IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecmode/v28y2011i3p1017-1029.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Models of trust-sharing in Chinese private enterprises

Author

Listed:
  • Qin, Zhong

Abstract

This paper presents two related models of development patterns of Chinese private enterprises. They illustrate incentive-based reasons for ownership arrangements of private enterprises, and highlight how institutional foundations of trust, particularly government and family-based cultural values, play an important role in influencing the development of private enterprises. These models attempt to explain why government and family-based culture are crucial for the ownership structure and management of private enterprises. The main argument in the models is that the structure of family businesses can be viewed, in essence, as a form of trust-sharing (Guanxi-sharing) arrangement within the firm. Furthermore, the increase in the prevalence of family businesses can be seen as a result of family trust replacing government trust in the firm's economic activities.

Suggested Citation

  • Qin, Zhong, 2011. "Models of trust-sharing in Chinese private enterprises," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 1017-1029, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecmode:v:28:y:2011:i:3:p:1017-1029
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264-9993(10)00238-5
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weitzman Martin L. & Xu Chenggang, 1994. "Chinese Township-Village Enterprises as Vaguely Defined Cooperatives," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 121-145, April.
    2. Myers, Stewart C. & Majluf, Nicolás S., 1945-, 1984. "Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have," Working papers 1523-84., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    3. Li, David D, 1998. "Changing Incentives of the Chinese Bureaucracy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 393-397, May.
    4. Stewart C. Myers & Nicholas S. Majluf, 1984. "Corporate Financing and Investment Decisions When Firms Have InformationThat Investors Do Not Have," NBER Working Papers 1396, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Lorenz, Edward, 1999. "Trust, Contract and Economic Cooperation," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 301-315, May.
    6. Myers, Stewart C. & Majluf, Nicholas S., 1984. "Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 187-221, June.
    7. Fama, Eugene F & Jensen, Michael C, 1983. "Separation of Ownership and Control," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 301-325, June.
    8. Che, Jiahua & Qian, Yingyi, 1998. "Institutional Environment, Community Government, and Corporate Governance: Understanding China's Township-Village Enterprises," Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 1-23, April.
    9. Sun, Laixiang, 2002. "Fading out of local government ownership: recent ownership reform in China's township and village enterprises," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 249-269, September.
    10. Alaka N Rao & Jone L Pearce & Katherine Xin, 2005. "Governments, reciprocal exchange and trust among business associates," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 36(1), pages 104-118, January.
    11. Williamson, Oliver E, 1993. "Calculativeness, Trust, and Economic Organization," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 36(1), pages 453-486, April.
    12. Harvey James, 1999. "Owner as Manager, Extended Horizons and the Family Firm," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 41-55.
    13. Bowles, Paul & Dong, Xiao-Yuan, 1999. "Enterprise Ownership, Enterprise Organisation, and Worker Attitudes in Chinese Rural Industry: Some New Evidence," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(1), pages 1-20, January.
    14. Tian, Guoqiang, 2000. "Property Rights and the Nature of Chinese Collective Enterprises," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 247-268, June.
    15. Harvey James, 2002. "The Trust Paradox: A Survey of Economic Inquiries Into the Nature of Trust and Trustworthiness," Microeconomics 0202001, EconWPA.
    16. Alston, Jon P., 1989. "Wa, Guanxi, and Inhwa: Managerial principles in Japan, China, and Korea," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 26-31.
    17. Shaomin Li, 2004. "The Puzzle of Firm Performance in China: An Institutional Explanation," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 47-68, March.
    18. Alan Gelb & Gary Jefferson & Inderjit Singh, 1993. "Can communist economies transform incrementally? The experience of China," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 1(4), pages 401-435, December.
    19. Alan Gelb & Gary Jefferson & Inderjit Singh, 1993. "Can Communist Economies Transform Incrementally? The Experience of China," NBER Chapters,in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1993, Volume 8, pages 87-150 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Shaomin Li, 2002. "Does east love guanxi more than west? The evolution of relation-based governance: Contemporary and historical evidences," Global Economic Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1), pages 1-11.
    21. Ken Roberts & Changcheng Zhou, 2000. "New Private Enterprises in Three Transitional Contexts: Central Europe, the Former Soviet Union and China," Post-Communist Economies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 187-199.
    22. Eswaran, Mukesh & Kotwal, Ashok, 1985. "A Theory of Contractual Structure in Agriculture," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 352-367, June.
    23. David D. Li, 1998. "Changing Incentives of the Chinese Bureaucracy," William Davidson Institute Working Papers Series 130, William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan.
    24. Hsiao, Cheng & Nugent, Jeffrey & Perrigne, Isabelle & Qiu, Jicheng, 1998. "Shares versus Residual Claimant Contracts: The Case of Chinese TVEs," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 317-337, June.
    25. Steve Lovett & Lee C Simmons & Raja Kali, 1999. "Guanxi Versus the Market: Ethics and Efficiency," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 30(2), pages 231-247, June.
    26. Stewart C. Myers, 2001. "Capital Structure," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 81-102, Spring.
    27. James Jr., Harvey S., 2002. "The trust paradox: a survey of economic inquiries into the nature of trust and trustworthiness," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 47(3), pages 291-307, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zhong Qin & Xin Deng, 2016. "Government and family Guanxi in Chinese private firms: perceptions and preference," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 35-60, January.
    2. Safa, Nader Sohrabi & Ismail, Maizatul Akmar, 2013. "A customer loyalty formation model in electronic commerce," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 559-564.
    3. Zhong Qin & Xin Deng, 2016. "Government and family Guanxi in Chinese private firms: perceptions and preference," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 35-60, January.
    4. Kai-Ping Huang, 2013. "Trustworthiness and ethical considerations: a review of personal connections in China," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 2723-2727, August.

    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:eee:ecmode:v:28:y:2011:i:3:p:1017-1029. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30411 .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.