16
INTERNATIONAL MANAGEMENT EDUCATION IN CHINA

A blessing or a curse?

Haiming Hang

 

 

Introduction

Since 1978, China has gradually increased its links with the rest of the world, with its accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001 the climax of the process (Buckley et al., 2007). However, reintegration into the global economy has not been an easy task because China was isolated from the world for nearly three decades. In addition, China was used to a centrally planned system, and thus moving towards a free-market system created new challenges. For example, one of the key tasks of its recent economic transition was to modernize Chinese state-owned enterprises (SOEs). In order to achieve this aim, in the 1980s and 1990s the Chinese government introduced performance contracts (PC) to enhance the competitiveness of SOEs (Shirley and Xu, 1997). In addition, the Chinese government opened its market to foreign investors in order to provide SOEs the opportunities to learn from their foreign counterparts (Wang, 2003). But neither approach was as successful as expected. The PCs were found to have a negative impact on the growth of SOEs while the open-door policy squeezed many SOEs out of competition (Shirley and Xu, 1997). This made the Chinese government recognize the necessity to learn advanced management knowledge from the West (Borgonjon and Vanhonacker, 1994; Zimmerman and Fey, 2001).

China's recent transition has also increased its economic cooperation with other countries. During the past three decades China has attracted numerous foreign entrepreneurs, as the lure of over 1 billion new customers made China a market that no multinational firms could afford to ignore (Xu, 1990). China has also become a major investor in other countries (Buckley et al., 2003). A recent OECD report suggests that since 1979, Chinese outward foreign direct investment has reached US$90 billion, the fourth largest among developing countries (OECD, 2008). However, a lack of qualified management personnel is one of the key obstacles in both situations. For example, a director of a Singapore company operating in China suggested that getting trained and experienced staff in China was very difficult (Tsang, 1999, cited in Newell, 1999). In a similar vein, lack of suitable management personnel is a key factor deterring Chinese firms from going abroad (Li, Wong and Wang, 2005). This is probably because working in a market-driven economy requires a different set of skills from working in a centrally planned system (Bai and Enderwick, 2005). But the Chinese education system in the 1990s only provided training for the old system.Thus, the Chinese government decided to reform its higher education sector to nurture qualified managerial candidates (Borgonjon andVanhonacker, 1994).

One of the key features of Chinese education reform is to encourage cooperation between Chinese and foreign universities to jointly offer programmes or exchange students/staff — international education or Zhongwai Hezuo Babxue in Chinese (Huang, 2003a, b, 2005). This is particularly evident in management education. Because of political and ideological influence, management education in China had been disbanded for a long time (Newell, 1999; Wang, He and Yu, 2005). But recent economic reform made the Chinese government realize the importance of management education. Thus, since the 1990s Sino—foreign collaboration has increased dramatically. Previous research suggested that management education is expected to diffuse cutting-edge knowledge, nurture managerial talents and influence public policies (Li, Wong and Wang, 2005; Pfeffer and Fong, 2004). In the Chinese context, this means that international management education is expected to help Chinese SOEs increase their competitiveness, provide qualified personnel to work in a market-driven economy and meet Chinese consumers' growing demand for higher education. However, whether international management education in China can achieve these aims remains unclear. Thus, the main purpose of this chapter is to provide a critical evaluation of the effectiveness of different international management education programmes in China.

The remainder of this chapter is organized as follows: the next section briefly reviews the evolution of international management education in China and relevant policy frameworks. This is followed by a review of the implementation of different international management education programmes. Finally, the whole chapter concludes with some recommendations to tackle current issues in international management education in China.

International management education in China: a brief review

China's exposure to modern management can be traced back to 1916, when Mu translated Taylor's book The Principles of Scientific Management into Chinese (Morgan, 2006). With the publication of the book, more and more Chinese entrepreneurs and managers showed great interest in management education. Thus, in 1929 the first management school in China was established at the Shanghai Jiaotong University with a special focus on training finance and economics (Southworth, 1999). After 1949, influenced by the Marxist—Leninist political ideology, China's search for modern management knowledge shifted from the West to the former USSR. Consequently, many Russian professors were invited to lecture Chinese students, and hundreds of Chinese students were also sent to the former USSR to study. Furthermore, copying the Moscow National Economy College, the People's University in Beijing was established, educating Chinese officials of various ranks in a centrally planned system (Wang, He and Yu, 2005). Chinese managers at that time were not treated as independent decision-makers but as central government policy implementers (Borgonjon andVanhonacker, 1994; Huang, 2005; Mok, 2003; Pan, Fleta and Pan, 2010;Wang, He and Yu, 2005).

