Hofstede Labels the Chinese as a Collectivist Culture Report (Assessment)

Introduction

The economy of China has been affluent in the past decades reporting economic growth rates surpassing 8.0%. This makes China to play an imperative role and contribute significantly towards the growth of global economy.

However, the corporations found in China have failed to impress the globe different from its remarkable economic growth rate. To boost the gross industrial output and economic growth rate, China has been considerably dependent on the FDI (foreign direct investments).

Study literature nonetheless indicates that most industries based in China embrace labour intensive strategy to produce low cost products. Besides, local based companies fail to generate state-of-the-art commodities while most management hardly prospers in compounded cultural situations.

Previously, many companies found in China operated in protected economic and business environments because of business protectionisms. Nevertheless, the pace at which China opens up and pursue economic reforms has enabled the country to emerge as an economic growth element.

Despite the fact that the adopted business strategies failed to be productive, various Chinese business enterprises and industries are in the right path to prosperity given the intensity of the assumed culture. Compared to the developed states, firms in China have weaker innovative cultural capacities.

Thus, the Chinese companies encountered serious challenges and problems with respect to adapting to global business competitions and situations. Such competitions have compelled Chinese companies to be inventive to adapt to the prevailing changes.

To be competitive, various scholars have reiterated that Chinese corporations should not just concentrate on developing processes and commodities, but should focus on managing, monitoring, understanding, and learning the Chinese culture to succeed.

As Hofstede puts it, Chinese citizens and corporations tend to embrace collectivism culture in their operations in order to thrive in the current competitive globalized markets. In fact, the collectivist Chinese culture is typified in the Chinese corporations’ innovative culture (Tjosvold & Ziyou, 2007).

This paper offers an analysis on why Hofstede often labeled the Chinese as a collectivist culture. The paper is anchored on personal experience and discusses as well as offers examples on the reason why Chinese is labeled as a collectivist culture.

Defining culture

The concept of culture has long been correlated to education, ethnography, communication, psychology, and sociology. When all these aspects are distinctively investigated, they offer specific definitions for the word culture.

Kit-Fai, Kwai-Sang and Lau (2000), assert that culture incorporates various beliefs and standards that individuals and groups share in their societies. Howell and Shea (2006) on the other hand claim that culture entails lifestyles embraced by individuals or groups.

For instance, culture includes the society, value systems, technologies, livelihoods, ideologies, behaviours, as well as speeches.

Hofstede (1983) while studying the people’s values asserted that culture has four distinctive dimensions namely the avoidance of uncertainty, masculinity or femininity, individualism or collectivism, as well as power distances.

Given that, there are various definitions for corporate culture, Hofstede, Neuijen, Ohayv and Sanders (1990) offered the most accurate definition for culture. The scholars define corporate culture to incorporate a collective encoding of individual and groups ideas distinguishing people in different groups.

This implies that, culture materializes to be the jointly held standards systems that could be transformed anytime.

Martinsons and Hempel (1995) claim that culture can be gauged on the basis of various characteristics including stability, aggressiveness, the orientation of teams, people, and results, as well as paying attention to details, taking risks and innovations.

The current Chinese culture and corporate culture

The Confucian value scheme is the social predominant point in the culture of Chinese. According to Confucius and his devotees, Confucianism refers largely to several dogmas. Indeed, Confucianism is a scheme in the philosophy of ethical prospects and moral dictates that cuddle the concepts, which are imprecise and broad.

Through micro entities of the society like families, this philosophical system upholds social order and the sensitivity in the chain of command (Lo, 1997).

Therefore, the culture of China together with the dimensions of Hofstede exhibits features such as avoidance of uncertainty, masculinity or femininity, individualism or collectivism, as well as power distances

High power distance typifies Chinese collective culture according to Choi, Troy, and Veillette (2009). Compared to the other corresponding persons from Japan and Europe, the Chinese top management revels in influence over every decision.

This emanates from the study of Chinese enterprise in regards to power distance and their structural impact. In fact, in China the power in decision-making is federal. However, the decision-making in Japan and Europe sees power as comparatively well balanced amongst different management echelons in an organization.

A Chinese middle manager for instance hardly has any say in the decision-making processes compared to a foreman in Western nation.

