Are the Effects of Age and Gender Changing the Personal Values of Japanese Executives?

There is ample justification for research on personal values in Japan and on comparisons between Japanese and American values. Japan is a major part of the world economy and has substantial economic interaction with the United States. Business relationships with Japanese firms may be improved

by understanding what motivates Japanese business managers, and those motivating factors may be defined by personal values. In addition, understanding the personal values of Japanese managers may be even more important for multinational firms with sites in Japan. Nearly 30 years ago researchers observed that successful management of an overseas workforce hinges on an objective, informed assessment of what employees want from their jobs. [1] Others have argued that the ability of an expatriate to understand why others behave as they do is critical to the success of business relationships. [2] A recent spate of Japanese failures, cover-ups and other embarrassments has once again focused eyes on Japan and its business pract ices.

Considering the influence that personal values have on business behavior, it is important to be aware of significant differences among nations. Some researchers have performed cross-sectional studies that compare personal values in Japan with those in the United States. An important 1980 study of international work values found that U.S. employees reported the highest national mean on individualism, while Eastern cultures such as Japan were more collectivist than Western cultures. [3] A study three years later concurred, finding that U.S. managers valued individuality, while Japanese managers valued socially-oriented activity. [4] Another study noted that this fundamental difference in values leads to different performance at work. The research found that Japanese managers internalize organizational goals more than U.S. managers, and that the two countries had distinctly different work value norms. In addition, Japanese managers valued goal achievement and creativity more than U.S. managers. [5]

Despite these fundamental differences, later studies discovered disparities within the Japanese business culture that suggested an impending convergence between Eastern and Western work values. One study reported that the values of (younger) Japanese management trainees were more similar to those of U.S. management students than to those of (older) Japanese managers. The Japanese trainees showed preferences for performance- over seniority-based pay/promotions and for free competition over monopoly, and were less in agreement with the value systems of large corporations than were older Japanese managers. [6] Another study found that older men were more committed to work than younger men in both Japan and the U.S., although there were no significant differences between older and younger women. [7] In a study comparing the values of Eastern and Western managers, researchers reported greater individual (intra-national) variance than between-nation (international) variance, a finding that agrees well with the pre vious two studies. [8] Collectively, these studies support the argument that values of Japanese business managers are changing, and that this change may be evident across generations.

In his of ten-cited work on cultural values, Geert Hofstede found that national culture explained more of the variance in work-related values and attitudes than did organizational position, profession, age or gender. [9] This finding suggests that individuals of the same culture will have similar values regardless of differences in age or gender. However, rapid change taking place in the modern world of business may be making age and gender more significant determinants of work-related values in Japan. In fact, there is a substantial amount of evidence supporting the argument that the values of Japanese business managers may be changing, and that the traditional Japanese culture is yielding to the influences of age and gender in the Japanese business environment. One study noted that there has been greater cultural change recently in Japan than in the U.S., and that the values of Japanese workers seem to be converging with those of Americans. The researchers found that Japanese workers are giving more consideration to the economic function of work as opposed to its traditional service function, and they suggest that the stereotypical self-sacrificing Japanese worker may be disappearing. [10]

A 1992 study by George Fields presented evidence that long work hours and the dominance of private lives by large corporations have led to changes in personal values as employees demand shorter work hours and longer holidays in Japan. [11] Japanese workers under the age of 30 appear to be replacing "effort" and "harmony" with "freedom" on their personal priority lists. Although Japanese managers still ranked the importance of work higher than did U.S. managers, the number of Japanese "workaholics" had declined. In a later work, Fields also noted that the Japanese have become less willing to subjugate their own interests for the good of Japanese companies. He further pointed out that postwar Japan has seen dramatic changes that have produced differences in attitudes between generations. In addition, the growing shortage of fresh labor has accelerated the entry of women into the Japanese workforce, consequently injecting new values (convenience, leisure etc) into businesses. Fields cautions that attributing th ese changes to changes in fundamental cultural values and the "westernization of Japan" is often erroneous. [12] However, in their study of twelve nations including Japan and the U.S., two researchers found evidence supporting the argument that managerial values are becoming increasingly homogenous across nations. [13] This finding agrees with much of the evidence already presented.

