a). Relationship among group integrative determinants for group work, relationship between the design of cooperative work and work management factors by social science approach (No. 26, pp. 117129). Memoirs of the Faculty of Engineering, Tamagawa University (MFE. TU). Nowatari, M. (1991b). Extraction of teamwork determinants in Japanese manufacturing industries by social psychological approach. Journal of Tamagawa University Research Institute, 18, 2753. Nowatari, M. (1992a). Group dynamics in Japanese manufacturing industries: Confirmation and verification of the teamwork determinants, conclusion of succeeding researches for group work. Journal of JIMA, 43(4), 241252. Nowatari, M. (1992b). Significance test of questionnaire items composed teamwork determinants (No. 27, pp. 95106). MFE. TU. Nowatari, M. (1994). Relationship among the teamwork determinants of work groups in the Japanese manufacturing industries. The Japanese Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (J. JESP), 34(1), 19. Nowatari, M., & Aswad, A. A. (1993). Extraction of teamwork determinants in Japanese manufacturing industries. The Japanese Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (J. JESP), 32(3), 269283. Steiner, I. D. (1972). Group process and productivity. Academic Press.

Information Argyle, M. (1972). The social psychology of work. Taplinger. Aubrey, C. A. II., & Felkins, P. K. (1988). Teamwork: Involving people in quality and productivity improvement. Quality Press, ASQC. Beyerlein, M. M., (Ed.). (2000). Work teams: Past, present and future. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Campbell, J. P., & Campbell, R. J. (1988). Productivity in organizations. Jossey-Bass. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. M. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Goodman, P. S. (1986). Designing effective work groups. Jossey-Bass. Hackman, J. R. (Ed.). (1989). Groups that work (and those that don t) creating conditions for effective teamwork. Jossey-Bass. Hare, A. P. (1976). Handbook of small group research (2nd ed.). Free Press. Landy, F. J., & Trumbo, D. A. (1985). Psychology of work behavior (3rd ed.). Dorsey Press. Larson, C. E., & Lafasto, F. M. J. (1989). Teamwork, what must go right, what can go wrong. Sage. Leung, K., Lu, L., & Liang, X. (2005). When East and West meet, effective teamwork across cultures. In A. M. West & others (Eds.), The essentials of teamwork, international perspectives. Wiley.

Information

25

McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Parker, M., & Slaughter, J. (1988). Choosing sides: Unions and the team concept. South End Press. Shaw, M. E. (1976). Group dynamics. McGraw-Hill. Shaw, M. E. (1981). Group dynamics, the psychology of small group behavior (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. Spector, P. E. (2000). Industrial and organizational psychology, research and practice (2nd ed.). Wiley. Sutermeister, R. A. (1969). People and productivity (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill. Szilagyi, A. D. J. (1984). Management and performance (2nd ed.). Scott Foresman. Szilagyi, A. D., Jr., & Wallace, M. J., Jr. (1983). Organizational behavior and performance (3rd ed.). Glenview: Scott Foresman. Itst, M. A. (Ed.). (1996). Handbook of work group psychology. Wiley. Itst, M. A., Tjosvold, D., & Smith, K. G. (2005). The essentials of teamwork, international perspectives. Wiley.

Chapter 2

Sympathy Management

Social productivity must manage both the social system and the production system. The teamwork that supports the social system is precisely the sympathy among the leader and members within the same work team, and management by psychology differs from the conventional one. It is sympathy management.

1 Pioneer’s Excellent Wisdom It shows the relationship of sympathy management with the knowledge of influential ancestors. In the latter half of the eighteenth century, Adam Smith publishes the Theory of Moral Emotions (Smith, 1759) before the Wealth of Nations (Smith, 1776), preaching the need for ethics, morality, and sympathy in economic activity. This concept incorporates the construction of social systems. On the other hand, the Wealth of Nations links to the production system as an economic activity pursuing productivity (Fig. 1a). In the first half of the twentieth century, Taylor proposes a scientific management method (Taylor, 1919) that breaks the conventional situation management and contributed significantly to the subsequent construction of production systems and production management. Scientific management measures workloads with a focus on work study on visible external physical load. On the other hand, sympathy management evaluates the workload of the invisible internal psychological load as teamwork (Fig. 1b) (Nowatari, 2003, 2015).

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_2

27

2

Fig. 1 Sympathy management concept based on pioneer’s excellent knowledge

28 Sympathy Management

2 Sympathy Deployment Process

29

2 Sympathy Deployment Process Now, the teamwork process is also the development stage of wisdom. Individuals possess experience-based personal wisdom, and it differs for each person. A variety of individual wisdom exists in a work team, and interaction among individual wisdom leads mutual wisdom to carry out team tasks. Finally, this mutual wisdom leads the teamed up wisdom to be common and affects team productivity. In sympathy management, it naturally expects that mutual complementation, no mutual interference, to improve social results as a team (Fig. 2). The relationship among individual wisdom, mutual wisdom, and teamed up wisdom verifies through exercises (see Sect. 4. Teamed up Wisdom in Exercise).

Fig. 2 Sympathy deployment process

3 Teamed up Wisdom A work team is composed of a leader and members and generates teamed up wisdom together with mutual wisdom through individual wisdom. An organization as a plant or a company constitutes organized wisdom based on the sum of these teamed up wisdom and mutual wisdom generated among teamed up wisdom in many work teams. This organized wisdom significantly contributes to innovation management. Furthermore, socialized wisdom is composed of the sum of each organized wisdom and mutual wisdom generated between organized wisdom. This socialized wisdom dramatically contributes to the SDGs. To aim for continuous upgrading, it needs to introduce the SECI Model and a spiral system (Figs. 3 and 4).

30

2

Sympathy Management

Fig. 3 Relationship among individual wisdom, teamed up wisdom, organized wisdom, socialized wisdom and mutual wisdom

3 Teamed up Wisdom

Fig. 4 Sympathy upgrading and social value creation

31

32

2

Sympathy Management

Fig. 5 Background of sympathy/be spiraled up “New SECI Model” toward wisdom creation

The development of the spiral SECI Model supports the interaction between tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge. In management, the wisdom based on experience must convert into phronesis as practical wisdom. Wisdom is higher tacit knowledge, and it requires constant confirmation of subjective intuition and objective knowledge (Nonaka & Yamaguchi, 2019; Nonaka & Takeuchi, 2020) (Fig. 5).

4 Teamed up Wisdom in Exercise

33

4 Teamed up Wisdom in Exercise The exercises confirm that the interaction in individual wisdom generates mutual wisdom and further teamed up wisdom. To verify this phenomenon supports understanding the real work team’s social system at the manufacturing production site. Each exercise compares the results of individual wisdom performed by individual work and the teamed up wisdom performed by teamwork after individual work. After analyzing these results, it statistically verifies that teamed up wisdom has a better result than individual wisdom. Furthermore, it certifies that higher performing teams are superior to lower performing teams in awareness of teamwork appraisal factors (TAF) as a social system in the business games exercise with statistical verification (Nowatari, 2017; Nowatari, Naoi, & Akutsu, 2006; Ono & Nowatari, 2002). a. Jigsaw Puzzle It is a piece assembly work of a jigsaw puzzle of two people and a group problem-solving exercise that finally completes the drawing. The experimental group is independency, and the pieces mixed in advance divide into two piles. Moreover, each individual charges one of the piles independently, and the conversation occurs at the time of the completion stage later. On the other hand, the control group teams up as a regular jigsaw puzzle assembly work, and the pieces are one pile, and two people perform the assembly work from the beginning. The conversation is free during the exercise on two groups, and they are instructed to do it in a comfortable atmosphere. There are 12 subjects in each group, so the team is 6, respectively. All are female students who belong to the same club activities and have a closer relationship. Interaction as a social system sets up the conversation and psychological feeling. It records all conversations, transcribes, and stratifies according to the category after the exercise. After the exercise, a questionnaire survey conducts on psychological feeling with a partner (Table 1). The work time as an individual ability is measured. It is why the subjects assign to no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Twenty-four subjects divide into two teams, respectively (Table 2a) It shows the work time by the team as a team ability. The independency type has a shorter mean value with statistically significant (Table 2b). It confirms the relationship between interaction and individual ability into team ability. The independency type has a considerable influence on individual ability, but the teamed up type has an enormous impact on conversation and has no individual ability (Table 2c). The principal component analysis (PCA) identifies the common background of conversation and psychological feeling for sympathy as a social system. The meanings of the first principal component and the second principal component interpret and names, respectively. The cumulative contribution ratio (CCR) is also better (Table 3a).

34

2

Sympathy Management

Table 1 Experimental sympathy (Jigsaw puzzle)

Table 2 Individual ability, team ability, and relationship on sympathy to team ability

Multiple regression analysis (MRA) confirms the influence of these concentration variables on team ability. The ordering based on the value of the standard partial regression coefficient shows. In all variables, including method, the independency type has the individual ability, conversation, and psychological feeling. Besides, the teamed up type has dramatically influenced conversation and psychological feeling as a sympathy (Table 3b). Furthermore, these five variables are narrowed down by the stepwise method. The independency type incorporates individual ability, and psychological feeling with team related. The teamed up type includes conversations with jigsaw puzzle construction and psychological feeling with team related and no individual ability. Psychological feeling with the team is a common factor in both. It means that even if the work method is different, this factor affects team ability. The multiple correlation

Table 3 Confirmation of sympathy

4 Teamed up Wisdom in Exercise

35

36

2

Sympathy Management

coefficient is also higher, and the multiple regression equation is also statistically significant. In the teamed up type, mutual wisdom through conversation and psychological feeling is added to individual wisdom to build teamed up wisdom, and more substantial sympathy is generated (Table 3c). Thus, it confirms that conversation and psychological feeling as a sympathy, which are interactions of social systems, may affect team ability more than individual ability (Nowatari, 1987). b. Job Performance Assessment It is a job performance assessment on a moving picture of the business person’s work performance. The job performance contents are the effects of grade, emotion, and ability, and the assessment is on a 5-point scale. First, it is an individual assessment based on self-assessment without consulting anyone. Next, it is a team assessment by performing with 3 to 4 people. The team randomly organizes each time, and it is a group problem-solving exercise in which the team evaluates through group discussions each time. After that, it introduces an expert’s model answer (scholarly and experienced person) with explanations. It confirms the differences between the individual assessment and the team assessment to the definitive answer. So, the individual evaluation means individual wisdom, and the team assessment means teamed up wisdom as a sympathy based on the individual wisdom and mutual complementation wisdom. The first lesson is educated on job performance through a simple case study and instructional education by an expert. After the second lesson, the subject evaluates each case study based on the first lesson. It confirms the difference between individual wisdom and teamed up wisdom to expert’s model answer and certifies smaller one between both. It clears that teamed up wisdom is 52.3%, individual wisdom is 27.3%, and the same is 20.4% throughout the four case studies over the three years. It can understand the effectiveness of teamed up wisdom (Table 4a). Furthermore, focusing on exercises II, III, and IV after gaining knowledge of job performance lessons, teamed up wisdom makes to upgrade around 10% than individual wisdom, confirming the usefulness of mutual wisdom (Table 4b). Also, teamed up wisdom’s effectiveness as a sympathy can confirm on the personal level on the mean value and standard deviation with statistically significant (Table 4c).