The culture of Chinese honors seniority and power authority greatly. Hence, this results into the nature of centralized power in the culture of Chinese. The collectivist culture is echoed from the Confucian epitome that an individual obeys frontrunners as well as their parentages.

Certainly, the position of an individual in a corporation in China is deemed significant more than the name. This makes the people of China to prefer being identified with business title names. Specifically, these business names aid in making clear an individual’s membership and rank in a company (Martinsons & Hempel, 1995).

The culture of Chinese emphasizes on social cohesion, sensitivity, trust, and collection harmony. On the other hand, the culture inspires an intricate chain of command based on inter-dependencies and inter-relationships.

Here, individualism is not observed as an extension of individual obligation and identity but rather to be expressive of egocentric conduct. This shows that Chinese collective culture is slanted towards a group. Thus, preeminence is harmonized to a group and accord building.

There is necessity for trust and co-operation amid every single member within the group. Subsequently with the aim of maintaining accord in the group, co-operation and trust make it essential for a person to assist, tell truth and self-regard at times (Hofstede, 1983).

The Chinese become concerned with affiliation and are more emotive due to the emphasis on harmony conservation and the safeguarding of face and honor. Within an organization, the Chinese are then inclined to dishearten interpersonal rivalry.

An organization experiences jeopardy instead of boosted objective achievement. This emanates due to numerous rivalries amongst organization members for extrinsic recompenses. The order of upkeep within the masses of distinct families influences the stability of the entire nation.

Generally, lots of reliance is sited upon inter-personal rapports in the Chinese business conduct as regards to the Confucian philosophy. A time-honored propensity towards the reliance on individual trust is in the culture of Chinese (Howell & Shea, 2006).

Surely, several business dealings are established on individual rapports. The growth of extensive individual relations is deemed as the critical aspect of business in the Chinese collective culture. Nevertheless, this circumstance is facing modifications with the implementation of a number of commercial decrees.

The existence of the concept of face in the collective culture of Chinese needs to be alluded mainly as it integrates ego and social image aspects. In addition, face aspect is a measure of social worth devoid of which an individual cannot function in the collective culture of the Chinese (Cameron, 1994).

In an individual’s conduct and psychology, the concept of face places a significant starring role in delineating interactions and it features rather prominently. Indeed, everybody in the Chinese collective culture comprehends the requirements that must be met to uphold unwavering relationship.

Thus, the occurrence of resilient face consideration subdues war. The concept of face incorporates the dimensional groups, which are likely to predominate over personal concerns.

Unlike in the Western where concepts like face might possibly be used to mean social standing and individual pride, face is closely entwined by way of personal victory within the context of Chinese collective culture.

Respect for authority, co-operative behavior, and accountability are what the collective culture of Chinese places a premium on based on Homburg, Workman and Jensen (2000) assertions.

From the high extent of homogeneousness and socialism necessitated by the Chinese collective culture, there is a propensity for China to evade jeopardy and uncertainty. Actually, risk extends amongst members of a group since verdicts are usually taken collectively.

As it is impossible to identify an individual, the responsibility takes place at the group stage. Moreover, blunders and errors made by an individual can endanger the entire group.

For that reason, accountability amongst the Chinese is important at the group stage to generate a propensity in the direction of averting the ensuing danger (Homburg, Workman & Jensen, 2000).

Definitely, personal career development in China frequently relies on risk taking but much more on avoiding the occurrences of errors. Power amongst the Chinese companies is not communal but concerted at the top in the organizational management.

The responsibility of Chinese archetypal administrative structure is spread due to the collective decision making processes despite that fact that structure emerges to be hierarchical. Generally, to a foreigner, it becomes problematic figuring out the actual decision makers due to the subsequent ambiguities.

Because of the Chinese resilient future planning instead of present attitude of consumption, the people of China plunge into an enduring orientation primarily and place a great worth of values on the philosophy of Confucian (Homburg, Workman & Jensen, 2000).

To be prosperous in future life, the Chinese considers it righteous to obtain skills, knuckle down, and be cultured. A higher sense of capitalism is encouraged in the standards embedded within the lasting orientation from the organization point of view.