However, the economic transition initialled by Deng Xiao-ping re-shifted China's search for modern management knowledge back to the West. According to Wang, He and Yu (2005), Deng's visit to the USA in 1979 led to the establishment of the National Centre for Industrial Science and Technology Development at Dalian in 1980. It was the first China—West joint programme for nearly six decades. Since then, China has gradually increased its links with Western management education. For example, in the 1980s, China sent numerous students and faculties to study in North America, Europe, Australia and Hong Kong, with some sponsored by Ministry of Education and different municipal governments while others self-funded (Huang, 2003a, b, 2005; Mok, 2003;Wang, He and Yu, 2005). Meanwhile, two pioneer international management education programmes were set up in this period. The first one started as an EU—China training project in Beijing but later on moved to Shanghai and became the China Europe International Business School (CEIBS) (Fischer, 1999; Southworth, 1999). The second was a collaboration between Dalian University of Science and Technology and the State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo, approved by the Chinese State Economic Commission and the US Ministry of Commerce (Qing and Xiao, 1998). Although both programmes offered the same courses (MBA) and were supported by the Chinese government, the former became the model of Chinese international management education while the latter was closed down (for a comparative analysis of these two programmes, see Fischer, 1999).

With the decentralization of the Chinese higher education sector in the 1990s, more and more international management education programmes were set up under the approval of different municipal governments (Huang, 2003a, b, 2005; Mok, 2003; Wang, He andYu, 2005). Consequently, on 26 January 1995 the State Education Commission (SEC, renamed as the Ministry of Education in 1998, MOE) issued the Contemporary Regulation on Operation of Higher Education Institutions in Cooperation with Foreign Partners to regulate and monitor these international management education programmes (Huang, 2003a, b). According to this document, any international management education programme without Chinese partners could not be approved by the SEC. It also required the Chinese partners to submit applications for international management education programmes where the presidents of these programmes had to be Chinese citizens living in China. In addition, the SEC suggested that it would use the same criteria to accredit Chinese institutions to accredit international management education programmes. Finally, the SEC asserted that international programmes were closed to foreign religious organizations and individuals (Huang, 2003a). On 23 January 1997 the SEC issued another document ‘Notice of Strengthening Degree Granting Management in Activities concerning Operation of Institutions in Cooperation with Foreign Partners’ to assure the quality of different international management education programmes in China. It emphasized that international programmes would be approved only when local demand could not be met. In other words, international programmes were used mainly to offer those courses/degrees that Chinese institutions could not offer. In addition, this document required foreign partners to have a high international reputation to assure the high quality of the international programmes. Finally, it required any degrees offered by international programmes to be approved by both the Chinese and the foreign government (Huang, 2003a, 2005). Since then, China has witnessed a rapid increase in cross-border collaboration. However, previous research has documented many challenges and issues faced by the various international management education programmes in China. The following section discusses this in detail.

International management education implementation

Pedagogical approach

One of the key challenges Western instructors face is the interaction with Chinese students in the classroom (Aguinis and Roth, 2005; De Vita, 2001; Frankel, Swanson and Sagan, 2006; Littrell, 2005;Wang, Harding and Mai, 2011; Wang, He and Yu, 2005;Wang and Wang, 2006). Chinese students are often found to be not as active as their Western counterparts. This was partly attributed to the culture differences between China and the West. For example, China is often described as a country of collectivism where individuals put group interests above their own. In contrast, Western countries are typical examples of individualism where independence and self-reliance are highly valued (Triandis, 1995). Thus, in order to maintain group harmony and avoid losing face, Chinese students tend to refrain from expressing their opinions and feelings openly (Aguinis and Roth, 2005; De Vita, 2001; Frankel, Swanson and Sagan, 2006; Littrell, 2005). Indeed, Frankel, Swanson and Sagan (2006) suggest that compared to Western students, Chinese students are less likely to communicate with instructors, in particular when they are not satisfied.

