Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=fapb20 Download by: [RMIT University] Date: 24 February 2016, At: 01:15 Asia Pacific Business Review ISSN: 1360-2381 (Print) 1743-792X (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/fapb20 Antecedents and characteristics of informal relation-based networks in Korea: Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek Sven Horak To cite this article: Sven Horak (2014) Antecedents and characteristics of informal relation- based networks in Korea: Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek, Asia Pacific Business Review, 20:1, 78-108, DOI: 10.1080/13602381.2013.791567 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2013.791567 Published online: 14 May 2013. Submit your article to this journal Article views: 143 View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 11 View citing articles Antecedentsandcharacteristicsofinformalrelation-basednetworksin Korea: Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek SvenHorak* ThePeterJ.TobinCollegeofBusiness,DepartmentofManagement,St.John’sUniversity,NYC, USA AlthoughtherehasbeenalargeamountwrittenaboutChinese Guanxi networks,a detaileddebateconcerningKoreaninformalrelation-basednetworksisbycomparison under-representedintheinternationalbusinessliterature.Thispaperintroducesand distinguishesbetweenthreeformsofinformalrelation-basednetworksinKorea:(1) Yongo,(2) Yonjul and(3) Inmaek. Inmaek describesasocialnetworkingeneral,while Yongo networksdrawprimarilyonexistingkinship-,university/school-andregional origin-basedties.Contraryto Yongo ties, Yonjul tiesexistforapurpose,oftentosecure personalgainsandbenefits.Inallthreeforms,kinship-,university/school-andregional origin-basedtiesplayprimary,butnotexclusive,roles.Abetterunderstandingof Koreaninformalrelation-basednetworkshelpscontributetotheadvancement ofknowledgeabouttheanatomyofinformalinstitution,aswellastothegrowingfield ofindigenousmanagementresearch,byidentifyingandanalysinganinfluential contextualfactorinKorea.Inaddition,itunderlinesimportantimplicationsfor managementpracticesinKorea. Keywords: indigenousmanagementresearch;informalrelation-basednetworks; Inmaek;Korea; Yongo; Yonjul Introduction DespitetherapidgrowthoftheKoreaneconomysincethe1960s,itreceivesfarless attentioninbusinessandmanagementresearchcomparedtoitsneighboursChinaand Japan.Today,theKoreaneconomyisamongthestrongest15worldwideaccordingto grossdomesticproduct(purchasingpowerparity(PPP),IMF2012).Koreanfirmsoccupy leadingpositionsinrespectiveindustries,with,forexample,Samsungleadingtheworld semiconductormarketandelectronics(KimandSeong 2010),HyundaiMotorsthefourth largestmanufacturerofautomobiles(OrganisationInternationaledesConstructeurs d’Automobiles/InternationalOrganizationofMotorVehicleManufacturers2010),and SamsungSDIandLGChemleadingthelithium-ionbatterymarket,importantformobile phones,notebooksandinthefutureforelectricallypoweredcars(VirtanenandLee 2010). AlthoughseveralstudieshaveanalysedformalfactorsandprocessesofKorean management(Kim 2011;LimandSanidas 2011;RugmanandOh 2008;Cho 1994; Kim 1997),lessattentionhasbeenpaidtotheinformalsphereofmanagerialbehaviourin Korea. ThispaperfocusesonthefundamentalfactorsunderlyingKoreanmanagement practices,namelyitsascriptiontoinformalrelation-basedties,asyetnoveltomanagement research.Whileoverthepast30yearsresearchintothebusinessimpactof Guanxi tieshas beencomprehensivelydescribed(Luo 2007;Gold,Guthrie,andWank 2002;Tsuiand q 2013Taylor&Francis *Email: [email protected] AsiaPacificBusinessReview,2014 Vol.20,No.1,78–108, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13602381.2013.791567 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Farh 1997;DunningandKim 2007),classified(Fan 2002b;ChenandChen 2004;Lin 2001;Li 2007)andcriticallydiscussed(Gu,Hung,andTse 2008;HoandRedfern 2010; Luo 2008;Fan 2002a),thedistinctivefeaturesofinformaltieswithinthesphereofKorean businessandmanagementremainlargelyunknown,orareatbestmentionedsuperficially intheinternationalbusiness(IB)andinternationalmanagement(IM)literature.Though somestudiesmakeKoreaninformaltiesaresearchsubjectinanIBorIMcontext,anin- depthanalysis,providingafundamentalclassification,definitionandcharacterization, suchasthatprovidedbyLuo(2008)orFan(2002a)inrelationto Guanxi,iscurrentlya necessity.Moreover,thoughindigenousmanagementresearch(IMR)iscurrently flourishing1 (XuandYang 2009;Tsui 2004;PandaandGupta 2007;Mayer 2006;Jackson, Amaeshi,andYavuz 2008),Koreanmanagementiscomparativelyunder-representedasa researchsubjectinthisfield.Hence,researchintoKoreaninformalrelation-based networkscanberegardedasaninnovativefieldofdiscussionandresearch. Table1 showstheresearchfieldfocusedinthispaper,aswellasitsrelationshipto neighbouringdisciplinesbyprovidingexamplesofstudiesconductedintheareaof informaltiesinIBandIMaswellasinIMR.Followingthisdistinction,studiesthat exploredistinctivecontextfactorsuniquetoKoreacancurrentlybeconsideredunder- represented.TheIMRapproachisdefinedbyTsui(2004),amongothers,asfollows: [ ... ]indigenousresearchisnotcomparativeorcross-culturalresearch.Bydefinition, comparativeorcross-culturalresearchinvolvesatleasttwonationsorcultures.Indigenous researchaimstounderstandaspecificcontextandthusitmustavoidinvolvingtwocontexts thatmaydifferonunknowndimensions.(Tsui 2004,503) Indigenousresearchprovidesabetterunderstandingofdistinctivecharacteristicsoflocal phenomenathatareuniquetoacountry,thusmakinganovelcontributiontoresearch. FutureresearchintoKoreanmanagementwillrequireapreciseunderstandingofthe natureofinformalrelation-basednetworksonwhichempiricalresearchcanbebuilt. Hence,acleardefinitionandcharacterizationofthedifferentexistinginformalnetwork typesisanimportantstartingpoint.Thispaperwilldistinguishbetween Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek basedonliteratureanalysis,interpretationofKoreantermsandaseriesof exploratoryinterviewsconductedbetween2009and2012. Theoreticalbackground PopularizedbyNorth(1990),theinfluenceofinformalinstitutions(e.g.culture,normsand ethics)incontrasttoformalinstitutions(e.g.laws,regulationsandrules)hasfounditsway intobusinessstudies(Peng,Wang,andJiang 2008).Informalinstitutionsare,contraryto formalinstitutions,mostlyunwritten,andconstructed,sharedandenforcedoutsideof officialchannels(Pejovich 1999).Thereislittledoubtthatinformalinstitutionsmatterin managerialdecision-making(Pengetal. 2009),butthewaysinwhichtheymatterandthe natureoftheirunderlyingprinciples,leadingtorespectivemodesofaction,iscurrentlya developingareaofmanagementresearch(Zhu,Wittmann,andPeng 2011). Inreferencetodisciplinesotherthanbusinessandmanagement(e.g.economicor politicalscience),itcanbeclaimedthattheorylacksaprecisedefinitionofwhatinformal institutionsactuallyareandwhattheyarenot.Severalphenomenasuchasnetworks,the mafia,corruption,culture,valuesandnormshavebeengenericallytaggedasinformal institutions.Relational,sometimesreferredtoaspersonal(Wang 2000)orsocial(Yazawa 2006;HelmkeandLevitsky 2004),networksareoftenregardedasasubcategoryof informalinstitutions. AsiaPacificBusinessReview 79 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Generallydefined,networkscanbedescribedas‘asetofinterconnectednodes’ (Castells 2001,1)betweenactors.Relation-basednetworks,thus,refertotheconnection betweenpeoplewhoaredirectlyorindirectlyinvolvedinasocialinteraction.Thenature oftherelationshipbetweenpeoplecanbeformalorinformalandtheformalnatureof relationshipscanbecharacterizedas‘explicitlyprescribed,exogenouslyimposedand rigidlyenforcedbyverticalauthoritypowersinauniversalisticdepersonalizedprocess (e.g.objective,cognitiveandtask-orientedandinstrumental)’(Li 2007,229).Onthe contrary,aninformalrelationshiprelatesto‘thenatureofsocialtiesandeventsas implicitlyassumed,endogenouslyembraced,andflexiblyenforcedbypeerpressures horizontallyinaparticularisticpersonalizedprocess’(Li 2007).Thus,informalnetworks ofrelationshipscanbedefinedasdirectorindirectconnectionsbetweenpeoplewhich, althoughbasedonvoluntaryparticipation,areheldtogetherbypeerpressure. Table1.Demarcationoftheobservationfieldinneighbouringdisciplines. Observationfield IB-relatedresearchon informalrelationsIMRoninformalrelations IM-relatedresearchon informalrelations Examples General scope NguyenandRose(2009, JBV), subject:Building trustamongVietnamese entrepreneurs Luo(2008,IBR), subject: Chinesecultureand businessbehaviourandthe intertwinementbetween guanxiandcorruption WongandBoh(2010, AMJ), subject:informal tiesandtrustworthiness ReagansandMcEvily (2003,ASQ), subject: Informalnetworksand knowledgetransfer Fan(2002b,IBR), subject: Questioningguanxi:defi- nition,classificationand implications MichailovaandWorm (2003,EMJ), subject: Personalnetworkingin RussiaandChina WongandEllis(2002, JIBS), subject:Socialties inSino-HongKonginter- nationaljointventures Cheng,Wang,andHuang (2009, MOR),subject:An ‘Insider’s’perspectiveof advancingChineseman- agementresearch EstrinandPrevezer(2010, APJM), subject:Informal institutionsandcorporate governanceinBrazil, Russia,IndiaandChina OnKoreaDyerandChu(2000, JIBS), subject:Trustin Supplier-Automaker Relationships KimandCannella(2008, JWB), subject:Social capitalandexecutivepro- motioninKorea Park,Hwang,andHarri- son(1996,IBR), subject: Communicationproblems inforeignsubsidiariesin theUSandKorea Under-represented currentlya Oh,Chung,andLabianca (2004,AMJ), subject: Groupsocialcapitaland effectiveness BstielerandHemmert (2008, JWB), subject: Comparingtrustinvertical productdevelopment partnershipsinSouth KoreaandAustria YoonandHyun(2010, MD), subject:Determi- nantsofinformalnetwork governanceinKoreaand China Note:JIBS,JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies;JBV,JournalofBusinessVenturing;AMJ,Academyof ManagementJournal;JWB,JournalofWorldBusiness;EMJ,EuropeanManagementJournal;APJM,Asia- PacificJournalofManagement;ASQ,AdministrativeScienceQuarterly;MD,ManagementDecision;IBR, InternationalBusinessReview;MOR,ManagementandOrganizationReview. a Indigenousbusinessandmanagement-relatedresearchonKorea,i.e.researchthatexplicitlytakesthedistinctive informal(cultural)contextintoaccountorthatdescribesuniquelocalcharacteristicsindepth(Tsui 2004). 