IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/maorev/v5y2009i01p57-73_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Context, Comparison, and Methodology in Chinese Management Research

Author

Listed:
  • Child, John

Abstract

In this paper, I accept Whetten's (2009) view that it is necessary to investigate Chinese management in a way that takes account of its context in order to assess the extent to which its features are context-specific or context-bounded. The first requirement, therefore, is to develop a way of conceptualising and measuring that context. A framework articulating material, ideational and institutional contextual features is offered to that end. Second, I argue that both ‘outside in’ and ‘inside out’ approaches to the study of Chinese management require comparison between China and other countries. Even a theory that claims uniqueness for China needs to have that claim tested through external comparison. We, therefore, have to employ a methodology that allows for valid comparisons between context and management in China and other countries. This paper focuses on these two issues of context and methodology with reference to comparative research. It examines them in turn and closes by arguing that the choice Barney and Zhang (2009) pose – between a Chinese theory of management and a theory of Chinese management – needs to be reframed within a more dynamic evolutionary perspective.

Suggested Citation

  • Child, John, 2009. "Context, Comparison, and Methodology in Chinese Management Research," Management and Organization Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(1), pages 57-73, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:maorev:v:5:y:2009:i:01:p:57-73_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1740877600000632/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:maorev:v:5:y:2009:i:01:p:57-73_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/mor .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.