Amidst an ever-changing international order, and the growing importance of the role of the business in international relations, it is important to analyze the foundations of the business...Show moreAmidst an ever-changing international order, and the growing importance of the role of the business in international relations, it is important to analyze the foundations of the business communities. Businesses function in diverse ways, from working in close relations with the state to diminishing physical boundaries through the reach of Multinational Corporations. The role of business is increasingly under focus, due to its role in facilitating mainly economic benefits, but also cultural, social, and even political ones. The mobility of businesses and their limitless access to innovation allows them to become a perfect candidate to attract and influence massive amounts of consumers globally, making it one of the more crucial actors in international relations today. While businesses were traditionally looked upon as simply being economically potent, the perspective has now shifted to how businesses influence culture, social and political affairs. According to the research, Western corporations functioned in more adhocracy-style management with moderate control due to their attention to flexibility and differentiation with competitors; n environment rooted in more individualization then collective thought. The analysis highlighted that for Japanese corporations, Japan’s national culture of consent has oriented Japanese corporations towards a more clan-like management style with a focus on the external market (competitiveness), as well as being an organic process that understands the needs of the individual. The analysis provides a unique opportunity to analyze the extent of how much corporate culture is influenced by the state's input on culture in Japanese corporations. While such classification appears convincing, their classificatory approaches nonetheless raise several questions such as: what does corporate culture really mean? While these authors interchangeably use tradition and culture, is culture really rooted in tradition? Or is it a dynamic tool that can be invented for the purpose of others in relation to the dichotomy that exists between the “organic” dynamism of culture vs. its bureaucratic purposes? How is the Japanese case so unique, and how significant is it? At the core of Japanese developmentalism, there exists a clear distinction between tradition and culture and is essential to building a Japanese national identity. This was because culture utilized aspects of tradition to reinvent what Japanese culture meant at the time based on external factors. The success of the Japanese developmental state model is attributed to the state’s creative appropriation of tradition, yet this shows that the term can be used as a tool to further the state’s ambitions.Show less