The culture differences between China and the West can also explain why Chinese students tend to memorize lecture notes without questioning (Aguinis and Roth, 2005; De Vita, 2001). Wang, He andYu (2005) suggest that in China the teacher is regarded as an authoritative figure whose knowledge is unquestionable. Consequently, students are expected to be passive listeners and debating or confronting the teacher are discouraged (Aguinis and Roth, 2005; Littrell, 2005; Wang, He and Yu, 2005). In fact, China as a country high on power distance (power inequalities among different members are tolerated and accepted, Hofstede (1980; 2001)) implies that junior members are expected to obey senior members' orders without question (Ho, 1996). Thus, Chinese students are more used to a teacher-centred lecturing style where there is limited interaction between instructors and students (Aguinis and Roth, 2005).

However, a case study is one of the most popular pedagogical approaches adopted by majority international management education programmes in China (Beamish, Wong and Shoveller, 2005). It can be argued that compared with the traditional Chinese lecturing style, case study is more appropriate to transfer Western management knowledge to Chinese students and managers. This is because knowledge can be divided into tacit and explicit knowledge along the dimension of tacitness (Kogut and Zander, 1993). While explicit knowledge is believed to be embedded in standardized procedures to provide the building blocks for learning, tacit knowledge is more context specific and provides the glue and integrating mechanism for learning (Buckley, Clegg and Tan, 2003; Martin and Salomon, 2003). Newell (1999) argues that the different theories Chinese students and managers learn from Western textbooks are explicit knowledge but with a strong Anglo-American bias. Since Chinese students tend to accept knowledge diffused within the classroom without question, they may not realize the right contexts to apply Western theories. Thus, case study is used to help Chinese students understand how to use different theories properly, as tacit knowledge can only be transferred via examples, observations and practice (Newell, 1999). However, due to Chinese students' learning style, how to actively engage with them is a key challenge for Western professors. In addition, Shugan (2006) argues that case study breaks the link between research and teaching.Thus, case study may deny students the opportunity to learn cutting-edge knowledge in the field (Shugan, 2006).

Curriculum design

Before the 1990s, management courses, if they were offered, were limited to operational research, accounting and management information systems, typically in an engineering department (Borgonjon andVanhonacker, 1994;Wang, He andYu, 2005). Wang, He and Yu (2005) argue that this was probably because the ‘soft’ and qualitative side of management subjects was considered as the tail of capitalism, and thus any involvement was discouraged. In addition, the old centrally planned system that emphasized optimal economic patterns provided little opportunities for Chinese managers to use people-oriented and conceptual subjects such as strategy and organization behaviour (Borgonjon andVanhonacker, 1994; Wang, He andYu, 2005). However, the transition towards a free market system highlighted the inadequacy of the old curriculum. Thus, various international management programmes were established to teach both ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ management subjects. For example, in a joint programme of enterprise management between Zhejiang University and Hong Kong Polytechnic University, it covered various management subjects ranging from information systems, data analysis to organizational behaviour and human resource management (Mak, 1999). Similar situations can also be found in the CEIBS (Fischer, 1999; Southworth, 1999) and other international programmes (Borgonjon and Vanhonacker, 1994).

In general, different management courses offered by different programmes all concentrate on well-established theories. However, several scholars have expressed their concerns about the Anglo-American bias in contemporary international business research (Buckley and Lessard, 2005; Faria and Wensley, 2002; Fruin, 2007; Scott-Kennel and Salmi, 2008). For example, Fruin (2007) argues that current international business theories only reflect Western firms' activities in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Both Buckley and Lessard (2005) and Scott-Kennel and Salmi (2008) suggest that international business research has lost its link with the real business world. In particular, they argue that the rise of emerging economies such as China may challenge existing theories that were mainly developed with reference to American or European firms (Buckley and Lessard, 2005; Faria and Wensley, 2002; Scott-Kennel and Salmi, 2008). Thus, Meyer (2006) identifies a strong need for developing theories relevant for emerging economies. In particular, he argues that Chinese and other Asian managers should not apply but build on Western theories (Meyer, 2006).

