Performance Outcomes in Chinas Technology Industry - Essay Example

ARTICLE CRITIQUE SUBMITTED BY YOU Your Academic Organisation Here Here Other Relevant Information Here ARTICLE CRITIQUE Introduction The chosenarticle for review, “Business Strategy, Organizational Culture, and Performance Outcomes in China’s Technology Industry”, reflects a primary study conducted by several professional researchers regarding the importance of human resources activities centred around the Chinese technology industry. In many respects, the researchers managed to successfully plan, coordinate and analyse a series of credible and informative findings. However, discrepancies exist in the presentation (content) of the article which will further be discussed in detail in this article critique project. Article characteristics Understanding little regarding China’s technology sector, the authors managed to clearly indicate the magnitude of their research project and its implications for today’s human resource professionals operating in highly competitive industries, such as the aforementioned. Additionally, the researchers identify a potential link between general human resource management practices and that of knowledge production in the contemporary business industry. This element of HR philosophy appears to be the catalyst for designing the article’s primary study in order to determine how knowledge is produced as an outcome of inter-connected business activity associated with utilising human capital to its fullest and with the most appropriate management possible. In terms of content, the abstract is written appropriately in direct proportion with what occurred during the implementation and data analysis portions of the primary study. It clearly addresses the scope and intention of the project as well as a brief summation of the research findings whilst preparing the reader for what to expect in terms of content. The introduction to the article addresses a specific industry where knowledge is a factor of production as well as maintaining competitive edge. The authors suggest that to keep this advantage, human resources may well be integral, in direct relation to knowledge production and coordination, to developing competitive edge. The introduction clearly outlines the potential problem or issue which may exist in this industry, suggesting the rationale for carrying out the study. This article maintains a sizeable literature review, touching on factors such as statistics in China, the role of human resources in modern industries and the importance of knowledge for creating innovation and competitive advantage. Issues of corporate culture are also identified in this section. Having such a sizeable literature review, based on a wide variety of theorist perspectives, offers the study increased validity in terms of the researchers’ approaches to carrying out the primary study. In essence, the quality of this literature review, in comparison to what actually occurred in the methodology section, are completely congruent with the expectations that the reader might have for researcher knowledge and reliability. It had already been identified in the article that Chinese technology-related firms maintain substantial difficulty in staying competitive and utilising its internal assets to foster a more productive series of business outcomes. As such, the methodology targeted 132 organisations, each involved in the technology sector, which was appropriate for the intended study objectives. This offered a rather broad sample population, thus representing a wider series of individual perspectives regarding the role of HR in knowledge-driven organisations. The sample size selected for this study and its expected research outcomes was not too small nor too large-scale in terms of presenting quality research data. The study relied on a quantitative approach, utilising questionnaires as research instruments, and were distributed via email to the aforementioned participants; along with a follow-up call to ensure return of the instruments. The targeted sample involved individuals who were responsible for managing human resources in these technology firms, regardless of company size or development within the market. This is congruent with the researchers’ objectives to understand the elements of knowledge and HR which drive positive competitive advantage, as no indication was made that the study would be conducted only on small- or large-scale organisations. The researchers are not taking an exploratory approach to the primary study as they are attempting to justify a particular hypothesis regarding HR and knowledge-management activities, which the researchers proposed well into the methodology section. This proposed hypothesis would have been better inserted into the introduction so that the reader fully understood what specific research objectives were to be measured. Upon secondary review of the article, a rather obvious lack of research objectives was noted as being missing from the introductory section. The specific objectives which drove this study should have been identified initially as outlining objectives acts as the catalyst for research orientation and ultimate design. The methodology appears, from a non-expert viewpoint, to take a rather different turn than what was originally intended as the researchers explain the substance (content) of the questionnaires utilised in the study. The review of literature briefly identifies issues of corporate culture, especially surrounding three specific types of corporate cultures to include bureaucratic, innovative and supportive. However, the methodology turns a different direction by labeling firms as bureaucratic (which is supported by the literature), competitive and sharing (two new concepts introduced without an initial review on the topic. The way the materials were presented in this particular section of the article did not seem to provide ample support for why the corporate culture divisions had changed labels from innovation and support to competition and sharing. The researchers further specify a series of control variables as a means to predict total business performance based on size and other demographics. The authors further indicate in this section that ownership maintains influence on total HRM and company performance. Was this aspect of identifying control variables important to this study when ownership factors were not described in the literature review? The researchers do not seem to be able to justify the inclusion of this control variables section by relating it as relevant to the study. In terms of presenting the data received through the research instruments and analyses efforts, the quantitative results were extremely difficult to understand. It has always been this researcher’s understanding that study’s of this variety should not only be catered to the well-versed (in terms of research knowledge and statistical data), but to the less-educated as well. The data provided in the article’s Exhibit 1, even after careful examination back throughout the study, was nearly impossible to connect with the study’s overall methodology. Oddly, the literature review was geared toward virtually any type of audience, regardless of knowledge in the areas of knowledge, HR, research activities or corporate phenomenon related to culture. However, it then took a very professional and complicated, statistical methodology for presenting data which over-complicated the process of learning from the study. Structurally, however, the article’s charts which presented the research findings were labelled according to what is appropriate for a study of this magnitude and were easily identifiable. Exhibit 2, however, maintained difficult-to-interpret and follow statistical data, using terminology much more advanced than the preliminary sections of this article. This actually made the process of identifying what was learned in this primary study distracting and somewhat confusing. Is this largely due to experience-level differences between this reader and the researchers regarding statistical analysis or would this distract any less-knowledgeable reader? Through the research, it was discovered that certain types of organisations (from a corporate culture viewpoint) created no large-scale benefit in terms of enhancing or improving organisational performance in a highly competitive industry. Based on the research data, the authors discovered that flexible environments which demand innovation as a key to longevity and success cannot be developed in business environments where management controls (bureaucracy) runs rampant. In many respects, the information uncovered by the authors is pretty much congruent with the majority of existing literature in the topic of human resources and competitive strategy. It is relatively common knowledge that a sharing and supportive culture will sustain a more rewarding working environment where knowledge is not controlled but shared. Thus, it might be said that the research uncovered in the study was not of significant value to many of today’s HR (or business) professionals as it only restates a proven theme in human resources. Conclusion This study appeared, despite its best efforts at contributing to the wide body of literature related to the topic, to take on too many corporate variables all at once. Instead of isolating knowledge outcomes as a singular focus of HR activities, the study attempted to blend performance issues, culture, knowledge-management, and even competition as potential variables in the study’s approach. This provided a study which was not tightly focused around a specific research objective, making it somewhat unreliable (overall) due to the many elements that the researchers attempted to address. Moreover, despite the quantitative data provided by the researchers’ analyses, many of the determinations regarding potential or future best practices as made on subjective assessments that are more qualitative in design. However, since the study maintained no qualitative focus (thus had no supportive data such as from interviews) and the authors’ credentials do not indicate superior degree status, it leaves a shadow of doubt on credibility of subjective determinations. References Chow, Irene H. & Liu, Shan S. (2007). ‘Business Strategy, Organizational Culture, and Performance Outcomes in China’s Technology Industry’. Human Resource Planning. 30(2): 47-55. Read More