80 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Tiescanbedistinguishedaccordingtotheirlevelofinformalityandtheirstrength. Lidistinguishesbetweendifferentintensitylevelsofinformality.Stronglypronounced informallyispersonalizedtrust,arelationalcontract,intuition,non-verbalcommunication ortacticalknowledge(Li 2007).Seminalworkontiestrengthwasconductedby Granovetter(1973)whoproposedaclassificationoftiestrengths(eitherweakorstrong) accordingto(a)timeinvestedtomaintaintheseties,(b)emotionalattachment,(c)intimacy and(d)reciprocity.Duetoahighdegreeoftrust,strongtiespreventfree-ridingand opportunism,henceservingasaneffectiveinformalcontrolmechanism.Whilescoringlow onthefactorsmeasuringtiestrengthmentionedabove(a–d),weaktieshavetheadvantage ofextertinglong-rangeinfluence,i.e.theyareabletoconnecttootherslocatedindistant partsofthenetwork,therebyestablishingcommunicationchannelsvaluablefortransferring informationacrossdistancesonthenetwork.Moreover,weaktiesfulfilabridgingfunction. Ifthereisnoconnectionbetweendifferentinformalnetworks,thereisa‘structuralhole’ (Burt 1995).Whenagentsfillthisstructuralhole,autilitymaximumresultsbothforthese agentsandforthemembersofthenetworksintheformof,forexample,gainsinmutual information.Asdistantinformationcanbeausefulacquisitionforfirmsinordertoincrease knowledge,itisimportantthatbothstrongandweaktiesaremaintainedbyfirms(Burt 2000).Totheindividual,however,thevalueofbeingequippedwithseveralinformalties decreasesthemorepeerstheagentspossess.Asaconsequence,thevalueofinformaltiesis highestformanagerswiththefewestpeers(Burt 1997). Whatfunctiondoinformalrelation-basednetworksfulfil?AccordingtoNee,theyserve toorganize‘market-orientedeconomicbehaviouraccordingtoinformalnormsreflecting theprivateexpectationsofentrepreneursandpoliticians.Theyactintheshadowofthestate, oftenatoddswiththegoalsformulatedbyrulers’(Nee 1998,86).Positivecharacteristicsof networksareidentifiedintheliteratureintheformofsupportservicessuchasforjob searches(Granovetter 1974)orincommunitycare(Lin 1999). AvarietyofconceptualizationsarebasedonGranovetter’sworksonsocialcapitaland networks,whocriticisesthelackofintegrationofthesocialenvironmentinthedecision- makingbehaviourofneoclassicaleconomics.Hiscontributioncanbeseenintheextension oftheassumptionofrationalhumanbehaviourbytheroleofsocialembeddednessof behaviourininterpersonalrelationshipnetworks(Granovetter 1985). Byfarthegreatestattentionwithinthiscategoryofinformalinstitutionshasbeen attractedbyresearchon Guanxi (Gold,Guthrie,andWank 2002;Luo,Huang,andWang 2012;Luo 2007;Fan 2002b;Luo 2008;Buckley,Clegg,andTan 2006).Surprisingly,in spiteofitsgeographicalproximitytoChinaandtheeconomicimportanceofKoreatoday, considerationofKoreanformsofinformalrelationalnetworkshasonlybeenimplicitly recognizedinmanagementresearch. ConsiderableconfusionaboutthetermsusedforinformalrelationaltiesinKoreais addedtobythesporadicuseofdifferenttermsservingtodescribethesamephenomenon. Mostoftheexistingmanagementliteraturedoesnotclearlyspecifythedeterminantsused whendiscussinginformalrelation-basednetworksinKorea,meaningthatitremains unclearwhether Yongo, Yonjul or Inmaek isbeingreferredto.Alternativelytheyare describedinrelationtoChinese Guanxi networks,withthepointmadethattheyarequite similar.Althoughthenetworksaretosomeextentinterrelatedandoverlapping,the differencesarenotmarginal.Theshortcutsdescribedabovecanleadtoanimpreciseusage ofkeytermsandmayleadtogeneralizationsthatarenothelpfulforadeeperanalysisof informalrelation-basednetworks. AsiaPacificBusinessReview 81 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Literaturereview InordertodefineandcharacterizeKoreanrelation-basednetworks,thispaperdrawson (a)literatureanalysis,(b)theinterpretationofkeytermsinKorean(Hangul)and (c)exploratoryinterviewswithexperts.Asafirststep,anoverviewoftheinternational literatureanalysedforthispurposeispresentedinAppendixB.Mostpublications appearedintheareaofsociologyandmanagement.Contrarytosomepaperspublishedin thefieldofsociology,mostofthemanagement-orientedliteraturehasnotasyetmadethis subjectanexplicitresearchtheme.Itcan,therefore,beclaimedthatresearchintoKorean informalnetworkscurrentlyremainsanimplicitandinsignificantsideissueinIBand managementresearch. Sowhatkindsofinformalrelation-basednetworksexistinKorea?Basedonthe literaturereview,threetypescanbedistinguished,namely Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek networks.Butthereiscontroversyregardingthefactthatimportantfeaturesofeachtypeare notallocatedtoeachnetwork.YoonandHyun(2010)regard Yongo tobearatherneutral termforrelationshipsorconnectionsingeneral,whereas Yonjul manifestsitselfbasedon familyties,graduationfromthesameschooloruniversityandregionalorigin.Yeeand Chang(2009),KimandKim(2008)andManskeandMoon(2003)alsoregard university/school,familyandregionaltiesastheconstitutivebaseof Yonjul.Lee(2000) defines Yonjul asifitcouldbeestablished amongothers basedonexistingformer university/school,familyandregionaloriginties,butitsdistinctionfromotherformsisinits ‘facilitativefunctionofbackdoorrentseeking’(Lee 2000,369),whichaddsanamoral characteristictotheterm.Onthecontrary,BstielerandHemmert(2010)andMilliman,Kim, andVonGlinow(1993)regardfamilyties,university/schoolandregionalaffiliation Inmaek relationshipsasdoKimandCannella(2008).Lee(2007),KimandBae(2004)andChung, Lee,andJung(1997)regardfamilyties,university/schoolandregionalaffiliation Yongo relationships.OtherauthorssuchasParkandShin(2005),ChangandChang(1994),Leeand Brinton(1996),ChoandYoon(2001),Chang(1991)andKim(2007),abstainfromusinga distinctiveterm.However,theyagreethatthethreeconstitutivebasesofkin, university/schoolandregionaloriginareimportantgroundsforforminginfluentialinformal ties.Theresultsoftheliteraturereviewaresummarizedin Table2. Theliteraturereviewresultsinseveralinitialfindings:first,formeruniversityorschool ties,regionaloriginandkinshiptiesdopresentimportantgroundsuponwhichinformal tiesareestablished.Second,informaltiesareusedforpersonalgains,butcertaintiesare usedforamoralorillegaltransactions.Hence,thenatureofthosetiesisdifferent.Third, Table2.TheclassificationcontroversyofinformaltiesinKorea. Distinctive network type[I][II][III] TiebaseUniversity/school,regionandfamilyEither[I]or through[I]or otherbase Allsocial ties NatureNeutralAmoralorillegalNeutral Taggedas Yonjul 1 , Inmaek 2 , Yongo 3 , Yongo 4 , Yongo 5 , Inmaek 6 , Yonjul 7 , Yonjul 8 , Yonjul 9 , Yonjul 11 , Yonjul 12 , Yonjul 13 and Inmaek 14 Yonjul 10 Yongo 1 and Yongo 11 Sources: 1 YoonandHyun(2010), 2 BstielerandHemmert(2010), 3 Lee(2007), 4 KimandBae(2004), 5 Chung,Lee, andJung(1997), 6 Milliman,Kim,andVonGlinow(1993), 7 YeeandChang(2009), 8 KimandKim(2008), 9 Manske andMoon(2003), 10 Lee(2000), 11 Yee(2000), 12 Kim(2000), 13 Park(2004)and 14 KimandCannella(2008). 82 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 thereisanothercategoryofties,asinothercountries,whichrelatestoinformaltiesthat peopleestablishindependentofanextraordinarybase.Thecontroversyintheexisting literatureliesintheconfusionbetween,orimprecisedefinitionof,allthreetiessothatit remainsunclearwhethergeneraltiesarereferredtooratieformationthatisdistinctivefor Koreaandinadditionwhetheritisusedforamoralorillegaltransactions.Mostauthors placeallthreetypesoftiesunderoneroof(compare Table2 [I]),orapplythesamedefinition totwotypesoftiesatthesametime,somethingwhichcaneasilyleadtotheassumptionthat inKoreainformaltiesareusedforamoralorillegaltransactions,whichiscertainlynotthe caseoverall.Moreover,itisunclearhowinfluentialtheyremaintoday. Researchapproachandmethod Theresearchsubjectisexploredundertheguidanceofapositiveresearchapproach (LoewensteinandHaisley 2008),ratherthananormativeapproach,byaimingtowardsthe understandingofinFriedman’sterm‘whatis’(Friedman 1953,3).Integralstepsinvolve theinterpretationofKoreantermsandexploratoryexpertinterviews. Inordertountangleinformalrelation-basednetworksinKorea,themeaningofthe syllablesoftheoriginalKoreanwords(inHangul,i.e.theKoreanalphabet) Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek wereanalysedinadetaileddiscussionwithtwoKoreanbilingual(Korean- English)nativesintwoseparatesessionseachtoensurecongruence.Inaddition,theexpert interviewshelpedestablishaclearerunderstandingofthedefinitionbordersoftheterms andtheirdistinctivecharacteristics. Exploratoryexpertinterviews Duetobusinessandmanagementliteratureratherthangeneralallusionstothecharacterof Koreaninformalrelation-basednetworks,expertinterviewswereconsiderednecessaryin ordertobringoutthesubtletiesmoreaccurately.Between2009and2012,threewavesof exploratoryinterviewswith10Koreannationalsand11Germannationals(N ¼ 21) representinginternationalcorporationsandpublicorganizationswereconductedacross KoreaandinGermany(see Table3). ThefirstwaveofinterviewstookplaceinKoreaandincludedKoreannationalsonly. ThatsampleincludedsixinterviewswiththreeKoreanmanagersandthreeprofessorsof businessandeconomicstudies.ThesecondwaveofinterviewstookplaceinGermany withtwoKoreanprofessorsonaresearchstayabroad.Inordertoincreasetheportionof participantsfromthebusinesssectorandtoavoidpotentialmonocultural-biasedviewson thesubject(Kwon 2006),athirdwaveofinterviewswasconductedinKoreaincluding13 additionalinterviewssolelywithupper-andtop-levelbusinessexecutivesofKoreanand Germannationality. Asquestionsrelatingtohighlyprivateassetsaresensitive,theinterviewswerestrictly anonymous.Whenallowed,theinterviewsweretaped,whennot,notesweretaken. Duetothenoveltyoftheresearchsubject,thenumberofquestionswaskeptlowto guardagainstoverlookingimportantdetailsthatcouldotherwisebecausedbyusinga comprehensivelystructuredquestionnaire.Thequestionsweretestedinapilotinterview withtwoKoreanstudentsindependentofeachotherinordertoconfirmtheir comprehensibility,andwereinitiallyconductedinanexploratorymannerinorderto covereveryaspectofimportancetotheintervieweebeforebecomingmorefocused inthecourseoftheinterviewaspartoftheelicitationtechniqueapplied(Johnsonand Weller 2001). AsiaPacificBusinessReview 83 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Datacollection Thedatacollectionfollowedajudgementsamplingstrategy(MilesandHuberman 1994; Marshall 1996a).Inselectingtheexperts,thekeyinformanttechniquewasapplied (Marshall 1996b;Tremblay 1989),accordingtowhichkeyinformantsneedtofulfilfive criteria:Theyshouldoccupya(1) roleinthecommunity thatexposesthemtothe informationindemand,(2)theyshouldbe knowledgeable aboutthesubjectofresearch, (3)are willing and(4)ableto communicate theirknowledgeopenlyand(4)be impartial, i.e.unbiasedandobjectiveinrelationtothesubjectunderinvestigation(Tremblay 1989). Baseduponthesecriteria,thekeyinformantswerecarefullyselected.Theyoccupieda highpositioninKoreaeitherinbusinessorinarelatedfield,i.e.asprofessorofeconomics andbusinessstudies(roleinthecommunity),hadseveralyearsofbusinessexperiencein Korea,or,asfarastheforeignkeyinformantswereconcerned,atleastthreeyearsof managementexperienceinKorea(knowledgeable).The willingness totalkopenlyabout thesubjectunderinvestigationwasconfirmedbeforetheinterviewstookplace.Theywere bilingual(i.e.eitherKorean-English,Korean-GermanorGerman-English),henceableto talkwiththeinterviewer(communication).Moreover,anonymityoftheinterviewswas guaranteedtothekeyinformants(impartiality). Toapproximately30%oftheparticipantsapre-existingdirectrelationshipora relationshipthroughamutualacquaintanceexisted,aconditionthatcontributedpositively totheestablishmentofatrustinginterviewatmosphere,afactorconsideredimportantfor exploratoryinterviews(Ryen 2001).Thedatagatheredweretranscribedandthecontent analyticallyevaluated(MilesandHuberman 1994).Thefindingsareincorporatedinthe definitionsandcharacterizationsprovidedinthefollowingsections(Table4). Table3.Listofexpertinterviews. No.PositionNationalityInterviewlocationInterviewduration(min) I-A1AcademiaKoreanSeoul(Korea)96 I-A2AcademiaKoreanSeoul(Korea)82 I-D3DirectorKoreanSeoul(Korea)55 I-M4ManagerKoreanSeoul(Korea)65 I-M5ManagerKoreanSeoul(Korea)73 I-A6AcademiaKoreanDuisburg(Germany)88 I-A7AcademiaKoreanBusan(Korea)72 I-A8AcademiaKoreanDuisburg(Germany)60 I-VP9VicePresidentKoreanSeoul(Korea)48 I-C10CEOGermanSeoul(Korea)56 I-P11PresidentGermanSeoul(Korea)38 I-D12DirectorKoreanSeoul(Korea)61 I-P13PresidentGermanSeoul(Korea)42 I-D14DirectorGermanSeoul(Korea)58 I-D15DirectorGermanSeoul(Korea)33 I-D16DirectorGermanSeoul(Korea)36 I-D17DirectorGermanSeoul(Korea)72 I-C18CEOGermanSeoul(Korea)34 I-P19PresidentGermanSeoul(Korea)35 I-P20PresidentGermanSeoul(Korea)41 I-P21PresidentGermanSeoul(Korea)54 84 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Table4.Criticalthemesintheinterviewanalysis. No. Critical themeRepresentativequotations I-A1 Yongo ‘InformaltiesexistineverycountrybutinKorea,school,family andregionaloriginplayanextraordinaryroleintheirformation. Todaytiestoformeruniversitymatesplayabiggerrolethanschool tieswhichwereinthepastmoreimportant.’ I-A2‘InKoreaitisimportanttohaveaprivaterelationshipwithpeople. Withoutaprivaterelationshipitisimpossibletogetthingsdone. MostimportantisYongo.Theserelationshipsmeanconnections throughgraduationfromthesameuniversity,beingborninthe samecityorbelongingtothesamefamily.’ I-D3‘WhenIenterabusinessnegotiationwithsomeone,thefirstthings Iaskishowoldishe,whereheisfromandwherehashestudiedin Korea.ItrytofindoutwhetherthereisYongo.Thatwillchange thesituationcompletely.’ I-D4‘WesternfirmsactveryrationalinKorea.Theyonlyusememos anddon’tliketoshareinformation.InKoreaweshareall informationwithourfriends.Theyhavenosenseforestablishing sympathiesbyunderstandingthegive-and-take-game.However, theyarejustnotabletobecausetheirforeignmanagersweren’t bornhereandhaveattendeduniversityabroad.Theyhaveno Yongo.’ I-P11‘Problemsareinterpretedanddecisionsaremadebytaking dependencyrelationsbetweenpeopleintoaccount,ratherthan focusingontheissueitselfdetachedfrompersons.Herein,most importantarerelationsthatstemfromfamily,hometownand universityconnections.Thosetiesarestrongandaremaintained.’ I-A6‘EveryKoreanhasYongo.ThewordinKoreanimpliesthatthereis acommongroundfromwhicharelationshipcanbeestablishedor alreadyexists.InKoreathatisusuallythegraduationfromthe sameuniversity,regionaloriginorfamily.[ ... ]itdoesn’tassume anyintentionorpurpose.’ I-D3 Hakyon ‘Forme,themostimportantsourcearethepeoplewhostudiedat thesameuniversityasme.Wearelikeabigfamily.Idon’ttrust peoplefromothercompetinguniversitiesthatmuch,theyare different.’ I-M5‘Manypeopleinmyfirmgraduatedfromthesameuniversityas me.Weoftenmeetafterworkfordinner.Peoplewhograduated fromotheruniversitiesdothesame.’ I-P13‘InformalnetworksinKoreaareestablishedaroundspecial institutions.E.g.havingstudiedatauniversityisenoughtodraw fortherestofyourlifeonasocialconnection.Onemustn’t necessarilyhavestudiedinthesameclassorsameyear,justhaving studiedatthesameinstitution,nomatterwhen,makesareasonfor aconnection.Thoseconnectionsaremaintainedbyanincredible effortofprivatetime,likemutualdinnersandlunchbreaks, drinkingevents,mutualsportevent,churchvisitsetcetera.Much effortisspendonorganizingthoseencounters.’ I-A2 Hyulyon ‘Family-tiesarethestrongestbondinKorea.Takealookatthe Chaebol.Usuallythesonsofthefoundertakeoverleadership soonerorlater.Insmallerfirmsitisthesame.Recentlythereare someexampleswherefamilymembershavenottakenoverthe managementofthefirmbutassociates.Wecallthat“donation culture”.Butthosearejustafewexceptions.’ AsiaPacificBusinessReview 85 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Table4– continued No. Critical themeRepresentativequotations I-A1 Jiyon ‘Forexample,ifImeetsomeonewhowasborninthesameregion likeme,weareimmediatelyveryclosetoeachother.Thetalkis veryinformalindependentofthecontext.Itislikesomeonefrom myfamilyalthoughwehaven’tmetbefore.Inordertounderline thisfamily-likerelationshipweaddresseachotherwith“elder brother”or“youngerbrother”dependentonage.Duetothis hierarchytherearecertainbehaviouralexpectations.That’sthe samewithformeruniversitytiestoo.Butregionaltiesarepowerful ineveryareaofKorea’ssociety,inbusinessorpolitics.President Rohtriedtostopitbutithasn’tchangedmuch.’ I-A2‘Regionaloriginplaysanimportantroleinfillingpositionsin business.Peoplefromthesameregionarepreferablyhired.Itis gettingmoreimportantthehigherthepositionsare.Competence playsaroletoo,butaccordingtomyexperiences,regionaloriginis decisivefinally.[ ... ]Regionalismisespeciallypronouncedwith peoplefromtheJeollanamprovince,southeastofKorea.’ I-D3 Yonjul ‘Forexample,Istudiedatthe[xyz]universityinSeoulalmost30 yearsago,auniversityfromwhichmoststudentsenterinto business.Meanwhile,theyhaveahugealumninetwork.IfIneedto findoutinternalinformationaboutacertaindepartmentofa companyoracompetitor,Iusemynetwork.EitherIfindadirect contactorthroughsomeoneelsefrommyformeruniversity.Since I’mseniortomanyalumni,itworksoutquitewell.Theywillnever negatemyrequest,andIwillsupportthemtoowhenever necessary.’ I-A6‘YonjulisdifferenttoYongobecauseithasclearlyanegative connotationinKoreancomparedtoYongo,whichisrathera neutralwordthatimpliesacommonbase.Yonjulisassociatedwith negativebehaviourorillegalbehaviourorbehaviourotherpeople wouldregardbadinsomeway.[ ... ]bothareverydifferentin nature,becauseillegaltransactionsmustbekeptsecret,sothe circleofpeopleshouldbetterbesmallandtrustmustbehigh.That servestosecureYonjul.[ ... ]Yonjulcanevolvefromorthrough existingYongorelationsorInmaekrelations.Theycantransform intoYonjulbutIcanalsohaveYonjulwithsomeoneIdon’tshare Yongo.ThisisoftenbetterbecauseYongoandInmaekareoften toobigasnetworks,sotheriskofgossipishigher.’ I-A1‘Well,YonjulisdifferenttoYongo.WhenyouthinkaboutYonjul youhaveaspecialintentionthatrequiresthehelpofothers.’ I-A6 Inmaek ‘Inmaekweuseasexpressionforapersonalnetworkingeneral. Itjustmeansconnection.Ithasneitheranegativenorpositive connotation.AsthistermissogeneralitcanincludeYongoand Yonjul.’ I-A1‘Inmaekjustmeansconnection.’ I-A5‘InmaekisliketheEnglishwordforconnection.Averybroadterm withoutaspecialmeaning.TalkingaboutYongoandYonjulisa differentstory.’ I-D12 Effective tie strength ‘IbelievethestrengthofYongoinKoreadecreasesjustslowly. Especiallytheyoungergenerationregardsreachinggoalsthrough Yongodifferentlythantheoldergeneration.Theyounger generationthinksthatusingYongoandYonjulisnotafairwayto achievee.g.gettingajoborbeingpromoted.Yongoiscertainly stronginKoreabutIfeelthattheyoungeronesareabitcritical towardsYongo.’ 86 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Findings SubtletiesofKoreaninformalrelation-basednetworks Koreaninformalnetworksarecommonlycalled Inmaek ( ), Yongo ( )or Yonjul ( )networks.Romanizationoftheletters,however,hasledtodifferencesinwriting styles. Inmaek,thoughratherrarelydebated,iscommonlywritteninromanletters. Yongo and Yonjul arepresentedindifferentways.WhereasKimandBaeusethewritingstyle Yongo (KimandBae 2004),otherauthorsprefer Yeon-gyeol (Yazawa 2006), Yo ˘n’gyo ˘l (Yee 2000), Yo ˘n’go (Lee 2000)or Yon-go (Chung,Lee,andJung 1997).Asfor Yonjul,the majorityofscholarsapplyromanizedletters(KimandKim 2008;Cha 2000;Park 2004; YeeandChang 2009),whereasothersprefer Yeon-jul (Yazawa 2006)or Yo ˘njul (Yee 2000;Lee 2000). Forthesakeofease,thetermsappliedthroughoutthispaperaresimply Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek,respectively.Originalmeaningsandrelevantliterature,coupledwiththe interviewsconducted,suggesttheneedtomakeacleardistinctionbetweenthesethree typesofnetworks. Definition: Yongo Yongo isthetermforpersonalrelationshipsinKoreathatareattachedtoaffiliationinan informallyorganizedgroup.Thereis,however,confusionintheliteratureaboutthe precisedistinctionsbetweenthedefinitorybordersof Yongo and Yonjul.Whensome authorsusethe Yongo terminageneraluniversalisticsenseofarelation-basedinformal network(Yee 2000),othersmaintainthat Yongo derivesitsmaincohesionpowerfrom strongparticularisticties,basedonkin,educationalinstitution(school/university)and Table4– continued No. Critical themeRepresentativequotations I-P13‘Ithinktheinfluenceofinformalnetworkswillnotdecrease.The basicprincipleswillnotchangebutmaybesomecharacteristics mayalterovertime.Forexample,familyisofutmostimportance inKoreaandthefatherenjoystheabsolutehigheststatus.Maybe thefatheraspatriarchwillslowlylooseimportanceasmoreand morewomenenterthejobmarketandcontributetothefamily budget.Socialhierarchiesmaydecreaseasyoungerpeoplemay notaccepttakingordersanymorejustbecauseofagedifferentials. Moreoverstudentsmoreandmorestudyabroadandlearnhowthe societyinothercountriesfunctions.’ I-D14‘Since10to20yearsthey[theChaebol]internationalizedand implementednewmanagementpracticesinspiredbyapproaches andideaslearnedabroad.ManyoftheChaeboltopmanagers studiedabroadtoo.ThehierarchicalstructureoftheChaebolcan beregardedanadvantageforimplementingnewmanagement techniquesandpoliciesveryquickbyatopdownapproach. However,allthosechangesIperceiveseemnottoinfluencethe relianceandmaintenanceandespeciallytheloyaltytowards informalrelationshipsinbusinessandprivatelife.Theyarestill strongbutpeopledonotoftentalkaboutit.’ AsiaPacificBusinessReview 87 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 region(Chung,Lee,andJung 1997;KimandBae 2004).Ontheotherhand,thesethree factorsareseenbymanyscholarsasthebasisthatforms Yonjul ties(Yee 2000;Cha 2000; Lee 2000;Han 2000;Kim 2000).Onaskingtheintervieweesaboutthiscontradiction,they allagreedthatthethreepivotalcentresformthebase–inthefirstplace–for Yongo but notnecessarilyfor Yonjul.Neverthelesseachofthethreecentrescanserveasaplatform forestablishing Yonjul (I-A6,I-D4,I-A2,I-D3andI-P11). Acloserlookattheoriginalmeaningofthecomponentsofbothwordshelpsto understandthesubtledistinction. Yongo and Yonjul bothsharethe‘yon’(tie).Itsmeaning expressesaffectionandabondbetweenindividuals.The‘go’in Yongo indicatesthatthe tieexistsforareason–becauseofasharedbackground.Thelatteris,inpractice,typically (butnotexclusively)derivedfromattendanceofthesameuniversityorhighschool,the sameregionaloriginorkinshipbelongingness.TheKoreanwordsforthesetiesare hakyon (education-basedties), hyulyon ( familyorbloodties)and jiyon (regionalorigin-based ties).Theseplaythemostimportantroleinforminginformaltiesandareexplainedin moredetailbelow. Hakyon( ):education-basedties Relationshipsestablishedinhighschoolorduringuniversityeducationarereferredtoas hakyon ties.Formerfellowstudentsareconnectedbyastrongrelationalbondinwhich, accordingtotheseniority-determinedhierarchy,theeldertakescareoftheyounger,whois expectedtobehaveloyally.Havingstudiedatthesameuniversityatthesametimedoesnot necessarilymeanabondisestablished.Thefactofhavingstudiedatthesameuniversityat allissufficientinordertoclaimassociationandamutualpersonalconnection.Therefore,in thiswayaccesstolargecooperativealumninetworksisenabledthatcanbeusedfor informationgatheringoranykindoffavours.Asaresult,favouritismisstrongly pronouncedinthesenetworks(I-D3,I-M5,I-P13,Cha 2000;Kim 2007;Lee 2007). Hyulyon( ):family,bloodties Hyulyon referstorelationsamongpeopleofthesamebloodlineageortoaconnection throughmarriage(KimandBae 2004);hence,itisfamilyandkinshipbased.Priorities towardspeoplearedeterminedbysexanddistancefromthepatriarch.Femalesranklower inthesocialhierarchy,asdomoredistantrelatives.Priorityisgiventosonsaccordingto age,forexample,successioninafirmisinfluencedby hyulyon,asispromotionto managementlevel(I-A2,Kee 2008). Jiyon( ):regionalorigin-basedties Jiyon indicatesarelationshipbasedonhomeorbirthplace.Kim(2007),Kim(2000),Lee (2007)andShinandChin(1989)reportontheimpactofbeingborninthesameregion. Thesameoriginleadsautomaticallytomembershipofagroup,basedontheassumption thatvaluesandnormstypicalfortherespectiveregionbecameapermanentcharactertrait oftheindividual.It‘providesprimafaciejustificationforasocialbond’(ShinandChin 1989,17).Thisfactexplainsthephenomenonthatmosthigh-rankedpoliticiansand corporateleadersinKoreastemfromaparticularregion.Sharingthesameregionalorigin isregardedasbeingamemberofaquasi-family,implyingacceptanceofbehavioural normsintheformofcooperationandloyalty.Asaconsequence,socialcohesionwithin thegroupishigh(I-A1andI-A2). 