Assessment

The majority of international management education programmes aim to develop Chinese students’ analytical skills as well as problem-solving skills (Branine, 2005; Mak, 1999). This is very important not only because Chinese business graduates face a complex and dynamic international business environment but also because employers expect them to have these skills when leaving university (Zimmerman and Fey, 2001). Thus, different international management education programmes use case studies, team tasks and projects to help Chinese students and managers foster these skills. However, Brown et al. (1997) suggest that students' learning can be significantly influenced by the ways they are assessed. Norton (2009) further argues that if used properly, assessment can encourage students to adopt a deep learning approach, whereas improperly used it may make students use a surface learning approach. In a typical international management education programme, students' participation in and analysis of case studies are not assessed. Instead, their degree results depend on their performance in team tasks and projects. For example, Branine (2005) reports that Chinese participants in a United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) is accessed via an individual-based project where they need to use the knowledge learned in the classroom to solve a real business problem. Thus, it is expected that students will adopt a deep approach to learning, trying to relate new knowledge to existing knowledge and critically evaluate it (Fry, Ketteridge and Marshall, 2009). In addition, this kind of assessment aims to help students develop self-directed learning skills via searching and analysing information independently. However, Chinese students are used to rote learning. Thus, problem-focused assessment is alien to them. Therefore, Branine (2005) finds that Chinese students use projects to repeat key theories/concepts rather than solve a real problem. In addition, Chinese students are not comfortable with group tasks and find it a waste of time. When Chinese students are asked to do a group task with their allocated team members, they may walk away or chat on the phone (Branine, 2005; Ho, 2010; Wills, 2010). Thus, whether current international management education programmes can really help Chinese students develop analytical and problem-solving skills is debatable.

Faculty

After the Cultural Revolution, there was a great shortage of qualified teaching staff in business and management studies. Therefore, the Chinese government sponsored many local faculties to study abroad (Mok, 2003). Currently, management programmes in China are mainly delivered by Chinese faculty members who may or may not have a foreign degree. However, in terms of international management education programmes, the majority of them are taught by foreign faculty members with the assistance of interpreters and local faculties (Fischer, 1999; Ho, 2010; Mak, 1999; Southworth, 1999;Van Auken,Wells and Borgia, 2009;Wills, 2010). Typically, foreign faculty members are full-time staff based in a foreign university and travel to China just for a short period of time (Mak, 1999;Wills, 2010). Thus, many international management education programmes are delivered at weekends and/or during the summer vacation.

Interestingly, Chinese students' perceptions of these foreign faculties are quite mixed. Ho (2010) finds that Chinese students believe that foreign faculties are better qualified than local ones. This is perhaps because local faculty members' salaries are not competitive in the market, and thus Chinese universities are struggling to keep qualified teachers (Zhang, 2008). Furthermore, Siu and Chan (1991) indicate that local faculties are usually left behind the ever-changing international business environment with limited time for self-development or conducting research. Thus, Chinese students appreciate the cutting-edge knowledge diffused by foreign faculties (Wills, 2010). Siu and Chan (1991) also suggest that, due to their limited exposure to the international business environment, local faculties lack confidence in teaching international business/ international management. But this is not the case of foreign faculties who have working and/ or research experience in international business, and thus they can deliver programmes with confidence (Ho, 2010;Wills, 2010).

However, Ho (2010) reports that Chinese students prefer local faculties over foreign ones. This is partly because of the learning-style issues discussed above and partly because of Chinese students' limited English proficiency, which may prevent them from communicating with foreign faculties in an effective way (Choo, 2007; Ho, 2010). Indeed, numerous studies have found that language ability is one of the main obstacles for Chinese students to effectively learn in a multicultural environment (Wang, Harding and Mai, 2011). In addition, many Chinese students believe foreign faculties set the bar lower than local ones, which can be very discouraging as they are used to high expectations (Ho, 2010). Some Chinese students even think that the quality of teaching by foreign faculties is inferior to equivalent programmes available in a foreign university (Van Auken, Wells and Borgia, 2009; Wills, 2010). But the strongest complaint is the short availability of foreign faculties. Since foreign faculty staff fly in and out of the country for a very short period of time, Chinese students have to turn to local faculties to clarify some issues raised by foreign faculties. In short, Chinese students are impressed by the knowledge of foreign faculties but think they set the bar too low and provide insufficient support (Choo, 2007; Ho, 2010; Van Auken, Wells and Borgia, 2009; Wills, 2010).

