Recent orders

Handling Human Resource Issues in Chinese Culture

Handling Human Resource Issues in Chinese Culture

Name

Institution

Handling Human Resource Issues in Chinese Culture

According to Hofstede’s model, there are several dimensions of viewing culture. These include individualism-collectivism, power-distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity-feminism, and long-term orientation. These dimensions define the cultural behaviors among different human groups. Culture gives one a feeling of belonging, which consequently influences one’s behavior. Moreover, culture determines one’s means of handling issues and interacting with other people (Soares, Farhangmehr, and Shoham, 2007). In cases where one mingles with people originating from a different culture, he or she will highly maintain their original cultural behavior. Such are cases that occur on international business platforms where people from differing cultures interact. However, it is crucial for people to maintain their culture but at the same time, respect other’s ethnicity. In such situations, it is notable that cultural groups handle issues in differing ways. For example, a Chinese human resource management handles issues that relate to their division in a different way from that of the United States.

In reference to the Hofstede’s model, it is clear that the Chinese human resource management is categorized as high in power distance, unlike that of the United States. Chinese culture leans more towards hierarchy than the United States. In the Chinese culture, hierarchy is an important factor to uphold and respect, even at the places of work. Consequently, it influences the manner in which the human resource department handles issues that sprout among its workers. The management is given ultimate authority over the workers, and any decision made is unquestionable. Culture plays a huge role in this since the subordinates follow authority without much of a problem. On the other hand, within the United States, culture elaborates otherwise in comparison to that of China (Zhang and Edwards, 2003). In America, the culture is low in power distance. Thus, hierarchy is not viewed from an authoritative angle but a structural angle. Workers in the United States display the expected respect to their management. Subsequently, the management treats their workers with due respect and do not stumble over them with authority.

In accordance to Hofstede’s framework, China’s culture is high in long-term orientation, which is yet another dimension separating different ethnic behaviors. Human resource departments within China believe in taking extensive time in fostering desired virtues. These virtues are encouraged with an aim of improving the worker’s production. Consequently, companies are able to reap from the high production levels of their workers. Hence, human resource management exposes their new employees to extensive training. This way, the human resource management keeps the new employees informed on all that is needed for them to work efficiently. Orientation in the United States does not take up much time as that within China. Thus, human management in the United States is low on long-term orientation since employees keep acquiring new and necessary information as they continue to work (Stone and Stone-Romero, 2008).

Individualism-collective is another dimension that Hofstede elaborates in his framework. It is low among Chinese human resource departments when dealing with employee related issues. This dimension explains the behavior among people within a cultural group. Hofstede explained that there are two relationships among cultural groups. A cultural group can either be individualistic or collectivistic. Individualistic cultures constitute of people taking care of themselves and members belonging to their families. On the contrary, collectivistic cultures focus on taking care of everyone regardless of their family roots. There is low individualism within the Chinese culture unlike in the United States, where it is highly upheld. The culture among Chinese companies encourages collectivism among employees rather than individualistic cultural behaviors. All employees are expected to act and behave in similar ways with the interest of the company being their foremost priority whilst at work. Thus, when an issue related to an individual’s behavior and affects the company’s productivity arises, the human resource management will handle it from a collectivist angle. They put the company’s interest first prior to that of the individual workers. This can be categorized as a harsh way of handling matters since people have feelings and rights that need to be respected. Such cases often end up with the employees being on the losing end since their reasons are not as significant as the company’s (Joynt and Warner, 2002).

In the United States, individualism is highly encouraged among employees within companies. The human resource is meticulous enough to accord their employees the expected respect. Thus, they put their employee’s personal needs such as comfort and health provisions into consideration. This shows that they care about their employees’ wellbeing and are ready to support and listen to them when matters concerning their productivity arise. Hence, they take their employees through fair processes as they try to comprehend the matters that stirred up the issue at hand.

Indeed, both the Chinese and the United States human resource managements have their different ways of dealing with issues arising among their workers. However, China is making drastic changes aimed at adopting the western way of executing things in the human resource departments. As such, they highly encourage individualism and shun collectivism among employees in China. Although it brings about change in the Chinese culture, it is careful enough to improve means of handling issues among employees.

References

Joynt, P. & Warner, M. (2002). Managing across cultures: Issues and perspectives. London: Cengage Learning EMEA.

Soares, A. N., Farhangmehr, M. & Shoham, A. (2007). Hofstede’s dimensions of culture in international marketing studies. Journal of Business Research, 60: 227-284.

Stone, D. & Stone-Romero, E. (2008). The influence of culture on human resource management processes and practices. New York, NY: Psychology Press.

Zhang, M. & Edwards, E. (2003). HRM practice and the influence of “the Country of Origin” in Chinese MNC’s operating in the UK. Retrieved on September 1 2013 from http://www.ilo.org/public/english/iira/documents/congresses/world_13/track_3_zhang.pdf

PROCEDURES AND TRANSITION

Name

Professor

Course

Date

Introduction

Throughout decades, researchers have criticized organization evaluation individuals by ignoring large forms of social structures. Some researchers have provided details of organization communication theories. Large forms of social structure include organization aspects such as regulations, traditions, policies and customs. Macro-phenomena are outside features that appear to control the organization, but they have their own life by controlling and manipulating members.