Table 4 Experimental sympathy (job performance assessment)

4 Teamed up Wisdom in Exercise 37

38

2

Sympathy Management

The same phenomenon can confirm using it through the overall task on the mean value and standard deviation with statistically significant (Table 5) (Nowatari, 2009). Table 5 Confirmation of sympathy

c. Survival Simulation For more than ten years, this exercise has been held as part of a lecture on group work for medical and nursing managers. They are veterans of nursing work different from the students mentioned above, and the mean age is about 50 years old, and about 90% are women. It is a group problem-solving, and the subject is a ranking of the 15 items according to their importance for survival. The situation assumes a survival from a light aircraft emergency landing at the limit of a tree 1500 m above sea level in the daytime during the coldest winter. First, an individual evaluates it by herself/himself without consulting anyone, so this is individual wisdom. Next, a team is formed by two people basically and considers group discussions, so this is teamed up wisdom. After that, it introduces the model answer of academic experts. Furthermore, it finds the difference between individual wisdom and teamed up wisdom to the definitive answer, respectively. Here, teamed up wisdom as sympathy is confirmed finally by adding wisdom as individual wisdom and mutual wisdom as a mutual complement (Table 6). For individual wisdom and teamed up wisdom, it finds the difference from the model answer and confirms the wisdom with a smaller difference. Teamed up wisdom is 54.3%, individual wisdom is 38.2%, and the same is 7.5% (Table 7). It evaluates the difference between the model answer for each year for individual wisdom and teamed up wisdom. It confirms the mean value is generally smaller in teamed up wisdom, so teamed up wisdom has effectively better answer through individual wisdom and mutual wisdom. It obtains statistical significance for the overall mean (Table 8a).

4 Teamed up Wisdom in Exercise Table 6 Experimental sympathy (survival game)

Table 7 Difference of wisdom to expert criterion

39

40 Table 8 Confirmation of sympathy

2

Sympathy Management

4 Teamed up Wisdom in Exercise

41

On the other hand, the standard deviation has the same tendency as the mean value, but the trend is weaker (Table 8b). On the above three exercises, even if it has never been experienced and is in a state of groping, “The wisdom of Manjushri if three people approach” exists. In this way, the existence and effectiveness of teamed up wisdom as sympathy confirms in all the exercises. Moreover, it can guess that a similar sympathy phenomenon carries out at real manufacturing production sites. Based on these findings, it tries searching sympathy phenomena in the later chapters.

5 Confirmation of Sympathy Management In the analysis, principal component analysis (PCA) is used mainly. It dues to the summarizing of original data information and the elimination of multicollinearity in social science data. In particular, questionnaires for a psychological survey on the same person have a higher correlation among questionnaires, so it cannot directly use original data as an explanatory variable in multivariate analysis. PCA can utilize the information value of TAF. Although the mean’s information value is low by “1/ n” according to “number of data: n,” PCA can extract the components that sufficiently contain the original data’s common background information. In general, it has empirically confirmed that the cumulative contributed ratio (CCR) up to the second principal component has approximately 50% more with sufficient information value in the worldwide survey. Based on this reason, it has been used until the second principal component of PCA to original data. Furthermore, it focuses on the factor loadings value of each principal component to more understanding of sympathy. On the other hand, to confirm the sympathy difference between the work teams, t-test for mean values and F-test for standard deviations are statistically tested for the original data of the teamwork appraisal factors (TAF). Teamwork management is performed based on these statistical significances. Furthermore, the discriminant analysis confirms the TAF awareness pattern’s similarity between the two groups and judges by the correct discriminant ratio (CDR). Finally, the discriminant function is tested with statistical significance. CDR is a value of 50 to 100%, 50% means the same response pattern of the two groups, and 100% means completely different. Therefore, it judges it seems the difference between the two groups with 75% or more. Furthermore, this step adapts to the personal attributes and TAFs according to statistical significance and picks them up as a target. Those steps are teamwork management (Nowatari, 1990, 1992, 1994; Nowatari & Aswad, 1993; Nowatari & Nanboku, 1997; Nowatari & Bolda, 1998; Nowatari, Naoi, & Akutsu, 2006; Nowatari & Tobita, 2013; Ono & Nowatari, 2002). It explains the details in later chapter.

42

2

Sympathy Management

a. Distance for Sympathy It defines the “distance for sympathy” as a range between the maximum value in the positive direction and the minimum value in the negative direction in the factor loading value (correlation coefficient with the synthetic variate) matrix in the same principal component. A work team with good teamwork expects a higher mean value and a smaller standard deviation in TAF awareness. In this case, every TAF has a closer relation, so the range is expected to be smaller. On the opposite, a more extensive range means poor teamwork, looser relation of TAFs, and weaker sympathy. The sympathy management confirms three distances on the teamwork appraisal factors (TAF) and stratified into task orientation (TO) and people orientation (PO). Distance for Sympathy ¼ ðThe Positivest Factor Loading Value)  (The Negativest Factor Loading Value)

b. Area of Sympathy It defines the “area of sympathy” as the product of the first principal component’s range and the second principal component’s range of uncorrelated and orthogonal to the first principal component. It means calculated area by the product of the “distance for sympathy” on the first and second principal components. The sympathy management confirms it on TAF, TO, and PO. As a natural consequence, a smaller “area of sympathy” means better sympathy, closer relation of TAFs, but a more extensive “area of sympathy” means poorer sympathy, closer relation of them. Area of Sympathy ¼ ð‘‘Distance for Sympathy’’ on First Principal ComponentÞ ð‘‘Distance for Sympathy’’ on Second Principal ComponentÞ

c. Sympathy Ratio It defines the “sympathy ratio”, “Area of Sympathy” of TO, and “Area of Sympathy” of PO. It is the final characteristic of sympathy. The worldwide survey has been certified, the “Area of Sympathy” of PO is generally smaller than the “Area of Sympathy” of TO, therefore the “sympathy ratio” is usually “1” or more. Because it seems that the TO carries out after strengthening the PO based on unity and cooperativeness. This finding makes us understand the characteristics of each work team, production site, and each country. Furthermore, it suggests the direction of sympathy management. Sympathy Ratio =

ð‘‘Area of Sympathy’’ of the Task OrientationÞ ð‘‘Area of Sympathy’’ of the People OrientationÞ

5 Confirmation of Sympathy Management

43

d. Value of Sympathy Information It defines the “value of sympathy information” as the cumulative contributed ratio (CCR) until the second principal component. As the above mentioned, “distance for sympathy,” “area of sympathy,” and “sympathy ratio” are based on factor loading value on first and second principal component factors in PCA. The contributed ratio on discriminant analysis guarantees the value of information on these criteria. In this way, CCR confirms the reliability of questionnaire content on TAFs and the respondent’s answer’s reliability. Too lower CCR, such as 50% or less until the second principal component, means the need to reconstruct questionnaire content and TAFs. It means lower information value cannot secure the effectiveness of management.

References Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (2020). The wise company. Toyokeizai. Nonaka, I., & Yamaguchi, I. (2019). Management of intuition. Kadokawa. Nowatari, M. (1987). Experimental study on cooperative work with different role-making. Journal of Japan Industrial Management Association (J. JIMA), 38(2), 112–119. Nowatari, M. (1990). Relationship among group integrative determinants for group work, relationship by every group size model and extraction of teamwork determinants from group integrative determinants through principal component regression. Journal of Japan Industrial Management Association (J. JIMA), 41(3), 153–164. Nowatari, M. (1992). Group dynamics in Japanese manufacturing industries: Confirmation and verification of the teamwork determinants, conclusion of succeeding researches for group work. Journal of Japan Industrial Management Association (J. JIMA), 43(4), 241–252. Nowatari, M. (1994). Relationship between teamwork level and the team productivity of work teams in the automobile related parts maker, industrial teamwork dynamics (Part I). Journal of Japan Industrial Management Association (J. JIMA), 45(5), 479–487. Nowatari, M. (2003). Proposal and international deployment for teamwork management in global industrial society. Communications of Japan Industrial Management Association (C. JIMA), 13(1), 25–28. Nowatari, M. (2009). Effectiveness of team estimation on the group problem solving practice. MFE. TU, No. 44, pp. 35–40. Nowatari, M. (2015). Teamwork management for global production, social productivity on work team based on social capital and social psychology. Communications of Japan Industrial Management Association (C. JIMA), 25(1), 32–37. Nowatari, M. (2017). Social system of work team on production line. Global Deployment of Teamwork Research, Bunshin-do. Nowatari, M., & Aswad, A. A. (1993). Extraction of teamwork determinants in Japanese manufacturing industries. The Japanese Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (J. JESP), 32(3), 269–283. Nowatari, M., & Bolda, A. B. (1998). Awareness to managing skills of Japanese general manager and his staffs in the automobile and it’s related manufacturing plants introducing QC circle activity in Japan. Japanese Association of Industrial & Organizational Psychology Journal (J. JAIOP), 11(1), 15–25. Nowatari, M., & Nanboku, S. (1997). Quantitative estimation on relationship between work types and the teamwork level of work teams in the ladies innerwear sewing maker plants, industrial teamwork dynamics (Part II). Journal of Japan Industrial Management Association (J. JIMA), 48(4), 166–173.

44

2

Sympathy Management

Nowatari, M., Naoi, T., & Akutsu, M. (2006). Time series study on group process in management simulation, group dynamics research on team management (2). Journal of Japan Industrial Management Association (J. JIMA), 57(2), 172–179. Nowatari, M., & Tobita, K. (2013). Effect of tact time difference to teamwork awareness of Chinese line workers. Japanese Association of Industrial/Organizational Psychology Journal (J. JAIOP), 26(2), 107–120. Ono, M., & Nowatari, M. (2002). Team achievement and teamwork in management simulation, group dynamics research on team management (1). Journal of Japan Industrial Management Association (J. JIMA), 53(1), 61–70. Smith, A. (1759). The theory of moral sentiments. Scotland, printed for Andrew Millar, in the Strand; and Alexander Kincaid and J. Bell, in Edinburgh. Smith, A. (1776). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the Wealth of Nations (generally, the Wealth of Nations). Scotland, W. Strahan and T. Cadell, London. Taylor, F. W. (1919). The principles of scientific management. New York: Happer & Brothers.

Information Argyle, M. (1972). The social psychology of work. Taplinger. Aubrey, C. A. II., & Felkins, P. K. (1988). Teamwork: Involving people in quality and productivity improvement. Quality Press, ASQC. Beyerlein, M. M., (Ed.). (2000). Work teams: Past, present and future. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Campbell, J. P., & Campbell, R. J. (1988). Productivity in organizations. Jossey-Bass. Cyert, R. M., & March, J. M. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Goodman, P. S. (1986). Designing effective work groups. Jossey-Bass. Hackman, J. R. (Ed.). (1989). Groups that work (and those that don’t) creating conditions for effective teamwork. Jossey-Bass. Hare, A. P. (1976). Handbook of small group research (2nd ed.). Free Press. Larson, C. E., & Lafasto, F. M. J. (1989). Teamwork, what must go right, what can go wrong. Sage. Landy, F. J., & Trumbo, D. A. (1985). Psychology of work behavior (3rd ed.). Dorsey Press. Leung, K., Lu, L., & Liang, X. (2005). When East and West meet, effective teamwork across cultures. In A. M. West & others (Eds.), The essentials of teamwork, international perspectives. Wiley. McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. Parker, M., & Slaughter, J. (1988). Choosing sides: Unions and the team concept. South End Press. Shaw, M. E. (1976). Group dynamics. McGraw-Hill. Shaw, M. E. (1981). Group dynamics, the psychology of small group behavior (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill. Spector, P. E. (2000). Industrial and organizational psychology, research and practice (2nd ed.). Wiley. Sutermeister, R. A. (1969). People and productivity (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill. Szilagyi, A. D. J. (1984). Management and performance (2nd ed.). Scott Foresman. Szilagyi, A. D., Jr., & Wallace, M. J., Jr. (1983). Organizational behavior and performance (3rd ed.). Scott Foresman, Glenview. Itst, M. A. (Ed.). (1996). Handbook of work group psychology. Wiley. Itst, M. A., Tjosvold, D., & Smith, K. G. (2005). The essentials of teamwork, international perspectives. Wiley.