If the values of Japanese business managers are indeed becoming more like those of U.S. business managers, studies regarding the latter are also relevant. With respect to gender, previous research on U.S. business managers has produced mixed results. Two studies found that U.S. females showed more concern for ethics than did males. [14] However, five other studies found little or no between-gender differences concerning personal values. [15] A 1991 study by others produced a different result, with males and females reporting similar work values but different personal/home values. [16]

Age has also been found to influence the values of U.S. managers. One study found that as U.S. managers get older, they place less importance on extrinsic (wage, hours, benefits) job characteristics and more on intrinsic (meaningful work, responsibility, accomplishment) job characteristics. In addition, attitudes toward work stayed positive but diminished with age. [17]

Our study builds upon another study that we conducted about the personal values of Japanese business managers. That study showed a very positive profile of Japanese business managers. It found that Japanese business managers placed very high importance on health, family security and world peace, and that they placed least importance on power and tradition. It also found that achievement, creativity, skill and autonomy were highly valued, but loyalty was not considered important. Many past studies regarding personal values have used the Rokeach [18] questionnaire for their surveys, while others have used the Schwartz survey questionnaire. Both instruments are useful for measuring the importance of specific personal values, and both can be used to classify individuals into groups and value types. Our current study expanded the use of the Rokeach instrument by employing a new typology, proposed and validated by Steven Musser and E. Orke. [19]

Musser and Orke Typology

The Musser and Orke typology of values is based on results from the Rokeach Value Survey. The Rokeach instrument classifies values into two categories, "instrumental" and "terminal." These categories reflect rank-ordered human values. Instrumental values guide behavior toward the end-states or terminal values. Musser and Orke then classify the terminal values into the "social" and "personal" categories and the instrumental values into the "moral" and "competence" categories. Figure One shows the values for each of the categories in the Musser and Orke Typology.

Respondents rank the importance of each set of values (instrumental and terminal). One(l)is the most important and eighteen (18) is the least important. From those rankings, we developed value types. Musser and Orke created a 2x2 value type matrix to identify four basic value system types as shown in Figure Two.

Scoring for each questionnaire was conducted as follows: (1) For terminal values, the importance scores of the nine "personal" values were totaled, and for instrumental values, the importance scores of the nine "competence" values were totaled, and (2) the scores for each set allowed the classification of respondents into one of four possible value types identified in Figure Two. A terminal value score of greater than 85.5 indicates personal (vs. social) orientation, and an instrumental value score of greater than 85.5 indicates competence (vs. moral) orientation. (Note: For 1 to 18 ranks, total points are 171, half of which is 85.5.) For example, if a respondent's score was 75 for terminal values and 95 for instrumental values, that respondent would be classified as an Effective Crusader.

According to the typology, Effective Crusaders score high on competence instrumental values and social terminal terminal values. Virtuous Advocates score high on moral instrumental values and social terminal values. Independent Maximizers score high on competence instrumental values and personal terminal values. Finally, Honorable Egoists score high on moral instrumental values and personal terminal values. Musser and Orke explain that individuals of different value types behave quite differently:

* Virtuous Advocates (i.e., virtue leaders) are more concerned with helping the team to reach its goals than with realizing their own personal goals. They help the team reach its goals by being sensitive to the needs and feelings of their associates. The trust and integrity resulting from this other-centered, other-sensitive focus encourages associates to take risks and become innovative. In a validation study, Musser and Orke identified Mother Teresa and Mahatma Gandhi as individuals who fit this value type.

