In the Confucian collectivist Chine

In the Confucian collectivist Chinese organization, authoritarian rather than democratic, paternalistic rather than egalitarian managerial culture still prevails. Furthermore, a certain amount of autocratic management is accepted and expected as authoritarian control is a legitimate paternal attribute, and may even be interpreted as signs of care and compassion (Cheng, 1995). It is thus not surprising that perceived control at work may not be a useful concept in understanding the work-stress processes for the Chinese people.

Although the autocratic feature of Chinese organizations renders both objective and subjective control at work almost irrelevant, being able to do the job as one wants to could be independent of believing that one has control over life at large. There are so many subtle and delicate processes that the Chinese culture has construed and sanctioned to facilitate personal well-being in the face of unbearable loss of control viewed by a Western eye (Kojima, 1984). In the present study, it was indeed found that primary control as a general control belief conceptualized from a Chinese culture vantage point was related to job satisfaction in both Chinese groups, as well as physical well-being in the Taiwanese sample (see Table IV). Chinese primary control beliefs were also found to buffer the work stress-job satisfaction relationship in general, and "Recognition"-job satisfaction relationship in particular (see Figure 3(A) and (B)). These results should alert us that although the Western etic model of work stress can be applied to a Chinese context in general, emic constructs such as Chinese control beliefs need to be incorporated to help us achieve a deeper and fuller understanding of the work-stress process as embedded in a particular cultural context (Figure 1).

The different roles played by Chinese primary and secondary control beliefs in the work-stress process are intriguing. As we hypothesized, primary control is generally a stress resistance factor whereas secondary control is a stress vulnerability factor (see Table IV. These results corroborated recent findings pertaining to general subjective well-being for both Chinese and British (Lu et al., 2001a, b; Lu, 2001a, b). This convergence of evidence has further supported our notion that for contemporary Chinese people, an autonomous, initiating, striving, and achieving attitude fits well with the efficiency-emphasizing, achievement-orienting and competition-based urban existence. In contrast, a traditional attitude of submission, withdrawal, and apathy toward life can be maladaptive in modern, vibrant Chinese societies. This disparity of control beliefs should be even more pronounced in the urban work contexts, as our present study has demonstrated.

Sub-cultural differences in work stress: the PRC vs Taiwan

The process of work stress is culture-specific, just like many other human behaviors and adaptation. In addition to the East-West cultural differences outlined above, only a handful of studies devoted to the sub-cultural differences in organizational behaviors (Kirkcaldy and Cooper, 1992; Siu et al., 1999; Huang, 1994). As outlined in Table I, although the PRC and Taiwan are both collectivist societies with Confucian traditional roots, and economically as well as socially undergoing enormous transformations, they nonetheless possess diverse social institutions and systems, have different regional development histories, and are influenced to rather different extent by foreign cultures and powers. As predicted by the generic work-stress model (Figure 1), the present study found substantial sub-cultural differences in work-stress processes in the two Chinese groups.

There were different predictors of work morale and personal health in the two Chinese groups. For Taiwanese, "recognition" was the most important source of work stress to affect work morale, and "home/work balance" to affect personal well-being. Taiwan has been free of major political or ideological upheavals since 1949, and Confucianism has remained a dominant philosophical system and guiding ethics in daily life, Confucianism advocates that one should be benevolent to others in a hierarchical order, depending on the intimacy of one's relationship with the other. This kind of structured intimacy is viewed as "hierarchical benevolence" in anthropological studies (Hsu, 1988). Furthermore, once a social position is prescribed to a Chinese person, he/she must show respect and unconditional obedience to his/her superior. Therefore, the Confucian "righteousness" for ordinary people is very different from the Western concepts of "democracy" and "justice" which are highly valued in Christian civilization. These Confucian ethics is still prevailing in contemporary Taiwanese organizations (Walder, 1983; Cheng, 1995).

