Search results

This chapter draws from a three-year ethnographic study focused on the educational and community interactions among working- and middle-class ethnic Chinese immigrants in a mid-western town in the United States. Aihwa Ong (1999) argues that “Chineseness” is a fluid, cultural practice manifested within the Chinese diaspora in particular ways that relate to globalization in late modernity, immigrants’ cultural background, their place in the social structure in their home society, and their new social class status in the context they enter. The study extends research focused on the complexities of social reproduction within larger global flows of Chinese immigrants. First, we describe how Chinese immigrants’ social status in their countries of origin in part shapes middle and working-class group’s access to cultural capital and positions in the social structure of their post-migration context. Second, we trace groups’ negotiation of their relational race and class positioning in the new context (Ong, 1999) that is often invisible in the processes of social reproduction. Third, we describe how both groups must negotiate national, community, and schooling conceptions of the model minority concept (Lee, 1996) that shapes Asian-American’s lived realities in the United States; yet the continuing salience of their immigrant experience, home culture, and access to cultural capital (Bourdieu, 2007) means that they enact the “model minority” concept differently. The findings suggest the complexity of Chinese immigrants’ accommodation of and resistance to normative ideologies and local structures that cumulatively contribute to social reproduction on the basis of class.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) states in 2018 that safeguarding “civil liberties is critical” to their official duties. The Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties within DHS, as its website explains,

reviews and assesses complaints from the public in areas such as: physical or other abuse; discrimination based on race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or disability; inappropriate conditions of confinement; infringements of free speech; violation of right to due process … and any other civil rights or civil liberties violation related to a Department program or activity.

My chapter tracks the centrality of deportability in shaping the civil liberties and rights that DHS is tasked with enforcing. Over the course of the twentieth century, people on US soil saw an expanding list of civil liberties and civil rights. Important scholarship concentrates on the role of the courts, state and federal governments, advocacy groups, social movements, and foreign policy driving these constitutional and cultural changes. For instance, the scholarship illustrates that coming out of World War I, the US Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment did not protect something the Justices labeled “irresponsible speech.” The Supreme Court soon changed course, opening up an era ever since of more robust First Amendment rights. What has not been undertaken in the literature is an examination of the relationship of deportability to the sweep of civil liberties and civil rights. Starting in the second decade of the twentieth century, federal immigration policymakers began multiplying types of immigration statuses. A century later, among many others, there is the H2A status for temporary low-wage workers, the H2B for skilled labor, and permanent residents with green cards. The deportability of each status constrains access to certain liberties and rights. Thus, in 2016, when people from the Office for Civil Rights and Civil Liberties within DHS act, they are not enforcing a uniform body of rights and liberties that applies equally to citizens and immigrants, or even within the large category of immigrants. Instead, they do so within a complicated matrix of liberties and rights attenuated by deportability, which has been shaped by the history of the twentieth century.

The goal of this paper is to investigate the relationship between government control and firm value in China.

Government might extract social or political benefits from a state-controlled firm, thus decreases firm value. However, government’s monitoring on firm management reduces managers’ agency problem, which increases firm value. We first build a game-theoretic model to prove the existence of optimal government control given these two roles of government, and we then employ the OLS regression method to test the theory predictions using the length of intermediate ownership chains connecting the listed state-owned enterprises to their ultimate controllers as the measure of government control.

We find that firm values first increase then decrease as government control weakens. Moreover, we find that government usually retains a stronger control over state-owned enterprises than the optimal level. In addition, we show that government control can be further weakened in firms with good corporate governance mechanisms, which serve as a substitution of government monitoring.

Our results demonstrate that government control in China is still a necessary but costly mechanism to mitigate agency costs, especially when corporate governance system is underdeveloped.

We identify the substitution effect between government control and corporate governance using a unique measure of government control.

The paper provides an overview of material helpful in placing the subsequent papers in context, as well as a summary of the research contributions made by the individual papers themselves.

We begin with a timeline of China’s Economic Reform, including both major events that permitted the opening and expansion of the nation’s economy, and important milestones of the historical movement. We then consider the impact of philosophy and culture (particularly, Confucianism and socialism) on China’s society and government, which leads naturally to certain observations regarding the political-economic model in which state-owned enterprises play a central role. In the final section, we briefly summarize the contents of the remaining papers.

