Endnotes

[i] An important point to consider when entertaining criticisms of American management practices being culturally limited or biased is the degree to which non-American management practices are biased within their own realm if they even exist. For example, while proposing Yin and Yang as a change concept, Marshal admits that no contemporary change model exists in Asian cultures. When considered as a whole, Lewin’s force field theory starts to sound like the Yin and Yang concept by proposing that change produces two opposing forces. However, contemporary literature tends to relegate Lewin’s force field theory to a simplistic three-step idea.

[ii] In a genuine Confusion manner, Japanese managers I discuss change theory emphasize the “wa” in all things, meaning “consensus” or “harmony.” The Confucian concept of “Wa” is so dominant in Japanese culture that the nation represents itself with the Chinese character “和” (wa). Japanese management professionals and politicians consistently emphasize every individual’s role in promoting the “wa” of all things. However, while the Yin-Yang philosophy emphasizes achieving harmony by balancing conflicting forces, harmony in a Confusion construct generally limits opposition and reduces individual initiative (Nuyen, 2001).

In the words of one manager that I recently interviewed: “We must do whatever necessary to preserve the harmony in our group, so we do not tolerate different opinions. For us to establish and preserve harmony, we must all be the same.” I have seen this same approach alive in American political environments where collectivist activists declare, “We must all be of one mind.” Through this schema, the power structure reduces individual initiative and differences. Equality means that each individual is equal to all others, but each fills a different and unequal role in the social structure.