88 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Yongo derivesfromone’sascriptiontothesethreeties(aswiththeeducational backgroundinanex-postsense).Hence,itisbasicallyimmutableonceacertain Yongo is ascribedtoaperson.Withtheexceptionofschooloruniversityaffiliations(hakyon),those tiesaredeterminedbybirthandhenceareirreversible.Allthreetiesrepresentlinesof relationalbondsthatlastforlife. Yongo initselfdoesnotpresupposeanypurpose, intentionorobjectiveonthepartofthepeoplesharing Yongo (I-A6). Definition: Yonjul Yonjul referstoinformalandratherparticulartiesbetweenindividualsthatexistfora purpose.Theworditselfshareswiththeword Yongo the‘yon’,againstandingfor‘tie’,but thesecondsyllable–the‘jul’–translatesto‘rope’or‘string’.Thecommonjudgement basedontheinterviewsconductedisthattheword Yonjul itselfhasarathernegative connotation(I-A6),as Yonjul presupposesapurposeorintentionandobjective,suchas personalgains.Thepurposeof Yonjul tiesisoftentosecurefavoursorbenefitsgranted becauseofthoseties,andnotbasedonfaircompetitionorequaltreatment.Examples include,ontheindividuallevel,theusageof Yonjul forjobentry,careerprogressionorthe acquisitionofsecretcompetition-relevantinformationor,onanorganizationallevel, receivingsubsidiesorsecuringmonopolyrightsinthemarket(Kim 2000).Basedonthe interviewsconducteditisclearthat Yonjul blurstheborderbetweenlegalityandillegality andisoftenassociatedwithillegaltransactions(I-D3,I-A6andI-A1). Definition: Inmaek Inmaek standsforthesocialnetworkinageneralsenseofonethatonebuildsupinthecourse ofone’ssociallife,whetherpurposefullyornot.Basedontheinterviewsitcanbeclaimed that Inmaek, Yongo and Yonjul areinterrelated,butthemostgeneralterminKoreafora socialnetworkwouldbe Inmaek (seealsoHitt,Lee,andYucel 2002;KimandCannella 2008;Milliman,Kim,andVonGlinow 1993).Asageneralsocialnetworkcanbeextended basedonexistingties, Yongo and Yonjul canbeconsideredpartofthe Inmaek.Throughthis interrelation,givenaspecialpurpose,ageneral Inmaek tiecandevelopintoa Yonjul relationship(cf. Figure1).Hence, Inmaek iscriticalforsecuring Yonjul.As Yonjul relationshipsareratherdelicate, Inmaek isalsoimportantforsafeguarding Yonjul relationships,duetotheoptiontheyprovideofexertingpeerpressure(I-A1,I-A5andI-A6). Developmentoftheeffectivetiestrength AsmostresearchonChinarecognizesthedeclineinthestrengthofinfluenceof Guanxi (BrennanandWilson 2010;Guthrie 1998)asaresultofeconomicandpolitical development,thequestionofwhethertheinfluenceofKoreaninformalrelation-based networksalsodeclinebecomesinteresting.AstheAsianfinancialcrisisof1997hitKorea hardresultinginthetakingofunusualsteps,includingmass-layoffs,causinghigh unemploymentratesandadecreaseinfirmloyalty,scholarsarguedthatKorea subsequentlyunderwenta‘culturaltransition’fromatraditionallycollectivisticsocietyto aoneinwhichindividualvaluesbegantoprevail(LeeandMcNulty 2003).Sincethe crisis,Koreancompaniesrecoveredandreformed,forinstance,byintroducing performance-basedpaymentsystems,thusabandoningthepracticeofseniority-based compensationandpromotion(Chang 2006).Aquestionthatarisesiswhetherthese AsiaPacificBusinessReview 89 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 measurementstriggeredbytheAsianfinancialcrisisof1997ledtoaweakeningofthe influenceof Yongo. Theresultsoftheinterviewsconductedrepresentarathermixedpictureinresponse. Whereassomekeyinformantsdoseeadeclineofinfluencelongterm,othersregardthe influenceasstablebutwithchangedcharacteristics.Overallitcanbestatedthatthe influenceof Yongo isperceivedasstillstrongtoday.Inparticular,twostreamsof perceptionthatleadtotheassumptionofanalterationinitscurrentshapecanbe summarizedasfollows:First, Yongo mayalteritsinfluenceduetochangesinsociety. Morewomenenterthejobmarketandpursuemanagementcareers,thuscontributingto families’finances;gender-determinedhierarchiesmightsoftenaccordingly,drivenalsoby ayoungergenerationthatprefersself-expressionandindividualismoverstrictpatriarchic familystructures.Moreover,ithasbeenarguedthattheyoungergenerationtoday perceives Yongo-basedprivilegesasaratherunfairpractice.Second,duetotheincreased internationalizationofKoreanfirms,newmanagementtechniquesareadopted,resulting intheadjustmentofexistingapproachesandattitudes.Forinstance,suchinternational firmsincreasinglyview Yongo-basedrecruitingcriticallyandinordertopromoteskill- basedover Yongo-basedrecruiting,informationaboutuniversityaffiliationandhome towninjobapplicationsoffreshmenarereportedtobeblackened.However,thosepolicies seemtobecommonfortheChaebolbutwhetherthesmall-andmedium-sizedenterprise (SME)sectorsfollowsuchmethodswasunknowntothekeyinformants.Moreover, itremainedunclearunderwhatselectioncriteriayoungprofessionalsandexperienced managersarerecruited(I-VP9,I-P11,I-D12,I-P13andI-D14). AssocietalchangeaswellasChaebolpoliciesrepresentforcesthatworkagainsta strengtheningofinformalties,theinterviewsconductedcannotdrawaclearpictureofthe influenceof Yongo inthefuture.Asthisstudyhassofarshown,informalrelation-based networksinKoreaadoptseveralformsandserveasaplatformforseveralpurposes.In ordertodeliverrepresentativedataconcerningthestrengthof Yongo inthefuture,firstan Inmaek-ties Yongo-ties Yonjul-ties Figure1. Inmaek, Yongo and Yonjul –interrelatednessandpossibletiedevelopment.Note: Possibledevelopmentpathofarelationaltie. 90 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 exclusiveandclearlydifferentiatedresearchdesignneedstobeestablishedand,second,an empiricalresearchmethodologyisrequiredintheformofalongitudinalstudyinorderto explorethisquestion. CharacteristicsofYongoandYonjulties As Inmaek isarathergeneralexpressionforasocialnetwork,thissectionfocusesona characterizationof Yongo and Yonjul,afterwhichitmovesontocompareallthreenetwork forms.Astheanalysisofnetworkcharacteristicsisamajorresearchthemeofthesocial capitalliterature,thefollowingcharacterizationisconductedthroughthislens. Comparedto Yongo, Yonjul relationsaremuchmoreparticularistic(Yee 2000;Kim 2000).Theymatch Yongo networksintermsofstructureandformbutdifferintermsof‘its facilitativefunctionofbackdoorrentseeking’(Lee 2000,369).Theyrepresentastrong bondbasedonhighpersonaltrust,wherebytherelationshipandreciprocalobligationsmay insomecasesbemorebindingthanformalrulesandlaws(Hitt,Lee,andYucel 2002;Lee 2000;Park 2004).Researchintosocialnetworkshasconcludedthatthelevelofmutualtrust isakeyvariableofcohesioninrelationalnetworks(Gambetta 2000;OstromandAhn 2003), andthatdeterminestiestrengths(Granovetter 1973;Li 2007).Whereastheleveloftrust attributedto Yongo networkpartnerscanbetendentiallyregardedasmodesttohigh,trust attributionto Yonjul networkmembersisextraordinaryhigh(I-A6,ChangandChang 1994). Highpersonalizedtrustisthusakeycharacteristicin Yonjul relations(Yee 2000;Lee 2000; Kim 2000;ManskeandMoon 2003;Park 2004;KimandKim 2008;ShinandChin 1989). Ontheotherside,trustascriptionislimitedtoinsidersonly,whichinturnleadstodistrust andtheexclusionofoutsiders(YeeandChang 2009;Chung,Lee,andJung 1997;Kim2000; Park 2004;ManskeandMoon 2003).Relationshipswithpeopleoutsidethenetworkare describedascoldanddistantandremainoutsideconsiderationforissuesofcare,supportor favours:‘Aconsciousnessofmoralobligationexistsonlyforthoseintheinsideworld,while theattitudetowardsthoseintheoutsideworldcanbecharacterizedasutmostindifference’ (ManskeandMoon 2003,51).Discriminationandhostilityisevenreportedtowardsnon- networkmembers(Fukuyama 1995;Kim 2000;Cha 2000). Therelationalmodeofoperationwithin Yonjul networksneedstobeexplainedinmore detailinrelationtotheinfluenceofitsauthorityonreciprocalobligationsandloyalty. AsConfuciannormsofbehaviourprevail, Yonjul networkscanbedescribedalternatively asa‘mutualpatron-clientnetworkwithastrongpaternalistictone’(Lee 2000,369). AccordingtoConfucianideals,thepatriarchinthefamily(usuallymale)enjoysabsolute authorityandunconditionaltrustandisnottobecriticizedbyhisinferiors(i.e.hiswife, childrenanddistantrelatives).Byhonouringhisauthority,i.e.showingunconditional loyalty,inferiorsenjoythecare,supportandprotectionofthepatriarch.Hence,the relationshipisbasedonmutualdependency. ThatKoreanbusinessesoperateunderthestronginfluenceofthesebrieflyoutlined behaviouralprinciplesisnotnew(Fukuyama 1995;Cha 2000).Toalesserextent,anissue ofdebateisthatthesefamilyidealsdoworkwithintheothertwopivotalcentresthat constitute Yongo andalsoplayarolein Yonjul relations(i.e.formeruniversity/schoolties, regionalorigin).Inthisway,thesphereoffamilism,itsemotionalattachmentdetermining personalvalues,idealsandbehaviouralnorms,isextendedfromthenuclearfamilyto othergroups.ThisexplanationisinlinewithwhatChareferstothroughhisuseoftheterm ‘pseudo-familism’whendescribingcorporategovernanceinKorea(Cha 2000,474). In Yongo networks,hierarchiesandattachedauthorityonrespectivelevelsaresteepandto agreatextentdeterminedbyseniority.Ifhierarchicalnormsarenotfollowed,social AsiaPacificBusinessReview 91 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 sanctionsfortheindividualmaybeimposed(ManskeandMoon 2003).Hierarchythus playsanimportantroleingroupformationandcollaboration,asitistherelationshipwith thesuperiorfromwhomagentsreceivekindnessandsupportthatleadsthemto collaborate,ratherthantheindividuals’sharedprinciplesandsimilarattitudes(Cha 2000). Yongo aswellas Yonjul tieswereconsideredhelpfulduringKorea’srapideconomic expansion.Basedonhightrust,itensuredflexibilitywithinitsrelationalbordersandfree informationflowbetweengovernmentandfirms,therebykeepingtransactioncosts lowandcounteractingfree-riding.Today,however,itseffectsarediscussedcritically. Inparticular,thosenotendowedwithsuperior Yongo (also Yonjul)tiescriticizetheir exclusivenessandfavouritismamongin-groupmembers,onthebasisthataccessisnot determinedbycompetencebutinsteadfixedbygivenfeatures.Asaresult,competitionfor eliteuniversityaccessissevere,asthisistheonlypivotalcentreof Yongo thatisnot prescribedbutpromisessuperior Yongo endowment(dependingontheuniversitythatis graduatedfrom)thatwillbehelpfulinafuturecareer.Althoughthereisacertainoverlap between Yongo and Yonjul,acleardistinctioncanbemaderegardingitsnature.Whereas Yongo isoriginallyneutralinmeaning, Yonjul impliesa(rathernegative)purpose. 2 Itisno secretinKoreathatbankloansandsubsidies,ormonopolyrightsinbusiness,aregranted basedon Yonjul ties.Hence,itiscriticizedforweakeningformalinstitutionsbypassing them,thusmakingdecisionslesspredictable.Itisthusperceivedastherootofcronyism andcorruptionandisthereforeseenasamoral(Kim 2000).Thecharacteristicsof Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek tiesaresummarizedin Table5. Anecdotalevidenceof Yongo and Yonjul relationsinbusinessandmanagement InKorea,theelementsof hakyon, hyulyon and jiyon canberegardedascornerstonesthat formrelationshipsbetweenindividualsand,throughthem,betweenorganizations (ManskeandMoon 2003).Thesethreeelementsarethebasisof Yongo relations,butthey alsoplayarole(directlyorindirectly)in Yonjul relations.Asbothmaypartlyoverlapwith Inmaek-basedties,theyextendtheirinfluenceintotheverygeneralsphereofsocial relations.Afterall,itcanbeassumedthattheremightbeanextraordinarilyhigh interconnectednessofsocialrelationshipsinKorea,whichimpliesahighdegreeof informalgovernance.Aquestionthereforearisesastowhatconcreteexamplescanbe givenregardingwheretofollowupwithenquiriesintothemicro-level. Table5.Characteristicsof Yonjul, Yongo and Inmaek tiesincomparison. YonjulYongoInmaek TiebaseAllkindsofties,oftenHHJHHJAllkindsofties ConnotationNegativeNeutralNeutral ImpliesintentionsYesNoNo OpennessVeryexclusiveExclusiveOpen TiecharacterVeryparticularisticParticularisticUniversalistic TiestrengthVerystrongStrongModest In-grouployaltyVeryhighHighModest ReciprocityVeryhighHighModest TrustVeryhighHighModest NetworksizeSmallLargeLarge NetworkdiversityHomogeneousHomogeneousHeterogeneous Note:HHJ: Hakyon (education-basedties), hyulyon (familyorbloodties)and jiyon (regionalorigin-basedties). 