Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T12:10:10.676Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Globalization of Chinese Firms: What Happens to Culture?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 June 2015

Kwok Leung
Kwok Leung*
Affiliation:
Chinese University of Hong Kong, China
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Child and Marinova’s (2014) framework provides an important conceptual tool to analyze the globalization of Chinese firms by highlighting the Chinese context and the context of the host country. Their framework is defined by two dimensions: political stability and institutional maturity, which needs to be augmented by a cultural dimension. To illustrate this argument, I review the importance of a broadened notion of cultural distance, intercultural competence, and intergroup dynamics in shaping the learning and adaptation, and eventual success of Chinese expatriates and firms in their global expansion. There is a severe lack of research on the culture-related issues confronting Chinese global firms, a priority area for future research.

摘要

摘要

通过强调中国情境和东道国情境，Child和Marinova（2014）的研究框架为分析中国企业的全球化提供了重要的概念工具。他们的研究框架分为两个维度：政治稳定性和制度成熟度，但这两个维度都需要一个文化维度来加强。为了展示这种论述，我回顾了文化距离的扩展性概念—跨文化胜任力以及在塑造学习和适应中群体间的动态性的重要性，这些最终导致中国外派人员和企业在全球扩展中的成功。现有研究缺乏对中国海外企业遇到的问题的研究，这将是未来研究中的优先领域。

Keywords

Chinese firmscultureglobalization中国企业文化全球化
Type
Forum Commentaries
Information
Management and Organization Review , Volume 10 , Issue 3 , November 2014 , pp. 391 - 397
Copyright
Copyright © International Association for Chinese Management Research 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brouthers, K. D., & Brouthers, L. E. 2001. Explaining the national cultural distance paradox. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(1): 177–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, C. C., Chen, X., & Huang, S. 2013. Chinese guanxi: An integrative review and new directions for future research. Management and Organization Review, 9(1): 167–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Child, J., & Marinova, S. 2014. The role of contextual combinations in the globalization of Chinese firms. Management and Organization Review, 10(3): 347–371.Google Scholar
Chiu, C.-Y., Gelfand, M. J., Yamagishi, T., Shteynberg, G., & Wan, C. 2010. Intersubjective culture: The role of intersubjective perceptions in cross-cultural research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(4): 482–493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeRue, D. S., & Ashford, S. J. 2010. Who will lead and who will follow? A social process of leadership identity construction in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35(4): 627–647.Google Scholar
Earley, P. C., & Ang, S. 2003. Cultural intelligence: Individual interactions across cultures. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelfand, M. J., Raver, J. L., Nishii, L., Leslie, L. A., Lun, J., Lim, B. C., … Yamaguchi, S. 2011. Differences between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study. Science, 332: 1100–1104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gong, Y. 2003. Subsidiary staffing in multinational enterprises: Agency, resources, and performance. Academy of Management Journal, 46(6): 728–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gudykunst, W. B. 1993. Toward a theory of effective interpersonal and intergroup communication: An anxiety/uncertainty management (AUM) perspective. In Wiseman, R. J. & Koester, J. (Eds.), Intercultural communication competence, international and intercultural communication annual, Vol. 16: 3–17. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hammer, M. R. 2011. Additional intercultural validity testing of the intercultural development inventory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35(4): 474–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstede, G. 2001. Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Hong, Y.-Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C.-Y., & Benet-Martínez, V. 2000. Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. American Psychologist, 55(7): 709–720.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Javidan, M., Dorfman, P. W., & Gupta, V. (Eds.). 2004. Culture, leadership, and organizations: The GLOBE study of 62 societies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Javidan, M., & Teagarden, M. B. 2011. Conceptualizing and measuring global mindset. Advances in Global Leadership, 6: 13–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kogut, B., & Singh, H. 1988. The effect of national culture on the choice of entry mode. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3): 411–432.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurman, J., & Ronen-Eilon, C. 2004. Lack of knowledge of a culture’s social axioms and adaptation difficulties among immigrants. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(2): 192–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leung, A. K.-Y., Lee, S.-L., & Chiu, C.-Y. 2013. Meta-knowledge of culture promotes cultural competence. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(6): 992–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leung, K., & Bond, M. H. 2004. Social axioms: A model for social beliefs in multicultural perspective. In Zanna, M. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology, Vol. 36: 119–197. New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Leung, K., Ang, S., & Tan, M. L. 2014. Intercultural competence. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 1: 489–519.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackie, D. M., & Goethals, G. R. 1987. Individual and group goals. In Hendrick, C. (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology: 144–166. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Manev, I. M., & Stevenson, W. B. 2001. Nationality, cultural distance, and expatriate status: Effects on the managerial network in a multinational enterprise. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(2): 285–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. 2001. Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108(2): 291–310.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Selmer, J., Chiu, R. K., & Shenkar, O. 2007. Cultural distance asymmetry in expatriate adjustment. Cross Cultural Management, 14(2): 150–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shenkar, O. 2001. Cultural distance revisited: Towards a more rigorous conceptualization and measurement of cultural differences. Journal of International Business Studies, 32(3): 519–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, P. B., Huang, H. J., Harb, C., & Torres, C. 2012. How distinctive are indigenous ways of achieving influence? A comparative study of guanxi, wasta, jeitinho, and ‘pulling strings’. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 43(1): 135–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. 1986. The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Worchel, S. & Austin, W. G. (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup relations: 7–24. Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
Tan, D., & Snell, R. S. 2002. The third eye: Exploring guanxi and relational morality in the workplace. Journal of Business Ethics, 41(4): 361–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Zee, K. I., & Van Oudenhoven, J. P. 2000. The multicultural personality questionnaire: A multidimensional instrument of multicultural effectiveness. European Journal of Personality, 14(4): 291–309.3.0.CO;2-6>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wall, J. A. Jr, & Stark, J. 1998. North American conflict management. In Leung, K. & Tjosvold, D. (Eds.), Conflict Management in the Asia Pacific: 303–333. Singapore: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Wood, E. D., & El Mansour, B. 2010. Integrative literature review: Performance interventions that assist Chinese expatriates’ adjustment and performance: Toward a conceptual approach. Human Resource Development Review, 9(2): 194–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xin, K. K., & Pearce, J. L. 1996. Guanxi: Connections as substitutes for formal institutional support. Academy of Management Journal, 39(6): 1641–1658.Google Scholar