Actually, personal aspects orientation of long-term strategies strengthens the entrepreneurial standpoints when combined together. The cultural custom of China will profoundly sway the Chinese administration continuously. Large power distance will stand to be the exceptional characteristic of administration in China.

In addition, the paternalistic leadership style will correspondingly remain in the Chinese business as a subjugated way of headship. Conversely, there is a resilient sway on hierarchical structure, federal authority, and schemes of administration in China (Pan, Chin, and Lau, 2000).

Similarly, the rheostat mechanism and the informal coordination of both the Chinese foreign businesses and the internal government got influence from the predominant Chinese cultural standards.

Currently, several Chinese old-style organizations are typically bureaucratic and formal especially the enterprises that are owned by the nation. Therefore, the upgrading of self-administration practices and the empowerment of workers is rarely fortified in Chinese institutional practices.

Besides, bounds to the administrative processes, practices, and notions are set by the Cultural standards. In managerial decision making in China, a study examines managers’ perception in regards to the structure of work.

The study reveals that executives desire a tall extent of subordinate consultation and they equally observe the important usage of time limits and schedules in making decisions.

At large, deficiency of idea communication from the organization top to bottom administration causes a barrier for the employees to report pessimistic incidences to the high-ranking management (Feng, Tang & Dai, 2010).

The novelty of Chinese corporation as a collective culture

The capacity of innovation in the Chinese firms is feeble as compared to the other world’s industrialized nations. However, enterprises and the echelons of technology in the Chinese industries are augmenting.

Lack of science and technology as well as inefficient incorporation amid economic activities has led to this condition. A system of benchmarking presentation that fails to put emphasis on aboriginal firms’ innovation is also another factor attributing to this phenomenon.

In addition, the other attribute is frail IPR and lack of effective institutions and policies that enable key industries to stimulate indigenous innovation (Tjosvold & Ziyou, 2007). The dramatic changes in Chinese division of labor and industrial structure have been experienced during the twenty first century.

These results from the growth of the advanced technology and globalization brought about by collectivist culture.

The development of Chinese collectivist economies are mainly driven by the knowledge based services, software, and information industries. Besides, the development of economy has moved to the novelty of knowledge and technology from depending on the capital and resources that are natural in nature.

The technologically advanced nations in light of these vicissitudes have been attentive on the growth of the innovative sectors of manufacturing inside their states. Through FDI outflows besides mergers and acquisitions of transnational companies, these nations relocate less-advanced industrial and processing operations to the developing nation states. As a result, different republics face changes in the division of labor for the most part in inexpert and skillful laborers (Cameron, 1994). Such resource endowments are collectively used for the benefits of the corporations and clients served.

The Chinese collectivist opportunities and challenges in the economy of China are presented through the adjustment of manufacturing structure all over the world.

As the most important force behind Chinese economic long-standing industrial growth, the economic objective of China is to tie together technological novelty. As a collective culture, China promotes larger scientific and technological progress besides upgrading the manufacturing structures (Feng, Tang & Dai, 2010).

China has established an extensive range of highly ranked industries and experienced rapid development in economy due to collectivism and open door strategy.

Nevertheless, low appeal added to production, ecological degradation, and high level of resource leftover and ingestion typify the development of Chinese economy.

To develop the Chinese worldwide competitiveness and promote the manufacturing technology, China has emboldened indigenous novelty amongst Chinese industries.

Chinese as a collectivist nation has shifted and improved to a more advanced structure and wide-ranging technology. In the fiscal 2003, the share of collective technological industries contributions moved to 14.0% from 11.0% where it was initially in the fiscal 1998.

On the contrary, a drop to 30.0% from 33.0% in the value added for low-tech industries as a fraction of the entire value added for the industrial sector was experienced due to non-collective culture.

However, there is a great upsurge in the capacity of innovation and technology between the Chinese corporations when the corporations involved work jointly (Tjosvold & West, 2004).

A number of firms in China fail to conceive the benefit of collective culture opportunities. In the odd occasions, the Chinese corporations do not demeanor additional novelty on imported technology, as there is low absorption of the imported technology (Martinsons, & Hempel, 1995).

Personal case examples

Without doubt, China has a collective culture in that the Chinese companies and their frontrunners conceive profound insight of integrating the novelty conception and innovation with the organization culture.

