After the Second World War, unionism in the Japanese auto industry was company-based, with separate unions in each auto company. Most company unions played no independent role in bargaining shop-floor issues or pressing autoworkers' grievances. In a 1981 survey, for example, fewer than 1 percent of workers said they sought union assistance for work-related problems, while 43 percent said they turned to management instead. There was little to distinguish the two in any case: most union officers were foremen or middle-level managers, and the union's role was primarily one of passive support for company goals. Conflict occasionally disrupted this cooperative relationship--one company union's opposition to the productivity campaigns of the early 1980s has been cited as such a case. In 1986, however, a caucus led by the Foreman's Association forced the union's leadership out of office and returned the union's policy to one of passive cooperation. In the United States, the potential for such company unionism grew after 1979, but it had difficulty taking hold in the auto industry, where a single union represented workers from all companies, particularly since federal law prohibited foremen from joining or leading industrial unions.
The Japanese model was often invoked as one in which authority decentralized to the shop floor empowered production workers to make key decisions. What these claims failed to recognize was that the actual delegation of authority was to the foreman, not the workers. The foreman exercised discretion over job assignments, training, transfers, and promotions; worker initiative was limited to suggestions that fine-tuned a management-controlled production process. Rather than being proactive, Japanese workers were forced to be reactive, the range of their responsibilities being far wider than their span of control. For example, the founder of one production system, Taichi Ohno, routinely gave department managers only 90 percent of the resources needed for production. As soon as workers could meet production goals without working overtime, 10 percent of remaining resources would be removed. Because the "OH! NO!" system continually pushed the production process to the verge of breakdown in an effort to find the minimum resource requirement, critics described it as "management by stress."
Question #50. 561-03 (23639-!-item-!-188;#058&000561-03)
The author of the passage mentions the "OH! NO!" system primarily in order to
(A) indicate a way in which the United States industry has become more like the Japanese auto industry
(B) challenge a particular misconception about worker empowerment in the Japanese auto industry
(C) illustrate the kinds of problem-solving techniques encouraged by company unions in Japan
(D) suggest an effective way of minimizing production costs in auto manufacturing
(E) provide an example of the responsibilities assumed by a foreman in the Japanese auto industry
OA [spoiler]B[/spoiler]
why the correct answer is correct?
can somebody rationalize the answer?
GMATPREP READING-"unionism in the Japanese auto industr
This topic has expert replies
- hoji
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 10:35 am
- Location: TASHKENT
- Thanked: 8 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:640
I know of no more encouraging fact than the unquestionable ability of a man to elevate his life by conscious endeavor.
Henry David Thoreau.
Sleep GMAT, eat GMAT, beat GMAT!
______________________________
Quant ----> 51
Verbal----> 44+
GMAT ----> 750+
Henry David Thoreau.
Sleep GMAT, eat GMAT, beat GMAT!
______________________________
Quant ----> 51
Verbal----> 44+
GMAT ----> 750+
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 382
- Joined: Thu Mar 31, 2011 5:47 pm
- Thanked: 15 times
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 104
- Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:25 pm
- Thanked: 11 times
- Followed by:3 members
Rather than being proactive, Japanese workers were forced to be reactive, the range of their responsibilities being far wider than their span of control. For example, the founder of one production system, Taichi Ohno, routinely gave department managers only 90 percent of the resources needed for production. As soon as workers could meet production goals without working overtime, 10 percent of remaining resources would be removed. Because the "OH! NO!" system continually pushed the production process to the verge of breakdown in an effort to find the minimum resource requirement, critics described it as "management by stress."
The above implies that the Ohno system was adopted by the founder of the company, not the union and was aimed to reduce the resouce and hence, to reduce overall production cost.
Option A,C, E out
(D) suggest an effective way of minimizing production costs in auto manufacturing
Although the stratagy worked but crashed in longer term so can't be said effective.
We are left with option B.
(B) challenge a particular misconception about worker empowerment in the Japanese auto industry.
Also "Rather than being proactive, " implies that the expectation from union was to be proactive rather than reactive. The Ohno system breaks that illusion.
Hope it helps
The above implies that the Ohno system was adopted by the founder of the company, not the union and was aimed to reduce the resouce and hence, to reduce overall production cost.
Option A,C, E out
(D) suggest an effective way of minimizing production costs in auto manufacturing
Although the stratagy worked but crashed in longer term so can't be said effective.
We are left with option B.
(B) challenge a particular misconception about worker empowerment in the Japanese auto industry.
Also "Rather than being proactive, " implies that the expectation from union was to be proactive rather than reactive. The Ohno system breaks that illusion.
Hope it helps
- Abhishek009
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 359
- Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 4:37 am
- Location: Kolkata, India
- Thanked: 50 times
- Followed by:2 members
- [email protected]
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 934
- Joined: Tue Nov 09, 2010 5:16 am
- Location: AAMCHI MUMBAI LOCAL
- Thanked: 63 times
- Followed by:14 members
hoji!!! what is the OA man? According to me the answer is D. But I did get lost between C and D.
IT IS TIME TO BEAT THE GMAT
LEARNING, APPLICATION AND TIMING IS THE FACT OF GMAT AND LIFE AS WELL... KEEP PLAYING!!!
Whenever you feel that my post really helped you to learn something new, please press on the 'THANK' button.
LEARNING, APPLICATION AND TIMING IS THE FACT OF GMAT AND LIFE AS WELL... KEEP PLAYING!!!
Whenever you feel that my post really helped you to learn something new, please press on the 'THANK' button.
- hoji
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 114
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2010 10:35 am
- Location: TASHKENT
- Thanked: 8 times
- Followed by:2 members
- GMAT Score:640
OA is B!
I know of no more encouraging fact than the unquestionable ability of a man to elevate his life by conscious endeavor.
Henry David Thoreau.
Sleep GMAT, eat GMAT, beat GMAT!
______________________________
Quant ----> 51
Verbal----> 44+
GMAT ----> 750+
Henry David Thoreau.
Sleep GMAT, eat GMAT, beat GMAT!
______________________________
Quant ----> 51
Verbal----> 44+
GMAT ----> 750+