92 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Aspartoftheinterviewskeyinformantswereasktoreportonanecdotesthatbestrepresent theinfluenceof Yongo inbusinesspracticesinKoreaaccordingtotheirperception.Anecdotes serveasthereal-worldcasesthatarenottobeconsideredrepresentativebutmaypavetheway forfurtherenquiry(GiarelliandChambliss 2005;Schostak 2006).Wherebyallrespondents underlinedthatinformalrelation-basednetworksplayacentralroleinmosthuman interactionsinKorea,fourgeneralfieldscanbesummarized(cf.Table6):recruitingpractices, decision-makingbehaviour,informationflowandsales/projectacquisition. Inrecruitingnewemployees,asmentionedabove,practicespossiblydifferbetween SMEsandChaebol.Whereasthelattertrytoprevent Yongo-basedrecruiting,smallerfirms seemtorelyonpre-existingrelationships.Decision-makingisinfluencedinfieldsthatare concernedwithdecidingbehaviouraloptionsinhumaninteractions.Forexample,getting accesstotherightdecision-makersorevengettinganappointmentatallwascitedasbeing inmanycasesamatterofpersonalrelationships.Aconcernraisedinparticularbyforeign firmsishowtopreventinformationflowsthatspreadviaprivatenetworks.Regardingthis, firmsperceivetheimplementationofformalconfidentialityagreementsinsufficientdueto thestrengthsandinfluenceofinformalties,anissuethatmaybeconsideredofhigh practicalrelevanceasitdirectlyinfluencesafirm’scompetitiveness.Moreover,informal tiesareperceivedtobeespeciallycriticalinsales,forexample,duringthepre-acquisition andacquisitionphaseofnewprojectsinbusiness-to-businesstransactions.Pre-existing tiesortiesthatcanbeactivatedeasilyareconsidereda‘relationalcompetitiveadvantage’ overcompetitorsasthroughthosetiesinitialcontactstopotentialcustomerscanbeeasily established,conflictscanbesolvedmoreeasilyandnewbusinesscanbeacquiredor existingbusinessmaintained. Intheframeworkofthisstudy,theseanecdotesaretobeconsideredtobesingle-case observations.AsfarasmanagementpracticeinKoreaisconcernedtheymayserveasan initialstartingpointforproceedingwithmorepracticallyorientedempiricalresearchinto Koreanmanagementpractices. Implications Implicationsfortheory:theinterplayofformalandinformalinstitutions Analysinginformalinstitutionsinordertodesignformalinstitutionsthatsuitthecultural environmentinwhichtheyareembeddedisaresearchfieldofrelevanceforpolicy-makers inpublicauthoritiesandbusinessalike.Asaconsequence,aprofoundunderstandingof informalinstitutionsisnecessarytomakeformalinstitutionsfunctioneffectively.Sofar theinterplayofbothtypesofinstitutionsisanunderdevelopedresearchfield(Helmkeand Levitsky 2004),but,nevertheless,inordertocontributetothefurtherdevelopmentof theoryinthisareaaprofoundunderstandingoftheinstitutionalenvironmentofthecountry concernedisindispensable.Moreprecisely,thefindingsofthisstudycontributeto theoreticalassumptions,firstly,onbasicinformalnetworkcharacteristics,secondly,ona culturallydeterminedrationalityindecision-makingbehaviour,andthirdlyonthe developmentdynamicsofties. Firstly,distinctivefeaturesofKoreaninformalrelation-basednetworkscanbe summarizedasfollows:regarding Yongo (basis:family,university/highschooland hometown),thoserelationshipsare–expectuniversityaffiliation–predetermined,i.e. theyaregivenbybirthandarenotbasedonvoluntaryparticipation.Measuredbythetime investedtomaintaintheseties,emotionalintensityandintimacy(Granovetter 1973)tie strengthscanbeassumedtobestrong.Theylastforalifetimeandmembersenjoyahigh gradeofloyaltyamongeachother.Moreover,Koreaninformalrelation-basednetworks AsiaPacificBusinessReview 93 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Table6.Anecdotalevidenceontheinfluenceof Yongo inbusiness. No. Critical themeRepresentativequotations I-P13Recruiting‘Iwasastonishedhowmuchattentionmystaffspendsona candidates’universityaffiliationinjobapplications.I,in contrast,wasalwayslookingforthegrades.’ I-D14‘PreventingYongo-basedrecruitingpracticesdepends howeveronthefirmsrecruitingpolicyandtheinfluenceof thehumanresourcemanagementdepartment.Biggerfirms usuallytrytoavoidYongo-basedrecruitingespeciallyfor freshmenbyblackeninformationaboutuniversity graduationandregionaloriginonthejobapplicationsheets. AsforhiringexperiencedmanagerIdon’tknowwhetherit followsthesameprocedure.’ I-D17Decision making ‘Onehastocertainlydistinguishbetweenthelarge companiesandthesmallerones.Thebigonesdonotplace somuchvalueoninterpersonalrelationshipsinbusiness decisionsasthesmallandmediumsizedenterprisesdo. However,ultimatelyonemustknowtherightpersonsinthe bigcompanies,otherwiseyoujusthaveverylittlechancesto getprojectsawarded.Youwillprobablynotevenbeinvited forapresentation.Thebusinessprocessesofthebigfirms arequitefairoverall.Inthefirstplacetheydecideonhard factssuchascompanystability,competitiveposition,and historyandsoon.Theirintentionistomakesurethatthey aredealingwithastablecompanyasapartner,whileamong thesmallercompaniesitisreallymostlyaboutrelationships. Here,thingsareimportant,suchas“Iknowhimfromhigh school”or“wevisitedthesameuniversity”.Thosethings areaveryimportantaspect.’ I-P13Information flow ‘Ihavethefeelingthatthereisahighdegreeofinformation exchangeinbusinessthatdrawsoninformationreceived frompersonalsources.Icannotseeacleardifferentiation betweenthebusinessandtheprivatesphere.Itissomehow interconnectedormoreclearlyexpressedthereisnotreallya distinctionintermsofinformationexchange.’ I-P21‘Ihaven’tseeninotherAsiancountriesthathighdegreeof loyaltybetweenpeoplewhograduatedfromthesame university.Itlastsforalifetime.Byformalrulesonly,you justcannotkeepfirm-relatedinformationsecret.’ I-D14Sales/project acquisition ‘WhenitcomestoprojectacquisitionsinbusinessIthink informalnetworksplayanimportantroleingettingaproject awardedorlosingaproject.Thosenetworksareevenmore important,Ithinkdecisive,forafirmwhenproductfeatures, e.g.qualityandpriceareequalamongcompetitors.Inthat case,thefirmwhoisbetterconnectedgetsthebusiness.’ I-D15‘Ifpreexistingtiesexistbetweenmycolleaguesandour customer,itisveryeasygettinganappointmentorgetting justattentionfromthecustomer.’ I-D17‘Intheindustryourfirmisactiveinwemostlycompetewith verysmallandmid-sizedfirms.InSeoulalonetheseamount toover3000.Ioftenhearfromourcustomersthattheyare notinterestedinchangingtheirserviceproviderbecausethe relationshiptoincumbentprovidersissostrong.Inthatcase youcannotarguebasedonsuperiorservicequality,ahigher serviceportfolioormuchlowerprices.’ 94 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 aremultifacedandinterrelated. Yongo-basednetworksareembeddedin Inmaek networks, asare Yonjul networks;both Yongo and Inmaek-basedtiescandeveloptowards Yonjul (purpose-basedties). Second,followingFukuyama’s(1995)assumptionsregardingculturallydependent rationalbehaviour,theexistenceandinfluenceof Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek areimportant cultural-contextfactorsthatinfluencedecision-makinginKorea.Thus,futureresearch intoindividualandgroupdecision-makingbehaviourneedstotakeitspossibleinfluence uponbehaviourintoaccount. Third,establishedtheoryproposesthatthrougheconomictransitionperiodsstrongties becomeweakerthefurtheranationdevelopsitseconomy,legallawandfurtherformal institutions(PengandZhou 2005).Koreacantodaybeconsideredanindustrializedcountry havingalreadylefteconomictransitionbehind.However,informalrelation-basednetworks stillexistandtheirinfluenceremainsstrong(Yee 2000;Kim 2000, 2007,I-A2,I-P11). Althoughindustrialized,democratizedandendowedwithfunctioningformalinstitutions, thisinvestigationdocumentsstrongandwidespreadinformalrelation-basednetworksin Korea. Inthefuture,thecharacteristicsandinfluenceofparticularfacetsmayalteroradjust. Similarly,Yee(2000)assumesaweakeningof Yongo tiesbutsees Yonjul ties strengtheningduetoincreasedcompetitionoverresourcesinamarketeconomy. 3 However,thosechangesarenotlikelytobedrivenbyincreasedeconomicdevelopmentor stableformalinstitutions,butratherby(a)societaladjustmentprocessesand(b)an increasedlevelofKoreanfirms(foremosttheChaebol)goingabroadandlearningnew managementtechniques. Futureresearchshouldapplylongitudinalanalysesinordertoinvestigatehow informalinstitutionsalterandtransformovertimeandeventuallychangetiestrengths. Implicationsforbusinessandmanagementpractice Detailedknowledgeabouttheinfluenceofinformalrelation-basednetworksinKoreahas importantimplicationsforthebusinessoperationsofinternationalfirmsinKorea. Yongo is,forinstance,vitalforhandlingfirm-externalstakeholderrelations,suchasbusiness-to- governmentorbusiness-to-businessinteractions.Animplicationofthispaperisthatafirm whoserepresentativeshaveahighlevelof Yongo endowmentwillbemoresuccessfulin dealingwithpublicstakeholdersandaremorelikelytosettleinter-firmconflictswhile actingasamediatorbetweenfirmsthatareuncomfortableusing,ornotabletouse,official Table6– continued No. Critical themeRepresentativequotations I-P19‘RelationsplayacrucialroleinKoreainbusiness development,definitely.Thisisespeciallyimportantforthe initialcontact.Weoftengetincontactwithcustomers throughsomepeopleofuswhovisitedthesameuniversity. Thatisveryhelpful.InGermany,youlookmorerationally atthebiggerpictureofthecompany.Thisincludesproduct quality,financialstabilityandthelike.Thisisofcoursenot unimportantinKorea,buttherelationshipbetweentwo peopleismoreimportant.’ AsiaPacificBusinessReview 95 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 communicationchannelsthrough Yongo-basedties.Severalconflictsandfailuresin businesscooperationhavebeenreportedbetweenKoreanandforeignfirms(Park, Vertinsky,andLee 2012;PengandShenkar 2002;Nam 1995),butnoneofthesestudies haveanalysedthereasonsforfailurebyincludingindetailtherole(ortheabsence)of Yongo.Hence,aforeignfirmshouldconsidertheprofileofamanagementaspirantor businessmediatorintermsofhis Yongo endowment. Managementpracticeisinfluencedby Yongo.Amongthemajorresearchsubjectsin thefieldofIMaboutKoreathathavenotbeenanalysedthroughthelensof Yongo are internationalhumanresourcemanagement,andinparticularexpatriation.Sofarthebulk ofliteratureinthisfieldhasanalysedtheculturaladjustmentproblemsofexpatriates(Kim andSlocum 2008;Lin,Chen,andSong 2012;Shin,Morgeson,andCampion 2006;Waxin 2004;Andreason 2003;Park,Hwang,andHarrison 1996).However,researchintocross- culturalmanagementphenomenainKoreamaybeincompletewhentheinfluenceof informalnetworksisnotconsideredexplicitlyintheresearchdesign.Thispaperimplies thatanexpatriates’abilitytomanagefirm-externalinteractionsinKoreaislimited perse duetotheabsenceofinformalnetworkintegration,i.e. Yongo relations.Onthecontrary, internalprocessesofafirm,suchassupervision,financialcontrollingandreportingtothe headquarters,maybebettersuitedforaforeignmanager’smissioninKorea.Inother words,afirm’soutwardactivitiesshouldbemanagedbyKoreanswhopossesshigh- quality Yongo ties,whereastheexpatriatemayinsteadbesuitableforafirm’sinward- orientedaffairs.However,bothmanagersshouldnotactindependentlyfromeachother. Ideally,theyformamanagementtandemandcooperateclosely,sothateachisableto benefitfromtheotherone’sexperience.Asaresult,theexpatriatemaygainabetter