For instance, corporations such as Haier, Wahaha, China mobile, Dongfeng automobile, Shanghai Jahwa, and Huawei are all Marxist companies. To start with, Haier as the lead Chinese white good industry was established primarily on the corporate culture and technological aspects of innovation.

The company has a comprehensive concept of how to inspire the staff to be constantly innovative. This made Haier to be an archetypal company that inspires personal growth through merging the corporate culture and Chinese culture in order to gather the collective insight (Kuipers & Witte, 2005).

Haier binds its products’ standards together with the worldwide standard to attain a better-quality product presentation. At the outset, Haier had gotten a certificate on global standardization organization.

Through its gradual innovative development, the company grasped the prospect low ingesting of energy required in progress. As a final point, Haier took part in the setting up of the transnational industrial standard.

In the recent past Haier participated in twenty established global industrial standard works and had approximately ten thousand patents. Haier thus created their collective cultural philosophy on Strategy Business Unit (SBU) and Overall Every Control and Clear (OEC).

Therefore, Haier is a characteristic example linking corporate and Chinese culture to gather a collective acumen by encouraging personal development (Feng, Tang & Dai, 2010).

The other company that can suggest collectivism in China is the Wahaha Corporation. The company is leading in the global marketplace and technology is its capability for growth, possessed sovereign research, and state enterprises certify its established laboratories and technical hubs.

In order to yield products that encounter the wants of the market, Wahaha shaped an independent innovation. Besides, the corporation required their specific expertise that categorically enabled them to be dependent on other companies’ technology to realize long-term marketplace leverage (Shadur, Kienzle, & Rodwell, 1999).

The company launched more than two innovative products a year and with its scientific research competences, Wahaha set up a resilient improvement center. This saw a fresh product come to be widespread amongst consumers because of the innovative concept in the fiscal 2008.

The culture of Wahaha was developed from the Confucian or the Chinese traditional collective culture that accentuated on collaboration essence. In fact, the initial president of Wahaha paid extra attention to the construction of family culture, which is the culture of this corporation.

Consequently, this collective culture has steered Wahaha to its future realization through stimulated growth for over twenty years. To evade facing the difficulty in affiliations amid enterprises and the society as well as workers and enterprise was Wahaha primal business consideration.

Wahaha discretely viewed the society, corporation, and personnel as large, medium, and small families respectively. The philosophy of Wahaha as an integral element of the society is to serve and be responsible for both the community and the country.

Moreover, Wahaha small families gather to develop smoothly the medium families to foster the co-existence (Kuipers & Witte, 2005). This conveys a symbiotic rapport amid the company and the workforces, hence a collective culture.

Conversely, China Mobile Company also exemplifies collectivism in the Chinese culture. Several departments together with the other thirty-one secondary corporations render China Mobile as one of the largest companies that foster collectivism.

The China Mobile company has led the progression of mobile technology as the operator of mobile through the novelty of mobile communication technology over the past years. China Mobile then rehabilitated to a technical frontrunner from a technical supporter by launching a number of fresh technologies and services.

However, the corporation today experiences one major assignment and three essential defies (Howell & Shea, 2006).

These cultural challenges transpire from the declining domestic mobile popularization rates, the Chinese telecom industry ferocious rivalry, and the situation of Chinese sway with respect to macroeconomics and global crisis.

Kuipers and Witte (2005) claims that it is actually significant to produce the execution culture for the numerous dissimilar types of units since Chinese Mobile culture are profound. Thus, over and done with the cohesive core value regulations, it is in order to bump into the diverse demands in a rudimentary office.

Indeed, a culture scheme of the client’s service center is established in the secondary corporations with a third party adviser on the guidance of a company. The system of this joint culture has a strong direction, execution, and guidance.

Hence, the establishment of power support in lieu of the new-fangled consumers’ service model of operation. In the main, this collective culture has operative system of appraisal to swiftly promote administration and improve, detect, control, as well as implementing the virtuous cycles (Kuipers & Witte, 2005).

In addition, Dongfeng automobile company over the past century has put together business with transnational companies. Dongfeng has fast tracked the erection of self-developed procedures and schemes based on the innovative model platform with global import.

Furthermore, through the intercontinental corporation the company has made full use of multiple teams. The company for trainings has designated more than fifteen hundred highly technical persons and skilled professional from all over the world.

