The Crisis of Management Culture in the Philippines: Neither East Asian nor Western 1
Magdalena L. Mendoza
2
Abstract
The paper examined the value system in Philippine firms against the backdrop of Eastern-Western cultural dynamics in East East Asia. The Asian milieu presents co-existence of cultural stasis and unease -balance and tension between Eastern values and Western ideas. Successful Asian countries demonstrated their ability to blend conflicting cultures and highlight certain values in order to promote nation-building efforts. The Philippine value system is a stark contrast to its East East Asian neighbors’. It partakes of both Asian traditions and Western practices but curiously is neither Asian nor Western. The absence of more solid foundation, the inability to distill foreign values, and the “disconnects” between national culture and local articulation have resulted in the “adulteration” of Philippine management culture. This culture gap might have been responsible for the country’s slower pace of development.
Keywords
Philippines, management culture, Asian values, Filipino values, East- West exchange
1
Paper presented at the 3rd EUROSEAS Conference in London, United Kingdom and the 4 th European Philippine Studies Conference in Alcoba, Spain on September 2001. 2 Vice President, Development Academy of the Philippines. 1
1. Introduction
After the Asian economic crisis, the discourse on “Asian values” lost steam. It was argued by Westerners that the crisis proved that it is economic fundamentals rather than values which propel Asian economies. In turn, at the firm level, Asian management success was seen solely as the product of “universal” organizational excellence practices. Yet Asian values--- respect for authority, harmony within the organization, discipline, and willingness to sublimate individual interests to those of the group---stack up differently from Western values, and reflect and determine distinct organizational behavioral patterns and management styles. Asian organizations like to emulate much of what they recognize as Western success (strong work ethic, efficiency, organizational excellence, openness to new ideas, customer focus), and much of the system (capitalist) out of which that success came from. But at the same time they like to challenge some Western predispositions (preeminence of individual rights, appeal to arbitration and judicial relief rather than on dispute resolution at group level) since they are seen as obstacles to organizational success. The paper first examines the dynamics of this Asian-Western cultural interaction as it is played out out in the East Asian setting. It suggests that both balance and tension exist as firms struggle to advance, and that this confluence has co-existed with the East Asian “miracle.” Japan, with its capacity to reconcile east and west, serves as a good cultural motif. The paper next examines the value system in Philippine firms, and indicates that a clear contrast exists e xists between the country and its East Asian neighbors. Philippine values are are firmly firmly grounded in neither Asian traditions traditions nor western practices. This failure failure to adopt might have been responsible for the country’s slower pace of development.
2
2. Perspectives
2.1 Culture and development A society’s fate is influenced by its culture. The shared beliefs (things accepted as facts), social norms (accepted ways of doing things), customary actions (behaviors accepted) and material traits of a society---its culture---never remain transfixed to any one point (Kawato, 1995). They are enriched---or corrupted---by other cultures. Cultures, in fact, are always “flowing” onto each other, creating a “dynamic” whole that keeps on shifting. The movement of people, goods and services lead to cultural “borrowings.” It is true that Western values permeate Asia much more than Asian values permeate the West. Nevertheless, cultures cannot be straightjacketed. The practice of “pigeon-holing”---Asians are group-oriented, Westerners are individualistic--is more of a misimpression than a historical and geographic reality (Kawato, 1995). Indeed, Western culture is not an all-time individualistic ethic; it progressed from communal to individual, as western civilization began to take shape as a result of economic development. Political freedom and democracy are not an ancient feature of western heritage (Sen, 1997).1 It is an absurdity to suggest that unless the Western paradigm of individualism is adopted, economic expansion outside the West could not occur; that Asia (and the Philippines) should therefore promptly shift to the Western ideal (Kawato, 1995). Conversely, it is equally foolish to say that progress can only be made if only Asian values were embraced and Western values rejected. Hence, this paper is not supportive of calls for authoritarian governance which is widely (but falsely) perceived as necessary for economic success. As Sen observes, empirical evidence does not support the claim that there is a general conflict between individual rights and economic performances. A recent survey suggests that Asians, concurring with westerners, honor new ideas, accountability and free expression (Ouyang, 2001). Neither does this paper suggest the championing of Asian values as an instrument to resist “Western 3
