We shall examine the organisation of work (or labour process) within manufacturing plants and their tied sub-contractors. We will discuss the nature of ‘just-in-case’ pattern of work organisation and compare it to a more recent innovation – ‘just-in-time’ system.

One of the main conclusions of the literature on the organisation of work (or labour process) has been the recognition that increased managerial control over labour and deskilling are just two among several means to the end of profit rather than goals in themselves. Empirical research has made it clear that product technology, product market conditions, employment relations and state employment policy all affect the type of labour process, or organisation of work. This suggests that labour process is not just a matter of organising technical division of labour within the manufacturing plant and the relationship of workers to management control and machines.

Increasingly, many social scientists acknowledge the importance of worker consent and motivation, and realise that naked coercion is an ineffective way of getting high productivity.

Japanese innovations in the organisation of work represent a radical departure from Anglo-American managerial wisdom (such as ‘Taylorism’), though there are some similar concerns such as search for time economies and dynamic economies. Particular organisational forms such as Taylorism are not universal types that all capitalist societies must possess. While forms of labour process are shaped by the general class character of capitalism, and driven by capital accumulation, they are products of historically- and spatially-specific conjunctures. While new forms of production organisations are invariably modifications of pre-existing ones adopted to suit local contexts, such adaptions can accumulate into a major new framework, as in the case of just-in-time.

It is suggested that the particular organisation of work found largely in Japan is cultural-specific (e.g., Japanese religion, traditional and patriarchal family structure, solidaristic communal ties and strong nationalistic ideology). Furthermore, it is suggested that it can not be applied to other societies, which emphasise individualism, privacy, and equality. While the peculiarities of Japanese culture has certainly shaped its form of capitalism (just as Anglo-American culture has influenced Anglo-American form of capitalism, and German and French cultures on European form of capitalism), there are significant non-cultural reasons for the success of Japanese work organisation and its spread to countries outside Japan, such as the UK and continental European.

‘Just-in-case’ (JIC) is shorthand for a bundle of production characteristics in certain leading industries outside Japan.

• JIC production is the establishment of a rationalised sequence of processing in which workers and machines are dedicated, as far as possible, to only one simplified task. For example, an assembly of an electronic product broken down into many simplified stages.
• The tendency is to give priority to maximising the utilisation of fixed capital and labour by increasing the speed of each operation, and by pursuing economies of scale. So high volume and standardised output are seen as the route to lower costs per unit. In effect, fixed costs are reduced and average costs are minimised by maximising capacity as much as possible.
• Long production runs of components are sought in order to minimise the amount of time machinery is not operational. In effect, time and cost are minimised by limiting the switching between different production of products.
• This in turn entails large inventories (stocks), and large ‘buffer stocks’ are maintained so that the rest of the system can continue to function should any stage of production be disrupted, or any component prove defective. Similarly, sufficient stocks of parts from suppliers are kept to insure against supply interruptions, and a reserve of labour may also be hired to prevent absences causing disruptions. In effect, this system develops huge levels of stocks and labour just-in-case supply and production is intentionally or accidentally interrupted.

A process of mutual adjustment between technical and social sides of production occurs.

• Demarcation is encouraged by certain features of this system: parts of the factory are specialised for particular operations (administrative, engineering, design, packaging, and so on); moving parts on a conveyor between specialist workers instead moving workers between several activities; and separating tasks and workers by larger buffer stocks. Inevitably by insulating different groups of workers, this generates coordination and communication problems.
• A vertical hierarchy of supervisory and managerial labour to link and control the specialised activities is required to resolve coordination problems.
• Lack of inter-firm contact and infrequent interactions between firms become common: suppliers are chosen primarily on the basis of price competitiveness, and key inputs are obtained from several sources to protect against possible disruption.

The JIC type of production has been presented as an ideal realisation of the capitalist logic of time economy. In practice, however, the JIC system has many problems.

• The system is geared towards uniformity and standardisation, and is inflexible and unresponsive to changes in the market.
• For complex products like cars and televisions, it is difficult to balance the various flows of parts and sub-assemblies into the main assembly process without over-supplies and shortages arising.
• Large inventories and buffer stocks are expensive in terms of storage and monitoring costs, wastage and unproductive capital.
• Rejects and poor quality tend to be concealed by the presence of buffer stocks.
• Distant relations with suppliers have disadvantages: permissive attitudes to suppliers’ quality control increase costs, failure to harmonise interests, lack of communication and ideas on improving efficiency and effectiveness of the supply chain.
• The deep vertical hierarchy of control becomes rigid and inflexible, encourages empire-building, and results in poor coordination.
• Restricting workers to single tasks under-uses their abilities, reduces motivation, increases boredom and hence fatigue, absenteeism, soldiering and resistance. Also, separating workers by buffer stocks conceals real interdependencies between them, and this reduces feedback and cooperation between workers.
• Several features combine to inhibit innovation and marginalise learning-by-doing: priority of quantity over quality, dedicated machinery and low-skill workers, excessive division and separation of workers.
• Poor coordination, poor quality, and restricting workers’ discretion mean that hold-ups and breakdowns are typical in the production run.

