Thai culture

Review Paper When JapanWesheatanDdoeTs hLaiiteCrautluturreesTeMlleeUts?in Thailand, Agnieszka Wang* and Peraset Chompuming** Thammasat Business School, Thammasat University Abstract Japan is Thailand's largest foreign direct investor. Thus, it is important to study the national and organizational cultures of Japan and Thailand, as well as Japanese companies in Thailand with their unique cultural characteristics. This paper, through a comprehensive literature review, reveals that in terms of national culture, Japan and Thailand have similar power distance. On the other cultural dimensions, generally speaking, Japanese are more masculine, individualistic, future-oriented and less willing to accept ambiguity than Thais. The cultures of international organizations can be more complicated than national cultures. This is because organizational cultures can be influenced by different national cultures when their employees are from different countries with different national cultures. Organizational cultures can also be shaped by the founders or managers of the organizations. This paper also reveals that a clear organizational cultural gap exists between Japanese managers and Thai subordinates in Japanese companies in Thailand. On the other hand, both Japanese managers and Thai subordinates in Japanese companies in Thailand have tried to adopt each other’s national culture, albeit to a limited extent. Keywords: Cross-cultural management, national culture, organizational culture, Japanese culture, Japanese manager, Thai culture, Thai subordinate * Corresponding author e-mail: [email protected] ** Corresponding author e-mail: [email protected] 115

วารสารญ่ปี ุ่นศึกษา Japanese Studies Journal 1. Introduction levels to identify plausible antecedents of the differences perceived by Japanese managers Thailand has been one of the top and Thai subordinates, and analyze how the destinations for foreign direct investment organizational culture is adjusted in Japanese (FDI) in Asia. According to the United companies in Thailand. After all, notwith- Nations (2012), Thailand was ranked 11th standing the cultural difference, Japanese globally in attractiveness as an investment managers and Thai subordinates need to find destination in 2010-2012. In a Bloomberg a way to work together as a team. Markets ranking, Thailand is second only Through a comprehensive literature to China among the world’s best emerging review, this paper compares the national and markets for investors (Bloomberg, 2012). organizational cultures of Japan and Thailand Japan is Thailand's largest foreign in Section 2. It also examines the organi- direct investor with a total investment value zational cultures in Japanese companies in of over US$9 billion by 2013 according to Thailand in Section 3. Finally, the conclusion Thailand Board of Investment (BOI, 2014), is presented in Section 4. covering a range of industries such as automotive, electronics and chemical manu- 2. National Cultures of Japan and facturing sectors. Japan has also remained one Thailand of Thailand's premier trading partners since the 1980s (Ichikawa, Cusurmano & Polenske, National culture refers to a set of 1990; Suehiro & Wailerdsak, 2014). In 2013, shared motives, values, beliefs, identities, the Japan-Thailand trade value reached over and interpretations or meanings of significant US$63 billion (BOI, 2014). events that result from common collective ex- Large investment from Japan in periences of the members and are transmitted Thailand means a large number of Japanese across age generations (House, 1999). Hofstede managers need to live in Thailand and work (1981) argued that each culture can be with Thai subordinates. Research finding described in terms of four dimensions – power reveals that differences between Japanese distance, uncertainty avoidance, individualism managers and Thai subordinates on several vs. collectivism and masculinity vs. femininity. work-related issues such as attitudes toward A fifth dimension called Long-Term organization and work ethics do exist and these Orientation was added in 1991 based on differences are influenced by cross-cultural research carried out by Michael Harris Bond, factor (Keeley & Siengthai, 2009:332-336). supported by Hofstede. Interestingly, some Thus, it is important to examine Japanese and literature has pointed out that the usefulness of Thai cultures at both national and organization Hofstede’s fifth dimension should be doubted 116