hegemony.” Asian values could not be made into an Asian cause against the West. To begin with, the idea that Asian culture revolves around harmony, concern for others, submission, etc., while Western culture prioritizes individualism, independence, freedom of individual choice, etc. is nothing more than stereotyping. The point is, all valued traits are present in both Eastern and Western settings at various times (Sen, 1997). Also, as anthropologists tell us, all cultures are on equal footing. Neither is Western culture superior nor eastern culture inferior. The difference between individuals in the West and the obligations to society in the East is only a matter of degree, and is not a particularly significant distinction (Ouyang, 2001). What all these suggest is that there are no fundamental values that separate the Asians as a group from people in the rest of the world. To start with, Asia is an immensely large and heterogeneous place. Asia is a kaleidoscope of cultures, religious beliefs, languages, politics and history. But that should not negate the fact that there are common grounds among Asians. Across the diverse cultures of Asia lie similarities, or common characteristics (e.g., respect for the elderly) (Sen, 1997). What is important to emphasize is that at particular stages in the development of nations, some values are necessarily highlighted, even if they are not the most important. In Asia, generally, values that receive more attention today differ from what the West consider as sacrosanct, such as individual liberty. The real issue is not whether the Western perspective is absent in Asian traditions---Confucian and Buddhist writings did champion individual liberty and free choice--but whether it is the most important at this particular historical conjuncture for Asian nations. It is not individualism---important it may be in later stages---that propels the progress of Asian nations, the Philippines included. The current key to social progress lies in modernization without the loss of traditional values. Japan provides a good example of how adaptation of western values has not diminished its value system. In the end, positive values build on proportionate sharing of different systems within the nation. Values are substantially, but not completely derived from membership in any nation. Social harmony as much as individual freedom is affirmed in the context of the 4
country or region of which a person is an inhabitant. Values may turn on their basic importance and on their instrumental role, but only to the degree that they can adapt to the local context.
2.2 Construct of value
National or societal cultures are built on adherence to a certain set of values. People act, think and dream in terms of what they value. What their cultures value, they value. What their cultures abhor, they abhor. Values, in a more specific context, are linked to societal needs. Ouyang (2001) elaborates: “Value is a relative concept that indicates the relationship between the needs of the value subject and the function of the value object. Values are the meaning and function of the value object to relevant value subject. When we say something is valuable or has value, it usually means the object has some positive meaning or function to a particular subject. The value subject may be an individual person or group, a nation, a country, even human life as a whole. The value object can also be anything, from matter to social organization, or the human spirit. However, different value relationships have different value standards.” In short, something has value, only if the subject has a need for it, and that object can meet this need. If Asian people are the subjects, values make up their hopes, wishes, their ideal world, their choices, their criteria for judging a situation, among others. If Asians do not have the same value perception, there is not a unified Asia subject, and therefore, it is difficult to reach common ground. (Ouyang, 2001).
2.3 Economic growth and modernization
Asian values as an issue was raised in the early 90s for their presumed role as explanatory variable of the Asian economic miracle. It would be naïve to say that the values explain the miracle. But while development is not culture-bound, it is neither culture-free. Certain regional values can be highlighted for their positive effects on fostering stability and social development. 5
Because dynamic emerging markets, rapid economic growth, increased political power and rising standards of living characterized the Asian “tigers,” there was tremendous pressure to redefine the nature of economic and political relationships between Asia and the Western hemisphere (Ouyang, 2001). The East Asian nations were mindful that although the market economy is fine, market values cannot be employed “for the maintenance of social order, for human flourishing, for the development of equitable forms of life” (Tu, 1998). With this precaution, and having passed the subsistence stage of development, Asians became more receptive to globalizing Western ideas, principally because of need. “There is by now a fairly agreedupon list of ‘helpful policies,’ and they include openness to competition, the use of international markets, a high level of literacy and education, successful land reforms, and public provision of incentives for investment, exporting, and industrialization” (Sen, 1997). It is within this “openness” that East Asia rapidly developed, based on low-cost export-oriented industrialization strategy (some, unfortunately under an authoritative environment). Of course, globalization will mean more Western influence penetrating Asian nations as exchange of ideas, goods and services take place among nations. The dominance of the West in science and technology, management, business, public administration and capitalist economics will mean its predominance in the economic and cultural exchange, leaving the Asian nations vulnerable to further westernization. Yet so far they have gained considerably in the exchange.
