Search results

The purpose of this article is to put forward China’s Hanyu Pinyin word guanli as an academic basic term to the world.

GUANLI as an academic basic term, which holds multiple meanings of several English words, such as management, administration, governance, etc. As a basic term, GUANLI, derived several words, such as GUANLIOLOGY, GUANLIST/GUANLIER and GUANLIWORK/GUANLIJOB, to precisely and exactly convey the Chinese GUANLI ideas. It is the historical mission and opportunity for the authors to research and establish the Chinese School of Modern GUANLI Science (CSMGS).

It is inevitably necessary to build the combined Chinese–Western discourse system of GUANLI science (CCWDSGS). Some other research results of CSMGS are also presented in this paper.

It is needless to say that there are still lots of problems in China, including in the GUANLI field. These problems will gradually be solved in China’s reform and development that takes place continuously. New problems will come up while old problems are being solved and settled; problems producing in a loop, problems solving in a loop, this is the dialectics. The authors have full confidence in solving problems, as well as in China’s development and future.

Practice comes first and then it is followed by theory. The authors first have the “China Model”, followed by the “Chinese School” consequently. The “China Model” has already been there, and the “Chinese School” relies on the author’s proactive research and innovation. It is just the right time for the authors to study and create the CSMGS. This is the historical mission and opportunity awaited by contemporary Chinese.

This paper presents the findings of a visiting scholarship research that was carried out at the Faculty of Engineering, University of Technology Sydney, Australia. Based on the extensive literature review, government databases and international statistics, it introduces an analytical framework for comparison of the national innovation systems (NIS) of China and Australia in regards to their strengths and weaknesses. This is done through individual examination and comparison of functions of typical institutions involved in innovation to reveal the structural characteristics and performances of the two systems. The interactions among these institutions are then analysed to illustrate their dynamics and efficiency. The comparison has shown clearly that China’s NIS has several weaknesses and gaps due to its developing and transition stage. There are positive signs that Chinese Government has recognised the nature and scope of the problem and seems to work in the right direction. This paper aims to support this process by providing some recommendations that could help bridge the gaps between the NISs of China and Australia. Due to the fact that both, China’s and Australia’s NISs, have their unique characteristics but share numerous complementary features, there is a large potential for further cooperation between the two national innovation systems.

This paper aims to consolidate prior research from policy and management domains to identify stages in China's technological learning within the imitation paradigm during 1949‐2001, focusing on changes in the government's strategic priorities and policies and the nature, mode and sources of technological learning, then to contrast the firm and institutional features that have emerged under the imitation paradigm with those defining the emerging creation paradigm. The analysis leads to clear implications for both policy and management for the Chinese firms to make this transition and compete in higher value‐added global industries.

An overview and conceptual paper based on observations and literature review.

This paper derives a parsimonious set of four dimensions to demarcate five stages in the evolution of China's technological learning: the government's strategic priority, nature of technology, the mode and the source of learning. It identifies six factors acting as significant impediments to Chinese firms' transition from imitation to creation.

In the first place, this paper provides managerial implications which are of great interest to Chinese practicing managers to manage their firms' transition from imitation to creation; second, the policy imperatives highlighted by this paper will help Chinese policymakers to design appropriate incentive mechanisms to enable Chinese firms to build up their competitiveness within the creation paradigm and thereby become global competitors. Meanwhile, this paper provides a systematic analysis on the evolution of China's technology development. This five stage‐based framework will help practicing managers in China understand whether, which and when Chinese firms can make the transition necessary to compete based on the creation of proprietary resources and capabilities.

Management is a “hot field” in China, yet little has been written in English about the history of management in China. Contrary to contemporary management literature, the paper aims to show that Chinese entrepreneurs and managers were exposed to modern management ideas from the early twentieth century. The paper is an initial exploration of the transfer of managerial knowledge to China, especially Scientific Management, during the interwar period.

Draws on Chinese journal articles and books from 1910‐1930s, supplemented with archive materials and secondary sources in Chinese and English.

