Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T17:32:15.711Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Introduction: The diversity and dynamism of Chinese philosophies on leadership

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2010

Chao-Chuan Chen
Affiliation:
Rutgers University, New Jersey
Yueh-Ting Lee
Affiliation:
University of Toledo, Ohio
Get access

Summary

Over 8000 years ago, the fundamental religious belief in China was a form of shamanism (Lee and Wang, 2007; Xu,1991; Yuan, 1988). Shamanism is the spiritual belief or practice of a shaman who can connect the inner world with the outer world, the body with the soul, and the living with the dead. As time went on, Confucianism and Daoism developed out of shamanism as two of the fundamental Chinese belief systems and these have affected Chinese behavior and thinking almost on a daily basis for thousands of years (see Hsu, 1981). When the formerly subordinate states of the Zhou dynasty (841–256 BCE) began to break away to create competing states, chaotic political and social changes ravaged China. Accompanying these social and political changes were many schools of thoughts, including Confucianism (Chapters 1 and 2), Daoism (Chapter 3), Legalism (Chapter 4), and the school of military arts philosophy (Chapter 5), known in history as the “100 Schools of Thought” (see Table I.1). Each school (jia) was headed by its own master or masters (zi), and had academics and disciples to study, teach, and propagate their respective philosophical and ideological perspectives and views. These masters contested to offer advice, primarily to rulers, on expanding powers and restoring peace and order to society. It was common for rulers or leaders to receive scholars or advisors from different schools and hear their debates on ways of governing.