3. Asian Management Culture 3.1 The core values
There are values which can be typically observed among Asians. They differ in degree rather than in substance from Western values. “Asian traditions place more emphasis on the group than the individual, consider order to be more useful than argument, rank authority above liberty, appreciate solidarity more than freedom, value discipline more than disorder, and prefer stability to what they perceive as decadence in the individualistic West” (Ouyang, 2001). 6
There is likewise an emphasis “on education and self discipline, and acceptance of diversity of spiritual and philosophical authority in theory, but enforced social consensus among such diversity in practice” (Mendes, 2001). Then there are the old favorites of thrift and respect for order, the state and the elderly (Ouyang, 2001). Asian values are indeed family values functioning as a crucial “group insurance.” There is, also, “a respect for political leadership, and a belief that government and business need not necessarily be natural adversaries” (Milner, 1999). Respect for authority is a cardinal concept of Confucianism. Authority implies hierarchy. It is a fact that in Asia, there is a strong adherence to and acceptance of the need for hierarchy and social ordering. The social ordering dictates how individuals should behave with respect to each other---among peers and with superiors.2 Family-orientation is another cherished Asian value. Among East Asians, there is a Confucian belief that an individual’s life is inherited from one’s ancestors, and that the lives of one’s offspring are a continuation of one’s own life. The family is thus considered the center of one’s existence. Asians value consensus and avoid open conflict. For Asians, it is important to foster harmonious social relations and to maintain harmony within the organization. The desire for stability also compels Asian societies to accept cultural and religious diversity. A clear example of this is Singapore, a multi-ethic society. In order to foster social harmony, Singapore emphasizes five core values: strength of the community, strength of the family, majority rule, social accord, religious harmony.
3.2 The East-West exchange
Asian management culture is essentially an amalgam of Eastern and Western values. When societal values were tested in separate interviews with managers from China, Japan, Thailand, Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Philippines, most chose the following: maintenance of an orderly society, harmony, accountability of public officials, openness to new ideas, freedom of expression, and respect for authority. When they were asked for the most important 7
personal values, they selected: hard work, respect for learning, honesty, self-reliance. These responses indicate that East Asians are generally still respectful of authority and prize an orderly society, but they also honor new ideas, accountability and free expression (Ouyang, 2001)---proof that there is a mix of Eastern and Western values in Asian management settings. It is instructive to look at particular cases. The Japanese experience is the most interesting one, since it is one of very few nations that have managed to modernize, globalize, and localize all at the same time. Its secret is finding the equilibrium between western and its own values, proving that no values would persist without adaptation. For Tu (1998), the Japanese, while they are devoted students of western learning, have not really abandoned their cultural roots, whether in the Shinto tradition, or Mahayana Buddhist tradition, or Confucian tradition. They can mobilize their own indigenous resources as a way of responding to the challenges of Westernization, in order to develop a certain kind of mixture.” As they adapted Western technology, the foreign elements were reconfigured to suit the local culture (Gonzalez, 2000). The best approach seemed to be a combination of Western technique with indigenous culture, or equivalently, modernization without culturally Westernizing (Mazrui, 1998). Taiwan is another illustrative example of value mix. Starting from a communal orientation, it gradually transformed into a capitalist society. Taiwan has been successful in blending Western capitalist ideas, science and technology and Confucian ethics. The Confucian tradition is evident in the way Taiwanese organizations have developed and are managed. Typical organizations established in Taiwan are family businesses, including small and medium enterprises that support big companies within the export-processing industry. The managers and most workers in such plants are members of the family and relatives, and as such are expected to do their share and take only what they need from the company. Kwang-Kuo (1995) revealed that the guanxi network enabled these enterprises to generate business, deliver orders beyond their production capacities and operate without big capital. Confucian “collectivism” enabled Taiwan’s export sector to be externally competitive, ensure continuity 8