There is increased attention in different levels where researchers are interested in connecting individual actions to structures of an organization (May, & Dennis, 2005). This is the core task of researchers analyzing organization communication concepts. Research shows that institutions can link macro-phenomena into organization communication structures. It is therefore, the responsibility of communication researchers to analyze the sociological roots of an organization and changing sociological concepts to enhance communication within an organization. Researchers argue that organization communication has been ignored in the past , but there is enormous potential that can solve facing organization communication.

Even with all this attention there is no clear definition of organization communication up to date. The institution character can assist in organizing the developing body of communication organization (May, & Dennis, 2005). It is proposed that institutional theory of communication organization can help connect institution theory of sociology. A formal theory is developed to describe the role of institutions in communication theory through the established practices and beliefs in an organization.

The word institution has different meanings that are used synonymously with an organization in reference to church, school, hospital or cooperation. Institution is also used to refer to large organization such as the state and the economy. Therefore, institutions help individuals to understand organization community. The plans in an institution use fundamental concepts such as behaviors and beliefs together with established practices. Moreover, the propositions connect these elements to concepts of membership such as rational myths and hierarchy. The concepts are grouped logically from general to specific terms that are conceptual but not operation.

There is a proposition where communication helps to sustain institutions. Researchers argue that institutions are constituted by communications. Individuals identify beliefs and practices routinized to sustain an organized institution. This proposition argues that institutions are sustained by following rules and practices (May & Dennis, 2005). Most researchers anticipate seeing the reproduction of institution through communication. However, it takes time for an institution to change since these changes emerge from practices and rules within an institution. These institutions can be adapted into new ways where rules are connected to the organization structure. This plan is consistent with communication processes that connect to institutions. People who accept individual rules in an organization tend to produce these rules through communication. There are internal and external aspects in this proposition making reproduction be biased.

Some researchers have provided details of organization communication theories. There is increased attention in different levels where researchers are interested in connecting individual action and structures of an organization. It is therefore, the responsibility of communication researchers to analyze the sociological roots of an organization and changing sociological concepts to enhance communication within an organization. Therefore, institutions help individuals to understand organization community.

Economic activities in some cultures extensively ignored women. Even though some of their work was recognized, individual women were not allowed to make decisions in connection to production, investment, distribution and consumption. Women were viewed as controllers of household chores. It is unfortunate that women contribute a lot in development but they are rarely recognized.

Most of the societies practice division of labor by sex and age. Traditional western models assumed men to be economic providers since their role was dynamic while women were domestic consumers and their role was static (Bosen, 2005). Anthropologist and other social scientist have discovered that men are only partial economic providers. The contribution of men towards women and children vary in different cultures and depends in variations of women work. Women make significant economic decisions not only for children but also for men and the society. Therefore, the important issue in analyzing economic system of any society is by considering the division of labor, and ways the fruits and labor are shared.

The early model of hunting society presented man as the chief provider and decision maker in the society. The early model of foragers as the blue print of sexual division of labor has been widely criticized (Merlan, 2007). It was assumed that foragers depended on meat as their only food and men did all the hunting as women stayed in camps with children waiting for men to bring them food. Anthropologist challenged this model when they started analyzing the contribution of women in foragers’ society. After extensive research, there are four changes in the model. Meat was not the staple food in forages society compared to the total food intake (Reskin, 2010). When meat was less important in the meal than plant food men still went out to hunt while women provided food for their groups through their contributions. Even in the male hunting and women, gathering model contributes sexual separation in food contribution especially between animal and vegetable food. Division of labor between sexes is flexible and changing in individuals and cooperative efforts.

There are some difficulties in separating horticultural and agricultural societies. The major difference is the intensity of farming that has major implication in division of labor. Horticulturalist utilize land extensively with little investing in cultivation than agriculturalist. They clear new fields but they do not invest in terracing and putting fertilizers (Reskin, 1984). Horticulture use hand tools while agriculturalist use plows and draft animals. Females mainly contribute horticultural cultivation such as shift cultivation.

Conclusion

Anthropologists have researched extensively various cultural societies in connection to economic roles by women. They have found that world markets and economic institutions have difficult effects that are different for both men and women. Women access to employment, education and technology is hindered by childcare interference and the expectation of the society that childcare will affect women duties. This is challenging to women since they opt to have few children for succeeding in gaining greater economic independence. Even though some economists continue to ignore gender differences in economic development of a society, exclusion of women from economic analysis is increasing and hard to justify.

References Bosen, L, (2005), women and economic institutions, New York: Oxford Brooker.

Merlan, F, (2007), Women, Productive Roles, and Monetisation of the ‘Service Mode’ in Aboriginal Australia: Perspectives from Katherine, Northern Territory.

Reskin, B, (2010), Sex Segregation in the Workplace: Trends, Explanations, Remedies, New York: National Academies Press.

May, S, and Dennis, M. (2005) Engaging Organizational Communication Theory & Research: Multiple Perspectives. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage. Print.