Part II

Activity in Japan

Chapter 3

Confirmation of Sympathy

1 Surveyed Plant It shows the outline of the domestic surveyed plant. Those plants are placed in the Kanto area, mainly in the automobile and the electrical industry. Most of the work content is assembly work. Respondents belong to the work team on the production line, and the staff supported the work team (Table 1). The details are also shown with the awareness of TAF (Appendix).

Table 1 Surveyed plant in Japan

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_3

47

48

3 Confirmation of Sympathy

2 Social Productivity It extracts the higher team productivity work team group and the lower team productivity work team group, respectively, from every case study, and the awareness difference for TAF is confirmed. Although the work teams include a wide variety of work styles in these plants, higher team productivity groups have a higher TAF awareness in trend (Table 2). Furthermore, it compares the awareness of TAF for case study plants and the social survey. The social survey plants have been actively developing QC circle, so their awareness of TAF is about twice as high as the case study. Both cases have a higher awareness of task orientation (TO) than the people orientation (PO). The higher team productivity groups are higher than lower team productivity groups in TAF, TO, and PO in case studies. It is a characteristic of Japan (Table 3). Also, it confirms the internal structure of the work team’s sympathy with the correlation coefficient between TAFs. Although countless empathic relationships are in TAFs, it shows a clear interrelationship, the correlation coefficient of 0.7 or more with highly statistically significant. This phenomenon is apparent in the higher team productivity group, especially in TO (Table 4) (Nowatari, 1999).

2 Social Productivity

49

Table 2 Appraisal of social productivity/awareness difference between higher and lower team productivity work team (1)

50

3 Confirmation of Sympathy

Table 3 Appraisal of social productivity/awareness difference between higher and lower team productivity work team (2)

2 Social Productivity

51

Table 4 Appraisal of social productivity/awareness difference between higher and lower team productivity work team (3)

52

3 Confirmation of Sympathy

3 Sympathy in Japan To confirm the Japanese sympathy, it performs the principal component analysis (PCA) on the awareness of TAF in the Appendix. The first principal component’s contribution ratio is about 82%, and the cumulative contribution ratio (CCR) until the second principal component is about 89%, which has sufficient information value. Furthermore, focusing on the factor loadings, the first principal components are all positive values, and the common information behind them can be interpreted as teamwork. The second principal component is composed of positive and negative values, and some are mixed (Table 5). It is easier to understand if the first principal component’s factor loading is on the horizontal axis. The second principal component is on the vertical axis, and each TAF is placed. The feature is that TAFs of TO includes TAFs of PO. It can interpret that TAFs of PO pull TAFs of TO hard, so it does not slacken. A remarkable feature is that “1. Level of Work Management” is mostly away from the block of TAFs. It seems this factor has significantly different awareness for task performance than other TAFs of TO, for they have been guided by firmed instruction of QC circle activity and production management. It is a characteristic of Japanese sympathy (Fig. 1).

Table 5 Appraisal of teamwork in Japan (1) (principal component analysis)

3 Sympathy in Japan

Fig. 1 Configuration of teamwork in Japan (N = 37)

53

54

3 Confirmation of Sympathy

Fig. 2 Confirmation of sympathy in Japan (N = 37) for analyzing

It considers the indicators according to “2.5 Confirmation of Sympathy Management” (Fig. 2). “Distance for Sympathy” tends to be smaller in the first principal component than in the second principal component. Also, in “Area of Sympathy,” TO is larger than PO. Therefore, the “Sympathy Ratio” is “18.00”. It is larger than the overseas value described later, and it means a significantly smaller “Area of Sympathy” of PO. It represents the strength of PO sympathy. It is the second characteristic of Japanese sympathy. The value of information is around 0.9 for the cumulative contributed ratio until the second principal component is 88.10% (Table 6).

Table 6 Sympathy in Japan

3 Sympathy in Japan 55

Appendix: Appraisal of Teamwork in Japan

(continued)

56 3 Confirmation of Sympathy

(continued)

3 Sympathy in Japan

57

(continued)

58

3 Confirmation of Sympathy

Reference

59

Reference Nowatari, M. (1999). Teamwork appraisal method: Industrial teamwork dynamics, toward unity of humanity and productivity. In Production Innovation General Conference Proceedings (pp. A-2-2-1–A-2-2-12). IE National Conference, Japan Management Association (JMA), Received Award for IE Excellent Paper.

Chapter 4

Case Study

It is out of management about the relationship between sympathy based on teamwork and team productivity in production site, and clarifying this relationship contributes to social productivity upward. It confirms the phronesis as practical wisdom or teamed up wisdom at the manufacturing production site through Japan’s typical examples. The evaluation system used in these case studies is the industrial teamwork dynamics (ITD), and its robustness has been confirmed through practical activities (Nowatari et al. 1999; Nowatari 2007).

1 Time Recorder First, it introduces an example in which remarkable results are confirmed (Table 1). It conducts an awareness of the teamwork appraisal factors (TAF) with staff and line and confirms the relationship between sympathy and team productivity. In particular, it assures team productivity for each work team in the line (Table 2). Furthermore, it confirms the personal attribute of six work teams (Table 3). It visualizes it to more understanding. Team productivity as a production system criterion correlates with sympathy as a social system criterion or TAF evaluation. The correlation coefficient is 0.808 with statistical significance, and it means the team productivity can be explained about 65% by sympathy (Fig. 1).

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_4

61

62

4 Case Study

Table 1 Surveyed plant (time recorder)

The social system based on the personal attribute and the awareness of TAF tends to have a higher correlation coefficient with the production system as team productivity (Table 4a). Furthermore, team productivity can be confirmed by TO and TAF through the regression equation with statistically significant (Table 4b). From teamwork management, each work team is placed on the biaxial plane of the social system and the production system (Fig. 2). Teamwork management analyzes the higher team productivity work team groups and the lower team productivity work team groups. The mean values of TAF are all higher in the higher productivity group. The lower productivity groups require to provide educational guidance to TAF and composed a questionnaire of it. It is useful to guide on the questionnaire item on each TAF with statistically significant. So, management focuses on many TOs mainly. After team management, it can be expected to upward team productivity. There is no statistical significance in the standard deviation (Table 5a). On the other hand, the discriminant analysis confirms that none of the TAF is statistically significant. The personal attribute affects the awareness difference of TAF between the two productivity groups. The correct discrimination ratio (CDR) is 100%, so awareness of TAF is entirely different, but the statistical significance for the discrimination function is not confirmed (Table 5b).

Table 2 Appraisal of social productivity

1 Time Recorder 63

64 Table 3 Personal attribute and social productivity

Fig. 1 Relationship between social system and production system

4 Case Study

1 Time Recorder Table 4 Effect of social system to production system

65

66

Fig. 2 Work team positioning/TAF (TO + PO)

4 Case Study

Table 5 Social productivity in higher and lower work team productivity

1 Time Recorder 67

68

4 Case Study

2 Women’s Inner Wear, Brassiere It confirms the awareness of TAF on the higher team productivity work team group and the lower team productivity work team group of the women’s underwear plant (Table 6a). Sewing lines and quality assurance lines are highly aware of TAF by the lower productivity group, but this is not linked to productivity. Therefore, management requires a social productivity approach that emphasizes production systems rather than social systems, and it is necessary to improve work systems and skill levels (Table 6b) (Nowatari, 1995; Nowatari & Nanboku, 1997).

Table 6 Social productivity in higher and lower work team productivity in Japan/women’s inner wear, Brassiere

2 Women’s Inner Wear, Brassiere 69

70

4 Case Study

3 Car Seat It shows the relationship between “distance for the sympathy” and team productivity (Table 7a). The regression equation and correlation coefficients have a high statistical significance, especially in the PO of TAF. So, it means strength sympathy of PO supports team productivity (Table 7b). Furthermore, higher productivity groups are highly aware of TAF (Table 7c) (Nowatari, 1993, 1994a, b).

Table 7 Social productivity in higher and lower work team productivity in Japan/car seat

3 Car Seat

71

72

4 Case Study

4 Car Chassis Frame It introduces a plant-related automobile (Table 8a). In the press workplace and the welding workplace, the higher productivity group has a more heightened awareness of TAF (Table 8b) (Nowatari, 1996).

4 Car Chassis Frame

73

Table 8 Social productivity in higher and lower work team productivity in Japan/car chassis frame

74

4 Case Study

5 Crane Truck It considers the awareness of TAF of higher and lower team productivity work team groups in the crane truck plant (Table 9a). The production line has two employee systems for regular and contract, and they have the work team, respectively. The contract employee’s work team has higher team productivity and much more heightened awareness of TAF. In this case, it is necessary to confirm the reason for motivation for contract employees and to consider the production system in detail, because it depends on the standard product or the ordered product (Table 9b) (Nowatari, 1997a).

Table 9 Social productivity in higher and lower work team productivity in Japan/Crane truck

5 Crane Truck 75

76

4 Case Study

6 Time Recorder and Parking Equipment (Japan and USA) Finally, it introduces an international comparison related to social equipment (Table 10a). The American has a higher awareness of TAF with statistically significant, confirming the PO in the mean value. Moreover, American has a smaller standard deviation than Japanese in tendency (Table 10b) (Nowatari & Bolda, 1992; Takeda & Nowatari, 2008). Table 10 Social productivity in Japanese and American work team/time recorder and parking equipment

References

77

References Nowatari, M. (1993). Industrial teamwork dynamics, new paradigm for relationship between teamwork condition and team productivity. Memoirs of the Faculty of Engineering, Tamagawa University (MFE, TU), pp. 117–124, No.28. Nowatari, M. (1994a). Relationship between teamwork level and the team productivity of work teams in the automobile related parts maker, industrial teamwork dynamics (part I). Journal of the Indian Medical Association, 45(5), 479–487. Nowatari, M. (1994b). Industrial teamwork dynamics, significance tests of questionnaire items composed teamwork determinants by G-P analysis on the Japanese automobile related parts maker (pp. 89–99, No.29). MFE, TU. Nowatari, M. (1995). Industrial teamwork dynamics, discriminant analysis and significance test of questionnaire items composed teamwork determinants by G-P analysis on the Japanese ladies’ innerwear maker plants (pp. 161–168, No.30). MFE, TU. Nowatari, M. (1996). Industrial teamwork dynamics, discriminant analysis and significance test of questionnaire items composed teamwork determinants by G-P analysis on the Japanese automobile parts maker of front frames components processed by pressing and welding (pp. 179–184, No. 31). MFE, TU. Nowatari, M. (1997). Industrial teamwork dynamics, significance test of questionnaire items composed determinants to identify teamwork in work groups by G-P analysis on the Japanese construction machine maker (pp. 171–176, No.32). MFE, TU. Nowatari, M. (2007). Appraisal and global comparisons of teamwork in work team, industrial teamwork dynamics. JMA Management Review, 13(2), 12–16. Nowatari, M., & Bolda, A. R. (1992). Differences of awareness to task-oriented nature on desirable supervisor between native American work students and staying Japanese business persons in the United States. Journal of JAIOP, 6(2), 35–47. Nowatari, M., & Nanboku, S. (1997). Quantitative estimation on relationship between work types and the teamwork level of work teams in the ladies innerwear sewing maker plants, industrial teamwork dynamics (Part II). Journal of Indian Medical Association, 48(4), 166–173. Nowatari, M., Phillips, J. J., Jones, S. D., & Beyerlein, M. M., et al. (Eds.) (1999). Developing high-performance work teams (vol. 2). American Society for Training & Development. Takeda, A., & Nowatari, M. (2008). A comparison on teamwork awareness of Americans in a US local plant and Japanese in Japan’s parent plant: A case study. Journal of Indian Medical Association, 59(3), 253–259.