of business for members of the network and further accumulation of wealth.3 Hong Kong is another example of an East-West hybrid. Predominantly-Chinese Hong Kong embraced the “ethos of economic development that underscored the materialistic attraction of industrial affluence and the agony of backwardness and poverty associated with underdevelopment” (Ng, Stewart & Chan, 1994). The business and work values in Hong Kong is a mix of “Confucian altruistic prescriptions,” British legal and professional practices, “free market” partiality for flexibility, contractual individualism and impersonality. Local enterprises in Hong Kong consolidated such practices and the result is a “quasi-paternalistic” system. For example, the apparent efficacy of the organizational pay and promotion system geared to annual staff appraisals is in part buttressed by the mutual trust stemming from the psychological contracts firms have with their workforce. The incentive and reward instruments in these firms are deferred payments and gratifications such that most employees are willing to sacrifice immediate personal interests and convenience, confident that in the long run, the company will compensate them for their dedication and loyal service (Ng, Stewart & Chan, 1994). While Confucianism is the backbone of Singapore’s developmental paradigm, it also boasts of “pragmatic acculturation.” As regards respect for authority, “Singaporeans as a whole tend to hold their national leaders in high regard and tend to respect the authority vested in government office. At the company level, some indirect figures hint that regard for managerial authority is weaker” (Quah, 1994). On work ethics, Singaporeans like to emulate the skillfulness of Swiss workers. They also envision themselves to be as industrious and quality conscious as the Japanese. Singaporean companies are quick to adapt foreign technology and management approaches as long as these can serve their own interests. Unlike their other Asian counterparts, Koreans are perceived as predominantly “this worldly oriented”. “The Korean belief system, as manifested in shamanism, is oriented to achieving secular wishes in daily life, and even Christianity and Buddhism have been acculturated to this belief system” (Kim, 1994). Confucianism is also well integrated into the belief system of this worldly orientation. 9
The Korean style of collectivism is more family centered, characterized by patriarchal structure on the basis of blood ties and emphasis on filial piety. Korean company familism is characterized by a paternalistic style of management rather than a participatory one (Kim, 1994). But there is a downside. With the democratization movement in Korea, the social value of collectivism has been transformed to “collective egoism” which relies upon “either violent collective action or group pressure to protect the common interests shared by participants against legitimate measures and due processes” (Kim, 1994). Korea is an example where tension and stresses exist because of Eastern and Western value discrepancies. Overall, the above cases prove the point that Eastern and Western values can co-exist, but in contexts where adaptations take place. Such East-West conjuncture has given East Asia the needed push to develop its industries, and hence its economies.
4. Filipino Values and Management Culture
Is the Philippines part of the Asian value system? Can the Philippine management culture be considered Asian? The Philippines played too little a part in the debate about Asian values. It is easy to see why. The tendencies of Filipino societal values---they are neither Confucian nor Hindu nor Islamic---cannot be clearly associated with the values of their neighbors in Asia. Surprisingly, Filipino values are not really Western. This, despite the nation’s close affinities with the US. It was the late Benigno Aquino, Jr. who said that although the Filipinos are an Asian people, they are “not Asian in the eyes of their fellow Asians, not Western in the eyes of the West” (Sheridan, 1999). As it is, Philippine culture is a crossbreed of influences stemming from its Malay roots and exposure to East Asian, Spanish, and American cultures. Spain brought to the Philippines Latin traits (through Catholicism) while the Americans introduced rational thinking and individualism. Filipinos accepted these values without question and without much distillation. They “do not appear to regard democracy as some alien system foisted on them by the interfering West, but as natural birthright” (Sheridan, 1999). Christian traditions (which are found nowhere else in Asia) now
10
define Philippine culture while Western pragmatism dominates the thinking of Filipinos. Paradoxically, while Filipinos exemplify these values in Asia, the Philippines is still considered culturally distant to the Western countries which championed these thoughts. The core beliefs of Christianity and democracy---which rival those of global systems (e.g., Hinduism, Islam, Confucianism) found elsewhere in Asia--- have not made a dent in unifying how Filipinos act, think and dream. To illustrate this incomplete transference of Christian dogma in the Filipino core values: among many Filipino Christians, there exists the phenomenon called “split-level Christianity”. It means the coexistence within the same person of two or more thought and behavior systems which are inconsistent with each other i.e., Christian doctrinal teachings vs. folk morality. “Split-leveling is the practical way Filipinos learn to handle the opposing pressures,” according to Andres and Ilada-Andres (1987). In order to please groups with opposing views, Filipinos deal with the pressures ”by keeping them apart and by simply ignoring the inconsistencies without a feeling of hypocrisy.” Though largely influenced by Western values, Filipinos still have much in common with fellow Asians. Deference to authority, centrality of the family, and community---values that typically characterize