When Japanese and Thai Cultures Meet in Thailand, What Does Literature Tell Us? Agnieszka Wang and Peraset Chompuming given the fatal flaws and other methodologi- and material rewards for success. Society at cal weaknesses (Fang, 2003). Despite these large is more competitive. A high ‘uncertainty weaknesses, considering the fact that the fifth avoidance’ index represents a society that feels dimension has been widely quoted in existing uncomfortable with uncertainty and ambiguity. literature, it is therefore included in this paper A high ‘long-term orientation’ index shows a for discussion. society is more long-term oriented. The power distance index (PDI) The scores of these cultural dimensions presents the degree to which unequal distri- of the selected countries in Asia and the bution of power within a country is expected USA, Australia and New Zealand are shown and accepted (Hofstede, 1991). A high score in Table 1. It indicates that Malaysia has the of PDI means a country is highly hierarchi- highest power distance index whilst Australia cal. A high ‘individualism’ index indicates a and New Zealand represent the lowest power society is more individualistic and individuals distance index. Thailand lies in the middle are expected to take care of only themselves of the ranking, whilst Japan’s score is lower and their immediate families. A high than those of Thailand and South Korea and ‘masculinity’ index represents a preference in higher than those of the United States, Australia society for achievement, heroism, assertiveness and New Zealand. Table 1 Cultural Dimension Index of Selected Countries Country Power Individualism Masculinity Uncertainty Long Term Malaysia Distance 26 50 Avoidance Orientation Philippines 32 64 China 104 20 66 36 19 Indonesia 94 14 46 44 118 India 80 48 56 40 Singapore 78 20 48 48 61 Thailand 77 20 34 40 48 South Korea 74 18 39 8 56 Japan 64 46 95 64 75 United States 60 91 62 85 80 Australia 54 90 61 92 29 New Zealand 40 79 58 46 31 36 51 30 22 49 Source: Retrieved November 17, 2014 from http://www.clearlycultural.com/geert-hofstede- cultural-dimensions/ 117

วารสารญี่ปุน่ ศกึ ษา Japanese Studies Journal Japan and Thailand score 46 and 20 societies such as China and India, people in in ‘individualism’, respectively, indicating society are expected to act like parents and that Japan is more individualistic than Thailand. take care of their subordinates. Japan and Thailand scores 95 and 34 in Thai paternalism is related to “doo ‘masculinity’, respectively, indicating Japanese lae” culture, meaning “take care of”. Kamoche value more success and challenge. It can also (2000) finds that Thai managers and supervisors be argued that the importance of avoiding constantly mention the need to take care of conflict in Thai culture is perhaps stronger than their staff. Moreover, “jai dee”, meaning “good it is in Japanese culture. In terms of uncer- heart” which reflects the importance of human tainty avoidance and tolerance for ambiguity, relations and social harmony, is also related Thais are more willing to accept ambiguity (with to Thai paternalism. Japanese paternalism a score of 64) than Japanese (with a score of (“onjoshugi”), a very distinctive feature of 92). The last dimension, long-term orientation Japanese management, also grew from the index shows that Japanese (with a score of cultural heritage and reflects traditional values 80) are more future-oriented than Thais (with of “groupism, feeling of dependency and high a score of 54). regard for harmony” (Tsutsui, 1997). Using a questionnaire survey meth- The gender egalitarianism dimension odology, after analysing 560 responses from has not been studied extensively. Gender Japanese managers and their Thai subordinates egalitarianism represents the degree to which using factor analysis, Onishi (2006) found that individuals in organizations or societies Japanese score higher than Thais in power minimize gender role differences and gender distance, masculinity and uncertainty avoidance discrimination. According to Komin (1991), and lower on individualism and long-term the most important issue for women surveyed orientation. House et al. (2004) find that Thais is family happiness-security and “everything have higher societal values than Japanese on inside home” whilst men value more self- all dimensions but the differences are small. esteem and success. Only power distance remains the same for Similarly, traditional Japanese society both countries. is male-dominated, where a strong sex role Aside from those well-researched division encourages women to be homemakers. cultural dimensions, researchers have also A statement: “A husband should go to work included paternalism as another dimension of and wife should stay at home and take care culture (James, et al., 1996; Aycan, 2000). of the family” was agreed by 30.7-40.2% of Paternalism plays an important role especially women of the age group of 20-60 and 38.1- in Asian countries. In highly paternalistic 52.6% of men of the age group of 20-60 118

