Persistent overtime is a failure of management
- リンクを取得
- ×
- メール
- 他のアプリ
Read the original article (in Japanese):
Prologue | Overtime Is a Failure of Management
As recent survey data suggests, younger workers—particularly those in their twenties—are no longer willing to accept long working hours without question.
When overtime becomes routine, and when it brings neither meaning, fair compensation, nor a sense of professional growth, people quietly leave such companies. This is not because younger generations have lost their work ethic. Rather, it reflects a growing ability to look at labor more rationally.
So what exactly is overtime?
There are of course exceptional situations: accidents, emergency responses, sudden deadlines, or unexpected workloads. But if overtime is built into everyday operations, that does not mean the company is “working hard.”
It means the company has failed.
It has failed in one of three areas: work planning, profit planning, or staffing planning.
If employees must work one extra hour every day just to finish their tasks, or if the organization cannot function without more than twenty hours of overtime per month, something in management has broken down.
Let us state the conclusion clearly.
Overtime is not a sign of effort.
It is a failure of management.
Of course, a completely overtime-free workplace may be an ideal. In real operations, unavoidable overtime can occur.
But when overtime becomes routine, it is clear evidence that management has failed.
Management is not simply the art of making employees feel motivated. It is a far more structural task: designing and managing the labor time generated by workers so that the organization can achieve its KGI.
Chapter 1 | The Essence of Management Is the Management of Labor Time
When people talk about management, they often refer to concepts such as:
Leadership
Motivation management
Performance evaluation systems
Organizational culture
One-on-one meetings
Psychological safety
None of these are unnecessary. They are important elements of a healthy workplace.
However, they are tools, not the objective.
The true objective of a company—and of the work performed by its employees—is the achievement of its KGI (Key Goal Indicator).
What is the largest resource consumed by a company each day?
Not money.
Not equipment.
It is labor time.
If a company employs 100 people, it possesses 800 labor hours per day. Over a year, that becomes an enormous pool of time resources.
In other words, a company is fundamentally a collection of labor time.
Therefore, the core responsibilities of management are:
Estimating the labor time required to achieve the KGI
Securing the personnel needed to generate that time
Allocating them appropriately
Converting their working hours into results
Recruitment, staff allocation, evaluation systems, and working conditions all exist to support this design.
When overtime occurs routinely, it means that this design has broken down.
Perhaps staffing is insufficient.
Perhaps the work structure is flawed.
Perhaps the KGI itself is unrealistic.
But one thing is certain.
The failure does not belong to workers.
It belongs to management.
Chapter 2 | Planned Growth: No Labor Beyond What Is Needed for the KGI
Entrepreneurs and executives often say:
“We want the company to grow more.”
“We want to exceed expectations.”
These are natural ambitions for business leaders. But if such aspirations simply translate into unlimited labor demands, they become problematic.
The real question is whether the organization has a design that matches its goals.
The correct process should look like this:
Define the company’s KGI
Break down the work required to achieve it
Estimate the necessary labor hours
Secure and allocate personnel
Translate the plan into daily operations
From this structure emerges the concept of planned growth.
Planned growth does not reject growth. Instead, it treats the growth process itself as something that can be designed and managed.
One key principle is simple:
Do not actively demand labor beyond what is required to achieve the KGI.
If results exceed expectations, that is fortunate. But such outcomes should prompt reflection and reevaluation of planning assumptions.
If employees are constantly pushed beyond the plan, those results become the baseline for the next cycle. Labor hours increase, turnover rises, and quality becomes unstable.
Short-term growth may occur, but long-term volatility expands.
Ironically, organizations that resist chasing excessive upside tend to minimize downside risk.
That is the real strength of planned growth.
Chapter 3 | The American “Big Catch” Model Does Not Fit Japan
The American labor model resembles what we might call a “big catch” fishing model.
Work harder. Take risks. Capture as much opportunity as possible. If the catch is large, celebrate it.
In the United States, this model has some rational basis. The culture allows exceptional individuals to stand out, and the rewards for success can be enormous.
In industries such as technology and finance, long hours and high performance can translate directly into financial compensation.
Japan operates in a very different environment.
Although long working hours exist in Japan, those hours do not convert into higher compensation to the same degree.