* Independent Maximizers are more concerned with realizing their own goals than those of the team or organization. Unfortunately, they seek their personal goals in a detached, impersonal way that often ignores the needs and feelings of associates. Leaders with this type of value system are often viewed with a great deal of suspicion and mistrust. As a result, associates are unwilling to take risks and eventually become stagnant. According to the Musser and Orke validation study, Donald Trump and Ivan Boesky fit this value type.

* Honorable Egoists also seek to realize their own goals first, but they are more sensitive to the needs and feelings of their associates in the process. Nevertheless, associates tend to view these people with suspicion because of their focus on personal goals rather than team or organizational goals. They are not confident enough about their leaders' motives to take risks and be innovative. According to the Musser and Orke study, Arsenio Hall fits this value type.

* Effective Crusaders are more concerned with helping to reach team or organizational goals than with reaching their personal goals. However, they often assist in reaching team goals in ways that ignore the needs and feelings of their associates. As a result, associates often find themselves in a love-hate relationship with these leaders. They want to love them because their leaders' hearts are in the right place, but the insensitive methods employed by the leaders result in hurt and alienation. This in turn results in a reluctance to take chances and be more innovative. Oliver North fits this type.

Musser and Orke conducted three validation studies to measure the usefulness of their typology. They established a scoring procedure for each of the four value system types and used cluster analysis to determine the viability of the scoring procedure. Figure Three summarizes each value system type and shows the associations of well-known individuals with those types. Musser and Orke found that these associations yielded good inter-rater reliability ([X.sup.2] of 479.097 with p[less than].001).

Our study applied the Musser and Orke Typology to a sample of business managers in Japan. The respondents were asked to rank each of the values in the terminal and instrumental sets from 1 to 18, with 1 indicating greatest importance. The survey questionnaire required that there were no tie scores to ensure proper application of the Musser and Orke typology. Respondents were categorized using the methods previously described. A regression analysis and two-sided t-test at a 95 percent confidence level ([alpha] = .05) was used to evaluate the effects of age and gender on respondent value types. For each of the 36 values used in the Musser and Orke typology, a two sample, two-sided t-test ([alpha] = .05), assuming unequal variances, was performed to determine if mean rank scores were significantly different for males and females and for those over and under 40 years of age.

Japanese business managers in Tokyo who held positions in procurement, sales, marketing, planning, materials supply and public relations completed the survey. Of the 86 respondents, 60(70 percent) were male and 26 (30 percent) were female. Females were between 19 and 65 years old, and males were between 24 and 64 years old. Value orientations (personal, social, competence, moral) were determined by combining the percentages of respondents classified into the value types that reflect those orientations. This showed whether the respondents as a group were more focused on their own (vs. other) interests and whether they were competency-(vs. morality) oriented. Figure Four presents a summary of how value orientations were calculated.

Figure Five presents a summary of respondent orientations by gender. The results indicate strongly that Japanese business managers have a personal (vs. social) focus and emphasize moral means (vs. competence) overall. Although this appears true for both males and females, there are significant differences between the two groups. Females appear to be less strongly oriented toward personal terminal values than men, but more strongly oriented toward moral means.

Figure Six illustrates a classification of all business people participating in the study. Notice that the dominant value type for the entire sample is Honorable Egoist (50 percent), which scores high on both moral instrumental values and personal terminal values. The next most popular value type is Independent Maximizer (35 percent), which also scores high on personal terminal values. The two least frequent value types are Effective Crusader (5 percent) and Virtuous Advocate (10 percent), which both score high on social terminal values.

Figures Five and Six indicate a measure of similarity between male and female respondents. Both males and females appear to be heavily oriented toward the personal terminal values associated with Independent Maximizer and Honorable Egoist. The two groups also appear to favor employing moral means to accomplish end goals, a characteristic of both Virtuous Advocate and Honorable Egoist. The intersection of these observations is Honorable Egoist, the most popular value type (50 percent of all respondents) of the survey. This value type captured the largest portion of both male (54 percent) and female (42 percent) respondents. There are some notable differences between male and female respondents, however. Females (35 percent) appear much more likely to exhibit social (vs. personal) terminal values than males (7 percent). Females (69 percent) also appear to have a stronger tendency to employ moral (vs. competence) means than males (57 percent) do. It is interesting to note that for both males (3 percent) and fem ales (8 percent), the least popular value type is Effective Crusader, the polar opposite of Honorable Egoist.

