Your P Number
Module Code: HRMG3203
Name of the Module Leader
Name of Seminar Group Tutor
Date of Submission
Word Count: 767
Title of the Assignment: The Likely Convergence of HRM Practices in China and the US
As one of the most advanced Western Nations, the US exhibits the Variety of Capitalism strategy with regards to management of human resources. Precisely, the US is a liberal market economy (LME) that operates in various parts of the globe especially through its MNCs (Wheelahan and Moodie, 2017). On the other hand, China tends to adopt the Variety of Capitalism theory despite being one of the Eastern nations that operates under restrictive conditions and the rule of collectivism. Specifically, China has undergone significant developments on matters about human resource management (HRM), probably due to certain reasons such as its rapidly growing economy that has prompted an improved focus on MNCs as it (China) strives to determine and embrace the most suitable HRM practices to support its growing presence in the international market place (Liu, Burridge and Sinclair 2002). Therefore, HRM practices in China and the US are increasingly becoming similar owing to the rising pressure from MNCs and global pressure.
China and the US conduct performance appraisals each year to determine productivity of their employees and facilitate relevant processes such as job promotions, rewards and celebrations of overall employee achievements. Even so, workers in the US enjoy a highly-decentralized rewarding system that is based mainly on an individual’s qualification and performance levels (Gooderham, Nordhaug and Ringdal, 2006). Accordingly, big margins exist with regards to benefits between employees handling different positions. Fortunately, such significant variances act as motivators for better performance among employees. On the other hand, China evaluates productivity of its employees on a continuous basis at a personal level. Specifically, job descriptions serve as the main baseline for appraising workers in China. Even so, such type of performance appraisal in China resulted from the significant economic reforms that have transpired over the past couple of decades (Lamond and Zheng, 2010). Initially, China was concerned with performance of teams due to its focus on collectivism, but economic reforms have triggered the need for individual focus. Hence, appraisal systems in China and the US tend to converge.
Employees in both the US and China enjoy significant opportunities for learning and developing their careers owing to the high presence of necessary resources and facilities including substantial government funding and learning institutions such as universities and colleges. Accordingly, workers undergo rigorous vocational training and education sessions that attract more knowledge and skills needed for handling varied types of jobs. As a result, employees in the US and China experience low levels of uncertainty avoidance, thus most workers are not concerned with permanent jobs (Carraher, Buchanan and Puia, 2010). Instead, job mobility is common in the US and China because the workforces are well-equipped with vital skills and knowledge for handling different types of work. Even so, China has dramatically increased resources that are aimed at training and developing its employees (Akhtar, Ding and Ge, 2008: Cooke, 2009). Earlier on, China used to allocate limited resources on training and developing its employees. Therefore, a considerate degree of convergence exists with regards to employee development and training in China and the US.
However, a significant difference in power distance between China and the US greatly influence the degree of employee participations (Shi and Wang, 2011). Power distance in the US is low, hence, encouraging better engagement of all workers in generation of feedback for decision-making activities and improved understanding of their firms. On the other hand, traditional Chinese values tend to discourage employee participations while encouraging maintenance of harmony thorough the Confucian doctrine (Taormina and Gao, 2009). Accordingly, many employees in China may not have adequate understanding of their firms since they are primarily concerned with their jobs. Luckily, the increasing training and development programs as well as globalization and rise in MNCs continue to unravel the importance of engaging employees in developing their organizations (Habib, Zahra and Mushtaq, 2015). Hence, the otherwise initial high power distance would probably change to moderate and low power distance to encourage more lateral communications for better decision-making processes and comprehension of organizations by workers. Thus, China could be heading to a workplace environment where workers are encouraged to understand their firms well and contribute to their (organizations) development like in the US.
In conclusion, a significant degree of convergence exists with regards to HRM practices in the US and China. China is an Eastern country that has been facing significant influence from restrictive traditional values such as the Confucian doctrine and the focus on collectivism rather than individual employee. Luckily, it (China) has embraced considerate reforms that encourage appraisals and rewards at personal levels, allocation of more resources for training and development of employees and a shift toward better engagement of workers. The rising pressure from globalization and the growth of MNCs seem to facilitate the change in China’s HRM operations. Hence, China tends to work towards the institutional approach of Varieties of Capitalism concept like the US.
Reference List
Akhtar, S., Ding, D.Z. and Ge, G.L., 2008. Strategic HRM practices and their impact on company performance in Chinese enterprises. Human Resource Management: Published in Cooperation with the School of Business Administration, The University of Michigan and in alliance with the Society of Human Resources Management, 47(1), pp.15-32.
Carraher, S.M., Buchanan, J.K. and Puia, G., 2010. Entrepreneurial need for achievement in China, Latvia, and the USA. Baltic Journal of Management, 5(3), pp.378-396.Cooke, F.L., 2009. A decade of transformation of HRM in China: A review of literature and suggestions for future studies. Asia Pacific Journal of human resources, 47(1), pp.6-40.Gooderham, P., Nordhaug, O. and Ringdal, K., 2006. National embeddedness and calculative human resource management in US subsidiaries in Europe and Australia. Human Relations, 59(11), pp.1491-1513.Habib, S., Zahra, F. and Mushtaq, H., 2015. Impact of training and development on employees’ performance and productivity: A case study of Pakistan. European Journal of Business and Social Sciences, 4(08), pp.326-330.Lamond, D. and Zheng, C., 2010. HRM research in China: looking back and looking forward. Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management, 1(1), pp.6-16.Liu, X., Burridge, P. and Sinclair, P.J., 2002. Relationships between economic growth, foreign direct investment and trade: evidence from China. Applied economics, 34(11), pp.1433-1440.Shi, X. and Wang, J., 2011. Cultural distance between China and US across GLOBE model and Hofstede model. International Business and Management, 2(1), pp.11-17.Taormina, R.J. and Gao, J.H., 2009. Identifying acceptable performance appraisal criteria: An international perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources, 47(1), pp.102-125.Wheelahan, L. and Moodie, G., 2017. Vocational education qualifications’ roles in pathways to work in liberal market economies. Journal of Vocational Education & Training, 69(1), pp.10-27.