When Japanese and Thai Cultures Meet in Thailand, What Does Literature Tell Us? Agnieszka Wang and Peraset Chompuming surveyed (Cabinet Office, 2009). organizations, Japanese employees are more The educational system in Japan and involved in the decision-making process but Thailand can also show the level of gender Japanese managers tend to use scolding as a inequality. Japanese men predominate in tertiary management tool. school whilst this is less true in Thailand. Both Japan and Thailand belong to the Women in Thailand are often better prepared collectivistic countries given the low ‘indi- to take managerial positions than women in vidualism’ index scores of the two countries. Japan (WEF, 2010). Thailand and Japan were The family connections play an important role ranked 60th and 98th respectively out of 135 when choosing new employees to maintain countries according to the Global Gender Gap good relationships within the group (Onishi, Report (2011). This further confirms that there 2006; Petison&Johri, 2006). However, is a great difference in gender egalitarianism Jaivisarn (2010) argued that Thais are more between Thailand and Japan. individualistic than Japanese because they are not keen to sacrifice their personal time 3. Organization Cultures of Japan for the company’s achievements. Japanese in and Thailand organizations support collectivism by unique Japanese practices: unionism, consensual Organizational culture is inevitably decision making, and quality circles (Onishi, influenced by national culture because 2006). They prioritize organizational goals organizations embedded within countries over their own. They often sacrifice personal and organizations have to interact with their time to achieve a common goal (Jaivisarn, national environment. For example, House 2010). et al., (2004) found that a large percentage In terms of decision making in an of the variance in the organizational cultural organization, in order to provide harmony and practices represented by cultural dimensions understanding in the organization, Japanese can be explained by the societal system. companies tend to involve employees at every Organizational culture can be measured level in the decision-making process (Onishi, using the same index to measure national 2006). In contrast, Thais tend to avoid making culture. High power distance in an organization decisions and taking responsibility. Rather, means the organization is highly hierarchical they preferclear instructions and directions with a structured and formalized process of to avoid ambiguity and future conflict (Thana- making top-down decisions. Subordinates do sankit, 2002). not question decisions made by the leaders Japanese organizational culture is and do not disagree with them. Onishi often long-term oriented. The seniority system (2006) found contrasting results in Japanese 119

วารสารญปี่ ุน่ ศกึ ษา Japanese Studies Journal and life-time employment in organizations immersed in their own societal culture. These clearly reflect this value in organizations founders establish the initial organizational (Onishi, 2006). They provide long-term culture and influence the behaviour of their employment and extensive training. The whole subordinate leaders (Schein, 1992; House, business is based on long-term group achieve- et al., 2004). Later, the attributes and ment and commitment to the organization behaviours of leaders influence subordinates (Jaivisarn, 2010). Thais, unlike Japanese, in the organization. This is often the case in focus mainly on short-term gains and have Japanese companies where strong role modelling limited job preparation or scheduling prior to is required. the assigned task (Petison, 2010). Table 2 summarizes the comparison In terms of paternalism, Japanese of national and organizational cultures and management treats the company as “family.” some of the management practices reflecting In Japanese companies, manager stend to listen cultural values in Japanese and Thai companies. to employees’ problems and concerns, both The national power distance, individualism, work-related and personal (Laws & Tang, and uncertainty avoidance dimension results 1999). Onishi (2006) argued that Japanese come from Hofstede’s research (1991). The collectivism is strongly related to paternalism long-term orientation dimension results are with the concept of “ie” meaning “household” based on House et al. (2004). The gender or “family” where employees are household egalitarianism dimension score comes from the members and the employers are their heads. Global Gender Gap Report (WEF, 2010). The Paternalism in the context of Thai social results for paternalism dimensions for Japan relations and hierarchy in the workplace is and Thailand are not available. The descrip- understood as “subordinates looking up for tion of the organizational cultural dimension is guidance and care from their supervisors who based on various sources (e.g. Onishi, 2006; in turn must show consideration and dominant Siengthai&Vadhanasidhu, 1991; Thanasankit, leadership” (Kamoche, 2000). 2002; Petison, 2010; Niratapattanasai, 2005; Apart from the above-mentioned Jaivisarn, 2010; Laws & Tang, 1999; Kamo- cultural dimensions, Hofstede, et al., (1990) che, 2000; Cabinet Office 2009; WEF, 2010). argued that founders of the organization are 120