The survey results with respect to gender appear significant when taken only at face value. Statistical tests were also positive, albeit less conclusive. Test results indicate that gender, considered alone or with age, is not a significant (t [sim].1.60) determinant of instrumental values. However, gender appears to be a very significant (t [sim]4.81) determinant of terminal values, whether considered alone or with age. The tests indicate that males are statistically more likely than females to exhibit personal terminal values. This is reasonably consistent with Figures Five and Six, which reflect much larger differences between male and female terminal value rankings than between male and female instrumental value rankings.

Results By Age Group

The average (mean) age of respondents was 41 years and the median age was 39.5 years (range was 19-65). The remaining figures show the results of comparisons between the values of the two age groups. Figure Seven shows that there is little difference between younger (86 percent, 14 percent) and older (84 percent, 16 percent) respondents in terms of personal versus social orientation. This small difference may indicate a slight shift toward social terminal values as managers grow older. Figure Seven shows the same strong inclinations toward personal terminal values as depicted in Figures Five and Six. However, the differences in instrumental value orientations between age groups are less than half of those that exist between males and females. If taken at face value, results show a shift toward moral instrumental values as managers age. The apparently slight dependence of age on personal values shown in Figure Eight was also evident in statistical tests. Statistical tests showed that age was not a significant (t [sum] .22 - .41) determinant of instrumental values. A similar test showed that age was a more significant (t [sum] 1.77) determinant of terminal values, although the test was not conclusive.

Figure Eight shows results by age group for each of the four value types. Honorable Egoist is the dominant value type for both age groups. The second most common value type was Independent Maximizer, which also scores high on personal terminal values. The least common value types, Effective Crusader and Virtuous Advocate, both score high on social terminal values. These facts reflect the dominance of personal terminal values in each age group as shown in Figure Seven. Figure Eight also reflects the apparent slight shift toward moral means shown in Figure Eight.

Summing Up

The results of the survey indicate that individual personal values depend more on gender than age. However, studies by other researchers concluded that age does, in fact, have a significant effect. Two studies both found that age had significant effects on values . [20] The results of age in our study have likely been affected by the limited scope of the survey. However, the results still support the hypothesis that the values of Japanese business managers are changing. It was shown that personal values are significantly affected by gender. Given the current influx of women into the Japanese business community and the information presented by other research, [21] it is reasonable to conclude that changes in Japanese business values are caused by changes in both age and gender mix in the workforce.

In general, Japanese business managers in this study have a personal (vs. social) focus and favor moral-oriented means over competence-oriented means. These findings agree with some of the previously mentioned research, but disagree with those of Geert Hofstede and Ann Howard's group. Hofstede found the Japanese to be more collectivist (less individualistic) and Howard found that the Japanese valued socially-oriented activity. [22] However, the results of our study show an emphasis on personal, rather than social, orientation by Japanese male (93 percent) and female (65 percent) business managers. This study also found that Japanese female business managers are more likely to have a social focus and employ moral means than males, and that gender is a significant determinant of terminal, but not instrumental values. In addition, there appears to be a slight shift toward moral instrumental values as Japanese managers grow older.

The rankings of individual personal values for younger and older respondents show few differences for either terminal or instrumental values, especially when compared with the impact of gender. This suggests that younger and older respondents have similar feelings with respect to personal values and that values may not depend as much on age as they do on gender. Younger respondents place significantly more importance on the values Courageous and Mature Love, while older respondents place significantly more importance on Family Security and Comfortable Life.

