Zhong Kui: Expressing East Asian Business Culture
Zhong Kui; The Enigma of a Shared East-Asian Business Culture
There is as much of a shared “East-Asian Business Culture” as there is a shared world business culture; that is to say, business culture varies just as much among East-Asian nations as it does with the rest of the world. East-Asian nations vary in regards state interaction with business, firm organization, ownership, and national economic goals. China and Taiwan, polar opposites in regards to their approaches towards economic development after WWII exemplify this. With so much variety it cannot be argued that these countries share a single, common East-Asian business culture. The different approaches towards economic development by Taiwan and China after WWII are nothing alike and disprove the notion of a single shared East-Asian Business Culture among the East-Asian nations.
State interaction with business was one of the major differences between China and Taiwan in their pursuit for economic development. In China, Chairman Mao of the communist party sought to consolidate the nation’s workforce into large state-run firms, in almost a militant fashion. Everything operated through the state to some degree. Dissent was crushed and slogans “whipped up enthusiasm, and forced conformity” (Shapiro 69). This dissuaded skepticism and promoted a “right way” of thinking, which was shown through the banning of fanmaojin, a move in which Michael Schoenthals deemed an “act of semantic self-incapacitation” by those with doubt towards the Great Leap Forward (Shapiro 71). As a result, decision making became increasingly centralized, and economic policies became the responsibility of a small and not necessarily informed group. In addition, Mao took a very active role in managing the economies state run firms through the use of quotas in an attempt to push development forward (Class Notes). This hands-on approach contrasts with the more passive role of the Kuomintang, the ruling party of Taiwan. The
There is as much of a shared “East-Asian Business Culture” as there is a shared world business culture; that is to say, business culture varies just as much among East-Asian nations as it does with the rest of the world. East-Asian nations vary in regards state interaction with business, firm organization, ownership, and national economic goals. China and Taiwan, polar opposites in regards to their approaches towards economic development after WWII exemplify this. With so much variety it cannot be argued that these countries share a single, common East-Asian business culture. The different approaches towards economic development by Taiwan and China after WWII are nothing alike and disprove the notion of a single shared East-Asian Business Culture among the East-Asian nations.
State interaction with business was one of the major differences between China and Taiwan in their pursuit for economic development. In China, Chairman Mao of the communist party sought to consolidate the nation’s workforce into large state-run firms, in almost a militant fashion. Everything operated through the state to some degree. Dissent was crushed and slogans “whipped up enthusiasm, and forced conformity” (Shapiro 69). This dissuaded skepticism and promoted a “right way” of thinking, which was shown through the banning of fanmaojin, a move in which Michael Schoenthals deemed an “act of semantic self-incapacitation” by those with doubt towards the Great Leap Forward (Shapiro 71). As a result, decision making became increasingly centralized, and economic policies became the responsibility of a small and not necessarily informed group. In addition, Mao took a very active role in managing the economies state run firms through the use of quotas in an attempt to push development forward (Class Notes). This hands-on approach contrasts with the more passive role of the Kuomintang, the ruling party of Taiwan. The