Type
Chapter
Information
Leadership and Management in China
Philosophies, Theories, and Practices
, pp. 1 - 28
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Berling, J. 1985. “Self and whole in Chuang Tzu,” in Munro (ed.), pp. 101–120.
Black, D. 1992. Essentials of Chinese herbs. Springville, UT: Tapestry Press.
Brewer, M. B., and Chen, Y. 2007. “Where (and who) are collectives in collectivism: toward conceptual clarification of individualism and collectivism,” Psychological Review 114: 133–151.Google Scholar
Chen, C. C., Chen, Y. R., and Xin, K. 2004. “Guanxi practices and trust in management: a procedural justice perspective,” Organization Science 15(2): 200–209.Google Scholar
Chen, C. C., Meindl, J. R., and Hunt, R. G. 1997. “Testing the effects of horizontal and vertical collectivism: a study of rewards allocation preferences in China,” Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 28(1): 44–70.Google Scholar
Chen, Z. X., and Aryee, S. 2007. “Delegation and employee work outcomes: an examination of the cultural context of the mediating processes in China,” Academy of Management Journal 50(1): 226–238.Google Scholar
Elvin, M. 1985. “Between the earth and heaven: conceptions of the self in China,” in Carrithers, M., Collins, S., and Lukes, S. (eds.), The category of the person, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 156–189.
Fung, Y.-L. 1948. A short history of Chinese philosophy. New York: Free Press.
He, W., Chen, C. C., and Zhang, L. H. 2004. “Rewards allocation preferences of Chinese employees in the new millennium: effects of ownership reform, collectivism, and goal priority,” Organization Science 15(2): 221–231.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture's consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
House, R. J., Hanges, P. J., Mavidan, M., Dorfman, P., and Gupta, V. 2004 (eds.). Culture, leadership, and organizations: the GLOBE study of leadership in 62 nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Hsu, P. S. S. 1981. Chinese discovery of America. Hong Kong: Southeast Asian Research Institute.
Hui, C. and Graen, G. 1997. “Guanxi and professional leadership in contemporary Sino-American joint ventures in Mainland China,” Leadership Quarterly 8(4): 451–466.Google Scholar
Hwang, K. K. 1987. “Face and favor: the Chinese power game,” American Journal of Sociology 92(4): 945–974.Google Scholar
Hwang, K. K. 2000. “Chinese relationalism: theoretical construction and methodological considerations,” Journal for the Theory of Social Behavior 30(2): 155–178.Google Scholar
King, A. Y. 1985. “The individual and group in Confucianism: a relational perspective,” in Munro (ed.), pp. 57–70.
King, A. Y. 1991. “Kuan-hsi and network building: a sociological interpretation,” Daedalus 120: 63–84.Google Scholar
Lee, L. O. 1985. “Romantic individualism in modern Chinese literature: some general explorations,” in Munro (ed.), pp. 239–258.
Lee, Y.-T. 2000. “What is missing in Chinese–Western dialectical reasoning?,” American Psychologist 55: 1065–1067.Google Scholar
Lee, Y.-T. 2003. “Daoistic humanism in ancient China: broadening personality and counseling theories in the 21st century,” Journal of Humanistic Psychology 43(1): 64–85.Google Scholar
Lee, Y.-T., and Hu, P.-C. 1993. “The effect of Chinese Qi-gong exercises and therapy on diseases and health,” Journal of Indian Psychology 11: 9–18.Google Scholar
Lee, Y-T., and Wang, D. 2003. “Aboriginal people in Taiwan, Continental China and the Americas: ethnic inquiry into common root and ancestral connection,” in Li, X. B. and Pan, Z. (eds.), Taiwan in the twenty-first century, Lehman, MD: University Press of America.
Markus, H. R., and Kitayama, S. 1991. “Culture and self: implications for cognition, emotion and motivation,” Psychological Review 98: 224–253.Google Scholar
Morris, M. W., and Peng, K. 1994. “Culture and cause: American and Chinese attributions for social and physical events,” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 67: 949–971.Google Scholar
Munro, D. 1985 (ed.). Individualism and holism: studies in Confucian and Taoist values. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
Nisbett, R., Peng, K., Choi, I., and Norenzayan, A. 2001. “Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition,” Psychological Review 108: 291–310.Google Scholar
Parsons, T., and Shils, E. 1951. Toward a general theory of social interaction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Peng, K., and Nisbett, R. E. 1999. “Culture, dialectics, and reasoning about contradiction,” American Psychologist 54: 741–754.Google Scholar
Poggi, C. 1983. Calvinism and the capitalist spirit: Max Weber's Protestant ethic. London: Macmillan.
Redding, S. G. 1993. The spirit of Chinese capitalism. New York: Walter de Gruyter.
Triandis, H. 1995. Individualism and collectivism. Boulder, CO: Westview.
Tsui, A. S., Wang, H., Xin, K. R., Zhang, L. H., and Fu, P. P. 2004. “Let a thousand flowers bloom: variation of leadership styles in Chinese firms,” Organization Dynamics 33: 5–20.Google Scholar
Tsui, A. S., Zhang, Z. X., Wang, H., Xin, K., and Wu, J. B. , J. B. 2006. “Unpacking the relationship between CEO leadership behavior and organizational culture,” Leadership Quarterly 17: 113–137.Google Scholar
Walder, A. G. 1986. Communist neo-traditionalism: work and authority in Chinese industry. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Wang, H., Law, K., Hackett, R., Wang, D. X., and Chen, Z. X. 2005. “Leader–Member exchange as a mediator of the relationship between transformational leadership and followers' performance and organizational citizenship behavior,” Academy of Management Journal 48(3): 420–432.Google Scholar
Whitman, C. 1985. “Privacy in Confucian and Taoist thought,” in Munro (ed.), pp. 85–100.
Xu, X. Z. 1991. The origin of the book Shan Hai Jing. Wuhan: Wuhan Publishing House.
Yuan, K. 1988. Chinese history of mythology. Shanghai: Shanghai Literature Publishing House (in Chinese).
Yukl, G. 1998. Leadership in organizations, 4th edn. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Zhang, Y., Chen, C. C., and Wang, H. 2007. “Bounded empowerment: main and joint effects of supervisory power sharing and management control.” Paper presented at the Academy of Management,Philadelphia.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×