Recommendations

With China's increasing demand for qualified management personnel, various international management education programmes have been established to nurture managerial talents. However, China's unique institutional and cultural environment, together with Chinese students' learning style, poses great challenges to current international management education programmes in the country. Thus, the key aim of this section is to discuss possible ways to tackle the issues identified above.

In terms of pedagogical approach, in order to encourage Chinese students' participation in the classroom, explaining what is expected in participation-based learning may be helpful. For example, Western professors may inform Chinese students that case study is to help them understand how to use the theories properly, and thus active participation is crucial. In addition, relevant materials can be translated or distributed in advance so that Chinese students, even with poor English skills, can still have enough time to process the materials and prepare their answers. Furthermore, setting highly structured tasks and allocating Chinese students different roles may also encourage participation, as each Chinese student can be quite clear about his/her responsibilities and thus more likely to actively contribute.

Current international business theories were developed mainly with reference to Western firms in a stable environment, and thus their relevance to emerging economies such as China has been questioned (Buckley and Lessard, 2005; Faria and Wensley, 2002; Fruin, 2007; Scott-Kennel and Salmi, 2008). Therefore, when designing the curriculum for international management education programmes in China, adapting to the Chinese context may be necessary. For example, Western instructors may point out the social/cultural/institutional contexts of different theories and encourage Chinese students to think whether these theories can be applied in the Chinese context. In addition, it may be helpful to explain the institutional and cultural environment firms face in different case studies so that Chinese students can understand the rationale behind different strategies/decisions. Alternatively, Western professors can collaborate with local faculties and firms to develop case studies of Chinese firms. In the long term, establishing a research community focusing on emerging markets may produce knowledge directly relevant to China and other developing countries (Meyer, 2006).

If students' learning is guided by the ways they are assessed (Brown et al., 1997), then assessment needs to be carefully designed to achieve the key aims of different international programmes. For example, the projects which different international management education programmes use often fail to achieve their aim — helping Chinese students to develop problem-solving skills (Branine, 2005). This is partly because Chinese students are purely assessed by the quality of their project reports (e.g. structure, analysis and conclusion). Thus, if the report is quite strong, then student's problem-solving skills and self-direct learning skills must be high. In contrast, if the report is weak, the student's skills must be weak. Such an approach is problematic, in particular if the project is done by a group of students rather than individuals. This is because if students work in a group, their contributions to the project may vary. Thus, to use project quality to infer each student's skills is very difficult. However, if we ask each student to write a report reflecting his/her own experience during the whole process, it may help Western instructors to judge their problem-solving skills and self-direct learning skills. This is because, as Savin-Baden and Major (2004) suggest, in a problem-based learning context assessment should focus on both the process and the final product to measure students' skills and abilities. Therefore, through the student's self-reflection, the student's learning process becomes clear. However, Western professors need to be very specific about what they expect from self-reporting. Otherwise, the reflective report may become a diary, recording what the students do without any indication about what they have learned. Furthermore, more detailed and specific feedback to Chinese students is needed to help them move forward (Savin-Baden and Major, 2004). This is quite important because students may get frustrated if they do not achieve the results they expect. By sending feedback to students, the tutors can help them understand what has gone wrong so that they can improve in the future.

In terms of faculty, the short availability of foreign faculties leads to the biggest frustration among Chinese students (Choo, 2007; Ho, 2010;Van Auken, Wells and Borgia, 2009; Wills, 2010). Thus, if possible, international programmes should have full-time foreign faculties based in China to answer students' queries and support their study (Wills, 2010). Alternatively, international programmes could provide Chinese students with the experience of studying or working abroad. Through these first-hand experiences, Chinese students can not only understand the institutional and cultural differences between China and the West but also become familiar with their roles in a participation-based learning environment.

International management education programmes in China have played an increasingly important role of diffusing advanced management knowledge and producing suitable managerial talents. Their contributions are not limited to the Chinese economy but to the world economy as a whole.

Bibliography

Aguinis, H. and H. Roth. 2005. Teaching in China: Culture-based Challenges. In Business and Management Education in China: Transition, Pedagogy and Training, ed. I. Alon and J. McIntyre, 141–164. London: World Scientific Publishing.

