Researching HRM in China: challenges and research directions

Citation

Lee Cooke, F. (2011), "Researching HRM in China: challenges and research directions", Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management, Vol. 2 No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1108/jchrm.2011.46502aaa.002

Researching HRM in China: challenges and research directions

Article Type: Guest editorial From: Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management, Volume 2, Issue 1

About the Guest Editor

Fang Lee CookeProfessor of HRM and Chinese Studies at the Department of Management, Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University, Australia. Previously, she was a Chair Professor at Manchester Business School, University of Manchester, UK. Her research interests are in the area of employment relations, gender studies, strategic HRM, knowledge management and innovation, outsourcing, Chinese outward FDI and employment of Chinese migrants. Fang Lee Cooke is the author of HRM, Work and Employment in China (2005), Competition, Strategy and Management in China (2008) and Human Resource Management in China: New Trends and Practices (2011).

It gives me immense pleasure to see the healthy development of the Journal of Chinese Human Resource Management (JCHRM) under the enthusiastic and sterling editorship of Professor Zhongming Wang initially and now Professor Greg Wang. As an innovative new journal, JCHRM adopts a broad and inclusive approach to accommodate studies that deploy quantitative, qualitative or mixed methods and cover a wide range of HR topics. I particularly like its balance between reporting theoretically driven research as well as practitioner-oriented studies in accessible language. This sound balance makes the journal highly informative, reader friendly and capably of reaching the widest range of readers globally, not least those from China and other Asian countries and those who are interested in the region.

Indeed, research interest in Chinese HRM has grown rapidly in the last decade or so. This is evidenced in the increasing number of articles published in major business and management journals on the subject (see Cooke, 2009; Zheng and Lamond, 2009; Zhu et al., 2008, for overviews). The majority of these studies adopted quantitative method, i.e. questionnaire surveys, for data collection. They were primarily engaged in testing Western-designed/developed theories in the Chinese context, often drawing on MBA/EMBA students as the convenient samples. Major cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Tianjin and Hangzhou have been the popular localities for research investigations, partly because they were the sites where access to the research targets was possible. In fact, the difficulty in gaining co-operations from Chinese firms and individual informants for data collection has been widely reported by researchers. This is partly to do with the cautious nature of the Chinese and Chinese firms in revealing information to strangers and partly to do with the fact that supporting social sciences research through fieldwork co-operation is a relatively unfamiliar concept in China.

Despite the phenomenal number of studies on HRM in China, the field is deficient from theoretical rigour and original theories and models (Meyer, 2006; Quer et al., 2007; Tsui, 2004). Given the current dominance of quantitative research as the preferred method in management studies generally and in HRM more specifically, and the growing pressure of academics in China to publish in top-ranking (American) journals, it is likely that positivist studies will continue to dominate. Here, JCHRM’s inclusive approach to different methods, particularly case studies, makes it stand out as a good journal to advance knowledge on HRM in China. There are, however, growing signs of efforts in extending the Western-originated theories and models into the Chinese paradigm and attempts to develop indigenous Chinese theories of management. Indeed, there has been considerable debate and discussion amongst scholars on Chinese management in search of ways to conceptualise management in China (MOR 05).

The advancement of theories on and knowledge of HRM in China requires intellectual skills as well as entrepreneurship and social commitment of researchers to identify research avenues that are not only academically interesting, but also highly relevant to the current political, economic and social environment in order to understand what implications there may be for firms and for policymakers. Here, I would like to highlight one area where research attention could be fruitful, informative and imperative – innovation and entrepreneurship.

It is now well understood that innovation and entrepreneurship are key ingredients for national competitiveness. But how much is China’s competitive advantage based on these? What is innovation, for whom and for what? Current studies on innovation in China have focused primarily on technology policy and the knowledge workers, often driven by a narrow thinking that innovation is equivalent to technology and invention. On the contrary, innovation spirits should permeate different parts of the business if we want to gain competitive advantages. These include marketing innovation, service innovation, product innovation, process innovation, and so forth. In each of these areas, the role of HRM and employee involvement remains crucial.

Another narrow thinking (misconception) in innovation is that the talk of innovation only applies to high-tech firms and that only knowledge workers are innovative. The fact is most innovations are driven by the need to satisfy (basic) human needs. Some of the most exciting and practical innovations come from very ordinary and poor people in order to improve their lives. In other words, employees are the most creative when the innovation benefits them. Here, the role of ordinary employees in innovation and the types of HRM practices needed to harness employees’ creativity deserve much more research and management attention.

A third narrow thinking is that innovation of new products and services should be targeting at affluent people in order for the firm to maximise investment return. Innovation is not only to service the rich and the elite of the society. More importantly, it is to solve basic problems in life and to enhance the quality of life for millions of those in poverty and hardship. But the social need and impact of innovation is not sufficiently understood or supported by government policy. Innovation is shaped by a number of factors: social policy, institutional environment, entrepreneurship and the commitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR). Aligning CSR with corporate innovation strategy is therefore an important undertaking. The interconnection between CSR, innovation and HRM is unique and their relevance in the Chinese business context is particularly significant. There has been, however, limited attention to link CSR, innovation and HRM together conceptually, strategically and operationally. As researchers, what can we do to help businesses engage in innovation activities in ways that will link their economic goals with their social responsibility and development goals? What advice can we provide, based on research evidence, to encourage stronger links between social policy and social development and science and technology policy?

A related and fourth narrow thinking in management research and practice in China concerns the notion of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship is often associated with CEOs in (private) firms and self-employed businesses. The importance of corporate entrepreneurship for innovation is largely overlooked. Corporate entrepreneurship is essential at all levels of management to encourage innovation and nurture creativity of the employees. What is the implication of corporate entrepreneurship for HRM, especially in leadership and management development? What is the role of management education in cultivating the corporate entrepreneurship mindset of managers and future managers?

What I have identified above is just one of the broad research areas that has been relatively well researched in the Western countries but remains significantly underdeveloped in China. Innovation and entrepreneurship are extremely important to China’s economic and social development and the adoption of a much broader approach to the research and management of these issues from an HRM perspective underpins China’s sustainable competitive advantage.

I am grateful for the valuable opportunity to contribute this editorial piece to the journal, and I am sure JCHRM will continue to flourish under the combination of the strong editorial team and the quality of the submissions that the journal is attracting. I very much look forward to reading the forthcoming issues.

Fang Lee Cooke