Texts with an international orientation cannot escape the necessity of tackling the comparative contexts of culture, legal environment and the degree of freedom in markets. Generally, authors and scholars of different disciplines can assume at least one of these contexts to be stable. In regards to the work environment, this is not necessarily the case with China. The dynamics and scale of change in this nation may well set it apart from typical standards of international comparisons in general and HR comparisons specifically. This is an important criterion on which I think the authors of Human Resource Strategies in China should be judged as to the usefulness of their text.
In the end, the authors do drive home the point of the uniqueness of China and how this might be the beginnings of a new model rather than the usual grafting of Western models of HR into the local context. For this purpose they introduce the complex adaptive systems (CAS) model. But this vital point is saved to the last chapter. I think it should have been a premise laid out in the first chapter and the subsequent arguments and data presented to let the readers judge for themselves. But this is a matter of style and who the intended audience for the text might be. The question of style merits no further comment, but intended readership is a critical point worthy of evaluating in the context of the organization of the text.
If the reader is an accomplished practitioner and/or academic, the authors dwell too much on rehashing the ideology of Western models. They do this with the objective of setting the baseline for empirical and conceptual models of evolving Chinese HR, but this tends to undermine the substance of their contributions. The sequence and presentation of the topics made the book a much harder read than is necessary. The book suffers from inattentive editing too. While not pervasive, there are annoying text gaps and syntax ambiguities. With some reorganization and better editing, I think the end result could have been a sleek production with greatly expanded appeal to readers, especially since the content is rich enough that the book could have served the dual purposes of an introduction to Chinese HR and as a useful practitioner's manual.
The real meat of what this book offers lies in the empirical data about Chinese HR practices, in the introduction of cases, and in the recognition that from an intellectual perspective, something very new may be happening in the Middle Kingdom. I should like to take these up in order.
The empirical data are simple, but important in helping readers not familiar with China to recognize what are acceptable HR practices, the breadth of those practices in China, and whether or not they are integrated with business strategy. The reader is cautioned that the data are, however, of limited interpretation, and primarily derived from foreign invested enterprises (FIEs), or joint ventures (JVs) of medium and large manufacturing organizations. Descriptive statistics are presented in tabular form that classify the type of HR strategies being pursued and the pattern of HR practices that have emerged. This ignores the state owned enterprises (SOEs), township and village enterprises (TVEs), and Chinese private ventures. The HR context in each of these economic “sectors” is likely to be very different.
An underutilized strength of the text, and an excellent learning tool, is the introduction of cases. They are well written and succinct. As instructional devices, they force us to confront the reality that our Western‐centric analytical/problem‐solving approach is insufficient in a different cultural setting. However, the cases seem rather surreptitiously injected in various places. They are not even referenced in the contents. This is an editing shortcoming and a failure to capitalize on a potential teaching contribution of the text from an international HR perspective.
The authors are onto something when they hint at the end of the text that Chinese HR (in the context of business practice) may be evolving into something unique. Western economic and business critics who have a general knowledge of market‐socialism are uncomfortable with all the ambiguous and seemingly conflicted types of organizations this spawns. In the Western circle of thought this is illogical (for example, the state sponsorship of one SOE to compete with another SOE). But this highlights the dynamic, rather than assumed stable, market evolution. The rapidly evolving body of labor laws is also dynamic. But is culture changing in the workplace too?
Market forces and Chinese culture of the family, of guanxi (extended relationships), and of mianzi (face) are being thrown into the same HR pot. Rather than conflicted, the authors suggest these may be complementary – and further suggestive of a different HR model based not on hybrid, but new theories that reflect a reality that the West, rather than China, may have greater difficulties of adaptation to the evolving socio‐economic environment. Unfortunately, they do not elaborate more on this point. For example, if this is truly a different model, is it only different from Western models, or is it in a class by itself compared to the Japanese, Taiwanese, or other Asian models?
Despite my criticisms of organization, editing and failure to capitalize the text's strong points to appeal to a wider readership, there are a number of “best lessons” from this book. First, the data limitations are cautionary, but a consistent theme is that Chinese cultural norms cannot be swept away by market imperatives, and in fact they may have something to offer to the evolution of HR thought in the broader international environment – formally characterized by the authors as complex adaptive systems. Second, from a practical perspective, a number of insights are offered that range from the problems of implementing performance appraisals (e.g. 360‐degree feedback with criticisms of superiors does not fit well into the Confucian ethic) to the use of videos in training (e.g. where pointing out individual performance deficiencies might cause a loss of face (mianxi)). Third, the cases invite good applied learning experiences.
I also think there were additional missed opportunities, which should be considered in follow‐up work by the authors. The authors point out that functional HR language is Western in origin, and the use of the functional name in China may not be reflected in the behavior expected to correlate with the functional taxonomy. If this is so, developing a new language is core to advancing Chinese HR. The authors touch on this need, but do not seem enthused about pushing this boundary. Finally, I see a common intellectual thread in all these contributions, and potential contributions. There is a need for a home‐grown cadre of Chinese HR academics to write this language and refine these theories. In China's fast‐paced economy, practice has outrun intellectual evolution. Even in the best Chinese universities there are not extensive course and program offerings in the field of HR. I think this is essential to articulating the “Chinese model” if it is indeed to be a unique contribution to the field. Without a domestic intellectual heritage, our view of what is happening in HR in China will always be a bit foreign to reality.
