Some recent articles that got me thinking...
On how English teachers (non-Japanese) are treated in Japan.
On how part-timers are being treated in Japan.
On a recent tour bus crash in Japan that killed 12 students.
On Asahi Kasei's piling scandal.
What is common is that all these are related to companies in Japan. And some of them are big names.
There are laws and regulations in place to protect people from being exploited, as well as to maintain certain standards (of which safety is an important one). We talk about corporate social responsibility and corporate ethics, yet how far are companies going to actually fulfill such responsibilities, beyond what is written in the books, if they even follow the books in the first place?
JW Marriott said it best: If you take care of your people, your people will take care of your customers and your business will take care of itself.
But it seems companies cannot resist the temptation of exploiting their employees as one of the means for cutting costs, thereby increasing profits (or maintaining profits when revenue drops). But cutting costs to increase/maintain profit is very short-sighted, I think.
Long long ago, I learnt that the difference between the worker and the entrepreneur is that the entrepreneur bears risk, and profit is the reward for bearing risk. Businesses don't always go as planned, there are market fluctuations and other factors that affect costs and revenues. The entrepreneur bears the risks associated with these factors, and is rewarded by profit for this risk-bearing. Workers don't bear the risk, which is why they get paid a fixed wage, in principle.
Exploitation of workers usually lead to breaches in safety, as people cut corners, take short cuts, or are simply overworked and tired. This spells disaster, in the end, as slips, lapses, and mistakes are made. Some may be financial losses, but some can lead to loss of lives and limbs too.
This is one of the motivations behind me picking up the textbooks and starting to study up on Japanese labour laws. Hopefully, with this knowledge, I can help those being exploited to fight for their rights, especially those in a foreign land who do not understand this foreign language, much less say these foreign laws.
Which brings me back to the main question: why do people even set up companies?
Are companies set up solely for individuals to profit? Or are they set up because they can benefit society more than the sum of their individuals? If companies are set up for the benefits/values they bring to society and not solely for individual profit, then those running companies need to rethink what they are doing to earn profits, to see if they are in a win-win situation with society, or if society is losing at their expense.
For example, are English language schools set up because they can help improve the level of English beyond what individual English teachers can do? I would like to think that this is the case. But the low standard of English among Japanese people and the exploitation of teachers at such English language schools seem to imply not.
Is the construction company there to provide better housing for other people? Is the tour company set up to provide better tours instead of everyone coming up with their own vacation plans? Are they here to make things better? Or to exploit society's needs for their own profits?
I think for a company to survive and prosper, it needs to think long-term. What is its value to society? How does it keep itself valuable (relevant, ready, responsive) so that society continues to want it around? Being too fixated on short-term returns may eventually lead the company towards not having any long-term anyway...
Food for thought for anyone who runs a company, or thinking about setting one up.
On how English teachers (non-Japanese) are treated in Japan.
On how part-timers are being treated in Japan.
On a recent tour bus crash in Japan that killed 12 students.
On Asahi Kasei's piling scandal.
What is common is that all these are related to companies in Japan. And some of them are big names.
There are laws and regulations in place to protect people from being exploited, as well as to maintain certain standards (of which safety is an important one). We talk about corporate social responsibility and corporate ethics, yet how far are companies going to actually fulfill such responsibilities, beyond what is written in the books, if they even follow the books in the first place?
JW Marriott said it best: If you take care of your people, your people will take care of your customers and your business will take care of itself.
But it seems companies cannot resist the temptation of exploiting their employees as one of the means for cutting costs, thereby increasing profits (or maintaining profits when revenue drops). But cutting costs to increase/maintain profit is very short-sighted, I think.
Long long ago, I learnt that the difference between the worker and the entrepreneur is that the entrepreneur bears risk, and profit is the reward for bearing risk. Businesses don't always go as planned, there are market fluctuations and other factors that affect costs and revenues. The entrepreneur bears the risks associated with these factors, and is rewarded by profit for this risk-bearing. Workers don't bear the risk, which is why they get paid a fixed wage, in principle.
Exploitation of workers usually lead to breaches in safety, as people cut corners, take short cuts, or are simply overworked and tired. This spells disaster, in the end, as slips, lapses, and mistakes are made. Some may be financial losses, but some can lead to loss of lives and limbs too.
Which brings me back to the main question: why do people even set up companies?
Are companies set up solely for individuals to profit? Or are they set up because they can benefit society more than the sum of their individuals? If companies are set up for the benefits/values they bring to society and not solely for individual profit, then those running companies need to rethink what they are doing to earn profits, to see if they are in a win-win situation with society, or if society is losing at their expense.
For example, are English language schools set up because they can help improve the level of English beyond what individual English teachers can do? I would like to think that this is the case. But the low standard of English among Japanese people and the exploitation of teachers at such English language schools seem to imply not.
Is the construction company there to provide better housing for other people? Is the tour company set up to provide better tours instead of everyone coming up with their own vacation plans? Are they here to make things better? Or to exploit society's needs for their own profits?
I think for a company to survive and prosper, it needs to think long-term. What is its value to society? How does it keep itself valuable (relevant, ready, responsive) so that society continues to want it around? Being too fixated on short-term returns may eventually lead the company towards not having any long-term anyway...
Food for thought for anyone who runs a company, or thinking about setting one up.
No comments:
Post a Comment