Whither Chinese HRM? Paradigms, models and theories

Abstract

In this introduction to this volume, we ask ‘Whither Chinese HRM?’ We explore the applicability of the concept of ‘paradigm’ to management in the Chinese context. Moving from the general to the particular, we discuss the notion of ‘paradigm-shift’ both in the natural and social sciences, moving on to the field of management studies and asking where this impinges on all things Chinese, including its HRM. A number of new original empirical studies chosen for this edited collection are then discussed vis-a-vis the above-mentioned themes. Of particular interest, is whether there is a dominant existing paradigm in play and what might be the prospect for the future. However, all things considered, we conclude that it would be premature as yet to say whether there is a ‘new paradigm’ emerging in the field.

Keywords:

• Asia
• China
• culture
• economics
• HRM
• paradigm

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank the following academic colleagues and collaborators for their advice and help in the development of the ideas in this contribution over the years: Syed Akhtar, John Benson, Samir Chatterjee, John Child, Ngan Collins, Daniel Z. Ding, Lex Donaldson, Vince Edwards, Keith Goodall, Grace Lee, Alan Nankervis, Sek-Hong Ng, Jane Nolan, Peter Nolan, Riccardo Peccei, Michael Poole, Chris Rowley, Bill Starbuck, Rosalie Tung, Morgan Witzel, Shuming Zhao, Ying Zhu and many others. I am grateful, too, for the long-term support of the present and past Directors and Faculty colleagues at the Judge Business School, as well as the past and present Presidents and Fellows of Wolfson College, in the University of Cambridge. I must also thank Penny Smith at the IJHRM for her administrative help and support.

Notes

1. See also Li, Leung, Chen and Luo (2012).

2. We must make it clear that we are using Google Scholar with some caution here and only as a surrogate of how widely specific work has diffused in academic usage. Harzing (2008) has created a new data source for citation analysis called ‘Publish or Perish’, based on this search-engine. Also see Leung (2007) on the ‘glory and tyranny’ of citation impact (p. 510).

3. The title of this book (Redding 1993) is, in fact, ‘Chinese Capitalism’ rather than Chinese management.

4. It should be noted that the term ‘sub-paradigm’ may have the virtue of logically nesting within the wider one of ‘Chinese management’.

5. This usage may parallel the less precise use of the term ‘Chinese HRM’ in the field, where it is often used rather generally as synonym for ‘people-management’ (see Warner 2012).

6. As yet, no major contemporary Chinese ‘management guru’ figure, possibly identified with either a key management innovation or a managerial theory or both, has emerged, unlike in the case of Japan, for instance in past decades.