Argues that, whether referring to economic or bounded rationality, the notion of rationality is meaningful only in a specific cultural context. Proposes, by analogy, a culture‐driven approach for rationally managing the human resource function in a global environment. Shows how culture provides additional explanatory power for human resource management (HRM) practices – beyond what is a accounted for by political or economic structures – by comparing the USA with one of its major trading partners, Taiwan and with the People′s Republic of China (PRC), a country with which the USA has had a rather checkered relationship, on their commonly‐used practices of selection, reward systems, performance appraisal and participative management. Makes suggestions on how to reconcile cultural differences in transplanting HRM practices to China.
[1]
E. Lawler.
High-Involvement Management
,
1986
.
[2]
P. Earley.
Social Loafing and Collectivism: A Comparison of the United States and the People's Republic of China.
,
1989
.
[3]
W. Ouchi,et al.
Theory Z: How American Business Can Meet the Japanese Challenge.
,
1981
.
[4]
Richard M. Steers.
Organizational Science in a Global Environment Future Directions
,
1989
.
[5]
G. Hofstede,et al.
Culture′s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values
,
1980
.
[6]
S. Kerr.
On the folly of rewarding A, while hoping for B.
,
1975
.
[7]
Mary Ann,et al.
The New Professionals: Managing Today's High-Tech Employees
,
1988
.