Asians---are present in Philippine culture but in varying degrees. The wellsprings of these Filipino values, however, are not strictly Asian. They are also rooted in Christianity and indigenous practices. The Filipino sense of authority can be traced to its indigenous barangay system. The barangay dates back to pre-Spanish times, and was a community cluster consisting of closely-knit families, and ruled by a chieftain. The hierarchical social structure of the barangay system was characteristic of authoritarian relationship, in which conflict resolution and decision-making were reserved for the chieftain and elders in the community. The Filipino notion of authority however somehow differs from the East Asian version. Having been exposed to ideas of Western democracy, the Filipino’s sense of authority is more aptly described as acceptance of authority. It suggests deference without full
11
adherence, recognition without high regard. It is rooted not in the same kind of reverence for authority ascribed to Confucianism. Many companies in the Philippines adopt Western management styles, which are supposedly less autocratic, more participatory, and more democratized. Yet, the value orientation of Filipino workers makes them more predisposed to accept authority and hierarchy. Filipino rank-and-file, in contrast to their Western counterparts, are less autonomous, more dependent on superiors for guidance, and less accepting of risk and responsibility. In 1980, the Hofstede findings on value orientation in the Philippines indicated such tendency. Filipinos were high on power distance. Power distance is the extent to which the unequal distribution of power and influence in a group is accepted. It is an indication of authority in the superior, acceptance of hierarchical authority structures, and an inability of the inferior to decide, thus, precluding job autonomy. Filipinos also ranked high in a related value: uncertainty avoidance, which is related to three concepts – the need for employment stability, stress in the work place and orientation to follow rules. High uncertainty avoidance is associated with the reluctance to exercise autonomy, and accept responsibility (Acuna and Rodriguez, 1995). Acuna and Rodriguez validated Holstede’s findings in 1995. Another predominant Filipino value is family-centeredness. Filipino society emphasizes the centrality of the family. Quite similar to Eastern familism, Filipino kinship stresses the welfare and interest of the family, which is takes precedence over both the individual members and the community. In contrast to the East Asian model, the sense of community in the Philippines ends with the family. In fact, in community decision-making, the unwritten rule is that it is the influential family, not individual members of the community, which decides on the resolution of important matters. Even the religious responsibility of Filipinos is familial in nature rather than church-centered. If concentration of ownership in Philippine firms is considered, it is the family that stands out. The profile of company ownership in the Philippines suggests substantial family holdings. But unlike the family owners of, say, Taiwanese companies, the Filipino business family does not subscribe to the guanxi concept. The guanxi network, 12
that is, the interlocking nature of Taiwanese business which has been responsible for its rapid advance, does not operate actively in the Philippines except perhaps in the Filipino-Chinese business community. Filipino familism has something in common with Asian familism: the practice of nepotism and reciprocity. Both have been identified as corporate governance problems in Asia. The value of community (group orientation) in the Philippines is somehow an extension of the concept of family cohesion. It is not uncommon to find a community in the Philippines tracing its lineage to one family tree. The study of Acuna & Rodriguez also validated this “collectivism” which implies the precedence of group accomplishments over personal goals. Collectivism is exemplified in the time-honored Philippine tradition of bayanihan (teamwork) but this has slowly eroded as the Western individualistic concepts of personal entitlements and democratic rights started holding sway in the Filipino minds. Again, one can observe that Philippine-style collectivism is culturally distant from the Confucian communal ideology or Japanese collectivism where individuals would be willing to sublimate their objectives in favor of collective interests. For Filipinos, it is more of pakikisama (good interpersonal relations). Filipinos prize social acceptance since conformity to social norms is rewarded with cooperation and assistance while non-conformity is rebuked by ostracism and withdrawal of support. Authority, family, community: these mainstream traits define what is Filipino. As suggested above, they are as much Asian as Christian, as much indigenous as Western. Such cultural foundation, in a context where the Philippines is the most westernized nation in Asia, provides the setting for a clash of Eastern and Western values --group restraint vs. individual entitlements, professionalism vs. personalism, community proscription vs. individual expression, social responsibility vs. personal choice. Westernization of Filipino management culture has given rise to tensions in company decisionmaking and industrial relations. Western management values of objectivity, professionalism, and company-goal orientation are diametrically opposed to Filipino behavior and decision making style which Andres and Ilada-Andres (1987) describe as “personalism, familism, and particularism or 13