Kibok Baik is a professor of management at the College of Business and Economics, and Head of Strategic Leadership Center, Kookmin University, Seoul, Korea. He earned his Ph.D. in organizational behavior from the University of Houston. His research interests focus on leadership, cross-cultural issues, and human resource development in multinational corporations. He currently advises dozens of firms in Korea.John W. Boudreau, Ph.D., Professor of human resource studies at Cornell University is recognized worldwide for breakthrough research on the bridge between superior human capital, talent and sustainable competitive advantage. His research has received the Academy of Management’s Organizational Behavior New Concept and Human Resource Scholarly Contribution awards. He consults and conducts executive development with companies worldwide and has published more than 40 books and articles, including the best-selling Human Resource Management (Irwin, 1997), now in its eighth edition in multiple languages worldwide. In addition to HR metrics, Dr. Boudreau’s large-scale research studies and highly focused qualitative research have addressed decision-based HR, executive mobility, HR information systems and organizational staffing and development. Winner of the General Mills Award for teaching innovations, Dr. Boudreau also founded the Central Europe Human Resource Education Initiative, and directed the Center for Advanced Human Resource Studies (CAHRS).Janet L. Bryant is a doctoral student in the Ph.D. program in industrial and organizational psychology at Old Dominion University. Her research interests include leadership, virtual work and cross-cultural issues. She completed her undergraduate degree at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville.Maxine Dalton is an industrial/organizational psychologist who received her education at the University of South Florida. Her research interests include adult learning and executive development. Her current research is on leadership and social identity conflict in organizations. She has published numerous book chapters, articles and a recent book on global leadership.Donald D. Davis received his Ph.D. in psychology from Michigan State University in 1982, where he also served as assistant director of the Center for Evaluation and Assessment. He has been a professor of organizational psychology at Old Dominion University since that time. He served for seven years as director of the Ph.D. Program in Industrial and Organizational Psychology and has served as a member of the board of directors of the Institute for Asian Studies since its creation in 1989. He has been awarded two Fulbrights – Asian Scholar in Residence (with Zhong-ming Wang, Hangzhou University – now Zhejiang University – Hangzhou, China) and Senior Scholar (Wuhan University, Wuhan, China). He has also held a visiting appointment at the University of Virginia. His research interests include virtual organizations, organization change, technological innovation, cross-cultural organization and management practices, and Chinese organizations. He has published one book and a number of papers on these topics.Jennifer J. Deal is a Research Scientist at the Center for Creative Leadership in San Diego, California, concentrating on global leadership and managing the Emerging Leaders project, which focuses on generational issues in the workplace. She has published a number of articles on topics including generational issues in the workplace, working globally, executive selection, and women in management, and a recent book on global leadership. She holds a B.A. from Haverford College, and a Ph.D. in industrial/organizational psychology from The Ohio State University.Daniel Denison is Professor of Management & Organization at the International Institute for Management Development (IMD) in Lausanne, Switzerland and is the Founder of Denison Consulting in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA. He is former Professor of Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Michigan. He is the author of Corporate Culture and Organizational Effectiveness (1990) and a number of articles on the link between culture and business performance. His survey assessments of culture, teams, and leaders are widely used by many organizations around the world. His website, www.denisonculture.com has extensive information on his work.Joseph John DiStefano is Professor of Organizational Behavior and International Business at IMD International Institute for Management Development (Lausanne, Switzerland) and Professor Emeritus of the Richard Ivey School of Business, The University of Western Ontario (London, Canada). He was educated at R.P.I., Harvard Business School and Cornell University and has been active as a teacher, researcher and consultant on issues of cross-cultural effectiveness since the early 1970s.Peter J. Dowling (Ph.D., The Flinders University of South Australia) is Pro Vice-Chancellor and Professor of International Management & Strategy in the Division of Business, Law & Information Sciences, University of Canberra. Previous appointments include Foundation Professor of Management at the University of Tasmania, Monash University, the University of Melbourne, and California State University-Chico. He has also held visiting appointments at Cornell University, Michigan State University, the University of Paderborn (Germany) and the University of Bayreuth (Germany). His current research and teaching interests are concerned with International HRM and Strategic Management. His co-authored text International Human Resource Management: Managing People in a Multinational Context, published by South-West, is now in a third edition. He is a former national Vice-President of the Australian Human Resources Institute, past Editor of Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources (1987–1996), and a Life Fellow of the Australian Human Resources Institute.Chris Ernst is a Research Associate at the Center for Creative Leadership with an international background, and a Ph.D. in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from North Carolina State University. His work centers on advancing the capacity for leadership in a diverse and globally interconnected world.Ping Ping Fu is an assistant professor of management at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. Her research interests are mainly in leadership and cross-cultural areas. She was the coordinator for the Chinese part for the Global Leadership and Organizational Effectiveness (GLOBE), and is now leading the CEO study in China. She has published in Journal of Organizational Behavior, International Journal of Human Resource Management, Journal of International Applied Psychology and Leadership Quarterly.Paulo Goelzer is President of the IGA Institute, an educational foundation providing training to 40 countries in five languages and oversees their international operations. He began his career in the food industry very early, working in a family food business. He has also worked as a senior consultant for Strategy and Food Package Goods Industry Practice for a German/Brazilian consulting company, a researcher and consultant for the Brazilian Wholesaler Association (ABAD), and as a Marketing Director for a grocery wholesale company.

To open your heart to others is a physical act of leadership. It can include crying and inspire hugs. In this chapter, I explore what it means to open your heart, why doing so is an act of leadership, how to do it, and why it is difficult to do. Opening your heart to others is both the simplest, most natural thing in the world, and tremendously difficult at the same time. It means sharing a part of ourselves that others will recognize as real and true, and important in a way that feels incredibly vulnerable. Opening your heart is a way of creating and working with the connection between people. Actors have long recognized that the single biggest barrier to achieving the kind of connection that comes from opening your heart is playing status games with each other. The challenge for the leader is to transcend the status game and stop playing it in a way that doesn’t damage their status as a leader. I offer an example of how Frank showed real leadership by overcoming his fear and opening his heart to his employees.

Purpose – Anthropomorphism abounds in contemporary consumer culture. This chapter evaluates the recent anthropomorphic uptick and shows how it can be utilized for pedagogic purposes – namely, a brand animal novel called The Penguin's Progress.

Methods/approach – The chapter adopts a case study approach (though “exemplar” is perhaps a better word). It employs an alternative mode of knowledge representation, fictionalized nonfiction.

Findings – The exemplar reveals that student engagement is enhanced when unorthodox modes of representation are embraced by educators, though such pedagogic tactics are not without their shortcomings.

Research implications – If student reaction to The Penguin's Progress is any indication, then this chapter has enormous implications for the way consumer researchers communicate their ideas. A root and branch rethink is required.

Practical implications – The Penguin's Progress provides an alternative pedagogic option, an off-beat route to knowledge acquisition. Whether it's widely adopted, remains to be seen.

Originality – The chapter reveals that marketing and consumer research does not have to be written in a dry-as-dust manner.