When a Japan Relationship Depends on One Person
Nearly twenty years ago, I was involved in initiating a joint activity between an Israeli technology company in satellite communications and a leading global Japanese corporation in the maritime sector. At the beginning, everything looked promising - there was an advanced product, a consistent team, and real business progress.
In practice, however, as often happens, the relationship depended to a large extent on one person. The Israeli company’s business development manager became the central trusted counterpart for the Japanese side. A broader team was involved, but the personal trust was built primarily with him.
As the activity expanded and became global, and later when that business development manager left the company, a gap was created that was never truly filled. From the Japanese side, what was lost was not only a contact person, but the individual through whom continuity had been built.
In Japan, Trust Is Personal - Not Only Organizational
Even when a full team is involved in a business process, trust in Japan is often built around one specific person. That individual becomes the anchor through whom the Japanese side understands how the company thinks, how it makes decisions, and how reliable its commitments really are.
- He or she carries the historical context of the relationship
- He or she provides continuity even when additional people join the process
- He or she connects business decisions to the relationship that has been built
- And he or she serves as a clear point of contact in moments of uncertainty or difficulty
For that reason, even when the broader team remains professional and engaged, losing the trusted counterpart may be seen in Japan not merely as an internal change, but as a loss of continuity itself.
What Happens When the Trusted Person Leaves the Picture
From the company’s perspective, it may seem possible to continue the activity with other team members. From the Japanese partner’s perspective, however, the person with whom trust had been built is no longer there.
In such a situation, even if the technology itself remains relevant, the relationship weakens. When technical, commercial, or organizational challenges later emerge, there may be no one left who holds both the shared history and the trust accumulated over time.
When the Technology Remains - but the Partner Changes
In this case, the Japanese company did not give up on the solution itself. It continued to develop and commercialize it successfully - but with a different partner.
- The technology still had value
- The business need did not disappear
- But the human continuity was broken
You can see an example of this type of solution in the activity currently available here.
The Question Worth Asking in Advance
When working with Japan, it is not enough to ask whether there is a professional team capable of continuing the work. The more important question is whether there is real continuity in the relationship, or whether the trust depends in practice on one person alone.
Frequently Asked Questions
In Japan, is business trust built with the company or with the individual?
Both matter, but in practice the initial trust and the practical continuity are often built around a specific person. That is why a change in that person can affect the relationship even if the organization itself has not changed.
Is it enough to transfer the relationship to another person within the same team?
Not always. If trust and familiarity were built mainly with one individual, the transition is not merely technical. It may take time to rebuild trust, historical context, and a sense of stability.
What is the risk when the trusted counterpart leaves?
The risk is not only weaker communication, but also the loss of continuity. When difficulties or complex decisions arise later, there may be no one left who can carry both the context and the trust that had accumulated.
What can be done to reduce dependence on one person?
It is advisable to gradually build broader continuity - involve additional people over time, expose them to the history of the relationship, and make sure the trust does not rely exclusively on one individual.