DON E. GIACOMINO, D.B.A., CPA, is a professor and chair of the Department of Accounting in the College of Business Administration at Marquette University. He holds the Donald F. and Beverly L. Flynn Chair in Accounting. He has written more than 35 journal articles and a textbook about management accounting. His previous experience includes auditing in the private sector.

ATSUSHI FUJITA, MBA, is Senior Lecturer of International Relations at the Saitama Institute of Technology in Saitama-ken, Japan. His previous experience includes important positions with Caltex Oil Japan Co., United Nations University, Tokyo and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development.

THOMAS M. JOHNSON is research assistant for the Department of Accounting at Marquette University. He holds a B.S. degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Wisconsin and is completing his Master of Business Administration degree at Marquette.

(1.) Sirota, David and M. Greenwood, "Understanding Your Overseas Workforce, "Harvard Business Review, 1971, 51(1) 53.

(2.) Mendenhall, Mark and CR. Oddou, "The Dimensions of Expatriate Acculturation: A Review," Academy of Management Review, 1985, (10), 39.

(3.) Hofstede, Geert, Culture's Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values, 1980, Beverly Hills, CA, Sage Publications.

(4.) Howard, Ann, K. Shudo and M. Umeshima, "Motivation and Values Among Japanese and American Managers," Personnel Psychology, 1983, (36), 883.

(5.) England, G.W., The Manager and His Values: An International Perspective from the United States, Japan, Korea, India and Australia, Cambridge, MA, 1975, 5-67.

(6.) Schwind, H.F. and R.B. Peterson, "Shifting Values in the Japanese Management System, 1985, International Studies of Management and Organization, (15)2,60.

(7.) Loscocco, Karyn A. and A.L. Kalleberg, "Age and the Meaning of Work in the United States and Japan," 1988, Social Forces, 1988, (67)2, 337.

(8.) Ralston, D.A., D.J. Gustafson, P.M. Elsass, P. Cheung, and R.H. Terpstra, "Eastern Values: A Comparison of Managers in the United States, Hong Kong and the People's Republic of China," Journal of Applied Psychology, 1992, (77).

(9.) Hofatede, Geert, loc. cit.

(10.) Loscocco, Karyn, loc. cit.

(11.) Fields, George, "Toward Great Consumer Society-Japanese Vision," Tokyo Business Today, August 1992,20.

(12.) Fields, George, "Doing Business in Japan: An Insider's Guide," Ch. 4, The Japanese Market and its Consumers, Key Porter Books, Toronto.

(13.) Bigoness, William J, and G.L Blakely, "A Cross- National Study of Managerial Values," Journal of International Business Studies, Winter 1996, (27)4,739.

(14.) Jones, T.M. and F.H Gautschi III, "Will the Ethics of Business Change? A Survey of Future Executives," Journal of Business Ethics, April 1988 (7)4,23. Peterson, R.A. et al., loc. cit.

(15.) Fagenson, Ellen A., "Personal Value Systems of Men and Women Entrepreneurs Versus Managers" Journal of Business Venturing, 1993, (8), 747. Pinac-Ward, Suzanne, D.R. Ward and T.E. Wilson, "University Accounting Professors: An Examination of Personal Valucs," Accounting Educators' Journal, 1995, (7)1, 39.

Davis, J.R. and R.E. Welton, "Professional Ethics: Business Students' Perceptions," Journal of Business Ethics (Netherlands), June 1991, (10)6, 451.

Kidwell, Jeaneen M., R.E. Stevens and A.L. Bethke, "Differences in Ethical Perceptions

Between Male and Female Managers: Myth or Reality?" 1987, Journal of Business Ethics (Netherlands), (6)6,489.

Isalikis, J. and M. Ortiz-Buonafina, "Ethical Beliefs: Differences of Males and Females," Journal of Business Ethics (Netherlands), 1990, (9)6,509.

(16.) Chusmir, Leonard H. and B. Parker, "Gender and Situational Differences in Managers' Values: A Look at Work and Home Lives," Journal of Business Research, 1991, (23)4,325.