Besides, from the technical input to the output of the main decisive moment, there is a slow but sure technical overseas experience in the indigenous solidification of technology.

In the meantime, Dongfeng has accomplished the transfer of technology input to the technology output by exporting their expertise (Feng, Tang & Dai, 2010).

The utmost advanced transnational power technology in combination with state of affairs is attentive on absorption and digestion. However, Dongfeng Corporation has not only complete intellectual civil rights of belongings to make certain their private technology.

The aptitude to novelty through core technology and comprehension has fashioned and added value to the higher levels of future growths. The collective culture of Dongfeng organization supports the matrix administrative structure based on a business plan.

The Company has condensed costs in operation as compared to the traditional administration. Similarly, there is an optimization of resources in accordance to one administrative style in terms of engineering, rummage sales, finance, and production.

Hence, the company experiences proper coordination with the matrix management for advantageous competition (Martinsons, & Hempel, 1995).

Shanghai Jahwa is the other Chinese corporation that embodies collectivism in its innovative culture. The company technologically advanced the first set of innovative individual skin care produce.

This Herbalist Series high-end marquee was prepared by multiple essences of traditional Chinese corporations dealing in herbal medicine. In fact, Jahwa has inaugurated approximately five hundred herbalist stores in middle and large metropolises surrounding China.

Recently, Shanghai Jahwa changed the sales strategy and established a nationwide sales network by relocating its bazaars from main conurbations to rural marketplaces. All employees working in the branches are compelled to work jointly to achieve the corporation’s goals.

Now, it seems more important to institute a rational distribution and change Jahwa’s corporation structure for national assets. This is essential as a result of the contemporary foreign flea market and the austere condition at the internal bazaars.

Given that China has a mass market and dualistic markets, Shanghai embraces a collectivist culture. This augments the development of Chinese economy through improved extent of internationalization, inventive administration, core technology, and business scales.

Consequently, the collective culture makes Jahwa one of the outstanding Chinese enterprises. Jahwa recognizes the significance of competence of research and development as well as depending on the systematical marquee power.

Finally, Huawei in the same way brands the Chinese as a Marxist culture as Hofstede labels. Apart from being a prosperous IT industry in China, Huawei is also a global industry trailblazer.

Hitherto, the acumen of Huawei in innovation echoed on corporation’s investment and novelty calibration procedures such as direction, concept of customer oriented technology, and administration.

Huawei carried out open innovation collaboration with ISO and supplementary enterprises after attaining accumulation of experience and novelty.

To be precise, the company recently acquired more than thirty nine thousand patents in all regions after joining roughly one hundred and twenty five worldwide institutions (Cameron, 1994).

Huawei collective culture is based on scientific administrative structure novelty and customer care services. Besides, its culture comprises of aspects like cooperation, integrity, initiative and candidness, continuous development, and devotion.

Dedication enables Huawei to win the reverence of the consumers by improving competences and creating their worth. So the workforces are remunerated in accordance to their contributions.

Conversely, constant improvement is necessary in order to grow and improve the corporation and turn into a better pattern for the clients through dynamic learning and listening.

Furthermore, Huawei fervently pursues centric novelties of consumers openly driven by the necessities of the clients. The corporation is definite that the worth of process improvement, solution, product, and technology are eventually measured by the business victory.

Otherwise, the utmost cherished asset in Huawei is integrity and collectivity. Collectivity steers the company to win the reverence and trust by keeping their promises and conducting themselves in good conscience. Lastly, teamwork ensures the success at Huawei.

A virtuous establishment is put down in a well-organized procedure, streamlined inter-departmental collaboration, and a prosperous culturally varied teamwork by working collectively and equally in appalling and good periods.

Discussion

In China, government linked enterprises and big institutions have numerous administrative levels. Additionally, these institutions and enterprises have a throng of homogenous regulations and procedures as well as preferment based on knowledge of compliance to these strategies and procedures.

However, the culture of hierarchy is not obliging or effective to both the enrichment of companies’ presentation and promotion of growth. Simultaneously, since the fiscal 1993 the Chinese government initiated an immense economy reform project.