Bai, X. and P. Enderwick. 2005. Economic Transition and Management Skills: The Case of China. In Business and Management Education in China: Transition, Pedagogy and Training, ed. I. Alon and J. McIntyre, 21–46. London: World Scientific Publishing.

Beamish, P.W., G. Wong and J. Shoveller. 2005. Meeting China's Need for Case-based Teaching Materials: The Ivey Business School Experience. In Business and Management Education in China: Transition, Pedagogy and Training, ed. I. Alon and J. McIntyre, 190–254. London: World Scientific Publishing.

Borgonjon, J. and W. R. Vanhonacker. 1994. Management Training and Education in the People's Republic of China. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 5: 327–356.

Branine, M. 2005. Cross-cultural Training of Managers: An Evaluation of a Management Development Programme for Chinese Managers. Journal of Management Development, 24: 459–472.

Brown, G., J. Bull and M. Pendlebury. 1997. Accessing Student Learning in Higher Education. London: Routledge.

Buckley, P., J. Clegg, A.R. Cross, X. Liu, H. Voss and P. Zheng. 2007. The Determinants of Chinese Outward Foreign Direct Investment. Journal of International Business Studies, 38: 499–518.

Buckley, P., J. Clegg and H. Tan. 2003. The Art of Knowledge Transfer: Secondary and Reverse Transfer in China's Telecommunications Manufacturing Industry. Management International Review, 43: 67–93.

Buckley, P. and D.R. Lessard. 2005. Regaining the Edge for International Business Research. Journal of International Business Studies, 36: 595–599.

Choo, K. L. 2007. The Implications of Introducing Critical Management Education to Chinese Students Studying in UK Business Schools: Some Empirical Evidence. Journal of Further & Higher Education, 31: 145–158.

De Vita, G. 2001. Learning Styles, Culture and Inclusive Instruction in the Multicultural Classroom: A Business and Management Perspective. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 38: 165–174.

Faria, A. and R. Wensley. 2002. In Search of ‘Interfirm Management’ in Supply Chains: Recognizing Contradictions of Language and Power by Listening. Journal of Business Research, 55: 603–610.

Fischer, W.A. 1999. To Change China Redux: ATale ofTwo Cities. Education + Training, 41: 277–285.

Frankel, R., S. Swanson and M. Sagan. 2006. The Role of Individualism/Collectivism in Critical Classroom Encounters. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 17: 33–59.

Fruin, W. M. 2007. Bringing the World (Back) into International Business. Journal of International Business Studies, 38: 353–356.

Fry, H., S. Ketteridge and S. Marshall. 2009. Understanding Student Learning, In A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, ed. H. Fry, S. Ketteridge and S. Marshall, 8–26. Abingdon: Routledge.

Ho, D.Y. F. 1996. Filial Piety and its Psychological Consequences. In The Handbook of Chinese Psychology, ed. M. H. Bond, 155–165. New York: Oxford University Press.

Ho, R. 2010. Assessment of Chinese Students' Experience With Foreign Faculty: A Case Study from a Chinese University. Journal ofTeaching in International Business, 21: 156–177.

Hofstede, G. 1980. Culture's Consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Hofstede, G. 2001. Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviours, Institutions, and Organizations across Nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Huang, F. 2003a. International Higher Education: A Perspective from China. Higher Education Research and Development, 22: 193–203.

Huang, F. 2003b. Policy and Practice of the Internationalization of Higher Education in China. Journal of Studies in International Education, 7: 225–240.

Huang, F. 2005. Qualitative Enhancement and Quantitative Growth: Changes and Trends of China's Higher Education. Higher Education Policy, 18: 117–130.

Kogut, B. and U. Zander. 1993. Knowledge of the Firm and the Evolutionary Theory of the Multinational Corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24: 625–646.

Li, M., Y. Wong and Q. Wang. 2005. Management Education in the Greater China Economy: Challenges and Tasks. In Business and Management Education in China: Transition, Pedagogy and Training, ed. I. Alon and J. McIntyre, 3–20. London: World Scientific Publishing.

Littrell, R. F. 2005. Teaching Students from Confucian Cultures. In Business and Management Education in China: Transition, Pedagogy and Training, ed. I. Alon and J. McIntyre, 115–140. London: World Scientific Publishing.

Mak, W. 1999. Developing Enterprise Managers in China. Education + Training, 41: 319–324.

