The aim of the paper critiqued is analysing South Korea Management. The design/methodology and approach that has been used is based on literature study and interpretations of existing analysis presenting the South Korea Management in five parts: South Korea, Three Styles of Asian capitalism, Contemporary South Korea management, Parallels with France and Futures issues. This academic article, use the link between the Korean culture and the business to show that the Korean management is a very complex management with a lot of influence and with particular characteristic which make Korea one of the G-20 major economies.II. Main argument This paper was very well written and describing the different aspects and influences which have made the Korean Management what it is today. The paper does a really good approach in order to describe and explain South Korean management, in order to give to their reader a really precise and complete description the two authors began with a broad approach to go deeper gradually and describe the environment’s main topic.The writer’s main focus is South Korea management, which is really well defined and enforced by a lot of quotations which make this paper really complete about the topic.
There is no kind of data that has been used or gathered, like qualitative and quantitative, just literature and journals which enforce the writers review about Management in South Korea. Firstly the writers do well with an overview that explains the Korea, culture and business culture; it was really pleasant to have the basis of Korean management.The research is focused on a macroscopic level and explains that Korean management is born with a mix of three influences: The Confucianism, the American and Japanese business. Furthermore they make the distinction between three Asian management styles: Japanese, Chinese and Korean management which is characterized by “the large and complex family or clan based South Korean conglomerate or chaebol” (p318-L6). One of the most famous chaebol is Samsung which is developed like a case example with a proper management (P322).The Korean management is also described as a decisive management, with a strong vertical hierarchy, for the communication and the power: Influenced by its culture Korean manager have a traditional respect for their senior, the seniority have a big impact in management and more precisely in promotion.
In addition of this “high degree of centralisation” (“senior management which is 80% of the authority”-P320), there are horizontal concentration with all the functional control.The communication is Korean management can be summarizing with a simple schema: Superior No open communication General directive (Except in informal occasion) Subordinate (Do action according to own views and perspective) With a Korea Management built on Chaebols, blood relationships have impact in management the company, “the Confucian value of filial piety is strongly emphasised in Korea; and hence primary loyalties do to one’s family or clan, rather than to the state or society in general”(P324-L3).A parallel with France is done because all this two management have a lot in common. Although it is very surprising to find this parallelism in this article, a connection where other Asian management would have had expected, it is very pleasant to learn that Korean have more in common with French management than Asian management. The future issue is focused on the international aspect, due to the globalisation the Korean management have to adapt itself to the international manager in the company and to internationalisation of the company.
This confrontation between the Korean management is really interesting because the reader can understand the proper Korean management style and how it is different from other. For example (P325): “There is a growing evidence of tension between the practitioners of the traditional style of Korean management described in this article and professional managers (in particular those who have been educated or worked in western countries and the USA-. ” The writers do well to introduce two cases example Hyundai and Samsung.
These examples give some energy to the text and add credibility to the main description. III. Related literatureThe author does a great job of providing citations, all paragraph have one in link with its subject, two authors comes often Chen,M (1995) Asian Management Systems, Routledge,London and Fukuyama,F. (1995),Trust: the social Virtues and the creation of Prosperity, Hamish Hamilton, London. Chen’s book is the only book on the market which gives a comparative analysis between the management styles in Asia country. This first edition covers the Asian management before the crash 1997-1998 so it is old but the text itself is from 1998. Excepted this fact the quotations put in the text are very clear and understandable.
The citations provide a high level of confidence, show the knowledge about the subject, and help to understand what is saying. It is a good practices in descriptive articles, adds credibility and confidence that Modern and Bowles’s approach was not only thorough, but also well informed because all the citations are in link and very relevant with this article. There is not more tools used, like data numerical, it isn’t annoying but the mix between references and data numerical would be really welcome to improve this article.
IV. Method The method used was adequately described and the research covered.The four elements covered were well planned and executed. The abstract is adequately summarising the article and present all the keyword and it present all the aspect of South Korea management view inside.
In an article which not goes over fifteen pages, it is really impressive how the authors have succeeded to present the Korean management. An overview about the South Korea gives the starting point after the authors go deeper in the subject with four other parts Three styles of Asian capitalism, Contemporary South Korea Management, Parallels with France and Future issues.The reasoning’s organisation is very logic and it is a descriptive approach, no critical aspects. Furthermore the writing style is really clear; there are no vagueness and repetition are only made in the future issues part but it is to present the aspect of Korean management in future view: (P324) the Chaebols construction for example is quoted when the author talk about the succession, a subject already discussed early (P318). This article doesn’t present new theory, it is a review but the entire conceptual viewpoint are quoted, defined, described and explained.This text is based on reference, the secondary researches for this article are really important, there are not many references but all the quotation in the text are really well introduce. Every paragraph is structured around quotations.
V. Conclusion This academic article is very pleasant to read because of its complete analyse, everything about Korean Management is presented, argued, analyse with quotation. The reader can learn a lot because this is a descriptive article present from A to Z the South Korea Management.The thread of the arguments is very clear and each paragraph is structured around one main subject so reading is very nice and easy. With this clarity, it is entirely possible to take the text in the middle is to follow the reasoning of the author. In spite of this article is old (1998) and the part talking about the future issues may seems irrelevant, it is still possible to say that this article is convincing: it ages well and remain as reference. Furthermore it was very difficult to find an article that included the concept of management Korea, chaebol and culture in the same article.Korean culture and management are poorly promoted abroad.
Many are those who only think of the Japanese management when Asian management is quoted. However, the Korean management as shown in this article is really fascinating.ReferencesModern, T. Bowles, D. (1998), Management Decision 36/5, Management in South Korea: A review, MCB University Press UK.
Godwin, T. (2008-2009) Lecture Handouts, Week 6 Research Methods, Example of a Critique of a Research Paper. LSBU, BABM. London Road, 2nd March 2009. Chen, M.
(1995) Asian management systems: Chinese, Japanese and Korean styles of business, London and New York