No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
From Philanthropy to Paternalism in the Noda Soy Sauce Industry: Pre-Corporate and Corporate Charity in Japan*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 June 2012
Abstract
Students of Japanese business development have long debated the question of what has been called “community-centered entrepreneurship.” Most often, the debate has involved two groups: one which has contended that Japanese businessmen put the public interest ahead of personal gain, and another which has argued that profits from private enterprise were so large that public interests could be served without imperiling private profits. In this article Professor Fruin examines the concept of community-centered entrepreneurship in terms of the Noda soy sauce industry as it evolved from the period of entrepreneurial capitalism of the nineteenth century to the managerial capitalism of the twentieth. While analyzing this important early industry in Japan within the context of ongoing institutional and ideological change, Fruin not only offers substantial evidence to support one side of the controversy surrounding community-centered entrepreneurship, but also draws some interesting parallels between the philanthropic endeavors of Japanese businessmen and their counterparts in the West during this era.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Business History Review , Volume 56 , Issue 2: East Asian Business History , Summer 1982 , pp. 168 - 191
- Copyright
- Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 1982
References
1 Ranis, Gustav, “The Community-Centered Entrepreneur in Japanese Development,” Explorations in Entrepreneurial History, XIII (1955)Google Scholar; Bronfenbrenner, Martin, “Some Lessons of Japan's Economic Development, 1853–1938,” Pacific Affairs, XXXIV, 1 (Spring 1961)Google Scholar; Sumiya, Mikio, Social Impact of Industrialization in Japan (Tokyo, 1963)Google Scholar; Smith, Thomas C., “The Aristocratic Revolution,” in Hall, John W. and Jansen, Marius B., eds., Studies in the Institutional History of Early Modern Japan (Princeton, 1968)Google Scholar; Hirschmeier, Johannes, The Origins of Entrepreneurship in Meiji Japan (Cambridge, Mass., 1964)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Marshall, Byron K., Capitalism and Nationalism in Prewar Japan (Stanford, 1968)Google Scholar; Dore, Ronald, British Factory — Japanese Factory (Berkeley, 1973)Google Scholar; Hirschmeier, Johannes and Yui, Tsunehiko, The Development of Japanese Business 1600–1973 (Cambridge, Mass., 1975).Google Scholar
2 Crawcour, Sydney, “The Tokugawa Heritage,” in Lockwood, William W., ed., The State and Economic Enterprise in Japan (Princeton, 1965)Google Scholar; “Changes in Japanese Commerce in the Tokugawa Period,” in Hall, John W. and Jansen, Marius B., eds., Studies in the Institutional History of Early Modern Japan (Princeton, 1968)Google Scholar; Rosovsky, Henry, “Japan's Transition to Economic Growth, 1868–1885,” in Rosovsky, H., ed., Industrialization in Two Systems (New York, 1966)Google Scholar; Patrick, Hugh T., “Japan, 1868–1914,” in Cameron, Rondo, ed., Banking in the Early Stages of Industrialization: A Study in Comparative Economic History (New York, 1967)Google Scholar; Taira, Koji, Economic Development and the Labor Market in Japan (New York, 1970)Google Scholar; Allinson, Gary D., Japanese Urbanism—Industry and Politics in Kariya, 1872–1972 (Berkeley, 1975)Google Scholar; Yamamura, Kozo, “Entrepreneurship, Ownership and Management in Japan,” in Mathias, Peter and Postan, M. M., eds., The Cambridge Economic History of Europe (Cambridge, England, 1978).Google Scholar
3 See Chandler's, Alfred D. treatment of entrepreneurial and managerial capitalism in The Visible Hand (Cambridge, Mass., 1977), 9–10.Google Scholar
4 Hirschmeier and Yui, The Develoment of Japanese Business, 178; Miwa, Ryōichi, “Nihon no karutem,” in Morikawa, Hidemasa, ed., Nihon no Kigyö to Kokka (Nihon Keizai Shimbunsha, 1976), 171.Google Scholar
5 Gustav Ranis, “The Community-Centered Entrepreneur in Japanese Development,” 446.
6 Johannes Hirschmeier, Ortgins of Entrepreneurship, 158.
7 Meiji Taisho Zaisei Shōran, Toyo Keizai Shinpōsha, 1926.
8 Anonymous, Noda Shōyu Jōzō Kumiai Shi, Noda, 1919 (?).
9 Meiji Taisho Zaisei Shōran, 678–679.
10 Craig, Albert, Chōshū and the Meiji Restoration (Cambridge, Mass., 1964).Google Scholar
11 Jisuke, Shinshima, Shōsō kara mita Rakudō (Tokyo, 1929), 4, 9.Google Scholar
12 Ibid., 8.
13 Lewis, David L., The Public Image of Henry Ford (Detroit, 1976), 119–121.Google Scholar
14 McCreary, Eugene C., “Social Welfare and Business: The Krupp Welfare Program, 1860–1914,” Business History Review, 42 (Spring 1968), 39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15 Ibid., 48.
16 Crowther, Samuel, John H. Patterson—Pioneer in Industrial Welfare (Garden City, N.Y., 1926), 230.Google Scholar
17 There is only one discussion in English of what is known as “the Great Noda Strike,” which occurred in 1927–28. George Totten's discussion of this calamitous event relies heavily on the account of Matsuoka Komakichi, one of the leaders of the strike and, later, a politician. Totten presumes that the pre-corporate and early corporate policies of paternalistic management at Noda Shōyu were a major cause of the strike. Paternalism, in Totten's use of the word, is a pejorative term. My research, by contrast, finds that new work rules rather than paternalistic policies were the cause of the strike and that paternalism benefited rather than harmed the workers on the whole. Moreover, paternalism became a systematic company policy only after and not before the strike. See my treatment of the strike in “Kikkoman: Company, Clan, and Community” (forthcoming) as contrasted with Totten's “Japan's Industrial Relations at the Crossroads: The Great Noda Strike of 1927–28,” in Silberman, Bernard S. and Harootunian, H.D., eds., Japan in Crisis—Essays on Taishō Democracy (Princeton, 1974).Google Scholar
18 For a full discussion of the creation of a system of lifetime employment and seniority-based compensation, two features of the so-called Japanese system of employment, see my article based on documents from the Noda Shōyu Company. Mark Fruin, W., “The Japanese Company Controversy—Ideology and Organization in a Historical Perspective,” The Journal of Japanese Studies, 4 (Summer 1978).Google Scholar