While the JIC system achieved a higher labour productivity than earlier forms of production, it nonetheless came up against a series of limits: hyper-rationalisation of one part of the system may come at the expense of overall efficiency; maximising current output is not sufficient in a changing environment; efficiency of the factory may come at the expense of efficient linkage to suppliers; degradation of common labour can cause withdrawal of worker interest and intelligence; cost-minimisation can be counter-productive, and so on.

Appreciation of JIC’s problems increased in the late 1970s, and Japanese manufacturers aroused interest in the West for their innovative and highly integrated system of product organisation.

‘Just-in-time’ (JIT) is shorthand for a group of related practices. Narrowly interpreted, JIT refers to a way of organising the immediate manufacturing labour process and buyer-supplier relationships between firms, but it is normally involves a wider set of practices regarding skills, labour-management relations and labour market conditions.

• JIT is a system in which tasks are done just when needed, in just the amount required to meet desired output levels. This means that utilisation of an individual machine may not be maximised.
• Workers at the end of the line are given output instructions on the basis of short-term order forecasts, and they instruct the workers immediately upstream to produce the parts they will need just-in-time, and those workers in turn instruct workers upstream to produce just-in-time, and so on.
• Buffer stocks are very small. Buffer stocks are regarded as evidence of waste, and key targets of management are to reduce buffer stocks towards zero, and to eliminate errors, mistakes and rejects in each task.
• This process of error elimination and quality control requires both management and workers to be highly knowledgeable about the details of the work process, to keep work under close surveillance, and to be able to elicit the workers’ own knowledge on how to improve the process. In addition, managers and supervisors give individual workers rapid and clear feedback on their performance, and train them to get quality right before going for quantity.
• JIT needs a more cooperative, innovative and adaptable workforce than in expected in the JIC system. Workers are expected take some responsibilities for their own regular preventive maintenance. Where appropriate, workers are trained to switch between jobs as and where needed helping fellow workers who are overloaded. The skills of the workers, particularly behavioural skills of cooperativeness and self-discipline, are thus part and parcel of this process of labour organisation. In effect, under JIT the reduction of buffer stocks not only keeps capital more active, but stimulates a continual learning process.
• Capital can get more benefit from the JIT system when suppliers also adopt it. Just-in-time production is greatly assisted by just-in-time deliveries. Supplies from suppliers and sub-contractors are small and frequent, and delivered to precise location within the factory where they are needed. Relationships between buyer and supplier are much closer than under JIC systems. The manufacturing firm (i.e., the buyer) exercises considerable influence not only over pricing, but also over product development and the day-to-day internal functioning of the supplier, in order to ensure security og quality and supply.

There are some problems with JIT system.

• Firms wishing to institute JIT not only have to ensure the deliveries of input are just-in-time, but also that they are constant in content as possible.
• Similar to JIC, integrating any complex labour process involves inevitable inequality of cycle times of different operations, so that oversupplies and shortages arise. To institute a smooth coordination of a JIT system requires increased attention to production engineering and layout of the factory. Whereas in JIC systems, coordination problems are reduced by buffer stocks, in JIT systems there is greater need for learning-by-doing for perfecting production operations.
• The relationships between buyer and supplier are asymmetric and uneven, in which the larger manufacturing buying firm dominates the smaller sub-contractors and suppliers.

It is worth noting that full JIT production can only be used by a minority of manufacturers, for most manufacturing production is in small batch and project production.

To summarise, whereas JIC is a system of mass production based on a collection of large production runs, separated by large buffer stocks and feeding into a final assembly line, JIT is a system of mass production consisting of highly integrated series of small production processes. Furthermore, JIT is a learning system that generates economies by instituting multi-skilling and up-skilling of workforce, flexible working practices and job rotation, close involvement of managers and workers on the shop-floor, zero defect and total quality control, team-working and quality circle, and strong horizontal links between interdependent groups within and between firms.

While we have focused on the material (non-cultural) organisation of production, we do not wish to deny the effects of culture, such as attention to interpersonal relations, and nationalistic solidarity. Nevertheless, explanations that stress cultural factors for the success of JIT production fail account of its widespread adoption, and fail to ask counterfactual questions (such as, does JIT system require strong patriarchal family structure and nationalistic ideology to operate?).