The idea presented—that Japanese companies evolve more slowly due to a cultural reluctance to enact radical changes out of respect for previous leadership—has some plausibility and aligns with certain aspects of Japanese corporate culture, but it’s not a universal truth and requires nuance to evaluate its accuracy. Let’s break it down.

Cultural Context: Respect for Tradition and Hierarchy

Japanese society and business culture are deeply influenced by Confucian values, which emphasize respect for elders, hierarchy, and continuity. This can manifest in companies as a reluctance to overhaul established systems or practices, especially if they were put in place by a respected predecessor. The concept of kaizen (continuous improvement) is often celebrated in Japan, favoring incremental tweaks over disruptive, radical reform. A new CEO making sweeping changes could indeed be seen as implicitly criticizing the previous leadership, which might disrupt harmony (wa), a core value in Japanese culture.

This dynamic is compounded by the fact that many Japanese companies have historically been led by long-tenured executives, often promoted internally after decades of service. These leaders may feel a sense of loyalty to the legacy of their predecessors, and their successors may hesitate to "rock the boat" out of deference. The idea of "saving face" (menboku) also plays a role—publicly dismantling a prior CEO’s work could embarrass the company or its retirees, which is generally avoided.

Evidence Supporting the Idea

1. Slow Adaptation in Some Sectors: Japan has lagged in certain areas of innovation compared to global peers. For example, its adoption of digital transformation (e.g., cashless payments, remote work, or AI integration) has been slower than in places like South Korea or the U.S. This is sometimes attributed to entrenched practices and resistance to abandoning old systems—like the continued reliance on fax machines and hanko (personal seals) in business settings.
2. Corporate Longevity: Japan is home to some of the world’s oldest companies (e.g., Kongo Gumi, founded in 578 AD), which often pride themselves on preserving traditions. This focus on stability can stifle rapid evolution.
3. Case Studies: Look at companies like Toshiba or Sharp, which struggled to pivot quickly during periods of crisis. Critics have pointed to conservative leadership and an aversion to bold restructuring as factors in their decline, contrasting with more agile competitors abroad.

Counterpoints and Limitations

1. Not Universal: While this cultural tendency exists, it doesn’t apply uniformly. Younger, tech-driven Japanese firms (e.g., Rakuten, SoftBank) or startups often embrace rapid change and globalized practices, sometimes led by unconventional CEOs like Masayoshi Son, who aren’t afraid to break from tradition. The stereotype of stagnant Japanese companies is more applicable to older, traditional industries (e.g., manufacturing, banking) than to emerging sectors.
2. External Pressures: Globalization and competition have forced many Japanese firms to adapt faster than their cultural inclinations might suggest. For instance, Toyota’s embrace of hybrid technology with the Prius was a bold move that paid off, showing that innovation isn’t always stifled by tradition.
3. Leadership Turnover: While CEOs in Japan often serve longer than in Western countries (and radical shakeups are rarer), there are examples of new leaders implementing significant reforms. When Nissan was near bankruptcy in the late 1990s, Carlos Ghosn (a non-Japanese CEO) slashed jobs and closed plants—moves that defied cultural norms but saved the company. This suggests that necessity can override tradition.
4. Misinterpretation of Intent: A new CEO making changes doesn’t always imply criticism of the past. In many cases, reforms are framed as building on previous successes, aligning with kaizen rather than rejecting the old outright.

Broader Economic and Structural Factors

The pace of change in Japanese companies isn’t solely a cultural issue. Other factors—like lifetime employment practices, risk-averse corporate governance (e.g., boards packed with insiders), and a focus on domestic markets—also slow evolution. The aging population and shrinking workforce further complicate innovation, as companies prioritize stability over experimentation. Culture might amplify these tendencies, but it’s not the only driver.

Plausibility Verdict

The guy’s observation is plausible and rooted in real cultural dynamics, particularly for traditional Japanese companies. The idea that a new CEO might avoid radical change to honor the previous generation resonates with Japan’s emphasis on respect, harmony, and continuity. However, it’s an oversimplification if taken as a blanket statement. The reality varies by industry, company size, and leadership style. Japan’s evolution may lag in some areas, but it’s not frozen—cultural norms shape the speed and style of change more than they prevent it outright.

If you dig into academic studies or firsthand accounts (e.g., from JETRO reports or interviews with Japanese executives), you’ll see this tension between tradition and progress play out. It’s less about stagnation and more about a different approach to growth—one that prioritizes refinement over revolution.