understandingaboutlocalcustomsandculture;andtheoutward-orientedmanagermay increaseknowledgeaboutthefirm’sglobalprocessesandbusinesspolicies. Conclusion Thispaperdistinguishedbetween Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek networksinKorea.Forthe formationofthesenetworks,thethreecoreelements hakyon (education-basedties), hyulyon (familyorbloodties)and jiyon (regionalorigin-basedties)playamajorroleand providethecommongroundespeciallyin Yongo relations.Theseelementsareirreversible and(withtheexceptionofeducation-basedties)givenbybirth. Yonjul ties,onthe contrary,arenotnecessarilybuiltupon Yongo ties,butmaybeusedtoestablishthem. Yonjul representexclusivenetworks,basedonhighin-grouptrust,thatareoftenusedfor personalgainorbenefits.Theyarearatherdelicatenetworktype,asindicatedbythe clearlynegativeconnotationoftheword Yonjul itself.Furthermore, Inmaek describes generalsocialtiesthatareestablishedoverthecourseofalife.However,allthreeforms mayoverlap,andthusmaypartlyberegardedasinterconnected.Inorder,forexample,to safeguard Yonjul ties, Yongo and Inmaek tiesmayservetosecuretheformerbyexerting peerpressureinordertoavoidfree-ridingorbetrayal. SeveralresearchfieldshavesofarfailedtomakeKoreaninformalrelation-based networksacentralresearchtheme,althoughtheirinfluenceinbusinessandmanagementis obviouslyimmense.AlthoughKorea’seconomicrisehasbeendebatedinthepastin connectiontothesupportivenatureorhinderinginfluenceofConfucianism(Stiglitz 1996; Lee,Roehl,andChoe 2000;Palais 2002),thecontributionmadetoitbyinformalrelation- basednetworkshasbeenwidelydisregarded.Theriseinthegovernancemechanismsof theChaebolhaveoftenbeenattributedtofamilism(Fukuyama 1995)buthaveseldom beenanalysedinrelationtoitsinclusionwithininformalrelation-basednetworks. 96 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Centringresearchinmanagementaroundthethemeofinformalrelation-basednetworks mayshedmorelightintomanagerialdecision-makingprocessesinKorea,aswellas advancingcross-culturalmanagementknowledge.Thisdifferentfocusofanalysis,i.e. makinginformalrelation-basednetworksthepivotalcentreofexplanationacrossseveral disciplines,mayresultintheadoptionofasofarunconsidereddimensioninordertobetter explainKorea’sandKoreanfirms’remarkableeconomicsuccess. Acknowledgements FinancialsupportisgratefullyacknowledgedfromtheDFGGraduateSchool1613RiskandEast AsiaattheInstituteofEastAsianStudies(IN-EAST).Forhelpfulcommentsandsuggestions,Iam gratefultoChangsooKim,SunkungChoiandtheanonymousreviewer. Notes 1.Twomajormanagementjournalspublishedspecialissuesonthissubject:Management InternationalReview(editedbyHoltbru ¨gge,Narayanan,andHui 2013,inpress)andthe ManagementandOrganizationReview(editedbyLeungetal. 2012). 2.Duetotheinterconnectednessbetween Yonjul, Yongo and Inmaek,theterm Yongo itselftendsto haveabadconnotationinKoreatoday.However, Yongo itselfispredetermined(cause-based)and hasbasicallyaneutralmeaning.Beingendowedwithalarge Yongo-basedinformalnetworkis equivalenttobeinghighlyendowedwithsocialcapital.Onlyitsdeliberatemisuse,whichwould be Yonjul (purpose-based),isclearlyperceivedasnegative. 3.Accordingtoclassicsocialsciencetheory,kinshipandpseudo-familytiesaresaidtodiminishin linewithincreaseddemocratizationandeconomicdevelopmenttowardsformalinstitutionsand moreopennetworks(Durkheim 1933).Thoughscholarsobservethisdevelopmentinthecaseof China(BrennanandWilson 2010;Guthrie 1998),theissueforKoreacannotbeconfirmedclearly (Lee 2000;Yee 2000). Notesoncontributor SvenHorakisanAssistantProfessoratThePeterJ.TobinCollegeofBusinessoftheSt.John’s UniversityinNewYorkCity,whereheresearchesandteachesintheareaofinternational management.BeforejoiningThePeterJ.TobinCollegeofBusiness,hehasbeenapost-doctoral fellowattheGraduateSchool1613RiskandEastAsiafundedbytheGermanResearchFoundation (DFG)andaresearchassociateattheMercatorSchoolofManagementoftheUniversityof Duisburg-Essen,Germany.ForamajorGermanautomotivesupplierheworkedwithAsianOEMs locatedatthefirm’sheadquarterinGermanyanditsregionalheadquartersinJapanandKorea.His researchinterestsincludethefundamentalanalysisofinformalnetworkstructures,theinfluenceof informalinstitutionsondecisionmakingbehaviorandAsianManagement. References Andreason,A.W.2003.“ExpatriateAdjustmenttoForeignAssignments.” InternationalJournalof CommerceandManagement 13:42–60. Brennan,R.,andJ.Wilson.2010.“DoingBusinessinChina:IstheImportanceofGuanxi Diminishing?” EuropeanBusinessReview 22:652–665. Bstieler,L.,andM.Hemmert.2008.“DevelopingTrustinVerticalProductDevelopment Partnerships:AComparisonofSouthKoreaandAustria.” JournalofWorldBusiness 43:35–46. Bstieler,L.,andM.Hemmert.2010.“TrustFormationinKoreanNewProductAlliances:How ImportantarePre-existingSocialTies?” AsiaPacificJournalofManagement 27:299–319. Buckley,P.,J.Clegg,andH.Tan.2006.“CulturalAwarenessinKnowledgeTransfertoChina–The RoleofGuanxiandMianzi.” JournalofWorldBusiness 41:275–288. Burt,R.S.1995. StructuralHoles:TheSocialStructureofCompetition.Cambridge,MA:Harvard UniversityPress. AsiaPacificBusinessReview 97 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Burt,R.S.1997.“TheContingentValueofSocialCapital.” AdministrativeScienceQuarterly 42: 339–365. Burt,R.S.2000.“TheNetworkStructureofSocialCapital.” ResearchinOrganizationalBehavior 22:345–423. Castells,M.2001. TheInternetGalaxi.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. Cha,S.H.2000.“KoreanCivilReligionandModernity.” SocialCompass 47:467–485. Chang,E.2006.“IndividualPayforPerformanceandCommitmentHRPracticesinSouthKorea.” JournalofWorldBusiness 41:368–381. Chang,Y.S.1991.“ThePersonalistEthicandtheMarketinKorea.” ComparativeStudiesinSociety andHistory 33:106–129. Chang,C.S.,andN.J.Chang.1994. TheKoreanManagementSystem:Cultural,Political, EconomicFoundations.Westport:Quorum. Chen,X.,andC.C.Chen.2004.“OntheIntricaciesoftheChineseGuanxi:AProcessModelof GuanxiDevelopment.” AsiaPacificJournalofManagement 21:305–324. Cheng,B.S.,A.C.Wang,andM.P.Huang.2009.“TheRoadMorePopularVersustheRoadLess Travelled:An‘Insider’s’PerspectiveofAdvancingChineseManagementResearch.” ManagementandOrganizationReview 5:91–105. Cho,D.S.1994.“ADynamicApproachtoInternationalCompetitiveness:TheCaseofKorea.” Asia PacificBusinessReview 1:17–36. Cho,Y.H.,andJ.K.Yoon.2001.“TheOriginandFunctionofDynamicCollectivism:AnAnalysis ofKoreanCorporateCulture.”In ManagingKoreanBusiness.Organization,Culture,Human ResourcesandChange,editedbyC.Rowley,T.W.Sohn,andJ.Bae,70–88.London:Frank CassPublishers. Chung,K.H.,H.C.Lee,andK.H.Jung.1997. KoreanManagement:GlobalStrategyandCultural Transformation.Berlin,NewYork:WalterdeGruyter. Dunning,J.H.,andC.Kim.2007.“TheCulturalRootsofGuanxi:AnExploratoryStudy.” The WorldEconomy 30:329–341. Durkheim,E.1933. TheDivisionofLaborinSociety.NewYork:TheFreePress. Dyer,J.H.,andW.Chu.2000.“TheDeterminantsofTrustinSupplier–AutomakerRelationshipsin theU.S.Japan,andKorea.” JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies 31:259–285. Estrin,S.,andM.Prevezer.2010.“TheRoleofInformalInstitutionsinCorporateGovernance: Brazil,Russia,India,andChinaCompared.” AsiaPacificJournalofManagement 28:41–67. Fan,Ying.2002a.“Guanxi’sConsequences:PersonalGainsatSocialCost.” JournalofBusiness Ethics 38:371–380. Fan,Ying.2002b.“QuestioningGuanxi:Definition,ClassificationandImplications.” International BusinessReview 11:543–561. Friedman,M.1953.“TheMethodologyofPositiveEconomics.”In EssaysinPositiveEconomics, editedbyUskaliMa ¨ki,3–42.MiltonFriedman,Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress. Fukuyama,F.1995. Trust:TheSocialVirtuesandtheCreationofProsperity.NewYork:TheFree Press. Gambetta,D.2000.CanWeTrustTrust? Trust:MakingandBreakingCooperativeRelations, DepartmentofSociology,UniversityofOxford,213–237.AccessedMarch12,2011. http:// www.loa.istc.cnr.it/mostro/files/gambetta-conclusion_on_trust.pdf Giarelli,J.M.,andJ.J.Chambliss.2005.“PhilosophyofEducationasQualitativeInquiry.” In QualitativeResearchinEducation:FocusandMethods,editedbyR.R.Sherman,andR.B. Webb,28–41.London,NewYork:Routledge. Gold,T.,D.Guthrie,andD.Wank,eds2002. SocialConnectionsinChina:Institutions,Culture,and theChangingNatureofGuanxi.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress. Granovetter,M.1973.“TheStrengthofWeakTies.” AmericanJournalofSociology 78:360–1380. Granovetter,M.1974. GettingaJob:AStudyofContactsandCareers.Cambridge,MA:Harvard UniversityPress. Granovetter,M.1985.“EconomicActionandSocialStructure:TheProblemofEmbeddedness.” AmericanJournalofSociology 91:481–510. Gu,F.F.,K.Hung,andD.K.Tse.2008.“WhenDoesGuanxiMatter?IssuesofCapitalizationand ItsDarkSides.” JournalofMarketing 72:12–28. Guthrie,Douglas.1998.“TheDecliningSignificanceofGuanxiinChina’sEconomicTransition.” TheChinaQuarterly 154:254–282. 98 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Han,K.K.2000.“ThePoliticsofNetworkandSocialTrust:ACaseStudyintheOrganizational CultureofKoreanVentureIndustry.” KoreaJournal 40:353–365. Helmke,G.,andS.Levitsky.2004.“InformalInstitutionsandComparativePolitics:AResearch Agenda.” PerspectivesonPolitics 2:725–740. Hitt,M.A.,H.U.Lee,andE.Yucel.2002.“TheImportanceofSocialCapitaltotheManagementof MultinationalEnterprises:RelationalNetworksAmongAsianandWesternFirms.” AsiaPacific JournalofManagement 19:353–372. Ho,C.,andK.A.Redfern.2010.“ConsiderationoftheRoleofGuanxiintheEthicalJudgmentsof ChineseManagers.” JournalofBusinessEthics 96:207–221. Holtbru ¨gge,D.,K.Narayanan,andW.Hui.2013.“IndigenousManagementResearch.” ManagementInternationalReview,53:1–167. Jackson,T.,K.Amaeshi,andS.Yavuz.2008.“UntanglingAfricanIndigenousManagement: MultipleInfluencesontheSuccessofSMEsinKenya.” JournalofWorldBusiness 43:400–416. Johnson,J.C.,andS.C.Weller.2001.“ElicitationTechniquesforInterviewing.”In Handbookof InterviewResearch:ContextandMethod,editedbyJ.F.Gubrium,andJ.A.Holstein,491–514. ThousandOaks:Sage. Kee,T.S.2008.“InfluencesofConfucianismonKoreanCorporateCulture.” AsianProfile 31: 9–20. Kim,L.1997. ImitationtoInnovation:TheDynamicsofKorea’sTechnologicalLearning.Boston: HarvardBusinessSchoolPress. Kim,S.2011.“InterpretingSouthKoreanCompetitiveness:FromDomesticRivalrytoGlobal Competitiveness.” KoreaObserver 42:621–643. Kim,Y.H.2000.“EmergenceoftheNetworkSociety:Trends,NewChallenges,andanImplication forNetworkCapitalism.” KoreaJournal 40:161–184. Kim,Y.T.2007.“KoreanElites:SocialNetworksandPower.” JournalofContemporaryAsia 37: 19–37. Kim,D.O.,andJ.Bae.2004. EmploymentRelationsandHRMinSouthKorea.Hampshire:Ashgate. Kim,Y.,andA.A.Cannella.2008.“SocialCapitalAmongCorporateUpperEchelonsandIts ImpactsonExecutivePromotioninKorea.” JournalofWorldBusiness 43:85–96. Kim,Y.H.,andY.M.Kim.2008.“ChangingFacesofNetworkCapitalisminKorea:ACaseof CorporateBoardofDirectors’Network.” KoreanJournalofSociology 42:39–58. Kim,W.,andJ.Seong.2010.“Catching-upandPostCatching-upStrategiesofLatecomerFirms: EvidencefromSamsungSemiconductor.” AsianJournalofTechnologyInnovation 18: 115–142. Kim,K.,andJ.W.Slocum.2008.“IndividualDifferencesandExpatriateAssignmentEffectiveness: TheCaseofU.S.-BasedKoreanExpatriates.” JournalofWorldBusiness 43:109–126. Kwon,O.Y.2006.“RecentChangesinKorea’sBusinessEnvironment:ViewsofForeignBusiness PeopleinKorea.” AsiaPacificBusinessReview 12:77–94. Lee,J.2000.“SocietyinaVortex?YonjulNetworkandCivilSocietyinKorea.” KoreaJournal 40: 366–391. Lee,K.Y.2007.“KulturelleInkompatibilita ¨tvonKyoposundsu ¨dkoreanischenUnternehmenin DeutschlandKyoposinDeutschland.”In Diversity-ManagementalsLeitbildvonPersonalpo- litik,editedbyD.Wagner,andB.F.Voigt,315–341.Wiesbaden:DUVGabler. Lee,S.,andM.C.Brinton.1996.