Asian Journal of Management

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Managerial Patterns in India and China:Changes in the Post-Liberalization Era


Affiliations
1 Department of East Asian Studies, University of Delhi, India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Foreign trade and investment leads to significant technological and managerial upgrading in a nation. The exposure to international markets and foreign business practices enhance the competitive spirit of domestic enterprises and induce positive organizational changes. Besides increase in overall efficiency of firms and enterprises, there is also considerable impact on product quality, allocation of resources and innovative capacity. While countries all around the world have seen changes in management systems as a consequence of increased foreign trade, the experience of India and China as the two largest emerging economies is quite worthy of note. In line with the new economic environment and trade reform, both India and China have made fundamental changes in their managerial practices. There is a visible move towards a new global orientation and operational context. Four key dimensions have been particularly relevant in shaping the management practices in the two countries namely, culture, state policies, managerial education and competitiveness of firms resulting from liberalization of management practices. As in most comparative estimates, China has been very adroit and expeditious in imbibing and adopting the managerial know-how as compared to India. In terms of education and competitiveness, India has been holding some leeway over China but the pro-active and targeted policies by Chinese state are fast changing the situation.

Keywords

Foreign Trade, Management Practices, Culture, Competitiveness, Comparative State Policy.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Malik, R. (1997) Chinese Entrepreneurs in the Economic Development of China. London: Praeger.

  • Reynolds, P.D. et al. (2000) Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2000 Executive Report. Kansas City, Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership.

  • Zhao, S. (2005) Changing Structure of Chinese Enterprises and Human Resource Management Practices in China. In Smyth, Retal. China’s Business Reforms: Institutional Challenges in a Globalized Economy. London, New York: Routledge Curzon.

  • Davis, H.J et al. (2006) Management in India: Trends and Transition. New Delhi: Sage Publications.

  • Storey, J. et al. (2008) The Routledge Companion to Strategic Human Resource Management. New York: Routledge.

  • Chen, M. (1995) Asian Management Systems: Chinese, Japanese and Korean Styles of Business. London and New York: Routledge.

  • Weber, M. (1930) Protestant Ethics and Spirit of Capitalism.

  • Selmer, J et al. (1994) Managerial Behavior of Expatriate versus Local Bosses. International Studies of Management and Organization, 24(3).

  • Park, S.H. and Luo, Y. (2001) Guanxi and Organizational Dynamics: Organizational Networking in Chinese Firms. Strategic Management Journal, 22(5).

  • Tsang, E.W.K. (1998) Can guanxi be a Source of Sustained Competitive Advantage for Doing Business in China? The Academy of Management Executive, 12(2).

  • Hofstede, G. (1991) Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. London, UK: McGraw-Hill.

  • Budhwar, P.S. and Bhatnagar, J. (2009) Changing Face of People Management in India. New York: Routledge.

  • Lynton, N. and Singh, J.V. (2010) Race to the Top: What Sets China and India Apart? India Knowledge@Wharton.

  • Cappelli et al. (2010) The India Way: How India’s Top Business Leaders Are Revolutionizing Management. Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business Press.

  • Gardella, A. (2010) Your New Management Role Model: India. Excerpts from interview with Harbir Singh. www.bnet.com.

  • The Economist. Islands of Quality May 31, 2001.

  • Kayne, J. (1999) State Entrepreneurship Policies and Programs. Kansas: Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership.

  • Pearson, M. (2005) The Business of Governing Business in China. World Politics (57).

  • Weiner, M. (1990) the Child and the State in India. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

  • Mukherji, R. (2004) Privatization, Federalism and Governance. Economic and Political Weekly 34(1).

  • Rudolph, L. and Rudolph, S. (2008) Explaining Indian Democracy: A fifty year perspective 1956-2006. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.

  • Dayal, I. (2002) Developing Management Education in India. Journal of Management Research, 2(2).

  • Philip, J. (2008). Management Education in India. Paper presented at the XIII International Study and Practical Conference“Competitiveness in Information Society: BRICS-countries Experience” held at State University of Management, Moscow, Russia.

