IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/corgov/v13y2005i3p437-446.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Deviant or Different? Corporate Governance in Japan and Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Ronald Dore

Abstract

There are good reasons for national differences in corporate governance, differences in the distributional outcomes desired and differences in motivational resources; material sticks and carrots are not the only ways of keeping top managers efficient, honest and dynamic. Yet, too often discussions of corporate governance assume the Anglo‐Saxon model to be normal and others “deviant”– a notion to be challenged, but nevertheless the dominant assumption among the “reformers” of corporate governance in Japan and Germany. Most of the reforms in those two countries over the past decade have purported to be about making top managers more honest and efficient. In fact their purport has more often been to change distributional outcomes, favouring shareholders at the expense of employees.

Suggested Citation

  • Ronald Dore, 2005. "Deviant or Different? Corporate Governance in Japan and Germany," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 13(3), pages 437-446, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:corgov:v:13:y:2005:i:3:p:437-446
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8683.2005.00438.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2005.00438.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2005.00438.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Goyer, Michel, 2002. "The transformation of corporate governance in France and Germany: The role of workplace institutions," MPIfG Working Paper 02/10, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Masanori Orihara, 2023. "COVID-19: Firm Value and Pre-Existing Corporate Governance Regulations," Working Papers 2218, Waseda University, Faculty of Political Science and Economics.
    2. Xie, Sujuan & Lin, Bingxuan & Li, Jingjing, 2022. "Political Control, Corporate Governance and Firm Value: The Case of China," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    3. Daisuke Okamoto, 2009. "Social Relationship of a Firm and the CSP–CFP Relationship in Japan: Using Artificial Neural Networks," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 87(1), pages 117-132, June.
    4. Lin, Ouwen & Guan, Jianbo, 2024. "The impact of media attention, board independence on CEO power, and ESG in state-owned enterprises," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 62(PA).
    5. Andrew J. Ward & Daniel C. Feldman, 2008. "Survival of the Embedded: Expelling and Embedding Forces on Members of the Corporate Elite," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(3), pages 239-251, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lütz, Susanne, 2003. "Convergence within National Diversity: A Comparative Perspective on the Regulatory State in Finance," MPIfG Discussion Paper 03/7, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    2. Vitols, Sigurt, 2003. "Negotiated shareholder value: The German version of an Anglo-American practice," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Institutions, States, Markets SP II 2003-25, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    3. Höpner, Martin, 2003. "European corporate governance reform and the German party paradox," MPIfG Discussion Paper 03/4, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    4. Anne Tempel & Peter Walgenbach, 2007. "Global Standardization of Organizational Forms and Management Practices? What New Institutionalism and the Business‐Systems Approach Can Learn from Each Other," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(1), pages 1-24, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:corgov:v:13:y:2005:i:3:p:437-446. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0964-8410&site=1 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.