Martin, X. and R. Salomon. 2003. Tacitness, Learning, and International Expansion: A Study of Foreign Direct Investment in a Knowledge-intensive Industry. Organization Science, 14: 297–311.

Meyer, K. 2006. Asian Management Research Needs More Self-Confidence. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 23: 119–137.

Mok, K. 2003. Globalisation and Higher Education Restructuring in Hong Kong, Taiwan and Mainland China. Higher Education Research and Development, 22: 117–129.

Morgan, S.L. 2006. Transfer of Taylorist Ideas to China, 1910–1930s. Journal of Management History, 12: 408–424.

Newell, S. 1999. The Transfer of Management Knowledge to China: Building Learning Communities rather than Translating Western Textbooks?. Education + Training, 41: 286–293.

Norton, L. 2009. Accessing Student Learning. In Business and Management Education in China: Transition, Pedagogy and Training, ed. I. Alon and J. McIntyre, 132–149. London: World Scientific Publishing.

OECD. 2008. China's Outward Foreign Direct Investment. Available at www.oecd.org/dataoecd/28/10/40283257.pdf, accessed 20 January 2012.

Pan, B., J. Fleta and S. Pan. 2010. The Internationalization of Business Studies: A Comparative Framework between the European Higher Education System and the Chinese One. Available at www.pagina-aede.org/zaragoza/05-25.pdf, accessed 3 March 2012.

Pfeffer, J. and T.C. Fong. 2004. The Business School ‘Business’: Some Lessons from the US Experience. Journal of Management Studies, 41: 1501–1520.

Qing, J. and H. Xiao. 1998. MBA in China, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press.

Savin-Baden, M. and C. Major. 2004. Foundations of Problem-based Learning, Maidenhead: Open University Press.

Scott-Kennel, J. and A. Salmi. 2008. The Rise of the Big Emerging Markets of Brazil, Russia, India and China: Implications for International Business Teaching in the Next Decade. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 19: 142–166.

Shirley, M. and C. Xu. 1997. Empirical Effects of Performance Contracts: Evidence from China. World Bank Development Research Group, Working Paper. wwww.worldbank.org.research.

Shugan, S. M. 2006. Save Research: Abandon the Case Method of Teaching. Marketing Science, 25: 109–115.

Siu, W. and A. Chan. 1991. International Business Education in China: Present Needs and Future Challenges. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 2: 83–95.

Southworth, D. B. 1999. Building a Business School in China: The Case of the China Europe International Business School (CEIBS). Education + Training, 41: 325–330.

Triandis, H. C. 1995. Individualism and Collectivism. San Francisco, CA: Westview Press.

Van Auken, S., L.G. Wells and D. Borgia. 2009. A Comparison of Western Business Instruction in China with U.S. Instruction: A Case Study of Perceived Program Emphases and Satisfaction Levels. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 20: 208–229

Wang, J. and G. Wang. 2006. Participation in Management Training in a Transitioning Context: A Case of China. Human Resources Development Quarterly, 17: 443–473.

Wang, S. 2003. Internationalisation of Retailing in China. In The Internationalisation of Retailing in Asia, ed. J. Dawson, M. Mukoyama, S. Choi and R. Larke, 114–135. London: Routledge Curzon.

Wang, X., W. He and K. Yu. 2005. East Meets West: The Dilemma of Management Pedagogy in China. In Business and Management Education in China: Transition, Pedagogy and Training, ed. I. Alon and J. McIntyre, 165–180. London: World Scientific Publishing.

Wang, Y., R. Harding and L. Mai. 2011. Impact of Cultural Exposure on Young Chinese Students'Adaptation in a UK Business School. Studies in Higher Education, 1–19.

Willis, M. 2010. Reaching Out to the West: An Assessment of Chinese Students' Views Regarding Foreign-delivered University Programs in China. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 21: 53–68.

Xu, B. 1990. Marketing to China: One Billion New Customers. Chicago, IL: NTC Business Books.

Zhang, J. 2008. 35% of the Chinese Executives are Women, available at www.china.org.cn/business/news/2008-10/06/content_16571898.htm, accessed 22 March 2012.

Zimmerman, A. and R. Fey. 2001. Undergraduate Business Education in the People's Republic of China. Journal of Teaching in International Business, 12: 15–28.