popularism.” In addition, the strategies used managing industrial relations, particularly in collective bargaining and arbitration, is impersonal and confrontational, which clash with the Asian idea of consensus and dialogue. “The culture clash internal to the management system in the Philippines is an illustrative case of culture gap. The relationship between labor and management in many corporations in the country is generally adversarial, particularly in the definition of rights, obligations, privileges, protection, and productivity of workers” (Jocano, 1999). Moreover, legal norms governing corporate and bureaucratic behavior in the Philippines, according to Jocano, often conflict with community norms. This incongruence between what is accepted as legally “correct” and what is felt as culturally “right” in actual life has given rise to much of the current difficulties in fostering harmonious industrial relations in the Philippine industries. Such discrepancies have larger philosophical overtones. Obvious differences in the ideology lead to almost irreconcilable interest of labor and management in the Philippines. If firm managers are trained according to Western business principles, union leaders are steeped in the dialectics of Western unionism and philosophy” (Jocano, 1999). Unions simultaneously adhere to the Marxist view of the class contradictions (hence the struggle between management and labor) and the capitalist view of free enterprise (hence free trade unionism). The clash of cultures has not proven to be beneficial for Filipino management. Unable to “process” the streams of values that have come his way, in terms of distilling, extracting positive components, and adapting them to local particularities, the Filipino manager has failed to create a productive corporate culture. At the same time, the Filipino worker has been too engrossed on adversarial means, generating an industrial relations atmosphere that went against the grain of indigenous values such as consensus, community and group orientation. The result is cultural disequilibrium.
5. Insights and Conclusion
The Asian-Western cultural interaction as it has been played out in East Asia suggests that stasis and unease co-exist as nations strive 14
to advance. What the successful Asian countries did was to highlight certain values in order to promote nation-building efforts, and to reconcile apparently conflicting cultures. Singapore’s “pragmatic acculturation,” Hong Kong’ East-West mix and Taiwan’s blending of Confucian philosophies and Western capitalist ideas and technology are good examples of good cultural distillation. Japan, of course, supplied the benchmark, with its unique adaptations of Western ideas and technology, while protecting its traditions and cultural values in order to rise from the devastation of war and restore national pride. It is apparent that certain values, predominantly but not entirely Asian, are highlighted at a particular stage of development because they are a necessary condition to create a strong socio-political environment for development. The Philippine value system is a stark contrast to its East Asian neighbors’. It partakes of both Asian traditions and western practices but curiously is neither Asian nor western. Many of its indigenous practices bear similarities with those found in Asia, but have different roots. The Philippine management culture is an East-West crossbreed but not a thoroughbred. The best of the East and best of the West have been “adulterated” because of lack of more solid foundation and the absence of integration at the national level. This has resulted in an immense culture gap. Nothing “connects” inhabitants across the social and geographical spaces of the Philippines. There is disjuncture between national culture and local sources of action. The Philippine state is organizationally weak to enforce its own formal structures on the routines of community life. These local routines evolved from the notions of kinship, locality and association, and on which are implanted the “practical consciousness” of most Filipinos. They have remained impervious to national “machination” to this day, thus retaining their relative autonomy from the nation-state. (Pertierra, 1990). Attempts to consolidate---examples include the New Society during the Martial Law years, and Moral Recovery under the Ramos administration---failed as a result of the disjointedness between national and local articulations. Today, Filipino culture remains a sui generis construction. The great task then is to create a broader synthesis of common experience that gives society a solid footing, and simultaneously, to produce categories necessary to integrate newer frameworks (e.g., 15
globalization, localization). The strength of nations is to bring cultural adaptiveness and developmental innovation together. The country has intrepid development entrepreneurs capable of articulating the country’s interests, but it does not have cultural articulators, those capable of bringing values and tradition to bear on development. The Philippines has yet to have a movement which can integrate the desirable values at the national level and rally the entire population towards nation building guided by these norms. We need one for the country’s future development. As Sheridan (1999) puts it, “The world also needs a Filipino contribution.”