Income inequality is smaller than in the United States, but even top performers rarely experience dramatic financial upside.
In other words, the catch is smaller even when the effort is large.
Additionally, Japan’s social structure makes risk-taking difficult:
The cost of entrepreneurial failure is high
Restarting careers or businesses is difficult
The education system emphasizes balanced performance rather than extreme outliers
When the “big catch” labor model is imported into this environment, the result is not innovation—but more labor without higher productivity.
Many companies imitate the appearance of American work culture while amplifying Japan’s existing inefficiencies.
Chapter 4 | Japan Should Aim for a Nordic-Style “Managed Fisheries” Model
The opposite of the “big catch” model is the managed fisheries model, seen in countries such as Norway.
Rather than catching as much fish as possible, the industry manages fish stocks carefully, stabilizes market prices, and builds a sustainable structure.
The goal is not short-term abundance but long-term productivity.
Work can be approached in the same way.
In Nordic countries and Germany, overtime is not the norm—not simply because people work fewer hours, but because labor time itself is treated as a resource to be managed.
This approach aligns surprisingly well with Japan’s national characteristics.
Japan possesses strengths such as:
High educational standards
Strong organizational coordination
A culture of continuous improvement
Excellence in quality control
Japan’s weakness is its limited ability to harness extreme individual talent.
Yet this is also a strength: the ability to maintain consistently high organizational performance.
Japan does not need to imitate the American model.
It should instead become a society that manages labor resources strategically.
Chapter 5 | Toyota Already Demonstrated the Japanese Model
Japan already has a successful example.
Toyota.
Toyota’s reputation often centers on concepts such as Kaizen and Kanban, but the essence of the Toyota Production System is simpler:
Move only what is needed, when it is needed, in the amount needed.
This is resource management.
Its core principles include:
Eliminating waste
Leveling production flow
Designing processes carefully
Stopping production when abnormalities occur
These principles represent the management of labor time and operational resources.
Toyota did not become strong by forcing employees to work longer hours.
It became strong by asking:
How can we produce the highest quality within limited time?
That question holds the answer for Japan’s broader economy.
Japan’s path to success is not the American big-catch model.
It is planned productivity.
Chapter 6 | Productivity Through Organization, Not Reckless Expansion
Japan’s strength is not flashy consumer platforms like Google or NVIDIA.
Instead, Japan excels at controlling critical choke points in global supply chains.
| Sector | Global Market Share | Japanese Companies |
|---|---|---|
| EUV Photoresist | Approx. 90% | JSR, Tokyo Ohka Kogyo, Shin-Etsu Chemical |
| Silicon Wafers | Approx. 50–60% | Shin-Etsu Chemical, SUMCO |
| CMP Slurry | World-leading share in some segments | Resonac |
Many key materials used in semiconductor production, for example, are dominated by Japanese companies.
These products are invisible to most consumers, yet the world economy depends on them.
Their value comes not from volume, but from:
precision
quality
process control
Japan does not need to become the next NVIDIA in every industry.
Rather, Japan’s strategic position lies in controlling the throat of global production.
Mass production and selling labor hours are not Japan’s winning strategy.
Epilogue | Turning Changing Work Values into Growth
Younger generations no longer value long working hours for their own sake.
What they seek is meaning and fair compensation.
This shift is not a threat to companies. In fact, it favors well-managed organizations.
Companies that rely on overtime to cover management failures will struggle to attract talent.
The companies that survive will be those that:
design their KGI clearly
design labor time deliberately
design staffing structures carefully
Japan may not be suited to the American big-catch labor model.
But that is not a weakness.
Japan has its own path to success.
Management is the discipline of designing labor-time resources and producing results within them.
When companies rediscover this simple principle, Japan’s corporate world can move beyond exhaustion—and toward sustainable, distinctly Japanese growth.
Read in Japanese ↓（For Japanese learners!）↓
残業はマネジメントの敗北だ｜日本に必要な「労働時間資源」設計（2026.3.13）
Read more articles (in Japanese)↓
心理的安全性は絶対ではない｜必要なのは「最大公約数」マネジメント（2026.3.10）
- リンクを取得
- ×
- メール
- 他のアプリ
コメント
コメントを投稿