“EliteEducationandSocialCapital:TheCaseofSouthKorea.” SociologyofEducation 69:177–192. Lee,H.C.,andM.P.McNulty.2003.“Korea’sEconomicCrisisandCulturalTransitionToward Individualism.”EconomicandSocialResearchInstituteCabinetOffice,ESRIDiscussionPaper Series,71,Tokyo. Lee,J.,T.W.Roehl,andS.Choe.2000.“WhatMakesManagementStyleSimilarandDistinct AcrossBorders?Growth,ExperienceandCultureinKoreanandJapaneseFirms.” Journalof InternationalBusinessStudies 31:631–652. Leung,K.,P.P.Li,C.C.Chao,andJ.D.Luo.2012.“SpecialIssueonIndigenousManagement ResearchinChina.” ManagementandOrganizationReview 8:1–251. Li,P.P.2007.“SocialTie,SocialCapital,andSocialBehavior:TowardanIntegrativeModelof InformalExchange.” AsiaPacificJournalofManagement 24:227–246. Lim,J.,andE.Sanidas.2011.“TheImpactofOrganisationalandTechnicalInnovationson Productivity:TheCaseofKoreanFirmsandSectors.” AsianJournalofTechnologyInnovation 19:21–35. AsiaPacificBusinessReview 99 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Lin,N.1999.“SocialNetworksandStatusAttainment.” AnnualReviewofSociology 25:467–487. Lin,N.2001.“Guanxi:AConceptualAnalysis.”In TheChineseTriangleofMainlandChina, Taiwan,andHongKong:ComparativeInstitutionalAnalyses,editedbyA.Y.So,N.Lin,and D.Poston,154–167.Westport:Greenwood. Lin,Y.,A.S.Chen,andY.Song.2012.“DoesYourIntelligenceHelptoSurviveinaForeign Jungle?TheEffectsofCulturalIntelligenceandEmotionalIntelligenceonCross-cultural Adjustment.” InternationalJournalofInterculturalRelations 36:541–552. Loewenstein,G.,andE.Haisley.2008.“TheEconomistasTherapist:MethodologicalRamifications of‘Light’Paternalism.”In TheFoundationsofPositiveandNormativeEconomics:AHandbook, editedbyA.Caplin,andA.Schotter,210–248.Oxford,NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress. Luo,Y.,ed.2007. GuanxiandBusiness.Singapore:WorldScientificPublishingCompany. Luo,Y.2008.“TheChangingChineseCultureandBusinessBehavior:ThePerspectiveof IntertwinementBetweenGuanxiandCorruption.” InternationalBusinessReview 17:188–193. Luo,Y.,Y.Huang,andS.L.Wang.2012.“GuanxiandOrganizationalPerformance:AMeta- Analysis.” ManagementandOrganizationReview 8:139–172. Manske,F.,andY.Moon.2003.“CulturalSignatureofInterorganisationalInformationSystems? TheDevelopmentofEDISystemsintheKoreanAutomotiveIndustry.” AIandSociety 17: 45–61. Marshall,M.N.1996a.“SamplingforQualitativeResearch.” FamilyPratice 13:522–525. Marshall,M.N.1996b.“TheKeyInformantTechnique.” FamilyPratice 13:92–97. Mayer,K.2006.“AsianManagementResearchNeedsMoreSelf-confidence.” AsiaPacificJournal ofManagement 24:527–534. Michailova,S.,andV.Worm.2003.“PersonalNetworkinginRussiaandChina:BlatandGuanxi.” EuropeanManagementJournal 21:509–519. Miles,M.B.,andA.M.Huberman.1994. QualitativeDataAnalysis.ThousandOaks:Sage. Milliman,J.F.,Y.M.Kim,andM.A.VonGlinow.1993.“HierarchicalAdvancementinKorean Chaebols:AModelandResearchAgenda.” HumanResourceManagementReview 3:293–320. Nam,S.H.1995.“Culture,ControlandCommitmentinInternationalJointVentures.” The InternationalJournalofHumanResourceManagement 6:553–567. Nee,V.1998.“NormsandNetworksandEconomicPerformance.” AmericanEconomicReview 88: 85–89. Nguyen,T.V.,andJ.Rose.2009.“BuildingTrust–EvidenceFromVietnameseEntrepreneurs.” JournalofBusinessVenturing 24:165–182. North,D.C.1990. Institutions,InstitutionalChangeandEconomicPerformance.Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress. Oh,H.,M.H.Chung,andG.Labianca.2004.“GroupSocialCapitalandGroupEffectiveness:The RoleofInformalSocializingTies.” AcademyofManagementJournal 47:860–875. Ostrom,E.,andT.K.Ahn.2003. FoundationsofSocialCapital.Cheltenham:EdwardElgar. Palais,J.B.2002.“ConfucianismandEconomicDevelopmentinSouthKorea.”In Rethinking ConfucianismPastPresentinChinaJapanKoreaandVietnam,editedbyB.A.Elman,J.B. Duncan,andH.Ooms,489–517.LosAngeles:UniversityofCalifornia. Panda,A.,andR.Gupta.2007.“CallforDevelopingIndigenousOrganizationalTheoriesinIndia: SettingAgendaforFuture.” InternationalJournalofIndianCultureandBusinessManagement 1:205–243. Park,T.H.2004.“TheInfluencesofFamilismonInterpersonalTrustofKoreanPublicOfficials.” InternationalReviewofPublicAdministration 9:121–135. Park,C.M.,andD.C.Shin.2005.“SocialCapitalandDemocraticCitizenship:TheCaseofSouth Korea.” JapaneseJournalofPoliticalScience 6:63–85. Park,H.,S.D.Hwang,andK.J.Harrison.1996.“SourcesandConsequencesofCommunication ProblemsinForeignSubsidiaries:TheCaseofUnitedStatesFirmsinSouthKorea.” InternationalBusinessReview 5:79–98. Park,C.,I.Vertinsky,andC.Lee.2012.“KoreanInternationalJointVentures:HowtheExchange ClimateAffectsTacitKnowledgeTransferFromForeignParents.” InternationalMarketing Review 29:151–174. Pejovich,S.1999.“InteractionofFormalandInformalInstitutionsonSocialStabilityandEconomic Development.” JournalofMarketsandMorality 2:164–181. Peng,M.W.,andO.Shenkar.2002.“JointVentureDissolutionasCorporateDivorce.” Academyol ManagementExecutive 16:92–105. 100 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 Peng,M.W.,S.L.Sun,B.Pinkham,andH.Chen.2009.“TheInstitution-BasedViewasaThirdLeg foraStrategyTripod.” AcademyofManagementPerspectives 23:63–81. Peng,M.W.,D.Y.L.Wang,andY.Jiang.2008.“AnInstitution-BasedViewofInternational BusinessStrategy:AFocusonEmergingEconomies.” JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies 39:920–936. Peng,M.W.,andJ.Q.Zhou.2005.“HowNetworkStrategiesandInstitutionalTransitionsEvolvein Asia.” AsiaPacificJournalofManagement 22:321–336. Reagans,R.,andB.McEvily.2003.“NetworkStructureandKnowledgeTransfer:TheEffectsof CohesionandRange.” AdministrativeScienceQuarterly 48:240–267. Rugman,A.M.,andC.H.Oh.2008.“TheInternationalCompetitivenessofAsianFirms.” Journalof StrategyandManagement 1:57–71. Ryen,A.2001.“Cross-CulturalInterviewing.”In HandbookofInterviewResearch:Contextand Method,editedbyJ.F.Gubrium,andJ.A.Holstein,335–354.ThousandOaks:Sage. Schostak,J.2006. InterviewingandRepresentationinQualitativeResearch.Berkshire:McGraw- Hill. Shin,E.H.,andS.K.Chin.1989.“SocialAffinityAmongTopManagerialExecutivesofLarge CorporationsinKorea.” SociologicalForum 4:3–26. Shin,S.J.,F.P.Morgeson,andM.A.Campion.2006.“WhatYouDoDependsonWhereYouAre: UnderstandingHowDomesticandExpatriateWorkRequirementsDependUpontheCultural Context.” JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies 38:64–83. Stiglitz,J.E.1996.“SomeLessonsFromtheEastAsianMiracle.” TheWorldBankResearch Observer 11:151–177. Tremblay,M.A.1989.“TheKeyInformantTechnique:ANon-EthnographicApplication.”In Field Research:ASourcebookandFieldManual,editedbyR.G.Burgess,151–163.London,New York:Routledge. Tsui,A.S.2004.“ContributingtoGlobalManagementKnowledge:ACaseforHighQuality IndigenousResearch.” AsiaPacificJournalofManagement 21:491–513. Tsui,A.S.,andJ.L.L.Farh.1997.“WhereGuanxiMatters:RelationalDemographyandGuanxiin theChineseContext.” WorkandOccupations 24:56–80. Virtanen,A.,andY.M.Lee.2010. ElectricVehiclesSouthKorea.Seoul:FinproSouthKorea. http:// www.agentschapnl.nl/sites/default/files/bijlagen/KoreaElectric_Mobility_in_South_Korea_2010. pdf Wang,H.2000.“InformalInstitutionsandForeignInvestmentinChina.” ThePacificReview 13: 525–556. Waxin,M.F.2004.“Expatriates’InteractionAdjustment:TheDirectandModeratorEffectsof CultureofOrigin.” InternationalJournalofInterculturalRelations 28:61–79. Wong,S.S.,andW.F.Boh.2010.“LeveragingtheTiesofOtherstoBuildaReputationfor TrustworthinessAmongPeers.” AcademyofManagementJournal 53:129–148. Wong,P.L.K.,andP.Ellis.2002.“SocialTiesandPartnerIdentificationinSino-HongKong InternationalJointVentures.” JournalofInternationalBusinessStudies 33:267–289. Xu,S.,andR.Yang.2009.“IndigenousCharacteristicsofChineseCorporateSocialResponsibility ConceptualParadigm.” JournalofBusinessEthics 93:321–333. Yazawa,S.2006.“SocialNetworksinEastAsia.” Theory,CultureandSociety 23:314–317. Yee,J.2000.“TheSocialNetworksofKoreans.” KoreaJournal 40:325–352. Yee,J.,andD.Chang.2009.“Transparency,aKeyFactortoImproveSocialCohesion:AReviewof theKoreanExperienceintheContextofSocialQualityResearch.” DevelopmentandSociety 38: 259–275. Yoon,W.,andE.Hyun.2010.“Economic,SocialandInstitutionalConditionsofNetwork Governance:NetworkGovernanceinEastAsia.” ManagementDecision 48:1212–1229. Zhu,Y.,X.Wittmann,andM.W.Peng.2011.“Institution-BasedBarrierstoInnovationinSMEsin China.” AsiaPacificJournalofManagement 29:1–12. AsiaPacificBusinessReview 101 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 AppendixA.Interviewinstrument A.1Defininginformalrelation-basednetworksinKorea. A.1.1Pleasedescribethedifferenttypesofinformalrelation-basednetworksinKorea. A.1.2Whatistherelationalbaseofeachtypeofnetwork? A.1.3Whatarethedistinctivefeaturesof Yongo, Yonjul and Inmaek ties? B.1Characterizinginformalrelation-basednetworksinKorea. B.1.1Howaccessiblearethesenetworkstooutsiders? B.1.2Howwouldyoudescribetheleveloftrust,loyaltyandreciprocityineachtypeof network? B.1.3Howlargedoyoubelievethesenetworksareandhowdomembersdifferintermsof demographicsandprofessionalprofiles? B.1.4Aretheinformalnetworkslosingorgainingstrengthovertime? 102 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 AppendixB. Sourcesusedforliteratureanalysis. DisciplineNo. Author(year), Journal/BookResearchcontextDescriptionofinformaltiesinKorea 1YoonandHyun (2010), Manage- mentDecision Determinantsof informalnet- workgovernance inKoreaand China ‘( ... )thestrengthofYonjul(apejorative termreferringtostrongties,amore neutraltermisyonkyol)characterizesthe Koreansociety.Yonjulmeansparticu- laristicrelationsmaintainedbykinship, schoolandregionaltiesandoftenit worksasamechanismtotranscend institutionalizedrulesandformalpro- cedures( ... ).’p.1218 2Bstielerand Hemmert (2010), Asia PacificJournal ofManagement Arepre-existing socialties importantintrust formationinnew productalli- ances? ‘Asaconsequence,kinandnon-kinties, originatinginalumninetworks,regional networks,orpersonalfriendshipsare widespreadinKoreaandareimportant modesofsocialexchangeforemotional support,problemsolving,andconflict resolution.Thesenetworksofties (Inmaek)characterizeKoreansociety ( ... ),theseaffiliationsimplycertain standardsofbehavior,whetherdeserved ornot.’p.301 3KimandCan- nella(2008), JournalofWorld Business Theinfluenceof socialcapitalof managersfor promotion ‘LiketheChinesewordguanxi,meaning asocialconnectiontoauthoritiesor importantinstitutionalplayers,theKor- eantermInmaekreferstothesametype ofinstrumentalpersonalties.The strengthofInmaek(personalconnec- tions)iscriticallyimportantinKorean society.Asthebonbetweenpeopleis strengthenedbycloseandpersonal relationships,itcaneasilytranscend institutionalizedrulesandformalregu- lations(Yee 2000).( ... )littlehasbeen writtenabouttheexecutiveswhorun Koreancompaniesandhowexecutive promotiondecisionsinthosecompanies aremade.MostKoreanscholarswould agreethatInmaekbasedonHyol-yon (bloodrelationorfamilyties),Jie-yon (regionalties),andHak-yon(schoolties) playcriticalrolesinKoreanbusiness.’ p.86 4Lee(2007), [Bookchapter] TheroleofKyo- posinoverseas operationsof Koreacorpor- ations ‘Thesethreebonds(family,school,and region)arecalledYongoandfeaturehigh trusttiesamongindividuals.Theseties areusuallypredefinedbybirthandmean alife-longlastingconnection.Itis probablyoneofthemoststriking characteristicsofSouthKoreanmanage- mentthatpersonsbelongingtothese networksaretreatedwithpreference.’ p.322(translatedfromGerman) AsiaPacificBusinessReview 103 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 AppendixB. – continued DisciplineNo. Author(year), Journal/BookResearchcontextDescriptionofinformaltiesinKorea Management5Oh,Chungand Labianca(2004), Academyof Management Journal Socialcapital andgroupeffec- tiveness ‘Ourstudyalsoaddstothestudyof groupsandnetworksbyfocusingona previouslyunderappreciatedtypeof socialtie–theinformalsocializingtie thatcrossesoutsideoftheworkplaceinto amoreinformalrealm.Thesetiesare particularlycriticalbecausetheswitchin focusfromtheworkplacetooutsidethe workplaceinvitesashiftinthetypesof resourcesthataretransferredintheties towardgreatercomprehensivenessand multiplexity.’p.869 6KimandBae (2004),[Book] Employment relationsand humanresource managementin Korea ‘Yongoism:Yongoreferstoconnection. Yongo-basedrelationshavepervaded almosteveryaspectofKoreansociety. ThreeYongo’sdifferentmanifestations arehyulyon(connectionbyblood), hakyon(byeducation)andjiyon(by geography).Theexistenceornon- existenceofYongowillresultindifferent outcomesindecision-making,attitude andbehaviour.Yongohasbeenapplied tosuchcasesasamedicalappointmentin ageneralhospital,promotionwithina company,recruitment,politicalcam- paigningandelectionsandtheselection ofpartnerforstrategicalliances.’p.43 7Chung,Lee, Jung(1997), [Book] Businessand managementin Korea ‘AnothertraditionalvalueinKorean cultureistheyon-gorelation,meaning ‘relation-basedbehavior.’Thisrelation- basedbehaviourispromotedtofoster trustandclosenesstoone’simmediate familymembersandrelativesandthento peoplewithcommoneducationalback- groundsandregionalorigin(usually birthplace).Havingattendedthesame schoolorhavingbeenbornandraisedin thesameregionpromotesasenseof belongingnessandtrust.Theyon-go relationshipisdeeplyrootedinKorean cultureandispervasiveineveryaspectof Koreans’lives.’p.136 8Changand Chang(1994), [Book] TheKorean management system ‘FARistheacronymforfamily,alumni, andregionalisminSouthKorea.Family denotesthefamilysystemanditsrelative importanceintheKoreansociety,alumni signifiestheattitudetowardeducationin generalandtherelativeimportanceof regionalsectionalisminthesociety. Exclusionismrecognizestheextentof rejectionofstrangersandoutsidersinthe societywhoareKoreansaswelland foreignersanddonothaveanydirector indirectrelationwithotherKoreans.’ p.52 104 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 AppendixB. – continued DisciplineNo. Author(year), Journal/BookResearchcontextDescriptionofinformaltiesinKorea 9Milliman,Kim, andVonGlinow (1993), Human RessourceMan- agementReview Koreanorganiz- ationalpractices andemployee attitudesinterms ofpromotion ‘Faceandcollectivismformthecultural contextforwhyKoreaisasociety composedofhighlystructuredgroups basedonkinship,geographicarea,and school.Thesesocialgroupsaffectpro- motionaspirationinseveralways.( ... )in Koreaclosepeergroups,associations,and informaltiesareformedbasedonage, region,university,schoolclassinthe university,andthetimingofentryinto one’sorganization.’p.304 ‘Otherbasesofpersonalconnectionsor ‘Inmaek’inKoreaincludefamily,region, andotherimportantpublicandprivate institutionsinsociety.( ... )Manyofthese socialfactorsarealsoimportantinJapan, andtoalesserdegreeintheUnitedStates.’ p.309 10YeeandChang (2009), Develop- mentandSociety Relationalcapi- talandsocial cohesion ‘Koreanstraditionallyhavedeveloped richanddiverseYonjul,orpseudofami- lialtiesbasedonnetworksamong commonkin,orpersonsfromthesame regionalorschoolbackground.’p.267 11KimandKim (2008), Korean JournalofSoci- ology Yonjul tiesof Koreanbusiness leaders ‘ThreeYonjuls–regional,schooland kinties–arethemostsalientnetworks. ( ... )Apparentlypersonalistictieshave continuedtoconditiontheKorean economydespitetherapidadvanceof industrializationanddemocratization. ( ... )particularistictieshavenot attenuatedinmodernKorea.’p.41 12ParkandShin (2005), Japanese JournalofPol- iticalScience Formaland informalgroup membershipin Korea,Taiwan, Japan ‘Althoughthoseorganizations[alumni circles]undoubtedlyholdsomecharac- teristicsofvoluntaryandhorizontal associations,theyrunashighlyexclusive andhomogeneousformsofsocial organization.Therefore,theirmembers tendtodevelopidentity-bondingsoli- darityonlyamongthemselvesandto distrustnon-membersingeneral.( ... ) NearlyhalftheKoreanpeoplerefuseto truststrangersinprinciple( ... ).Those whotrustothersunconditionally,how- ever,constitutearelativelysmallmin- orityoftheKoreanpopulation.’ 13Manskeand Moon(2003), AIandSociety Culturalinflu- encesonthe developmentof standardsfor electronicdata interchange ‘Family-centredcollectivismisnot limitedtobloodrelationships,italso relatestothehometownandits surroundingarea,toschoolsattended, etc.,asseenin‘Yonjul’–basicsocial networks(...).Thesesocialnetworks groupKoreans.Suchnetworkshavean informalbutdecisiveinfluenceon bringingaboutlateralcoordinationacross organizations.’p.50 AsiaPacificBusinessReview 105 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 AppendixB. – continued DisciplineNo. Author(year), Journal/BookResearchcontextDescriptionofinformaltiesinKorea Sociology14Cha(2000), SocialCompass Civilreligion andinformal relationalnet- worksinKorea ‘Koreancivilreligionsurfacedasa dominatingsocialforceinthecourseof industrialization.Itplacesmarked emphasisonprivatehumanrelationships (InmaekorYonjul)ratherthanpublic rulesofsociety.’p.469 ‘Inotherwords,theysoughttoachieve theirgoalsviatheirYonjulorhuman relationsnetwork.ButKoreanleadersdid notdisplaypubliclytheirinnerintentions, becausemodernwesternsocialinsti- tutionsandnormsclearlyexistedinan objectiveandofficialform.( ... )Personal relationshipsandYonjulworkpowerfully assubstantialandactualprinciplesof organizationinKoreanpoliticalgroups, stateandsocialorganizations,business enterprises,andvariousreligiousgroups includingChristianity.Becausethis consciousnessofYonjulispowerfully supportedbyKoreancivilreligion,a moderneducationwillnotweakenor breakit.’p.478 15Lee(2000), KoreaJournal Civilsocietyand Yonjul networks ‘Yonjulisbuiltinmostcasesuponsome preexistingprimarygroupasabase (yon’go),soYonjulisnotdistinguished fromordinarynetworksintermsof compositionorform,butintermsofits facilitativefunctionofbackdoorrent seeking.Yonjulcanbeinterpretedasa mutualpatron-clientnetworkwitha strongpaternalistictone.True,thatevery formofnetworkcanhavethatcharacter- isticorfunction,since,astheterm ‘relationcapital’implies,everyoneis involvedinthebusinessofnetwork mobilizationforpersonalgain.Butwhen themutualpatron-clientaspectpossesses anextremedegreeofexclusiveness amongmembers,andthataspectalone, aboveandbeyondotherpossiblecharac- teristicsofanetwork,is(abnormally) overgrown,thenwehaveYonjul,a peculiartypeofsocialnetwork,coming outof,butbeingdistinguishedfrom,other socialnetworks.’p.369 16Yee(2000), KoreaJournal Socialnetworks inKorea ‘Yongyolisaneutralwordmeaningthe openrelationsamongobjectsorpeople connectedbyuniversalrules.Yonjul,on theotherhand,meansparticularistic relationsmaintainedbykin,school,or regionalties.ThestrengthofYonjulties characterizesKoreansociety.( ... )But thestrongbondworkingwithinthe Yonjultietendstobecomeabarrierto thosewhodonotsharethelink.’p.326 106 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 AppendixB. – continued DisciplineNo. Author(year), Journal/BookResearchcontextDescriptionofinformaltiesinKorea 17Kim(2000), KoreaJournal Socialnetworks andnetwork capitalism ‘YonjulisaKoreanwordthatisdifficult totranslatebecauseofitsconnotation. Literally,itmeansconnectionsorties. Itsconnotation,however,impliesthat theconnectionsmostlycomefromties basedonregion,school,andfamily relationships.Itisslightlydifferentfrom guanxiinthatguanxiismoreopento variouscategoriesthanYonjul.Because ofthedifficultyoftranslation,Iusethe Koreantermwithoutatranslation.’ p.163 18Leeand Brinton(1996), Sociologyof Education Theinfluenceof universitypres- tigeandsocial backgroundin labourmarketof Koreangradu- ates ‘Inotherwords,besidestheeconomic advantagesassociatedwithhigheredu- cation,schoolbackgroundisabasisof informalsocialgroupingsthatserveas animportantsourceofsocialcapital amongSouthKoreans.( ... )alumnities andfamilytiesarethemostfrequent commondenominatorsofpersonalnet- works.Otherstudiesthathavecon- sideredthemanagerialcharacteristicsof chaebol(largebusinessgroups)have emphasizedtheimportanceofboth schooltiesandcommonregionalorigin intherecruitmentandpromotionof individualstotopmanagerialpositions.’ p.182 19Shinand Chin(1989), Sociological Forum Socialaffinityof topmanagersin Korea ‘Wefoundthatabout21%ofthetotal numbersofexecutivepositionsinthe largecorporationswereoccupiedby individualswhohadsometypeof‘family tie’withtheownersofthecorporations. Also,thereisastrongtendencyof corporationownerstoemploythe executivesofthesameregionaloriginof birthastheirown,buttheaffinitybased onschooltieswasnotasstrongasthatof regionalorigin.’p.3 PublicAdminis- tration 20Park(2004), International ReviewofPublic Administration Familismand interpersonal trustamong Koreapublic officials ‘Thosedysfunctionsaretheresultof mutualfamilialobligationscreatingan insider/outsiderdistinction.Tomake mattersworse,suchphenomenaare moreseriousingovernmentthanother organizations.Theysaythatthereci- procalnetworksmediatedbyblood relations,schoolalumni,andhometown havebeeninternalizedwithinthe Koreanpublicbureaucracy.Thesenet- works,Yonjulhaveunderminedmerit- basedsystemleadingtoinefficiency, inequity,andalackofinternal democracy.’p.121 AsiaPacificBusinessReview 107 Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016 AppendixB. – continued DisciplineNo. Author(year), Journal/BookResearchcontextDescriptionofinformaltiesinKorea History21Y.-S.Chang (1991), Com- parativeStudies inSocietyand History Moralandethics ofKoreans ‘ThereisawidespreaddriveinKorean citiestoorganizepeopleonthebasisofa sharedlineage,orhavingattendedthe sameschool,comefromthesametown, orfoughtinthesamecompanyduringthe KoreanWar( ... ).Inthisutilitarian context,anelaborateprincipleof reciprocitydevelopswithinthepersonal network.Anyhelprenderedbyoneto anotherisregardedasapersonalfavor,to beappreciatedandatsomefuturetime reciprocated.Withoutthepersonalcon- nectionsthatcouldfacilitateone’s affairs,onecanalsoborrowthemthrough friendsoracquaintanceswhohaveaccess tosuchconnections,aslongasonecan payfortheborrowedfavor.’p.117 Anthropology22Han(2000), KoreaJournal Organizational culture,social trustandinter- personalnetwork ‘( ... )atthesametimetheydetestedthe oldergeneration’s‘duplicity,’they acutelyfeltthecontradictionbetweenthe ‘rational,’Western-style,formalruleson thesurfaceandtheinformalsurvival rulesheavilydependentonpersonal networks(Yonjul),nepotism,andcor- ruption.’p.353 Areastudies23Kim(2007), JournalofCon- temporaryAsia Informalnet- worksofKorean elites ‘Inparticular,thisanalysisexploreswhy andhowlargecompanieshavedeveloped theirsocialtieswithstateofficialsand politiciansinordertopursuetheirown interests,demonstratingmarriageand kinshipnetworks,commonregionaland educationalbackgroundsandothersocial ties.’p.19 ‘Althoughitisnoteasytogather informationonthewayinwhichinformal tiesinfluencethepolicymakingprocess, thereisnodoubtthattheystronglybind togetherKorea’selitegroups.Thus,the businesscommunityhasvigorously developedregional,school,andmarriage, andotherpersonaltieswiththegovern- mentandotherelites.’p.30 108 S.Horak Downloaded by [RMIT University] at 01:15 24 February 2016