(17.) Brenner, O.G., "Relations of Age and Education to Managers' Work Values," Psychological Reports, 1988, (63)2,639.

(18.) Rokeach, M., The Nature of Human Values, 1973, New York, Free Press.

(19.) Musser, Steven J, and E. Orke, "Ethical Values Systems: A Typology," The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1992, (28)3,348.

(20.) Loscocco, Karyn, loc. cit. and Brenner, O.C., loc. cit.

(21.) Fields, George, 1994, loc. cit. Chusmir, Leonard and B. Parker, loc. cit.

(22.) Hofstede, Geert, loc. cit.

(23.) Howard, Ann, loc. cit.

                       The Musser and Orke Typology
                              TERMINAL VALUES
Social Terminal Values Personal Terminal Values
(focus on others)      (focus on self)
A World at Peace       A Comfortable Life
A World of Beauty      An Exciting Life
Equality               A Sense of Accomplishment
Family Security        Health
Freedom                Inner Harmony
Mature Love            Pleasure
National Security      Salvation
Social Recognition     Self-respect
True Friendship        Wisdom
                            INSTRUMENTAL VALUE
Moral Instrumental Values              Competence Instrumental Values
(focus on moral means to attain goals) (focus on competence to attain goals)
Broadminded                            Ambitious
Forgiving                              Capable
Helpful                                Clean
Honest                                 Courageous
Loving                                 Imaginative
Loyal                                  Independent
Obedient                               Intellectual
Polite                                 Logical
Responsible                            Self-controlled
                             Value Type Matrix
                            Instrumental Values
                       High Competence High Moral
                            85.5
Terminal Hight Social     Effective     Virtuous
Values                    Crusader      Advocate
         85.5
                         Independent   Honorable
                          Maximizer      Egoist
         High Personal      (IM)          (HE)
                      Summary of Value Systems Types
Value System Type  Concern For: Emphasizes:             Associated With:
Effective Crusader Others       Competence in attaining OliverNorth
(EC)                            social goal
Virtuous Advocate  Others       Morals in attaining     MotherTheresa
(VA)                            social goals            Mahatma Gandhi
Independent        Self         Competence in attaining Donald Trump
Maximizer (IM)                  personal goals          Ivan Boesky
Honorable          Self         Morals in attaining     Arsenio Hall
Egoist (HE)                     personal goals
                     Computation of Value Orientation
          Computations                          Key
% Personal Orientation = IM + HE   IM = % of respondents classified as
                                   Independent Maximizer
% Social Orientation = EC + VA     HE = % of respondents classified as
                                   Honorable Egoist
% Moral Orientation = VA + HE      EC = % of respondents classified as
                                   Effective Crusader
% Competence Orientation = EC + IM VA = % of respondents classified as
                                   Virtuous Advocate
                       Value Orientations By Gender
Orientation % of Respondents % of Males % of Females
 Personal         85%           93%         65%
  Social          15%            7%         35%
   Moral          60%           57%         69%
Competence        40%           43%         31%
                           Value Types By Gender
  Effective       Virtuous
   Crusader       Advocate
 3% of Males    3% of Males
8% of Females  27% of Females
 5% of Total    10% of Total
 Independent     Honorable
  Maximizer        Egoist
 40% of Males   54% of Males
23% of Females 42% of Females
 35% of Total   50% of Total
                      Value Orientations By Age Group
Orientation   % of 85   % of (43) Over 40 % of (43)Under 40
            Respondents
Personal        85%            86%               84%
Social          15%            14%               16%
Moral           60%            58%               63%
Competency      40%            42%               37%
                          Value Types By Age Group
Effective      Virtuous
Crusader       Advocate
2% of Younger  14% of Younger
7% of Older    7% of Older
5% of Total    10% of Total
Independent    Honorable
Maximizer       Egoist
35% of Younger 49% of Younger
35% of Older   51% of Older
35% of Total   50% of Total