When Japanese and Thai Cultures Meet in Thailand, What Does Literature Tell Us? Agnieszka Wang and Peraset Chompuming Table 2 National and Organizational Cultures with Management Practices National Organizational Culture and Management Practices Dim. Culture Jap. Th. Japanese Thai • Support lower hierarchy by involving • Support a highly hierarchical system people in consensual decision making with top down communication style or quality circles (Onishi, 2006) (Siengthai&Vadhanasindhu, 1991: 225-227) • Managers are frequently rotated to offer • Tall organizational structures with the top them experience in various departments decision making (Thanasankit, 2002) and divisions as well as in order to • Subordinates do not question decisions promote coordination and teamwork in made by the manager and do not disagree the firm (Keeley, 2006) with him (Thanasankit, 2002) • Use scolding as a tool (Petison, 2010) • Leader as controller rather than a Power Distance colleague (Thanasankit, 2002) Moderate • Places and ranks assigned to employees High (Thanasankit, 2002) • Highly structured and formalized process of making decisions (Thanasankit, 2002) • Public scolding of the supervisor in front of his subordinates causes loss of face (Petison, 2010) • Show respect to seniors (Jaivisarn, 2010) • Support collectivism by unionism, • They do not sacrifice their personal life consensual decision making, and quality for corporate achievements. They do not circles (Onishi, 2006) work long after normal business hours • Maintain harmony in a team by humility (Jaivisarn, 2010) and refraining from expressing pride and • Choose workers and people to cooperate priority of a group over individual goals with based on the relationship, e.g. Individualism (Onishi, 2006) family ties (Onishi, 2006; Petison, 2010) Moderate • Sacrifice personal time to achieve Low common goals (Jaivisarn, 2010) • Individual’s success is measured by the group’s success (Jaivisarn, 2010), and each of the employees shares responsibil- ity for all tasks (Jaivisarn, 2010) • Solving problems in a group (Swierczek and Onishi, 2003) 121

วารสารญีป่ ุ่นศกึ ษา Japanese Studies Journal Table 2 National and Organizational Cultures with Management Practices (Cont.) Dim. National Organizational Cultureand Management Practices Culture Japanese Thai Jap. Th. • Consensual decision making to support • Avoid making decisions and taking harmony and avoid misunderstanding responsibility by subordinates and even of the lowest level employees (Onishi, by managers who have the power to 2006) make those decisions (Thanasankit, • Great respect to the elders to avoid 2002) Uncertainty Avoidance conflict and losing face (Onishi, 2006) • Avoid ambiguity by waiting for clear High • Accepted public scolding as a tool to instruction, procedures and directions prevent mistakes in the future (Onishi, from the leader (Niratapattanasai, 2005: Moderate 2006) 29-30) • Strict, specific and unchangeable rules • Criticism avoidance to save face (Swierczek&Onishi, 2003) (Thanasankit, 2002) • Avoidance of possible conflicts (Onishi, • Employees accept uncertainty especially 2006) during delays due to long process in decision making (Thanasankit, 2002) • Seniority system and life-time employment • Focus on short term gains (Sienghtai & reflect long term orientation (Onishi, Vadhanasindhu, 1991, 223) 2006) • Low degree of preparation or scheduling • The whole business in based on long-term in prior to the assigned task (Imai, 2005) group achievement and commitment to • Required time for work often is extended the organization (Jaivisarn, 2010) even if they say task will be finished on • Value hard work and goal achievement time (Thanasankit, 2002) Future Orientation in order to achieve more in the future • Understanding of standards-lower quality Long term Understanding of standards-higher expectations for the final result Short term quality expectations to the final result (Petison, 2010) (Petison, 2010) • Expect promotion in one year (Swierczek • Company plans for the period of at least & Onishi, 2003) 3 years (Swierczek&Onishi, 2003) • Expected promotion three-to-five years (Swierczek & Onishi, 2003) 122

When Japanese and Thai Cultures Meet in Thailand, What Does Literature Tell Us? Agnieszka Wang and Peraset Chompuming Table 2 National and Organizational Cultures with Management Practices (Cont.) Dim. National Organizational Cultureand Management Practices Culture Jap. Th. Japanese Thai • Managers always listen to work related • Managers have a strong need to take Lack of Empirical Evidence and personal employee’s problems and care of subordinates (Kamoche, 2000) concerns (Laws & Tang, 1999), Paternalism • Managers have a paternalistic relationship with younger staff, “ie” concept-em- ployees are like household or family, employer is the head of it (Onishi, 2006) GenderEgalitarianism. Low • Emphasize masculinity, and employ more • In comparison with Japan, Thai companies Moderate men than women on all posts (WEF, employ more women as professional 2011; Cabinet Office, 2009) staff, technical workers, legislators, senior officials and managers (WEF, 2010) 4. Culture of Japanese Companies Multinational organizations often need in Thailand to adapt their management practices to the national cultures in which they operate in “Public self” and “private self” of order to achieve enhanced business performance. Japanese often make it difficult for other Hofstede (2001) recognized that ‘there have nationalities to understand them. The public-self been examples of multinationals successfully (soto, tatemae) represents the group norms reforming local cultural traits’ but he cautioned and the way Japanese should behave in public. that ‘this is a difficult task’, and ‘for best The private-self (uchi, honne) represents the results a multinational’s management practices individual desires and goals. Thais also create should fit the local culture’. Organizations that three types of circle in which they act dif- cooperate in many countries therefore have to ferently, these are: family circle, “official” decide how much they need to adjust to the circle, and the outside circle (Onishi, 2006). local context and how much standardization or These distinctions of Japanese private/public consistency should be maintained (Rosenzweig self, groups and Thai circles make it more & Nohria, 1994). difficult for Japanese and Thais to understand each other and work in the same company. 123

