Comparative analysis of M. Weber’s theory of bureaucracy and the japanese Kaizen system

Authors: Mysin A.A.
Published in issue: #7(24)/2018
DOI: 10.18698/2541-8009-2018-7-343
Category: Humanities | Chapter: Philosophy Science
Keywords: theory of bureaucracy, Japanese system, management process, social structures, corporate employees, production management system, manufacturing process, quality of production
Published: 24.07.2018

The article considers the social structures management process exemplified by the systems inherent in the German management represented by M. Weber’s theory of bureaucracy and the Japanese Kaizen philosophy. The authors analyze their characteristic features and reveal the essence and contents of the presented social structures management systems. We show the primary benefits and advantages of each management system and examine the shortcomings of the bureaucratic management system as well as the management system based on the Kaizen philosophy. The article provides examples of implementing these management systems. On the basis of the research conducted and the comparative analysis we have determined the possibility of applying the management systems considered in the article in the current conditions of the industrial management.

References

[1] Weber M. Economy and society: an outline of interpretive sociology. University of California Press, 1978, 1712 p. (Russ. ed.: Khozyaystvo i obshchestvo. Ocherki ponimayushchey sotsiologii. T. 1. Sotsiologiya. Moscow, HSE publ., 2016, 448 p.)

[2] Kaydzen M.I. Klyuch k uspekhu yaponskikh kompaniy [The key to the success of Japanese companies]. Available at: http://www.universalinternetlibrary.ru/book/40296/ogl.shtml#t8 (accessed 12 May 2018).

[3] Ohno T. Toyota Production system: beyond large-scale production. Productivity Press, 1088, 176 p. (Russ. ed.; Proizvodstvennaya sistema Toyoty. Ukhodya ot massovogo proizvodstva. Moscow, IKSI publ., 2008, 194 p.)

[4] Neave H.R. The Deming dimension. SPC PRESS, 1990, 440 p. (Russ. ed.: Organizatsiya kak sistema. Printsipy postroeniya ustoychivogo biznesa Edvardsa Deminga. Moscow, Al’pina Pablisher publ., 2011, 370 p.)

[5] Konopatov S.N. Upward mobility of personnel and success of the companies. Menedzhment segodnya, 2016, no. 3, pp. 186–194.

[6] Konopatov S.N. Government control methodology of the RF: science academy reform analysis. Menedzhment v Rossii i za rubezhom, 2013, no. 6, pp. 50–53.

[7] Kusov T.E., Pavlovskaya I.A. Teorii byurokratii i modeli gosudarstvennoy sluzhby v mirovoy i rossiyskoy praktike [Bureaucracy theory and civil service model in the world and Russian practice]. Vladikavkaz, IP Tsopanovoy A.Yu. publ., 2015, 79 p.

[8] Vorotnikov A.A. Bureaucracy and state: history of relationship. Vestnik Saratovskoy gosudarstvennoy yuridicheskoy akademii, 2014, no. 4(99), pp. 103–113.

[9] Omel’chenko I.N., Borisova E.V. Enterprise evaluation in respect to consumer service. Vestnik mashinostroeniya, 2007, no. 8, pp. 65–72.

[10] Omel’chenko I.N., Shumakov I.P. Concern for a client is one of the ways to products manufacturer’s profit markup. Vestnik mashinostroeniya, 2007, no. 5. pp. 64–66.