Michael Porter is Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School and a leading authority on competition and strategic management; Hirotaka Takeuchi is Professor and Dean of the new Graduate School of International Corporate Strategy at Hitotsubashi University in Japan; and Mariko Sakakibara is Assistant Professor at the Graduate School of Management at the University of California, Los Angeles.
"This book aims first and foremost to offer a theory that can explain and interpret Japan's postware economic trajectory." This 'theory' follows a mostly academical and economical research method. In Chapter 1 the authors first discuss Japan's economical history, whereby the authors use extensive graphs, figures and tables to prove their point: "Japan's actual competitive performance, then, has been mixed for decades." Expanding on their discussion on the economical history, the authors challenge the Japanese government model. "At the core of the Japanese government model is a particular conception of the process of economic development and the bases of competitiveness. It embodies an implicit aversion to certain forms of competition and an effort to channel competition in various ways." This model goes back to the early post-World War II period, when "the nation was in shambles". There is an 12 developmental policies list which form the building blocks of the Japanese governmental model. The authors discuss the impact of these policies on Japan's successes and failures.
In Chapter 3, the authors discuss Japan's unique management model. "The model stresses attributes such as teamwork, a long time horizon, and dedication to continuous quality improvement, all of which remain important Japanese strengths. But it has also encouraged conformity and a conception of competition that is dangerously incomplete." Again, the authors introduce a list of policies which are typical for the Japanese corporate model. The authors' biggest complaint is that most Japanese companies do not have a strategy, they tend to compete on operational effectiveness. (For more see Porter's 1996-article 'What is Strategy?')
In Chapter 4 the authors try to explain Japanese competitiveness. This model for competitiveness follows the universal model: "vigorous competition in a supportive business environment, free of government direction, is the only path to economic vitality." Most of this chapter is directly taken from Porter's 1990-book 'The Competitive Advantage of Nations', discussing various industries (both successful and unsuccessful).
In Chapter 5, 6, and 7 the authors aim to come up with an answer to move Japan forward. The authors discuss the requirements for both government and companies. "What is needed is nothing short of a new economic strategy, one that builds on the true bases of Japan's past success, recognizes the differences between the country's rebuilding challenges and its present circumstances, and addresses the realities of modern global competition." So can Japan compete? The authors believe it can. "Japan has a history of competing successfully at the highest level and rapidly advancing national productivity, when competition was allowed to proceed unfettered. ... Japan can compete. To do so, however, it will require the systematic changes in both business and government we have described. ... As it has shown in earlier periods of transition, if mind-sets change, Japan has the capacty to move rapidly."
Yes, I do understand the disappointment of some of the other readers. In line with Michael Porter's 'The Competitive Advantage of Nations' (1990) this book is more about governmental issues than the activities within companies as in Porter's bestsellers 'Competitive Strategy' (1980) and 'Competitive Advantage' (1985). In their search for their answer to the title-question (Can Japan Compete?) the authors use an mostly academical and economical approach, which can be daunting to some readers. The book is mostly aimed at Japanese multinationals, economists, and governmental officials, and includes some strong critical comments toward their policies.