This reform work was principally attentive to the growth of an external oriented and a more marketplace enterprises based on possession of the state. As a result, a mixture of both hierarchical and flea market culture reproduced the Chinese companies collective culture.

One would lay down that certain archetypal characteristics reflecting numerous aspects are in China and Chinese companies based on the model of business practices. China started its marketplace economy reform not so longer in the aspect of hierarchy.

Indeed, the norms and pecking order of titles and status are fundamental in business events while networks are very significant since hierarchical procedures and schemes are not well established. Furthermore, study reveals that this impact is also found on the procedures of novelty.

A good number of technological capabilities attached to the Chinese companies were advocated for and enthused from executive to subordinate management levels.

In the meantime, the employees reverence the frontrunners power and comply with the guide after the leader has made the innovation guidelines and instructions (Lo, 1997). This implies that the resultant innovation products are collective efforts rather than individuals’ efforts.

There is a diminutive split-up amid secluded and civic life in the outlook of privacy. By way of unlike combination of partakers business can come about in everyplace at any time. As well, this feature can be echoed in particular Chinese companies.

For instance, a corporate culture that is family or clan culture adopted by Wahaha Corporation insisted on the erection of cohesive community inside an institute. In order to form an assimilated vision, Chinese companies asked their workforces to dedicate themselves and unite their views to conglomerates.

Currently, the Chinese corporations are going through business reforms and tremendous ecological vicissitudes (Hofstede, Neuijen, Ohayv & Sanders, 1990).

To establish operative corporate culture whilst upgrading the schemes of inner administration is a solitary objective of enterprise reforms. Chinese firms have been facing a resilient rivalry in both global and local souks all through the transition of China into a flea market economy.

Therefore, to fit in the marketplaces requirements most of the Chinese corporations are actively readjusting their corporate culture, schemes, and resources. Despite the fact that these enterprises made their development, they still trail behind in elevating their systems of administration.

However, the state owned enterprises fall back and are less marketplace oriented (Kit-Fai, Kwai-Sang & Lau, 2000). The prosperous companies in China practice a combination of the necessities of marketplace economy, the procedure for novelty, as well as the Chinese culture.

What influences the Chinese collectivist culture

The dimensions of business culture are very challenging to explain. To divide the corporate culture, a scholar proposed person, role, task, and power as the four-structure view to be used for explanation. The others assert to have recognized and considered another four generic external ecological structures.

Otherwise, another researcher who evaluated culture by use of an induced opinion in term of operating environment, policy, and structure mixes together the external and internal milieus. Thus, state culture performs as a significant aspect since historic and nationwide culture influences corporate culture very much.

Significantly, corporate culture deviates from another and is affected by diverse nations’ attitudes and values, edification schemes, laws, social organization, religious conviction, and lingos.

For the general culture on corporate culture to be seriously taken, there is adequate evidence of national cultural differences (Ralson, Terpstra, & Egri, 2006).

The American resilient characteristic tendency in their upgrade and recruitment practices is a good example. They base the recruitment and promotion on the morals relating to personal skills and knowledge.

In fact, this is in disparity with group oriented nations like China and Japan who put more emphasis on the responsibilities and assignments in collective terms. The corporate companies as well as the populaces of these republics are entirely emphasizes on individual abilities and associations of cooperation.

Hence, this model can give one a lot of information regarding the influence of culture on corporations. Those who make up an organization should comprehend as well as share the meaning and morals to help in describing culture.

Conversely, personal manners are acknowledged in responsiveness and assertiveness as mechanisms to set up the corporate culture. Subsequently, it is worth noting that corporate culture has an enormous rapport with individual outlook..

Conclusion

Literature shows that corporations are not just advised to develop and improve on the technological capacities to generate processes and commodities, which satisfy the requirements of the clients.

In fact, companies ought to be encouraged to establish corporate cultures, which are committed towards improving organizational performances. Corporations found in China both state owned and private owned enterprises are bureaucratic and highly formalized, but embrace collective culture.

This implies that Chinese corporations as labeled by Hofstede tend to embrace collectivist culture. For instance, in Chinese companies, information and ideas are hardly communicated to the bottom from the top management while workforces are normally not allowed to report unconstructive incidences to the corporations’ executive managements.