Part III

Activity in Overseas Country

Chapter 5

Confirmation of Sympathy

It confirms a high likelihood of sympathy management and a work team’s social system worldwide. In this approach, although it uses and constructs ITD (Industrial Teamwork Dynamics) through a domestic survey in the 1990s, after the twenty-first century, it makes up robustly beyond overseas surveys and spirals up into GITD (Global Industrial Teamwork Dynamics) (Nowatari, 2012, 2017). So, let us start confirming sympathy from the GITD viewpoint.

1 Surveyed Plant Entering the twenty-first century, it visits overseas manufacturing production sites and empirically confirms the work team’s social system. The survey period is from 2000 to 2015, the number of plants is 35, and the number of respondents is about 13,000. The survey areas are the United States, Europe, China, and Southeast Asia, and the industry is the automobile and the electric, mainly. Also, the work content is mostly assembly work, the same as in Japan. Respondents belong to the work team on the line, and the staff who support production activities (Table 1). The details are shown (Appendix).

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_5

81

Table 1 Surveyed plant in overseas country

82 5 Confirmation of Sympathy

2 Sympathy in Overseas Country

83

2 Sympathy in Overseas Country Principal component analysis (PCA) confirms the teamwork awareness factors (TAF) structure of overseas respondents, the same as Japan’s procedure. The first principal component’s contribution ratio is about 84%, and the cumulative contribution ratio (CCR) up to the second principal component is about 91%, which is sufficiently informative. This CCR is similar to the Japanese, and this tendency is universal. Furthermore, focusing on the factor loadings value, the first principal components are all positive values, and the common information behind them can be interpreted as teamwork. The factor loading of the second principal component is composed of positive and negative values, but task orientation (TO) and people orientation (PO) are mixed (Table 2). After it sets up, the horizontal axis represents the factor loading value of the first principal component and the vertical axis represents the second principal component’s factor loading value. It places each TAFs on these two-dimensional planes. This figure shows TO has a smaller area and PO has a lager area. It can interpret that TO pulls each PO hard without “11. Mutual Component/Cooperativeness”, and the sympathy structure is the opposite of the Japanese. It means that the awareness of mutual complementation is weak and different from other TAFs. This phenomenon is why the production site sets emphasis on the management of individual ability evaluation firmly. As “11. Mutual Component/Cooperativeness” is an Table 2 Appraisal of teamwork in overseas (1) (principal component analysis)

84

5 Confirmation of Sympathy

Fig. 1 Configuration of teamwork in overseas (N = 35)

essential factor to sympathy as a social system and establishes social productivity, it needs educational guidance that integrates with other TAFs (Fig. 1). It confirms the sympathy accoding to “2.5 Confirmation of Sympathy Management”. From Fig. 1, “Distance for Sympathy” and “Area of Sympathy” has smaller TO and larger PO. This phenomenon is the opposite of the Japanese. Therefore, the “Sympathy Ratio” is “0.23” less than “1”. It emphasizes that TO has strong sympathy than PO as a cohesiveness centered on human relationships, requiring educational guidance to emphasize PO (Table 3). Furthermore, it confirms the awareness difference of TAF between overseas and Japanese respondents. The mean value of TAF is high, and the standard deviation is also larger among overseas respondents, and statistically significant differences can confirm on PO more clearly. It seems this more considerable standard deviation influences by the spread of religions in each country. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze religion’s influence by country, so it explores in Chap. 8 (Nowatari 2009).

Table 3 Sympathy in Japan and overseas

2 Sympathy in Overseas Country 85

86

5 Confirmation of Sympathy

Table 4 Social system difference between Japan and overseas

The discriminant analysis shows that sympathy is very different between Japanese and overseas respondents. It confirms affected TAF to sympathy difference, TO has “4. Care of Subordinates by the Leader” and “5. Ability to Accomplish Work”, and PO has “8. Atmosphere of Team”, “9. Human Relationships”, “11. Mutual Complement/Cooperativeness” and “12. Satisfaction”. In particular, the weights of “4. Care of Subordinates by the Leader”, “9. Human Relationships,” and “12. Satisfaction” are larger and have a significant influence on sympathy. The correct discrimination ratio (CDR) is also significantly higher at about 96%, and the discriminant function has higher statistical significance, so Japanese and overseas respondents have completely different sympathy (Table 4).

Appendix: Appraisal of Teamwork in Overseas

(continued)

2 Sympathy in Overseas Country 87

(continued)

88

5 Confirmation of Sympathy

(continued)

2 Sympathy in Overseas Country

89

90

5 Confirmation of Sympathy

References Nowatari, M. (2009). Confirmation of teamwork awareness differences based on religion and national wealth, construction and verification of industrial teamwork dynamics (the third report). Journal of Japan Industrial Management Association (J. JIMA), 60(4), 197–210. Nowatari, M. (2012). Global industrial teamwork dynamics. Nakanishiya. Nowatari, M. (2017). Social system of work team on production line, global deployment of teamwork research, Bunshin-do.

Chapter 6

Confirmation of Sympathy in Industry

The case studies in the automobile industry and the electrical industry in the early twenty-first century certify sympathy as a work team’s social system in both sectors. Here, a case study conducted in Japan at the same time is also shown as a comparison (see Table 1, Survey Equipment).

1 Comparison Between Industries In both industries, the mean value and the standard deviation have a tendency, task orientation (TO) is larger than people orientation (PO) (Table 1). In the principal component analysis (PCA), the first principal component’s factor loading value has all large positive values. It can interpret as a dimension indicating teamwork, which is the common background of each teamwork appraisal factor (TAF). Moreover, the second principal component’s factor loading value shows “5. Ability to Accomplish Work” and “6. Conformance to Job Requirement” in TO incorporate into PO. Nevertheless, their value is smaller, and there is no problem caused by individual human psychological differences. Therefore, productivityoriented can stratify by TO and PO based on positive and negative symbols. The cumulative contribution ratio (CCR) up to the second principal component is 60% or more, but it is lower than about 90% of the Japanese. After each questionnaire content of TAF is created for Japanese, it translates into the local language for each overseas respondent. Therefore, there is a sensory deviation for each country’s respondents, so there is a reduced sensitivity. It is necessary to confirm and supplement the local people’s teamwork in each country in the future. Here, the Japanese have a mixture of TO and PO, but overseas respondents tend to be stratified, and it can say, the sympathy as a social system or teamwork is in the early stages (Table 2). It can also confirm by the plant (Table 3). © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_6

91

Table 1 Comparison between industry in worldwide survey

92 6 Confirmation of Sympathy in Industry

Table 2 Appraisal of TAF in industry factor loading value (Principal Component Analysis)

1 Comparison Between Industries 93

Table 3 Appraisal of teamwork in plant/factor loading value (Principal Component Analysis)

94 6 Confirmation of Sympathy in Industry

2 Sympathy of Worldwide Industry

95

2 Sympathy of Worldwide Industry It confirms the sympathy of overseas respondents. Although the mean value of the “Area of Sympathy” varies among factories, TAF, TO, and PO are similar by industry. These standard deviations are also generally identical. The “Sympathy Ratio” is “2.77” in the automobile industry and “3.52” in the electrical industry because the “Area of Sympathy” of PO is stronger than TO. However, they are smaller than the Japanese “18.00” (see Chapter 3. Table 6), and the “Area of Sympathy” of PO is relatively weak compared to the Japanese. Educational guidance is needed to increase PO sympathy. Some of the plants have a large “Sympathy Ratio” because all of them have more substantial PO sympathy, that is, a smaller “Area of Sympathy” or strengthen closeness among TAFs in PO (Table 4).

Table 4 Sympathy of worldwide industry

96

6 Confirmation of Sympathy in Industry

Chapter 7

Case Study in China

China has developed as a world factory since the latter of the twentieth century, and many of Japan’s plants’ companies, mainly in the electrical industry, automobile industry, and machinery industry, are actively promoting localization. China has developed as a world factory since the latter of the twentieth century, and many of Japan’s plants’ companies, mainly in the electrical industry, automobile industry, and machinery industry, are actively promoting localization. This social background actively develops the social survey in China with Southeast Asia (Nowatari and Tobita 2013; Nowatari 2017).

1 Surveyed Plant The case study is four plants belonging to electric companies, and the number of respondents is about 4,500. It starts operation from the 1990s to 2005. It shows employee attributes and management policy. As a policy, Shanghai (1) puts on emphasis on wages. All plants produce electrical products for social capital related. The production system and production speed differ depending on the product characteristic (Table 1).

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_7

97

Table 1 Surveyed plant (China)

98 7 Case Study in China

2 Confirmation of TAF

99

2 Confirmation of TAF It confirms the teamwork appraisal factor (TAF) of the work team and the staff team supported the production line. The mean value and standard deviation tend to be more task orientation (TO) than people orientation (PO). It confirms the awareness difference between TO and PO statistically significantly by the Dalian work team. The feature of Chinese is vital TO (Table 2). Furthermore, there is an awareness difference of TAF between the work team and the staff team. Overall, the staff team has a higher mean value and a smaller standard deviation than the work team, and it confirms statistical significance in Dalian and Shanghai (1) clearly (Table 3).

Table 2 TAF in China

Table 3 TAF of line and staff

100 7 Case Study in China

3 Social Productivity

101

3 Social Productivity It shows personal attributes and awareness to TAF in Dalian and Shanghai (2). In the personal attributes, Shanghai (2) has a higher working year and age and a lower women ratio than Dalian. Dalian has many hometowns and job ranking. Both plants have a tendency, mean value and standard deviation of TO are larger than PO (Table 4a, b). It indicates an awareness of TAF and team productivity of both plants (Table 5a, b). Moreover, it confirms the difference of awareness of TAF and personal attribute as a social system, between the higher and the lower productivity work team groups as a production system. It confirms that Dalian has the mean value and standard deviation with statistical significance, the gender of personal attribute, and TO and PO. In the mean value, the higher productivity group is higher in all TAFs. Furthermore, the standard deviation is smaller in the lower productivity for the personal attribute, but TAF is smaller in the higher productivity group. In the discriminant analysis, the factors that influenced team productivity difference are working year and job ranking in personal attribute, and TO has “3. Training and Instruction by the Leader”, “6. Conformance to” Job requirement,” and PO has “10. Morale/Motivation”, “12. Satisfaction”. The correct discriminant ratio (CDR) is not higher, with about 66%, but it obtains the discriminant function’s statistical significance. Therefore, teamwork management practices educational guidance and management for these personal attributes and TAF to upgrade social productivity (Table 6a). It confirms that Shanghai (2) has the statistical significance of gender of the personal attribute, and many TAFs in the mean value. Besides, awareness of TAFs is highly in higher productivity groups. In the standard deviation, many statistically significant differences can confirm the personal attribute’s age and job ranking, and PO. In the discriminant analysis, the factors that influenced team productivity difference is age and hometown in personal attribute, and TO has “1. Level of Work Management”, “3. Training and Instruction by the Leader”, and “6. Conformance to Job Requirement”, and PO has “9. Human Relationships” and “10. Morale/ Motivation” with statistically significant. CDR is as lower as about 67%, but it obtains the discrimination function’s statistical significance with not higher. Therefore, teamwork management practices educational guidance and control for these personal attributes and TAF to improve social productivity (Table 6b). Although the contents of different between higher and lower productivity groups in both plants, the mean value of TAF is lower, and the standard deviation is more extensive in the lower productivity group. It needs comprehensive education and guidance for teamwork to them. The personal attribute that supports the social system affects team productivity, so personal attribute management is also necessary.