Endnotes 1
Sen examined the writings of Confucius, Buddha, Ashoka, Kautilya, and Akbar (representing the Asian traditions of Confucianism, Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam). Sen found significant support for the concepts of freedom and tolerance, even if these eminent persons were no democrats. On the other hand, Kawato, surveying western heritage, noted that supposedly Asian traits such as social harmony, family orientation and pantheism were present in Graeco-Roman and Byzantine cultures. Ouyang indicated that Asian values such as filial piety, thrift, the stress on education, can also be counted as Christian (and therefore western) principles. 2 In
Singapore, the hierarchical orientation might also have come from the caste system (among Indians). “The caste system has a psychosocial orientation to arrange everything hierarchically, with each being superior to some and inferior to others. This orientation contributed to excessive centralization of power in top positions, particularly in Indian organizations” The family is also the most important “ingroup” in the caste system. “Within the family, the person is completely imbedded. A person defines his or her identity in terms of the family and yields to the family and caste goals, and confirms to the family and caste norms” (Sinha, 1994). 3
While taking full advantage of modern science and technology, familism is evident even in management of large companies. Top managers are usually the owners of the company with family members being assigned to important positions as finance and accounting. The paternalistic style of management is generally preferred, with limited delegation of authority to staff.
16
6. References Acuna, J. E. and Rodriguez, R. A. (1999). “Value Orientations of Filipinos,” Readings in Human Behavior in Organizations , Acuna, Rodriguez & Pilar (editors), Diwata Publishing, Inc., Manila, Philippines Andres, T.D. and Ilada-Andres, P.C.B. (1987). Understanding the Filipino , New Day Publishers, Quezon City, Philippines. Gonzalez, E. T. (2000). “Is Globalization a Threat to the Nationalist Imagination in the Philippines?” Asian Studies , Vol. XXXVI, No. 1, University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines. Jocano, F. Landa (1999). Towards Developing a Filipino Corporate Culture: Uses of Filipino Traditional Structures and Values in Modern Management , PUNLAD Research House, Inc., Metro Manila, Philippines. Kawato, A. (1995). “Beyond the Myth of ‘Asian Values’,” Chuokoron . Kim, S. (1994). “The Socio-Cultural Impact of the Improvement of Living Standards on Job Performance and Productivity: With Special Reference to Korean Experience”, Easternization: Socio-Cultural Impact on Productivity , Kwang-Kuo, H. (editor), Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo, Japan. Kwang-Kuo, H. (1995). Easternization: Socio-Cultural Impact on Productivity , Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo, Japan. Mazrui, A. A.(1998). “Africa, Asia, and the Dialectic of Globalization,” Cooperation South , Volume No.2, United Nations Development Programme. Mendes, E. P. (2001). “Asian Values and Human Rights: Letting the Tigers Free,” Human Rights Research and Education Centre, University of Ottawa, Canada. Milner, A. (1999). “ What Happened to Asian Values?” Faculty of Asian Studies, Australia National University, Australia.
17
Ng, S., Stewart, S. & Chan F.T. (1994). “Socio-cultural Impact on Productivity: The Case of Hong Kong,” Easternization: Socio- Cultural Impact on Productivity , Kwang-Kuo (editor), Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo, Japan. Ouyang, K. (2001). “Behind the Varying Understandings of Asian Values,” Scholar Papers , International Research and Exchange Board. Pertierra, R. (1990). “National Consciousness and Areas of Struggle: The Contradiction of the Philippine State,” Asian Studies , Vol. XXVII. University of the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines. Qua, S. R. (1994), “Socio-Cultural Factors and Productivity: The Case of Singapore,” Easternization: Socio-Cultural Impact on Productivity , Kwang-Kuo, H. (editor), Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo, Japan. Sen, A. (1997). “Human Rights and Asian Values,” The New Republic . Sheridan, G. (1999). Asian Values Western Dreams: Understanding the New Asia , Allen & Unwin, Australia. Sinha, J. P. B. (1994). “Socio-cultural Factors of Behaviour in India,” Easternization: Socio- Cultural Impact on Productivity , Kwang-Kuo, H. (editor), Asian Productivity Organization, Tokyo, Japan. Tu, W. (1998)“Asian Values and the Asian Crisis: A Confucian Humanist Perspective.” Talk given at Rice University, Houston, Texas.
18
19
20