The ability to act collectively has enabled most leading corporations in China to maintain their competitive advantage over market competitors. As a matter of fact, most Chinese corporations tend to assume a collectivist culture in their innovative undertakings to continuously thrive in the global competitive markets.

In the leading Chinese companies, it is apparent that most firms tend to focus on market driven or market oriented innovative processes in order to outdo their market opponents.

For example, Chinese corporations encourage the employees to participate in the innovative processes although the suppliers’ factors are overlooked. In fact, any inventive information or products that accrue from a particular individual contribution are perceived as a collective effort.

The case examples given above illustrates that the Chinese companies innovations are hardly perceived as isolated business venture efforts, rather, the information suppliers are incorporated in the innovation implementation so that the ideas can be properly executed.

Given the level of market competitions, Chinese corporations encourage teamwork in order to be triumphant.

However, to realize this, employees in most Chinese corporations are compelled to work collectively during appalling and good moments to set bases for well-organized processes, rationalized interdepartmental teamwork, as well as triumphant cross cultural collaborations.

Given that, the resultant innovative ideas and products are never perceived to be an individual’s efforts, but rather a group’s efforts; then Hofstede was not wrong to label the Chinese culture as a collectivist culture.

References

Cameron, KS 1994, ‘Strategies for successful organizational downsizing’, Human Resource Management, vol.33 no.3, pp.189-211.

Choi, JN, Troy, AA & Veillette, A 2009, ‘Contextual inhibitors of employee creativity in organizations: the insulating role of creative ability’, Group & Organization Management, vol. 34 no.3, pp. 330 – 357.

Feng, C, Tang, W & Dai, J 2010, ‘Investigation of Dongfeng automobile facing up the economic crisis’, China Economic Information Daily 2010.

Homburg, C, Workman, JP & Jensen, O 2000, ‘Fundamental changes in marketing organizations: the movement towards a customer-focused organizational structure’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, vol.28 no.4, pp.459-478.

Hofstede, G, Neuijen, B, Ohayv, D & Sanders, G 1990, ‘Measuring organizational cultures: a qualitative and quantitative study across twenty cases’, Administrative Science Quarterly, vol.35, no.3, pp.286-316.

Hofstede, G 1983, ‘The cultural relativity of organizational practices and theories’, Journal of international business studies, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 75-89.

Howell, JM & Shea, CM, 2006, ‘Effects of champion behavior, team potency, and external communication activities on predicting team performance’, Group & Organization Management, vol. 31, no.2, pp.180 – 211.

Kit-Fai, P, Kwai-Sang, C & Lau, C 2000, ‘A review of the Chinese cultural influences on Chinese enterprise management’, International Journal of Management, vol. 2 no.2, pp. 325-338.

Kuipers, BS & Witte, MC 2005, ‘The control structure of team based organizations: a diagnostic model for empowerment’, Economic and industrial democracy,” vol.26 no.4, pp.621-643.

Lo, VH 1997, ‘The adoption of Confucian principles in quality management: proceedings of the CIRP international symposium’, Advanced Design and Manufacture in the Global Manufacturing Era, vol. 2, no.3, pp.958-963.

Martinsons, MG & Hempel, PS 1995, ‘Chinese management systems: historical and cross-cultural perspectives’, Journal of Management systems, vol.7 no.1, pp.1-11.

Ralson, J, Terpstra, W & Egri, C 2006, ‘Today’s state-owned enterprises of China: are they dying dinosaurs or dynamic dynamos?’ Strategic Management Journal, pp.825-842.

Shadur, MA, Kienzle, R & Rodwell, JJ, 1999, ‘The relationship between organizational climate and employee perceptions of involvement: the importance of support’, Group & Organization Management, vol.24 no.5, pp. 479 – 503.

Tjosvold, D & Ziyou, Y 2007, ‘Group risk taking the constructive role of controversy in China’, Group & Organization Management, vol. 32, pp. 653 – 674.

Tjosvold, ML & West, M 2004, ‘Reflexivity for team Innovation in China: the contribution of goal’, Interdependence Dean Group & Organization Management, vol.29 no.3, pp. 540 – 559.

This assessment on Hofstede Labels the Chinese as a Collectivist Culture was written and submitted by user Kaylynn C. to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly.

You can donate your paper here.

More Case Study Paper Examples