152
modernization of China as a whole. In short, the bourgeoisie believed that China's revival could be achieved by nonpolitical means, that is, by practical actions which had no need of an accompanying ideology.
Harmony and conflict
How did the cotton spinners regard politics internal to their enterprises? Did they regard the company as a big family where management and labour have essentially similar interests? Or did they believe organizational dissent and conflict to be healthy and normal? Or were they convinced that disruptive conflict of interests are unavoidable in an organization? Their responses are presented in Table 5. The most significant feature in the distribution of choices is that none of them regard disruptive conflicts to be inherent in an industrial organization. Although 58 percent of them agreed that differences in opinion and conflict were good for the company, they made a clear distinction between dissent expressed in words and deeds. Their attitude was summed up by A19: 'Conflicts in opinion, yes; but conflicts in action, no.' Therefore, in effect, their position was not very different from those who held that the company was like a family and there should be no conflicts. Only that they did not view organizational harmony in terms of homogeneity and complete conformity. They allowed for divergencies in opinions. Some of them even insisted on disagreements because they were wary of the danger of compliance among employees. The 'yes man' was a target of criticism. A19 said:
Table 5: Hong Kong Cotton Spinners' Attitude Toward Organizational Conflict
Choice Number Percentage Similar interest, no conflict 14 42 Dissent healthy and normal 19 58 Conflict harmful but unavoidable 0 0 No answer 2 TOTAL 35 100Source: Interviews, 1978.
152
modernization of China as a whole. In short, the bourgeoisie believed that China's revival could be achieved by nonpolitical means, that is, by practical actions which had no need of an accompanying ideology.'
Harmony and conflict
How did the cotton spinners regard politics internal to their enterprises? Did they regard the company as a big family where management and labour have essentially similar interests? Or did they believe organizational dissent and conflict to be healthy and normal? Or were they convinced that disruptive conflict of interests are unavoidable in an organization? Their responses are presented in Table 5. The most significant feature in the distribution of choices is that none of them regard disruptive conflicts to be inherent in an industrial organization. Although 58 percent of them agreed that differences in opinion and conflict were good for the company, they made a clear distinction between dissent expressed in words and deeds. Their attitude was summed up by A19: 'Conflicts in opinion, yes; but conflicts in action, no.' Therefore, in effect, their position was not very different from those who held that the company was like a family and there should be no conflicts. Only that they did not view organizational harmony in terms of homogeneity and complete conformity. They allowed for divergencies in opinions. Some of them even insisted on disagreements because they were wary of the danger of compliance among employees. The 'yes man' was a target of criticism. A19 said:
Table 5: Hong Kong Cotton Spinners' Attitude Toward Organizational Conflict
Choice
Number
Percentage
Similar interest, no conflict
14
42
Dissent healthy and normal
19
58
Conflict harmful but unavoidable
0
0
No answer
2
TOTAL
35
100
Source: Interviews, 1978.
!
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.