102 Table 4 Social system in line

7 Case Study in China

Table 5 Social productivity in line

3 Social Productivity 103

104

7 Case Study in China

Table 6 Social productivity in higher and lower team productivity work team

4 Sympathy in China

105

4 Sympathy in China It confirms the sympathy structure of TAF awareness of Chinese through the principal component analysis (PCA). The contribution ratio of the first principal component of the whole (Line + Staff) is about 58%, and the cumulative contribution ratio (CCR) up to the second principal component is about 67% (Table 7a). It also confirms on Line and Staff and has sufficient information value (Table 7b, c). Furthermore, focusing on the factor loading value, the first principal components are all positive values, and it can interpret as teamwork from the shared information behind them. The factor loading value of the second principal component is composed of positive and negative values, and although it is partially mixed, it can be stratified into TO and PO. The Japanese sympathy is that TO and PO are mixed and integrated, but the Chinese tend to stratify TO and PO. It can be said to be the initial stage on the teamwork sympathy (Table 7a–c). Moreover, to confirm the questionnaire contents’ similarity on the line, it performs the Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha test, and all of them exceeded 0.90. It guarantees goodness of similarity (Table 7b). It confirms the sympathy of the Chinese. The “Area of Sympathy“ is influenced by the social background unique to each plant. However, the mean values of TAF are similar in line and staff, TO of line is half of the staff and PO of the line has larger than staff. The line has strengthened unity to TO than PO clearly and staff has the same level of sympathy to TO and PO. Furthermore, the standard deviation is smaller for TAF staff, and the line has smaller TO, and staff has a small PO. The “Sympathy Ratio“ is “0.567” for the line and “1.099” for the staff in the mean value. Because they have a value of “1” or less, and there is more substantial sympathy for TO. Furthermore, PO has weak sympathy and tends to diffusion. After confirming the questionnaire of PO, it provides educational guidance. However, some of the staff has the “Sympathy Ratio” exceeds “2”, they have a small “Area of Sympathy” on PO, and they work based on this strong sympathy. Therefore, it useful to refer to their idea (Table 8).

106

7 Case Study in China

Table 7 Appraisal of teamwork in plant factor loading value (Principal Component Analysis)

Table 8 Sympathy in China

4 Sympathy in China 107

108

7 Case Study in China

References Nowatari, M., Tobita, K. (2013). Effect of tact time difference to teamwork awareness of Chinese line workers. Japanese Association of Industrial/Organizational Psychology Journal (J. JAIOP), 26(2), 107–120. Nowatari, M. (2017). Social system of work team on production line. Global Deployment of Teamwork Research, Bunshin-do.

Chapter 8

Case Study in Malaysia

Malaysia is a multiethnic country, and each plant in the case study has various kinds of employees from neighboring countries and practices management with consideration of their religious background. There are topographical and social issues that cannot consider in Japan. The latter half considers ethnicity and religion’s effects on sympathy (Nowatari, 2009, 2017).

1 Surveyed Plant It shows three plants in the electrical industry and the number of respondents is around 1,500. It starts operation in the latter of the twentieth century (Table 1).

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_8

109

110

8 Case Study in Malaysia

Table 1 Surveyed plant (Malaysia)

2 Confirmation of TAF It shows the outline of personal attributes and awareness of teamwork appraisal factors (TAF) of each plant according to ethnicity. The working year is more extended for Malaysians, Chinese, and Indians, and lower for other ethnic groups in mean value. Selangor (2) has a larger standard deviation of the working year. Ages tend to be similar, with Malaysians, Chinese, and Indians being longer and other ethnic groups being low. The mean value of TAF tends to be higher in people orientation (PO) than task orientation (TO). It certifies a strong sense of community due to religion. Also, the standard deviation tends to be larger inTO than in PO, so it confirms various work contents. Besides, Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha (CCA), which tests the similarity of question contents, is generally good at 0.9 or higher, and its statistical significance confirms (Table 2).

Table 2 TAF in Malaysia

2 Confirmation of TAF

111

112

8 Case Study in Malaysia

3 Social Productivity Evaluating social productivity confirms the personal attribute and awareness of TAF as a social system or sympathy and team productivity as a production system for each workplace. Here, it shows Selangor (1) (Table 3a, b), and Penang (Table 3c, d). Next, it confirms the awareness difference between the higher productivity work team group and the lower productivity work team group. Selangor (1) demonstrates the statistically significant difference between the mean and standard deviation in the hometown and job ranking of a personal attribute. Moreover, in the awareness of TAF, it confirms a significant difference in the mean value centering on PO. A feature is a higher awareness of lower productivity groups. It is also influenced by the hometown and job ranking of the personal attribute. It seems affects by the promotion system. Furthermore, it is necessary to survey the work contents and product characteristics in detail. In Selangor (1), it certifies about 95% correct discriminant ratio (CDR) and the discriminant equation has higher statistical significance in the discriminant analysis. Team productivity is influenced by the hometown and job ranking of the personal attribute, so management is essential. However, it cannot confirm by TAFs (Table 4a). Also, in Penang, it can confirm statistically significant differences in the mean value and standard deviation of the working year, age and job ranking of the personal attribute, and many TAFs between higher and lower productivity groups. Nevertheless, the mean value is lower than Selangor (1), and the standard deviation tends to be larger. Awareness of higher productivity groups is higher than lower productivity groups. In Penang, it certifies about 87% CDR and the discriminant equation has higher statistical significance in the discriminant analysis. Here, team productivity is influenced by personal attributes and awareness of overall TAFs as a social system or sympathy. It requires comprehensive teamwork management for lower productivity work groups (Table 4b).

Table 3 Social productivity

(continued)

3 Social Productivity 113

8 Case Study in Malaysia

(continued)

114

3 Social Productivity

115

116

8 Case Study in Malaysia

Table 4 Social productivity in higher and lower team productivity work team

(continued)

4 Sympathy in Malaysia

117

4 Sympathy in Malaysia It confirms the sympathy difference of respondents of the work team by each plant, religion, and ethnicity. Here, religion sets up according to major prevalent religions in each country. Also, ethnicity is stratified by their born country. Information aggregates by principal component analysis (PCA) and the cumulative contribution ratio (CCR) up to the second principal component is tested. CCR has about 70% or more on confirming plant and religion and it has sufficient information value. Furthermore, focusing on the factor loading value, all the first principal components are positive values, and the specific background information can be interpreted as teamwork. The factor loading of the second principal component is composed of positive and negative values, and although some TAFs are mixed, it can be stratified into TO and PO. Japanese sympathy is a mixture of TAFs, so the social system as teamwork can be said to be the initial stage. Here, it performs the Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha test to confirm the similarity of the question contents, and all of them are good at 0.90 or more and have statistical significance (Tables 5a and 6a).

Table 5 Sympathy in plant

118

8 Case Study in Malaysia

Table 6 Sympathy in religion

4 Sympathy in Malaysia 119

120

8 Case Study in Malaysia

On confirming ethnicity, CCR up to the second principal component in the ethnic group is good at about 80% or more and it has sufficient information value. However, factor 6 of Vietnamese’ first principal component has a negative value, significantly different from the normal teamwork state. Furthermore, factors 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the first principal component of Nepalese also show negative values. The second principal component all shows positive values, so it is very different from the normal teamwork state. These cases are judged, do not form the concepts of TO and PO as teamwork. Primary education on teamwork management needs to require (Table 7a). (1) Sympathy in Plant The “Area of Sympathy” for all three plants has a TAF of “0.101”, TO of “0.070”, and PO of “0.028”. Therefore, the “Sympathy Ratio” is “2.50”. A more substantial sympathy for the PO can confirm. In the “Area of Sympathy” of each plant, the values of the TAF are similar. Selangor (2) has a slightly larger or weaker sympathy of TO, and Selangor (1) has a smaller or stronger sympathy of PO. The overall tendency is that PO is smaller than TO. Therefore, the “Sympathy Ratio” is “1” or more, and it means PO sympathy is strong with the maximum Selangor (1). The operating length has strengthened PO sympathy of teamed up wisdom (Table 5b). (2) Sympathy in Religion In the “Area of Sympathy” of religion, TAF is significantly different, and sympathy spreads in the order of Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism. TO is smaller and similar in Islam and Hinduism due to strong sympathy. Furthermore, PO is very different, and sympathy spreads in Islam, Buddhism, and Hinduism. Islam and Buddhism have a “Sympathy Ratio” of “1” or more and they have more substantial PO sympathy. On the other hand, Hinduism is the opposite, with stronger sympathy for TO (Table 6b). (3) Sympathy in Ethnic It considers the ethnic. In Islam’s “Area of Sympathy,” TAF, TO spreads in the order of Indonesian, Bangladeshi, and Malaysian. For PO, sympathy spreads in the order of Malaysian, Indonesian, and Bangladeshi. Therefore, the “Sympathy Ratio” increases in the order of Indonesian, Bangladeshi, and Malaysian, and Malaysian can confirm a more substantial PO sympathy. Similarly, Buddhism’s “Area of Sympathy,” TAF, TO spreads in the order of Chinese and Vietnamese, but PO is similar. So, the “Sympathy Ratio” increases in the order of Chinese and Vietnamese, and in particular, Vietnamese can confirm PO sympathy. Still, TAF and TO sympathy are weak, too widely spread of “Area of Sympathy.” It needs primary education and guidance for TO and production management. Furthermore, in Hinduism’s “Area of Sympathy,” TAF, TO, and PO are the larger in the order of Nepalese and Indian. On the contrary, the “Sympathy Ratio” is larger in the order of Indian and Nepalese, and strong sympathy for Indian’s PO can confirm. In Nepalese, the “Area of Sympathy” of TAF is too comprehensive, as, in