Kết quả (Việt) 1:

Trong khổng collectivist tổ chức Trung Quốc, độc tài thay vì dân chủ, paternalistic thay vì bình đẳng văn hóa quản lý vẫn chiếm ưu thế. Hơn nữa, một số tiền nhất định của quản lý độc đoán chấp nhận và dự kiến sẽ như độc tài kiểm soát là một thuộc tính nội hợp pháp, và thậm chí có thể được hiểu là dấu hiệu của chăm sóc và lòng từ bi (Cheng, 1995). Nó là như vậy không đáng ngạc nhiên rằng nhận thức kiểm soát tại nơi làm việc có thể không có một khái niệm hữu ích trong sự hiểu biết các quy trình công việc-căng thẳng cho người dân Trung Quốc.Mặc dù các tính năng độc đoán của Trung Quốc tổ chức ám khách quan và chủ quan kiểm soát lúc làm việc gần như không liên quan, có thể làm việc như một muốn có thể được độc lập của tin rằng một có quyền kiểm soát cuộc sống chung. Hiện có rất nhiều tinh tế và tinh tế quá trình nền văn hóa Trung Quốc đã hiểu và bị xử phạt để tạo điều kiện cá nhân hạnh phúc khi đối mặt với khó chịu mất kiểm soát xem bởi một con mắt phía tây (Kojima, 1984). Trong nghiên cứu hiện nay, nó thực sự được thấy rằng kiểm soát chính như một niềm tin chung kiểm soát hình thành từ một điểm thuận lợi của văn hóa Trung Quốc liên quan đến sự hài lòng của công việc trong cả hai nhóm Trung Quốc, cũng như thể chất tốt được trong mẫu người Đài Loan (xem bảng IV). Trung Quốc kiểm soát chính niềm tin cũng đã được tìm thấy để mối quan hệ hài lòng đệm làm việc căng thẳng-công việc nói chung, và mối quan hệ hài lòng "công nhận" công việc đặc biệt (xem hình 3(A) và (B)). Những kết quả này nên cảnh báo chúng tôi rằng mặc dù mô hình phương Tây etic công việc căng thẳng có thể được áp dụng cho một bối cảnh Trung Quốc nói chung, các cấu trúc quan như Trung Quốc kiểm soát niềm tin cần phải được kết hợp để giúp chúng tôi đạt được một sâu sắc hơn và sự hiểu biết đầy đủ hơn về quá trình làm việc căng thẳng là nhúng trong một bối cảnh văn hóa cụ thể (hình 1).The different roles played by Chinese primary and secondary control beliefs in the work-stress process are intriguing. As we hypothesized, primary control is generally a stress resistance factor whereas secondary control is a stress vulnerability factor (see Table IV. These results corroborated recent findings pertaining to general subjective well-being for both Chinese and British (Lu et al., 2001a, b; Lu, 2001a, b). This convergence of evidence has further supported our notion that for contemporary Chinese people, an autonomous, initiating, striving, and achieving attitude fits well with the efficiency-emphasizing, achievement-orienting and competition-based urban existence. In contrast, a traditional attitude of submission, withdrawal, and apathy toward life can be maladaptive in modern, vibrant Chinese societies. This disparity of control beliefs should be even more pronounced in the urban work contexts, as our present study has demonstrated.Sub-cultural differences in work stress: the PRC vs TaiwanThe process of work stress is culture-specific, just like many other human behaviors and adaptation. In addition to the East-West cultural differences outlined above, only a handful of studies devoted to the sub-cultural differences in organizational behaviors (Kirkcaldy and Cooper, 1992; Siu et al., 1999; Huang, 1994). As outlined in Table I, although the PRC and Taiwan are both collectivist societies with Confucian traditional roots, and economically as well as socially undergoing enormous transformations, they nonetheless possess diverse social institutions and systems, have different regional development histories, and are influenced to rather different extent by foreign cultures and powers. As predicted by the generic work-stress model (Figure 1), the present study found substantial sub-cultural differences in work-stress processes in the two Chinese groups.There were different predictors of work morale and personal health in the two Chinese groups. For Taiwanese, "recognition" was the most important source of work stress to affect work morale, and "home/work balance" to affect personal well-being. Taiwan has been free of major political or ideological upheavals since 1949, and Confucianism has remained a dominant philosophical system and guiding ethics in daily life, Confucianism advocates that one should be benevolent to others in a hierarchical order, depending on the intimacy of one's relationship with the other. This kind of structured intimacy is viewed as "hierarchical benevolence" in anthropological studies (Hsu, 1988). Furthermore, once a social position is prescribed to a Chinese person, he/she must show respect and unconditional obedience to his/her superior. Therefore, the Confucian "righteousness" for ordinary people is very different from the Western concepts of "democracy" and "justice" which are highly valued in Christian civilization. These Confucian ethics is still prevailing in contemporary Taiwanese organizations (Walder, 1983; Cheng, 1995).