  • Gupta, R. (2001) Creating Indian entrepreneurs. In Lal, A.K. and Clement, R.W. Economic Development in India: The Role of Individual Enterprise (And Entrepreneurial Spirit), Asia-Pacific Development Journal, 12(2).

  • The Global Competitiveness Report 2016–2017, World Economic Forum.

  • Ojha, A.K. (2005) Management Education in India: Protecting it from the Rankings Onslaught, Decision, 32(2).

  • Tsui, A.S. (2004) Organization and Management in the Midst of Societal Transformation: The People's Republic of China in Organization Science, 15(2).

  • Wong, L. (2008) Managing for “creativity”: MBAs and the transfer of creativity, Chinese Management Studies 2(2).

  • Zhao, W. and Zhou, X. (2004) Chinese organizations in transition: Changing promotion patterns in the reform era, Organization Science, 15(2).

  • Child, J. and Yuan, L. (1996) Institutional Constraints on Economic Reform: The Case of Investment Decisions in China Organization Science, 7(1).

  • Ramachandran, J. et al. (2004) Indian Companies in Overseas Markets: Perspectives, Patterns, and Implications, Vikalpa, 29(4).

  • Ralston, D.A. (2006) Today’s State-Owned Enterprises of China: Are They Dying Dinosaurs or Dynamic Dynamos? Strategic Management Journal (27).

  • Lin, X. and Germain, R. (2003) Organizational Structure, Context, Customer Orientation, and Performance: Lessons from Chinese StateOwned Enterprises. Strategic Management Journal, 24(11).

  • Boisot, M. and Child, J. (1996) From Fiefs to Clans and Network Capitalism: Explaining China’s Emerging Economic Order. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41 (4).

  • Byrd, W.A. (1992) Chinese Industrial Firms under Reform. New York: Oxford University Press.

  • Steinfeld, E.S. (1998) Forging Reform in China: The Fate of StateOwned Industry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  • Tse, E. (2006) Transformation of a Chinese State-Owned Enterprise: Guangzhou Metro Corporation. Greater China: Booz and Company Inc.

  • Som, A. (2008) Innovative human resource management and corporate performance in the context of economic liberalization in India. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 19(7).

  • Khanna, T. and Palepu, K.G. (2004) Globalization and convergence in corporate governance: evidence from Infosys and the Indian software industry. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(6).

  • Geiger, T. and Rao, S.P. (2009) The India Competitiveness Review 2009. Geneva: World Economic Forum.

  • Shenkar, O. (2004) The Chinese Century: The Rising Chinese Economy and its impact on the Global Economy, the Balance of Power, and Your Job. Pearson Prentice Hall.


Abstract Views: 226

PDF Views: 0




  • Managerial Patterns in India and China:Changes in the Post-Liberalization Era

Abstract Views: 226  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Vaishali Singh
Department of East Asian Studies, University of Delhi, India

Abstract


Foreign trade and investment leads to significant technological and managerial upgrading in a nation. The exposure to international markets and foreign business practices enhance the competitive spirit of domestic enterprises and induce positive organizational changes. Besides increase in overall efficiency of firms and enterprises, there is also considerable impact on product quality, allocation of resources and innovative capacity. While countries all around the world have seen changes in management systems as a consequence of increased foreign trade, the experience of India and China as the two largest emerging economies is quite worthy of note. In line with the new economic environment and trade reform, both India and China have made fundamental changes in their managerial practices. There is a visible move towards a new global orientation and operational context. Four key dimensions have been particularly relevant in shaping the management practices in the two countries namely, culture, state policies, managerial education and competitiveness of firms resulting from liberalization of management practices. As in most comparative estimates, China has been very adroit and expeditious in imbibing and adopting the managerial know-how as compared to India. In terms of education and competitiveness, India has been holding some leeway over China but the pro-active and targeted policies by Chinese state are fast changing the situation.

Keywords


Foreign Trade, Management Practices, Culture, Competitiveness, Comparative State Policy.

References