วารสารญี่ปุ่นศกึ ษา Japanese Studies Journal Generally, Japanese managers retain a prefer managers with more of a fun orienta- Japanese management style in their overseas tion” (Swierczek & Onishi, 2003). branches and are often reluctant to adapt to the host country in their foreign bases. 5. Summary and Conclusions Japanese managers are unwilling to adapt the local practices, and in most cases follow The literature review in this paper their headquarters’ approach because their reveals that in general, Thailand and Japan own culturally endorsed management practices differ dramatically in ‘masculinity’. Japanese are perceived as more effective. Additionally, value more success and challenge whilst Japanese managers are expected to act as if Thais attach more importance to comfort and they were in Japan, thus they resist changes cooperation. Japanese are more individualistic, and transplant their management practices more future-oriented and less willing to accept without adapting them (Jaivisarn, 2010; ambiguity than Thais. Changsorn, 2010; Swierczek & Onishi, 2003). Organization cultures are generally Such observations are echoed by more complicated than national culture. For Keeley (2001, 2006), who proposed three instance, Japanese staff tends to be involved salient national cultural factors: nihonjinron, in decision making, indicating low power a tight collectivist culture and ethnocentric as distance. However, Japanese managers can well as xenophobic behaviour. He observed scold staff in public as a management tool, that Japanese tend to stress differences rather indicating high power distance. Such contrast than similarities between their culture and makes evaluation of culture dimensions less non-Japanese cultures. straightforward. However, Swierczek and Onishi Based on the relevant existing literature, (2003) found that to some extent, Japanese this paper reveals that a clear organizational managers adapt to Thai culture, and at the cultural gap exists between Japanese managers same time Thai subordinates adapt to the and Thai subordinates in Japanese companies Japanese style of management. For example, in Thailand. Japanese managers tend to retaina in terms of organizational and work behaviors, Japanese management style in their overseas Thais working in Japanese companies perceive branches and are often reluctant to adapt to work punctuality and role clarity as important the host country in their foreign bases. On the factors which are traditional Japanese other hand, literature also shows that Japanese organizational cultural characteristics, while managers and Thai subordinates tend to adapt Japanese managers consider themselves to to each other’s cultures, albeit to a limited have a good sense of humor because “Thais extent. 124

When Japanese and Thai Cultures Meet in Thailand, What Does Literature Tell Us? Agnieszka Wang and Peraset Chompuming The key findings of the paper provide Changsorn, P. (2010). Intangibles loom large a solid basis for further studies. For instance, in M&A. The Nation. Retrieved July 3, one can argue that the conclusions and 2014, from http://www.nationmultimedia. observations in this paper are to some extent com/home/2010/03/12/business/Intangi- generalized. In specific organizations, these bles-loom-large-in-M&A-30124598.html. conclusions may not always hold true. Future research should be more focused on empirical Fang, T. (2003). A critique of Hofstede’s fifth analysis and case studies to further examine national culture dimension. International the conclusions in the paper and shed more Journal of Cross Cultural Management, light on the organizational culture of Japanese 3 (3), 347-368. companies in Thailand. Global Gender Report (2011), World economic References forum. Retrieved July 3, 2014, from http://www.weforum.org/issues/global- Aycan, Z. (2000).Cross-cultural industrial and gender-gap. organizational psychology: Contributions, past developments, and future directions. Hofstede, G. (1981). Culture and organiza- Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, tions. International Studies of Management 31, 110 - 128. and Organization, 10, 15-41. Bloomberg (2012). Thailand proving best Hofstede, G. (1991). Cultures and organiza- after China among emerging markets. tions: Software of the mind. New York: Retrieved July 3, 2014, from http:// NYM McGraw-Hill. www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-22/ thailand-proving-best-after-china-among- House, R. (1999). Cultural influences on global-emerging-markets.html. leadership and organisations: Project GLOBE. In W.H. Mobley (Ed.), Advances BOI (2014). Thailand: Investors’ gateway to in Global Leadership (pp. 171-233). ASEAN. Thailand Investment Review, Stamford: JAI Press Inc. 24(2).Retrieved July 3, 2014, from http:// www.boi.go.th/tir/issue/201404_24_4/ House, R.J., Hanges, P.J., Javidan, M., cover.htm. Dorfman, P.W. and Gupta, V. (2004). Culture, leadership, and organizations. The Cabinet Office (2009). White papers on GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand gender equality. Retrieved July 3, 2014, Oaks: SAGE Publications. from http://www.gender.go.jp/whitepa- per/ewp2009.pdf. Ichikawa, N.,Cusurmano, M. and Polenske, K. R. (1990). Japanese investment and influ- ence in Thai development. Working paper, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 125

