Approval system - Ringisei

A method of decision-making in the Japanese government and companies since the Meiji era. It is defined as a method of administrative (or management) decision-making in which a document (called a ringisho) is drafted by a low-level employee, circulated to the relevant officials (or persons) for their stamp, then forwarded to a higher-ranking official, and finally to the legally designated approver (Tsuji Kiyoaki). The characteristics of the ringisho system are that (1) it is drafted by a low-level employee who has no decision-making or leadership power, (2) the ringisho is individually reviewed by the departments and bureaus involved in the content, and it is not customary for the relevant parties to hold a meeting to discuss and deliberate, and (3) the legal authority to approve the ringisho is only held by the head of the organization (the minister in the case of a ministry, the president in the case of a company), but the head of the organization usually has the practice of accepting decisions made after this long process as a rule. For this reason, the ringisho system is called the "accumulation method" and criticized as "hanko administration."

There are various theories about the origin of the ringi system, including those that trace it back to the decision-making method used by the shogunate at the end of the Edo period and those that emphasize the influence of the Prussian bureaucracy, but in any case, it is different from the decision-making method used in modern bureaucratic organizations. Indeed, by adopting the ringi system, even the lowest-ranking employees would feel that they were participating in the organization's decision-making, and it would be effective in preventing objections from arising from within the organization after the decision has been made. On the other hand, however, this system has three defects. The first is a decrease in efficiency. Not only does the ringi process take a long time, but progress stagnates when the relevant parties are absent or are left unconsciously or consciously. The second is the dispersion of responsibility. Since the final responsibility for the decision lies with the Chief Secretary, even if the drafter or the circulator is aware that he or she has read the document, there is little awareness of the responsibility for the implementation of the decision. Furthermore, the Chief Secretary did not personally instruct the drafting of each document, and therefore, although he is aware of his legal responsibility, he lacks the willingness and ability to revise the content of the document of his own volition. This is why this system is called a "system of irresponsibility." The third problem is the lack of leadership in decision-making or the difficulty of providing leadership (the "lordly system"). In order to correct the above defects, it would be desirable to adopt a "sticking-it-alone system" in which the Chief Secretary makes decisions on important issues himself or with the assistance of his staff, and delegates authority for the remaining parts to his subordinates for decision-making.

[Taguchi Fukuji]

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

わが国の行政府ならびに企業における明治以来の意志決定の方式。行政（または経営）における意志決定が、末端の職員によって起案された文書（これを稟議書という）を、関係官（者）に順次回議して、その印判を求め、さらに上位者に回送して、最後に法令で定められた決裁者に至る方式、と定義されている（辻清明）。稟議制の特色は、（1）起案が決定権も指導力ももたない末端の職員によって行われること、（2）稟議書は、その内容に関係をもつ課部局の者によって個別に審議されるのであって、関係者が会議を開いて討論審議することは通例ではないこと、（3）稟議書を承認する法的権限は、組織の長（各省ならば大臣、企業ならば社長）にのみあるが、組織の長は、普通は、この長い過程を経た意志決定を原則として認める慣行があること、などである。そのため稟議制は「積み上げ方式」とよばれ、「ハンコ行政」と批判される。

　稟議制の起源については、これを幕末の幕閣における意志決定方式に求めるもの、プロイセンの官僚制の影響を重視するものなど諸説があるが、いずれにしろそれは近代的官僚制組織の意志決定の方式とは異質である。なるほど、稟議制の方式を採用することによって、末端の職員にも組織の決定に参加しているという意識をもたせ、かつ、決定後に、組織内部から異議の生ずるのを未然に防ぐ効果はあろう。しかしその反面、この方式には三つの欠陥がある。第一は能率の低下で、稟議の過程が時間的に長いというだけではなく、関係者が不在であるとか、無意識的か意識的に放置する場合には進行が停滞する。第二は責任の分散である。決定の最終責任は最高長官にあるから、起草者や回議者は書類に目を通したという自覚はあっても、その決定の実行結果についての責任の自覚が乏しい。また最高長官も、自己の責任において起案の指示をいちいち行ったわけではないから、法的責任の意識はあっても、その内容を自分の意志で修正する意欲も能力も乏しい。この方式が「無責任の体系」といわれるゆえんである。第三は、決定に対する指導力の不足ないし指導の困難性である（「殿様方式」）。以上のような欠陥を是正するためには、重要な問題については長官が自らあるいはスタッフの援助を受けて決定し、残る部分については部下に権限委譲を行って決定させる「はりつけ方式」を採用することが望ましい。

［田口富久治］

出典　小学館　日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ)日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ)について　情報 | 凡例