Table 7 Sympathy in ethnic

4 Sympathy in Malaysia 121

122

8 Case Study in Malaysia

Vietnamese, it needs educational guidance for teamwork. Even excluding Vietnamese and Nepalese who pointed out the problem, the “Sympathy Ratio” tends to be “1” or more, so the work team at the production site has a strong PO sympathy (Table 7b). Although the sympathy difference between Islam and Buddhism is not a standard deviation, there is a statistically significant mean value. Moreover, there is no significant difference in the mean value between Islam and Hinduism, and there is a significant difference inTO in the standard deviation. Furthermore, between Buddhism and Hinduism, a statistically significant difference can confirm the mean value and establish the standard deviation. This way, it can prove Islam’s similarity to Hinduism and not Islam’s similarity to Buddhism and Buddhism to Hinduism on TAF’s awareness (Table 8a). The discriminant analysis confirms the difference of awareness of TAF. Here, it focuses on the discriminant function’s statistical significance, discriminant coefficient (weight), and the correct discriminant ratio (CDR). Although all discriminant functions have statistical relevance, CDR is as lower as around 60%. So, there is no extreme difference in sympathy construction. Commonly TAFs that influenced the awareness difference among three religions are “1. Leve of Work Management” and “5. Ability to Accomplish Work” inTO, and “9. Human Relationships” in PO, but other TAFs also influence it, respectively (Table 8b). Furthermore, the same procedure approaches ethnic. First, it compares with the respondents from each country ethnic based on Malaysian. Overall, there are many differences in TAF awareness among ethnics, so they have more PO awareness than TO. CDR is 60–70% for Chinese, Indonesian, Indian, and Bangladeshi, so it means they are similar and have little difference in TAF awareness. However, Vietnamese are higher at about 79% and Nepalese at 96%, and their awareness of TAF with Malaysians is quite different. The average CDR is about 73%, and the statistical significance of the discrimination function obtains excluding Bangladeshi (Table 9a Malaysian). Based on Chinese has a similar tendency, and it confirms many of the TAFs with Indonesian. As a whole, there is a difference in PO rather than TO, and CDR of Nepalese with 92%, especially. The average CDR is about 73%, and the statistical significance of the discrimination function obtains, excluding Bangladeshi (Table 9b Chinese). Based on Indonesian, there are differences in awareness of TAF between Indians and Nepalese. As a whole, there is a difference in PO rather than TO and CDR of Nepalese with 93%, especially. The average CDR is about 74%, and the statistical significance of the discrimination function obtains excluding Bangladeshi (Table 9c Indonesian).

Table 8 Comparison on awareness of TAF among religions

4 Sympathy in Malaysia 123

Table 9 Comparison on awareness of TAF among ethnics (discriminant analysis)

(continued)

124 8 Case Study in Malaysia

4 Sympathy in Malaysia

125

126

8 Case Study in Malaysia

According to the Indian standard, there is a difference in TAF awareness, especially from Vietnamese, and CDR with Nepalese is higher with 91%. The average CDR is about 79%, and the statistical significance of the discrimination function obtains excluding Bangladeshi (Table 9d Indian). According to Vietnamese standards, they have a different PO awareness with Nepalese, and CDR is higher with about 81% to Nepalese. The average CDR is about 78%, and the statistical significance of the discrimination function obtains excluding Bangladeshi (Table 9e Vietnamese). According to Nepalese standards, there are many differences in awareness of TAF with TO of Bangladeshi. CDR is about 85%, and the statistical significance of the discrimination function confirms with a lower level (Table 9f Nepalese). It should pay attention to Nepalese and Bangladeshi because the number of respondents is small and both are not industrial countries. It seems respondents do not have to sense and feel in making products according to plant management and it needs to resurvey in the future. On the other hand, it confirms the number of statistically significant TAFs between ethnicities, according to Table 9. TAF appeared in 10 or more in all 21 comparisons are “1. Level of Work Management”, “5. Ability to Accomplish Work”, and “6. Conformance to Job Requirement” in TO, and “7. Sense of Unity/ Cohesiveness”, “8. Atmosphere of Team”, “10. Morale/Motivation,” and “12. Satisfaction” in PO. Understanding that these TAFs vary from ethnic to ethnic must manage overseas work teams (Table 10). Finally, arranging the above CDRs, the average of all is about 75%. (a) Malaysian, (b) Chinese, (c) Indonesian, (d) Indian, and (g) Bangladeshi are about 70s%, and they have not significant differences, and they are similar. However, (e) Vietnamese has a higher about 78%, which is different from other

Table 10 Significance of TAF among ethnics (number of statistic significant TAF according to discriminant coefficient)

4 Sympathy in Malaysia

127

Table 11 Correct discriminant ratio (CDR) among ethnics

ethnicities. Furthermore, (f) Nepalese has a remarkable higher of about 90%, which is entirely different and requires educational guidance on teamwork from the elementary stage (Table 11).

References Nowatari, M. (2009). Confirmation of teamwork awareness differences based on religion and national wealth, construction and verification of industrial teamwork dynamics (The Third Report). Journal of Japan Industrial Management Association (J. JIMA), 60(4), 197–210. Nowatari, M. (2017). Social system of work team on production line. Bunshin-do: Global Deployment of Teamwork Research.

Chapter 9

Case Study in Thailand

Thailand has many hub plants in Southeast Asia and has solidified its position as an industrialized country through imports and exports from the surrounding countries. For this support, many Japanese companies have expanded since the 1970s. Many case studies have taken up in the construction of GITD (Nowatari, 2017).

1 Surveyed Plant Three plants are surveyed, and the respondents are about 1,300. It started operations in the 1990s to 2000s. All plants produce wire harnesses related to automobiles and are mainly labor-intensive assembly lines (Table 1).

Table 1 Surveyed plant (Thailand)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_9

129

130

9

Case Study in Thailand

2 Social Productivity It introduces the awareness of the teamwork appraisal factors (TAF). Besides, Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha (CCA), which confirms the similarity of question contents, is as good as 0.900 or higher (Table 2). On the personal attributes that support the social system, the working year is 3– 4 years, and the age is similar to around 28 years old in the mean value. Every plant is a women-centered workshop. Siam has a higher awareness of TAF as sympathy. Also, the people orientation (PO) is higher than the task orientation (TO) in tendency. It dues to community consciousness influenced by Buddhist culture. Amata has higher team productivity, which is an evaluation of the production system (Table 3). Next, it confirms the placement of the work team in Central for testing by discriminant analysis (Fig. 1). It confirms TAFs’ awareness difference between the higher productivity work team group (Quadrant I) and the lower productivity work team group (Quadrant III). There is no influence of personal attributes, and the mean value of TAF is generally statistically significant and is lower in Quadrant III. Guidance education is needed to improve overall TAF awareness for lower productivity group, which can also reduce the standard deviation of TAF. There is great potential for improving team productivity. In the discriminant analysis, it can confirm factors to larger influence team productivity, as “1. Level of Work Management”, “4. Care of Subordinated by the Leader” in TO, and “9. Human Relationships” in PO, respectively. It is efficient to perform teamwork management based on these factors. The discriminant function is statistically significant and the correct discriminant ratio (CDR) is about 77%. (Table 4).

Table 2 Social productivity

2 Social Productivity 131

132 Table 3 Social productivity in work team

9

Case Study in Thailand

2 Social Productivity

Fig. 1 Work team positioning/TAF (TO + PO)

133

Table 4 Social productivity in higher and lower team productivity work team

134 9 Case Study in Thailand

3 Fruit of Management

135

3 Fruit of Management It introduces the results of productivity improvement after this survey. It includes the results of teamwork activities and other management activities. The significant decrease in the turnover ratio can highlight the importance of sympathy-based production activity (Table 5).

Table 5 Fruit of management

136 9 Case Study in Thailand

4 Sympathy in Thailand

137

4 Sympathy in Thailand The principal component analysis (PCA) performs on the original data of TAF and the factor loadings value corresponding to the first and second principal components are confirmed. The first principal component is all positive values and has a common background that is interpreted as teamwork. The factor loadings of the second principal component have positive and negative values. Although some mix, they can be stratified into task orientation (TO) and people orientation (PO) for productivity upgrading. Thai people stratify both TO and PO same as the Chinese, although Japanese sympathy is mixed and integrated TO and PO, so sympathy is an early stage. The cumulative contribution ratio (CCR) until the second principal component is 70% or more, and the information density is higher (Table 6). It confirms the sympathy of the Thai people. In the “Area of Sympathy,” TAF and TO are smaller in quadrant III (teamwork awareness: lower, team productivity: lower) than quadrant I (teamwork awareness: higher, team productivity: higher), and the tendency is more vital in Siam. Strong sympathy works to improve team productivity. The PO confirms a similar trend in Amata and Siam, but the opposite is in Central with expanding, and awareness is weakening. It desires educational guidance for teamwork. As an essential matter, Amata’s quadrant III in “Sympathy Ratio” is “0.98”, and it means that TO and PO are equally of “Area of Sympathy.” Here, another “Sympathy Ratio” is more than “1”, the sympathy of PO is stronger than TO. It desires educational guidance for PO of teamwork (Table 7).

Table 6 Appraisal of teamwork in plant/factor loading value (principal component analysis)

138 9 Case Study in Thailand

Table 7 Sympathy in Thailand

4 Sympathy in Thailand 139

140

9

Case Study in Thailand

Reference Nowatari, M. (2017). Social system of work team on production line. Global Deployment of Teamwork Research, Bunshin-do.

Chapter 10

Case Study in Vietnam

Since China and Thailand, Vietnam has been attracting attention as an industrially developing country, and many Japanese plans have advanced (Nowatari, 2017).

1 Surveyed Plant The case study is one plant and the number of respondents is about 200. The operation started in 2010, and the main products are industrial electrical equipment. It is a mainly labor-intensive workshop that utilized equipment based on made-to-order (Table 1). Table 1 Surveyed plant (Vietnam)

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_10

141

142

10

Case Study in Vietnam

2 Social Productivity It shows social productivity based on the evaluation of the social system and production system. Awareness of teamwork appraisal factors (TAF), which is a social system as sympathy, tends to be more the task orientation (TO) than the people orientation (PO). Also, team productivity as a production system is higher in workshops B and C, and workshop C has a smaller team size with five people (Table 2). Based on the evaluation of the social system and the production system, each work team is assigned in the two dimensions plane (Fig. 1). It certifies the mean value and standard deviation of the personal attribute and TAFs with statistical significance. It should note that the awareness of TAF of the lower productivity group has a high awareness and their standard deviation has smaller than the higher productivity group. It seems why the male-centered lower productivity group produces complex products, and the female-centered higher productivity group produces standard products. The discriminant analysis compares the higher productivity work team group (Quadrant I + Quadrant II, n = 19) and the lower productivity work team group (Quadrant III + Quadrant IV, n = 41) in workshop C, and it confirms the awareness difference of TAF. The correct discriminant ratio (CDR) is higher at about 89%, and the statistical significance of the discrimination function can ensure. No statistically significant difference confirms in TAFs, and the personal attribute's age and gender are statistically significant, especially the influence of gender difference is more remarkable (Table 3).

2 Social Productivity Table 2 Confirmation of social productivity

143

144

Fig. 1 Work team positioning/TAF (TO + PO)

10

Case Study in Vietnam

2 Social Productivity

Fig. 1 (continued)

145

146

Fig. 1 (continued)

10

Case Study in Vietnam

Table 3 Social productivity in higher and lower team productivity work team

2 Social Productivity 147

148

10

Case Study in Vietnam

3 Fruit of Management It introduces the results of production management after the teamwork survey. It includes the results of teamwork improvement activities and other management activities. It can confirm that defective and turnover rates have decreased significantly, and the number of produced varieties has increased dramatically (Table 4).