วารสารญ่ีป่นุ ศกึ ษา Japanese Studies Journal James, K., Chen, D.L. and Cropanzano, R. Komin, S. (1991). Psychology of Thai people: (1996). Culture and leadership among Values and behavioural patterns. Bangkok: Taiwanese and US workers: Do values National Institute of Development influence leadership ideals? In M.N. Administration. Ruderman, M.W. Hughes-James and S.E. Jackson (Eds.), Selected Research Laws, J. and Tang, T. (1999). Japanese trans- on Work Team Diversity (pp: 33-52), plants and union membership: The case of Washington, DC:American Psychological Nissan Motor Manufacturing Corporation. Association/Center for Creative Leader- SAM Advanced Management Journal, 64 ship. (2), 16-26. Jaivisarn, V. (2010). How organizational Niratapattanasai, K. (2005). Bridging the gap: culture of Japanese multinationals in Thai- Managing the cross-cultural workplace in land influences Japanese-speaking Thai Thailand. Bangkok: Asia Books. employees' organizational commitment. Journal of International Business & Onishi J. (2006). Working Japanese: Conflict, Economics, 10(1), 106-120. cultural difference, and the Japanese multinational in Southeast Asia. CRC, Kamoche, K. (2000). From boom to bust: the Philippines. The challenges of managing people in Thailand, International Journal of Human Petison, P. (2010). Cross cultural relation- Resource Management, 11(2), 452-468. ship marketing in the Thai Context: The Japanese buyer’s perspective. International Keeley, T. D. (2001). International human Journal of Trade, Economics, and Finance, resource management in Japanese firms: 1(1), 17-23 Their greatest challenge. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave. Petison, P. and Johri, L. M. (2006). Driving harmony: Philosophy of Toyota Motor Keeley, T. D. (2006).Cultural and structural Thailand, Strategic Decision, 22 (11), impediments affecting localization of 3-5. management in Japanese overseas sub- sidiaries. Kyushu Sangyo University, Rosenweig, P.M. and Nohria, N. (1994). Influ- KeieigakuRonshu (Business Review), 17 ences on HRM practices in multinational (2), 77-89. corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(2), 229-251. Keeley, T. D. and Siengthai, S. (2009). International human resource management Schein, E. (1992). Organizational culture in Japanese firms in Thailand. Bangkok: and leadership, (2nded.). San Francisco: Chulalongkorn University Press (in Thai). Jossey-Bass. Siengthai, S. and Vadhanasindhu, P. (1991). Management in the Buddhist society. In J. 126

When Japanese and Thai Cultures Meet in Thailand, What Does Literature Tell Us? Agnieszka Wang and Peraset Chompuming Putti (Ed.), Management: Asian Context Tsutsui (1997). Rethinking the paternalist (pp. 222-238), Singapore: McGraw-Hill. paradigm in Japanese industrial manage- Suehiro, A. and Wailerdsak, N. (2014). ment. Business and Economy History, 26 Thailand: Post-developmentalist capital- (2), 561-572. ism. In M.Wittand G. Redding (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of Asian business United Nations (2012). World investment systems (pp. 260-282), London and New prospects survey 2010-2012. Retrieved York: Oxford University Press. July 3, 2014, from http://unctad.org/en/ Swierczek, F.W. and Onishi, J. (2003). Cul- pages/publications/World-Investment- ture and conflict: Japanese managers and Prospects-Survey.aspx. Thai subordinates. Personnel Review, 32 (1/2), 187-210. WEF (World Economic Forum) (2010). Thanasankit, T. (2002). Requirements Global gender gap report. Retrieved July engineering: Exploring the influence of 3, 2014, from http://www.weforum.org/ power and Thai value. European Journal en/Communities/Women%20Leaders%20 of Information Systems, 11 (2), 128-41. and%20Gender%20Parity/GenderGapNet- work/index.htm. 127