Defeat of Japanese Way of Management

The Organizing Committee for Tokyo Olympics 2020 announced that it would scrap official logo for the event on Monday. While doubt of plagiarism had been the core of this scandal, the committee rejected admitting it, but emphasized significance of public denial. It is still unclear what was the problem or who was responsible for it. This Japanese way of risk management does not persuade the world. With inappropriate leadership, Japan appears to be a loser.

Fatal error was that Director General of the Committee, Toshiro Muto, badly tried to settle the scandal. Last Friday, Muto publicly disputed against skepticism over plagiarism of logo designed by Kenjiro Sano, insisting that Sano’s original design did not resemble any other’s works. However, that “original design” might not original. Right after Muto’s press conference, there appeared on websites similar design to Sano’s original and question about unauthorized use of other’s design. Muto had to admit that new problem rose up in the weekend.

However, Muto firmly denied plagiarism. “Mr. Sano admitted unauthorized use of picture, but he denied imitating or plagiarism of the emblem. Although we also do not think it was plagiarism, it became unable to accept public understanding,” told Muto as the reason why the committee scrapped the logo. This is the same way as a politician in scandal steps down as a minister without admitting the fact of the scandal, but insisting on invitation of confusion.

What will happen, if the organizing committee recognizes Sano’s plagiarism? People will start looking for who picked Sano for official logo designer. Muto and other leaders then cannot escape from its responsibility. As former Administrative Vice Minister of Finance, which is recognized as a top elite in Japanese society, Muto could not resign as a leader of committee with this kind of primitive scandal.

As economic animals, the leaders also consider collateral damage in terms of money. Sponsors of Tokyo Olympic have begun to use the logo in their commercial messages or webpages, appealing their willingness to support the event. Thirteen top sponsors called “gold partner” had paid ¥200 billion for the contract to the committee. It is possible that those sponsors will file lawsuits asking compensation for their losses. They kept on pressuring the committee to dismiss Sano’s design.

One important point, however, is that Belgian designer, Olivier Debie, who disputed Sano’s design as plagiarism, has not been satisfied. The committee needs to realize that scandal has not been settled. Although the committee is going to have another competition for logo, it may make matters worse, if another scandal rises up.