Table 4 Fruit of management

3 Fruit of Management 149

150

10

Case Study in Vietnam

4 Sympathy in Vietnam It shows the factor loading value based on the principal component analysis (PCA). The usual pattern can confirm for the first principal components of workshop A and C, and the second principal components are generally mixed, which is similar to Japanese (Table 5a, c). However, workshop B has a lower cumulative contribution ratio (CCR), and the first principal component shows an entirely different situation from the normal level. It means the immature status of understanding production management, requiring educational guidance from various fields to teamwork (Table 5b). It confirms the sympathy of the Vietnamese. In the “Area of Sympathy,” the work team group of Quadrant III (teamwork awareness: lower, team productivity: lower) has smaller than Quadrant I (teamwork awareness: higher, team productivity: higher) in TO. It is possible to understand that TO sympathy has a strengthened concentration to improving lower team productivity. A similar tendency can confirm in workshop A and C for TAF and PO. However, the work team group in Quadrant III of workshop B for TAF and PO is the opposite, and sympathy diffuses and awareness weakens. Educational guidance for teamwork desires. The “Sympathy Ratio” is around “2”. Especially, PO sympathy is weaker, and “Area of Sympathy” is more extensive. In this way, compared to Thailand's higher industrial power, Vietnam needs primary education and guidance on social systems centered on teamwork (Table 6).

Table 5 Appraisal of teamwork in workshop/factor loading value (principal component analysis)

4 Sympathy in Vietnam 151

Table 6 Sympathy in Vietnam

152 10 Case Study in Vietnam

Reference

153

Reference Nowatari, M. (2017). Social system of work team on production line. Global Deployment of Teamwork Research, Bunshin-do.

Part IV

Toward SDGs and ISO 56000s

Chapter 11

Case Study in Global

In the introduction, activity of sympathy management and social productivity in the restructuring of the manufacturing companies. It confirms Group Dynamics in the restructuring process, which has never been researched before. It introduces the perspective of sympathy into innovation management in a work team on a production site. It strengthens the relationship between psychology and control, which was previously estranged and accumulates mind capital. This chapter is to verify the feasibility of “8. Decent work and economic growth” in the SDGs and the innovation management system of ISO56000s.

1 Sympathy in Japan The plant produces surveying instruments. The production site is a labor-intensive assembly line, and the lens processing workshop has a craftsmanship atmosphere with a sort of special skills. The restructuring focuses on production management, mainly. In this process, the work team's teamwork awareness survey conducts twice, and it confirms sympathy management (Table 1). It improves the mean value of awareness of teamwork appraisal factors (TAF) in the latter half. The especially noticeable factor is “4. Cara of Subordinates by the Leader” in task orientation (TO), and “7. Sense of Unity/Cohesiveness,” in people orientation (PO). On the contrary, the standard deviation in TAFs is expanding. It is due to the confusion about new production management, including the work

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6_11

157

158

11 Case Study in Global

Table 1 Surveyed plant (Japan)

method changing. It should be noted that the “8. Atmosphere of Team” in the PO has significantly reduced, and it shows the maximum standard deviation in the first survey. Hence, it certifies by useful guidance on teamwork. On the other hand, it has upgraded the production system from the push system to the pull system, and the lead time and lot size have each reduced to about 1/10. Also, innovation activity at production sites has improved by about 60% up, confirming the effects of restructuring (Table 2) (Takeda, 2008). It confirms Japanese sympathy based on sympathy management. In the “Area of Sympathy,” TAF and PO are similar in both surveys, but TO is further strengthened and corresponds to restructuring activity. Besides, TO is identical because they are the same team member, and PO is smaller than TO. That is, the sympathy of PO is stronger than TO (Table 3).

Table 2 Innovation management in Japan

1 Sympathy in Japan 159

160

11 Case Study in Global

Table 3 Sympathy under innovation management in Japan

2 Sympathy in Germany This plant produces electrical power tools. It focuses mainly on production management in restructuring. It conducts two surveys on TAF's awareness of the work team's workers at the production site and the staff department manager in the process. The production site consists of a machining workshop with high-performance machinery and an assembly line (Table 4).

Table 4 Surveyed plant (Germany)

2 Sympathy in Germany

161

It improves the mean value of awareness of TAF in the latter half. The especially noticeable factor is “3. Training and Instruction by the Leader”, “4. Cara of Subordinates by the Leader”, and “6. Conformance to Job Requirement” in TO, and “10. Morale/Motivation” in PO with statistically significant. On the contrary, the standard deviation decreases overall, mainly in PO. They are “9. Human Relationships” and “11. Mutual Complement/Cooperativeness” with statistically significant. It differs from the Japanese in that the standard deviation also decreases, and it confirms the intense awareness of TAF as a sympathy of the Germans for restructuring. On the other hand, restructuring the production system means that lead time and lot size reduce to about 1/3 to 1/5. Also, production inventories decrease, sales volume is increasing, and innovation activities at production sites are improving. In this way, it is essential to introduce social productivity in the innovation management system and reflect it in management (Table 5) (Takeda & Nowatari, 2008). It confirms German sympathy based on sympathy management. Deceasing TAF and TO of the “Area of Sympathy” in the latter half means strong sympathy for work. On the contrary, PO expands because staff managers have widespread sympathy made by many meetings with other departments in innovation management activity. Therefore, the “Sympathy Ratio” decreases (Table 6).

Table 5 Innovation management in Germany

162 11 Case Study in Global

3 Sympathy in Malaysia

163

Table 6 Sympathy under innovation management in Germany

3 Sympathy in Malaysia The case study is a manufacturing plant for electric power equipment for industrial and social capital related. Innovation for restructuring focuses on production management from the point of the entire business. In this process, two surveys were conducted on the manager and related employee to TAF's awareness (Table 7). Since the survey on the production system cannot be carried out, it only shows the social system. It improves the mean value of awareness of TAF in the latter half.

Table 7 Surveyed plant (Malaysia)

164

11 Case Study in Global

The especially noticeable factor is “2. Training and Instruction by the Leader's Superior” in TO with statistical significance. The standard deviation increases in many TAFs, although some factors are decreasing (Table 8). Furthermore, there is a statistically significant difference between the age of personal attributes in the mean value. In the discriminant analysis, “2. Training and Instruction by the Leader's Superior” and “4. Care of Subordinates by the Leader” in TO influence to awareness difference of TAF. However, CDR is low at about 63%, and the discriminant function's statistical significance has not been obtained (Table 9). It confirms the factor loading value for each principal component in PCA. CCR up to the second principal component is around 70%. The second principal component is similar to the Japanese type, in which TO is strongly attracted to the PO, and both are mixed (Table 10). It certifies the placement of TAFs as a social system before and after the restructuring process. Both graphs figure three factors mostly free from one unity TAFs, they are “2. Training and Instruction by the Leader's Superior”, “3. Training and instruction by the Leader”, and “4. Care of Subordinates by the Leader” in TO. These factors related to leaders and their superiors tend to lower mean value and more extensive standard deviations in TAFs. Management should focus on and manage them. The remaining three factors in TO are close to six factors in PO and grouping as one unity (Fig. 1). It checks Malaysian manager sympathy. The values of the “Area of Sympathy” in both surveys are similar. The values of TAF and TO are decreases, and it can confirm that sympathy strengthens. PO is a small value identical to the first and second times, and it can ensure that the manager has a strong sympathy for PO for daily management, always. As the “Area of Sympathy” of TO decreases like a strong sympathy for PO, so the “Sympathy Ratio” decreased, but it is no problem (Table 11).

Table 8 Innovation management in Malaysia

3 Sympathy in Malaysia 165

Table 9 Social system in innovation management

166 11 Case Study in Global

Table 10 Appraisal of teamwork in innovation management factor loading value (Principal Component Analysis)

3 Sympathy in Malaysia 167

168 Table 11 Sympathy under innovation management in Malaysia

11 Case Study in Global

Fig. 1 Configuration of Teamwork in Innovation Management

3 Sympathy in Malaysia 169

170

11 Case Study in Global

References Takeda, A. (2008). Doctoral thesis research on team competency of German company and Japan company in the Industry. Tamagawa University. Takeda, A., Nowatari, M. (2008). A case study on team competency under organizational restructuring in a German company. Journal of Japan Industrial Management Association (JIMA), 59(2), 184–194.

Epilogue

Teamwork at the manufacturing production site is a social system on sympathy management. It is a challenge to human welfare on SDGs and attempts to break away from traditional management, focusing on team productivity by production systems. This deployment of practical activities is the inquiry for the significance of sympathy, human labor value, collective value, and teamed up wisdom. Management should not only evaluate productivity, but should also assess the work team's humanity. Here is the significance of social productivity, team management, and sympathy management. The evaluation of teamwork as a social system ignored reduces opportunity loss and situation management caused by teamwork. It proposes sympathy management for managing teamwork and upgrades from technical productivity to social productivity based on Group Dynamics. Moreover, evaluation of systems bases on basic statistics and multivariate analysis such as principal component analysis and discriminant analysis. It sets up the criterion of sympathy management based on knowledge and wisdom through worldwide actual activity findings. It introduces many case studies for a better understanding of readers. The critical point is understanding teamwork and the setting of questionnaire content and determining how management should be. Although the SDGs deployment has less than ten years left, it emphasizes superficial environmental issues, and there are few in-depth or concrete examples of all 17 goals. It seems that SDGs already feel losing enthusiasm for no deep digging in the production site especially. This book is one proposal for it, too. It expects practical activities to dig deeper at the production site. On the other hand, ISO56000 aims at an innovation management system in the organization and is a search for management based on a concept different from the conventional one. It wants to expect new wisdom and additional view link to management results. Rather than raising the level of individuals, searching for activities based on groups or teams makes up management activities. It desires the utilization of Group Dynamics and teamed up wisdom. © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6

171

172

Epilogue

The sympathy has a more robust PO than TO from a global view. TO tends to spread sympathy against the diversification of work contents. The sympathy of TAF strengthens by the period of affiliation with the work team and the length of the plant operation period. In particular, it is prominent in PO, and it confirms the influence of religion. On the other hand, the interrelationship between PO and TO composed TAF accompanied by time-series changes depending on management level. In the early stages, both tend to coexist. After several years, they separate, and both orientations form independently. Furthermore, after the activity becomes stable, the tendency for both to coexist again becomes. Here is, teamwork bases on teamed up wisdom forms. The level of sympathy is clarified and the “Sympathy Ratio” tends to increase. It needs management to judge whether TAFs' mixed state regards the initial stage or the sound stage. Toward to future society, it would like to say that it to practice teamwork management and identify sympathy management much helps human welfare. As the work team on the production site is the fundamentals of a manufacturing company, it desires to manage the social system and social productivity.

