LEADER 04016nam 22005651a 450 001 9910418353503321 005 20251116180548.0 010 $a9780472880133 010 $a0472880136 024 7 $a10.3998/mpub.18650 035 $a(CKB)4100000011405596 035 $a(OCoLC)1184508149 035 $a(MdBmJHUP)muse91948 035 $a(MiU)10.3998/mpub.18650 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC6403498 035 $aEBL7007894 035 $a(OCoLC)1247582623 035 $a(AU-PeEL)EBL7007894 035 $a(MiAaPQ)EBC7007894 035 $a(BIP)78232042 035 $a(BIP)1939409 035 $a(EXLCZ)994100000011405596 100 $a19880715d1982 uy 0 101 0 $aeng 135 $aurm|#||||nn|n 181 $ctxt$2rdacontent 182 $cc$2rdamedia 183 $acr$2rdacarrier 200 00$aIndustry at the crossroads /$fedited by Robert E. Cole 210 1$aAnn Arbor, Michigan :$cUniversity of Michigan Press,$d1982. 215 $a1 online resource (viii, 107 pages) $cillustrations; digital, PDF file(s) 225 1 $aMichigan Papers in Japanese Studies ;$vno. 7 300 $aPapers presented at an U.S.-Japan auto conference held in March 1982 held at the Center for Japanese Studies, University of Michigan. 311 08$aPrint version: 9780939512126 320 $aIncludes bibliographical references. 330 $a The mood of the first U of M U.S.-Japan Auto conference in January 1981 could only be described as electric. People wanted to know what our problems were and how we could begin to solve them. Inherent in the latter issue was the questions, what could we learn from the Japanese? One left the conference with a sense that there was a call for action, a mandate to address the problems facing industry. The mood, about a year later, at the March 1982 U.S.-Japan Auto Conference was far more subdued. While undoubtedly this reflected the stream of statistics confirming the continually depressed state of the industry, another dynamic was possibly operating as well. Whereas the 1981 conference was "electric," a state of mind which flowed from a certain frustration at seemingly overwhelming difficulties and often vague expectations of what we might learn from the Japanese, the 1982 conference was more "workmanlike" in the sense that speakers discussed specifically what progress was being made in addressing problems. This more subdued, pragmatic approach continued throughout wand was reinforced by workshops held the day after the main conference. Instead of discussing the virtues of the Just-In-Time system in Japan, speakers addressed the practical problems of introducing such a system in the U.S. firms. Instead of railing about the benefits or failings of regulation of the industry, they discussed what we could reasonably expect from regulation. Instead of exhorting the industry to adopt Japanese practices willy-nilly, they focused on some of the limitations of the Japanese model in a range of different areas. Instead of trying to identify some magic key to Japanese success in the automotive industry, they discussed the interrelationships among various factors. At the same, they continued to explore the basic issues transforming the auto industry worldwide. In this connection, they sought to unravel some of the complexities associated with the internalization of the auto industry and trade obligations under the GATT. 410 0$aMichigan papers in Japanese studies ;$vno. 7. 606 $aAutomobile industry and trade$zUnited States$xCongresses 606 $aAutomobile industry and trade$zJapan$xCongresses 615 0$aAutomobile industry and trade$xCongresses. 615 0$aAutomobile industry and trade$xCongresses. 676 $a338.4/76292/0952 701 $aCole$b Robert E$0105811 712 02$aUniversity of Michigan.$bCenter for Japanese Studies, 801 0$bMiU 801 1$bMiU 906 $aBOOK 912 $a9910418353503321 996 $aIndustry at the Crossroads$92430959 997 $aUNINA