Chinese industrialists, officials and academics were attracted to Taylor's ideas of scientific management during the 1920s and 1930s, which were experimented with on a wider scale than is commonly realized. The interest in “new” management extended beyond industrialists and industry officials to reportage in the popular press.

Future research should consider first how new ideas about management and organization were implemented on the shopfloor in individual Chinese enterprises, and second examine the role of social networks constituted by native place, industry ties and professional association membership in the diffusion of managerial ideas among the Chinese business elite of the period.

The paper shows that the transfer to China of modern management as an ideas system was not a recent phenomenon, but part of a century‐long process of transfer and adaptation of western management theory and practice.

The purpose of this paper is to trace back the roots of US-driven “Human Resource Management” (HRM) school of thought which now become widely institutionalized in China, up to the present day.

It looks at the diffusion of management knowledge over the period to Chinese business, which involved in turn scientific management (SM), human relations (HR) and HRM, respectively, from the interwar years onwards, by using a bibliometric analysis of Chinese language sources, searching a number of databases now available.

The authors scanned the international, as well as Chinese, literature to support a conjecture of a HR route towards China and how it morphed into HRM and went on to conclude that there was by the end of the year 2015 still a significant output of academic publications with references to both HR and HRM, respectively, but that we must be cautious in asserting a firm conclusion.

This paper traces back the roots of Chinese HRM back to the US-driven HR school of thought.

This paper aims to provide an overview of education system reform in China since 1978, and its practical implications.

Data were collected from literature review and interview. An overview of education system reform and its practical implications was found through data analysis.

There has been two types of education system reforms in China since 1978. The first type is school education system reform, and the second is education management system reform.

A point arising is how to reform the education system at the national level.

This is the first time the researcher has studied education system reform and its characteristics in China since 1978, and it can help people to understand education system reform in China systematically.

This work aims to address source and dynamics of institutional change. It seeks to develop analytic tools by adaptation of Schumpeterian notion on entrepreneurship, Nelson's work on basic institutions and specific institutions, and Nonaka's middle‐up‐down framework of knowledge management in contrast to top‐down process. Pragmatically it attempts to understand how to improve policy capacity that challenges China seriously.

The work adopts a detailed case study method. A paired case is chosen with the criteria that they have widespread impact in China, and are representative of general and specific institutional change, respectively. Data came from mixed sources: field work and publications. Comparison of the paired cases identifies similarities and differences of different institutional change.

Similarities in the cases are in the important role of institutional entrepreneurs, crucial necessity of field experimentation, and regulatory and legislative means of knowledge processing. Differences are that centralized “top‐down” process of knowledge development, together with committed and centrally guided field experimentation, characterizes general institutional change. In contrast, coordinated and distributed “middle‐up‐down” process, together with autonomously emerged creation at the grassroots, characterizes specific institutional change.

This is a new research area. Many more empirical and theoretical works are needed.

As to how China should improve policy capacity, the study indicates: to focus policy learning on specific parts and facets of institutional settings; to change policy‐makers' role from omni‐competent controller to catalyst/promoter of institutional change; to assign an active role to middle levels and allow broader participation and diverse experimentations.

The author explores interesting details of institutional entrepreneurship and institutional changes based on the two case studies. This work fills the gap of how to analyze institutional change from the innovation/innovation systems perspective.

China′s market‐oriented reforms have brought about fundamental changes not just to its economy, but also to urban governance. The reforms have significantly changed urban development from its previous pattern which was largely determined by decision makers within the central government. Reform measures have transformed the role, functions and processes of urban government and have made them a force to be reckoned with in the whole reform endeavour. Examines and analyses issues of administrative reform at the urban government level in ten years of economic reform since 1979. Looks at three aspects of the problem – the trend towards financial decentralization; institutional changes in local administration; and changes in the relationship between urban government and the local economy. Argues that there is an unfinished agenda of administrative reform that needs to be faced by the authorities concerned if the mighty endeavour of economic reform is to succeed.