Index

A Ability, 36 Actual data, 12 Adam Smith, 27 Amata, 130, 137 American, 76 Appraisal system, 5 Area of sympathy, 42, 43, 54, 84, 95, 105, 120, 137, 150, 158, 161, 164 Assembly line, 160 Assembly work, 47, 81 Atmosphere of social value, 5 Automobile, 81 Automobile and the electrical industry, 47 Automobile industry, 91, 95, 97 Awareness of TAF, 7, 48, 52, 62, 68, 110, 112, 122, 130, 142, 157, 161 Awareness survey on teamwork, 12 Awareness to TAF, 101 B Bangladeshi, 120, 122, 126 Buddhism, 120, 122 Buddhist culture, 130 Business person’s work performance, 36 C Candidate factor for confirming awareness of teamwork, 13 Case study, 48, 91, 97, 109, 141 Central, 130, 137 Chaos, 7, 12 Characteristic of sympathy, 42 China, 97

Chinese, 99, 105, 110, 120, 122, 126, 137 Comfortable atmosphere, 33 Community consciousness, 130 Contract employee’s work team, 74 Contribution ratio, 105 Control group, 33 Conventional management, 9 Conventional production system, 7 Conversation, 12, 33, 34, 36 Correct Discriminant Ratio (CDR), 41, 62, 86, 101, 112, 122, 126, 130, 142, 164 Correlation coefficient, 48, 61, 70 Country, 117 Craftsmanship atmosphere, 157 Crane truck plant, 74 Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha (CCA), 110, 130 Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha, 105 Cronbach’s Coefficient Alpha test, 117 Cumulative Contribution Ratio (CCR), 12, 41, 43, 33, 52, 83, 91, 105, 117, 137, 150, 164 D Dalian, 99, 101 8. Decent work and economic growth, 157 Discriminant analysis, 41, 62, 86, 101, 122, 130, 142, 164 Discriminant coefficient (weight), 122 Discriminant equation, 112 Discriminant function, 41, 86, 122, 130, 164 Discrimination function, 142 Distance for sympathy, 42, 43, 54, 70, 84 Domestic survey, 81 Domestic surveyed plant, 47

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021 M. Nowatari, Sympathy Innovation for Phronesis, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1460-6

173

174 E Electric, 81 Electrical industry, 91, 95, 97, 109 Electrical power tools, 160 Electric power equipment for industrial, 163 Elimination of multicollinearity, 41 Emotion, 36 Employee, 163 Employee attributes, 97 Employee systems for regular and contract, 74 Enthusiastic discussions with the parties concerned, 11 Ethnic, 110, 122, 126 Ethnicity, 110, 117 Evaluation criterion, 7 Experimental group, 33 Expert’s model answer (scholarly and experienced person), 36 Explicit knowledge, 5, 7, 12, 32 F Factor loadings, 52 Factor Loading Value (FLV), 12, 13, 41, 42, 43, 83, 105, 117, 137, 150, 164 First principal component, 12, 13, 33, 52, 83, 105, 117, 137, 150 First principal component’s contribution ratio, 83 First principal component’s factor loading value, 91 First principal component’s range, 42 Four quadrants, 10 G Germans, 161 German sympathy, 161 Global Industrial Teamwork Dynamics (GITD), 81, 129 Goal 8. Decent Work and Economic Growth” of the SDGs, 21 Grade, 36 Group discussions, 36 Group Dynamics, 6, 157 Group Integrative Determinants (GID), 12, 13 Group problem solving, 36, 38 Group problem-solving exercise, 33 Group process, 6, 7 H Higher and lower team productivity work team groups, 74 Higher productivity group, 72, 101, 142 Higher productivity work team group, 112

Index Higher productivity work team group (Quadrant I), 130 Higher team productivity work team group, 48, 62, 68 Hinduism, 120, 122 Horizontal axis, 52 Humankind’s welfare, 9 Human social science, 12 Hypothesis verification, 11 I Independency type, 33, 34 Indian, 110, 120, 122, 126 Individual ability, 33, 34, 36 Individual assessment, 36 Individual wisdom, 12, 29, 33, 36, 38 Indonesian, 120, 122, 126 Industrial electrical equipment, 141 Industrial Teamwork Dynamics (ITD), 61, 81 Innovation activities, 161 Innovation for restructuring, 163 Innovation in manufacturing technology, 9 Innovation management, 29, 157 Innovation management activity, 161 Innovation management system, 21, 157, 161 Interaction, 33 Internal structure, 48 International comparison, 76 Invisible internal psychological load, 27 Islam, 120, 122 ISO56000, 157 J Japanese, 76, 83, 137 Japanese sympathy, 52, 54, 117, 158 Japanese type, 164 Job performance, 36 L Labor-intensive assembly line, 129, 157 Labor-intensive workshop, 141 Leader and members, 12, 29 Leader and member (subordinate), 12 Lead time, 158, 161 Line, 61, 81, 105 Line and staff, 105 Lot size, 158, 161 Lower productivity, 101 Lower productivity group, 142 Lower productivity work team group, 112 Lower productivity work team group (Quadrant III), 130 Lower team productivity work team group, 48, 62, 68

Index M Machinery industry, 97 Machining workshop with high-performance machinery, 160 Malaysia, 109 Malaysian, 120, 122, 126 Malaysian manager sympathy, 164 Malaysians, 110 Management activities, 148 Management by psychology, 27 Management policy, 97 Management technology, 9 Manager, 160, 163 Manufacturing companies, 157 Manufacturing production site, 5, 33, 61 Model answer of academic experts, 38 Multi-ethnic country, 109 Multiple correlation coefficient, 36 Multiple Regression Analysis (MRA), 34 Multiple regression equation, 36 Multivariate analysis. PCA, 41 Mutual complementation, 29 Mutual complementation wisdom, 36 Mutual sympathy, 5 Mutual wisdom, 12, 29, 33, 36, 38 N National survey, 12 Natural science, 12 Nepalese, 120, 122, 126, 127 New labor value, 21 New production management, 157 O Omen’s underwear plant, 68 Organized wisdom, 29 Original data information, 41 Original data of TAF, 137 Original data’s common background information, 41 Overseas, 83 Overseas and Japanese respondents, 84 Overseas manufacturing production sites, 81 Overseas respondents, 86 Overseas surveys, 81 P Penang, 112 People Orientation (PO), 9, 13, 42, 48, 52, 54, 70, 83, 84, 86, 91, 95, 99, 101, 105, 110, 112, 117, 120, 122, 126, 130, 137, 142, 150, 157, 158, 161, 164 People Orientation (PO) as cohesive force-oriented, 13

175 Performance, 9 Personal attribute, 41, 61, 62, 101, 110, 112, 130, 142, 164 Personal attribute management, 101 Phronesis, 32, 61 Plant, 117 Practical wisdom, 32, 61 Principal component, 41, 164 Principal Component Analysis (PCA), 12, 33, 41, 43, 52, 83, 91, 105, 117, 137, 150, 164 Production inventories, 161 Production line, 47, 74, 99 Production management, 148, 150, 157, 160, 163 Production site, 21, 61, 157, 160 Production system, 5, 7, 9, 10, 27, 62, 68, 101, 112, 130, 158 Productive ability, 7 Productivity, 7, 13 Psychological approach, 7 Psychological feeling, 33, 34, 36 Psychological interactions, 12 Psychological occasion, 9 Psychology and control, 157 Pull system, 158 Push system, 158 Q QC circle, 48 QC circle activity, 52 Quadrant I, 10, 137, 150 Quadrant III, 137, 150 Quadrant IV, 10 Question items, 10 Questionnaire, 11–13 Questionnaire item, 62 Questionnaire survey, 33 R Real work team’s social system, 33 Regression equation, 62, 70 Regular awareness surveys, 7 Religion, 84, 110, 117, 122 Respondents, 81 Restructuring, 157, 160 Restructuring activity, 158 Restructuring process, 157, 164 Restructuring the production system, 161 S Sales volume, 161 SDGs’ social productivity approach, 21 SECI Model, 29

176 Second principal component, 12, 13, 33, 41, 43, 52, 83, 91, 105, 117, 137, 150, 164 Second principal component’s factor loading value, 91 Second principal component’s range, 42 Selangor, 110, 112, 120 Sense of community, 110 Shanghai, 97, 101 Siam, 130 Situation management, 6 Skill levels, 68 Social abilities of the work team, 21 Social ability, 7 Social activity, 12 Social background, 105 Social canopy, 5 Social capital related, 163 Social chaos, 6 Social equipment, 76 Social goals, 5 Socialized wisdom, 29 Social network, 5 Social productivity, 7, 9, 10, 12, 21, 27, 61, 68, 84, 101, 112, 142, 157, 161 Social psychology, 6 Social research, 11 Social science, 7 Social science data, 41 Social survey, 48, 97 Social sympathy, 9 Social system, 5, 7, 9, 10, 27, 33, 61, 62, 68, 101, 112, 117, 130 Social system and production system, 142 Social system as sympathy, 142 Social system worldwide, 81 Sort of special skills, 157 Spiral system, 29 Staff, 47, 61, 81, 105 Staff managers, 161 Staff team, 99 Statistically significant, 76 Statistical significances, 41 Sufficient information value, 13 Surveying instruments, 157 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 9, 29, 157 Sympathy, 5, 7, 10, 21, 33, 36, 41, 42, 61, 84, 86, 91, 95, 105, 112, 120, 122, 130, 150, 157, 161 Sympathy among the leader and members, 27 Sympathy as a social system, 84, 91 Sympathy-based production activity, 135 Sympathy management, 27, 29, 42, 81, 157, 158, 161

Index Sympathy ratio, 43, 54, 84, 95, 105, 120, 122, 137, 150, 161, 164 Sympathy structure, 105 System, 7, 12 T Tacit knowledge, 5, 6, 12, 32 TAF's awareness, 122, 130, 160 TAF awareness pattern, 41 Task Orientation (TO), 9, 13, 42, 48, 52, 54, 62, 83, 84, 86, 91, 95, 101, 105, 110, 117, 120, 122, 126, 130, 137, 142, 150, 157, 158, 161, 164 Task Orientation (TO) as work force-oriented, 13 Task performance, 52 Taylor, 27 Taylor’s scientific management, 7 Team, 5, 12 Team ability, 33, 34, 36 Team assessment, 36 Teamed up type, 33, 34 Teamed up wisdom, 12, 29, 33, 36, 38, 61, 120 Teamed up wisdom as sympathy, 38 Team productivity, 5–7, 9, 10, 12, 61, 62, 101, 112, 130, 137, 142 Team resources, 9 Team task, 9, 21 Teamwork, 5, 6, 13, 27, 52, 61, 91, 101, 105, 120, 137, 150 Teamwork Appraisal Factors (TAF), 9, 13, 33, 41–43, 48, 52, 61, 62, 70, 74, 76, 83, 84, 86, 91, 95, 99, 101, 105, 112, 117, 120, 122, 126, 130, 142, 150, 157, 158, 161, 163, 164 Teamwork awareness, 10 Teamwork Awareness Factors (TAF), 83 Teamwork improvement activities, 148 Teamwork management, 9, 10, 41, 62, 101, 112, 120, 130 Teamwork process, 29 Temporary Teamwork Appraisal Factors (T-TAF), 13 Thai, 137 Thailand, 129, 150 Turnover ratio, 135 Twice, 157 Two surveys, 160, 163 U Uncorrelated and orthogonal, 42 Understandable result, 11 United States, Europe, China, and Southeast Asia, 81

Index V Value of the labor of work teams, 9 Vertical axis, 52 Vietnam, 141, 150 Vietnamese, 120, 126, 150 Visible external physical load, 27 W Welfare of humankind, 21 Wire harnesses related to automobiles, 129 Wisdom of Manjushri if three people approach, the, 41 Work capacity, 7 Work content, 81

177 Work method, 34 Workplace, 112 Workshop, 150 Work systems, 68 Work team, 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 29, 62, 74, 81, 99, 117, 150, 157 Work team and the staff team, 99 Work team productivity, 5 Work team’s production goals, 7 Work team’s social system, 10, 91 Work team’s sympathy, 12, 48 Work team's teamwork awareness survey, 157 Work team's workers, 160 Worldwide survey, 41, 42