Study on the pattern and the challenges of devolvement to line managers in
the China’s state-owned enterprise
A case study of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China
Volume 1
Student: Jiabao (Gillian) Li
Student number: s2438488 (Groningen) b2037464 (Newcastle)
Master subject: Master of Science in International Business & Management (Groningen) Master of Arts in International Business Management (Newcastle) Faculty: Faculty of Economics and Business (University of Groningen)
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences (University of Newcastle) Supervisors: Dr. Rudi Vries (University of Groningen)
Dr. Tracy Scurry (University of Newcastle) Date of Submission: December 9th 2013
Table of Contents
Title Page………....i Table of Contents………...ii List of Tables Table 1………...iv Table 2………...iv Table 3………v Table 4 ………...…….………...v Acknowledgement……….vi Abstract……….vii Abbreviations………...viii Chapter 1. Introduction………...1Chapter 2. Literature Review 2.1 HRM………...5
2.2 Positives and Negative Motives for Devolution………...7
2.3 The Changing Business Environment and HR system in China………..8
2.4 Devolvement in China………12
Chapter 3. Methodology 3.1 Case Background………....14
3.2 Data Collection………...15
Chapter 4. Results 4.1 Demographic Profile of Participants……….……..…18
4.2 Pattern of Devolvement………....…...18
4.3 Challenges of Devolvement………...18
Chapter 5. Discussion 5.1 Pattern of Devolvement 5.11 Job Design Aspect……….………....……20
5.12 Selection and Recruitment Aspect…………...…………....………....21
5.13 Performance Assessment Aspect………..……22
5.14 Training and Career Development Aspect………....……23
5.15 Pays and Benefits Aspect………..…24
5.16 Labour Relations Aspect………...26
5.22 Pattern of Devolvement in the SOE………..………...27
5.23 Perceived Trend for Devolvement………..………...28
Chapter 6. Conclusion………..……….30
Chapter 7. Implications……….….………...…33
Chapter 8. Limitations……….……..………35
Appendix Appendix A Invitation Letter in English………...………36
Appendix B Invitation Letter in Chinese………..………38
Appendix C Consent Form in English………..………40
Appendix D Consent Form in Chinese………..………...41
Appendix E Transcript of Participant 1 in Chinese………..…………....42
Appendix F Transcript of Participant 1 in English………..………...46
Appendix G Transcript of Participant 2 in Chinese………..………....49
Appendix H Transcript of Participant 2 in English………..………...54
Appendix I Transcript of Participant 3 in Chinese……….…………...58
Appendix J Transcript of Participant 3 in English………..…………...65
Appendix K Transcript of Participant 4 in Chinese………..………68
Appendix L Transcript of Participant 4 in English………..……….74
References………..…………..….78
List of Tables
Table 1: Personnel System of the ICBCTable 2: Demographic Information
Gender Position Tenure in Current Position Tenure in ICBC P1 Female Front-line employee 8 Years 13 Years P2 Male Front-line employee 1 Month 3 Years P3 Female Deputy Supervisor 15 Months 8 Years
Table 3: Devolvement of HR functions to Front-line Managers Job design Selection &
Recruitment
Internal Promotion Performance Assessment
P1 Yes No Unknown Yes
P2 Yes No Unknown Yes
P3 No No Unknown Yes
P4 Yes No No Yes
Training & Career Development
Pay and Benefits Labour Relations
P1 Unknown No No
P2 Yes No No
P3 Yes No No
P4 Yes No No
Table 4: Devolvement of HR functions to Middle-line Managers Job design Selection &
Recruitment
Internal Promotion
Performance Assessment
P1 Unknown No Unknown Unknown
P2 Yes No Unknown Yes
P3 Probably No Yes Yes
P4 Yes No Yes Yes
Training & Career Development
Pay and Benefits Labour Relations
P1 No No No
P2 Yes Yes No
P3 Yes Yes Probably
Acknowledgements
I would like to express the deepest appreciation to my supervisors Dr. Tracy Scurry and Dr.
Abstract
Purpose – the recent study conducted by Zhu, Cooper, Cieri, Thomson and Zhao (2008) regarding devolvement of human resource (HR) responsibilities to line managers in the context of China inspires this thesis. According to Zhu et al. (2008), while research findings indicate that middle-line managers are involving in HR practices, in particular employee training and performance assessment, devolvement seems a poorly-practiced pattern among front-line managers. Therefore, this research seeks to explore the pattern of devolvement and the challenges to devolving HR responsibilities to the line in the context of China from the perceptions of front-line supervisors and non-managerial employees in the state-owned enterprise (SOE).
Research design – a case study of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) was conducted in order to gain rich and meaningful data. Case study data was collected from a sub-branch of ICBC located in Guangzhou (the third largest city in China) via semi-structured interviews to front-line managers and non-managerial employees.
Findings – there is evidence of devolvement of HR responsibilities to the line. However, front-line managers are less likely than the middle-line to engage in performing HR practices. Although the state-owned attribute has been viewed as the greatest challenge of the devolution, the selected participants have perceived an increasing trend for devolvement.
Value – this study offers the perceptions of front-line employees, in addition to identifying the pattern and the challenges of devolvement in a state-owned enterprise.
Key words – strategic HRM, line managers, devolvement, China, state-owned enterprise (SOE), ICBC
Abbreviations
The following table describes the abbreviations used throughout the thesis: Abbreviations Meaning
SHRM Strategic Human Resource Management HRM Human Resource Management
HR Human Resource
WTO World Trade Organization SOE(s) State-owned Enterprise(s) MES Modern Enterprise System FDI(s) Foreign Direct Investment(s) SEZ(s) Special Economic Zone(s)
CER Comprehensive Economic Reform CCP Chinese Communist Party
ICBC Industrial and Commercial Bank of China
Chapter 1. Introduction
Many of the Strategic Human Resource Management (SHRM) studies have dedicated to unlock the black box regarding the relationship between Human Resource Management (HRM) and organizational performance, as firm performance is an organizational goal of exceeding importance (Delery and Doty, 1996). However, research has so far proved inconclusive. Bowen and Ostroff (2004) have suggested that it is also important to consider the context within which the HRM practices are conducted and communicated rather than paying attention only to the measurement of a set of HRM policies. Also, research attention has deviated from HRM policies and practices at corporate level to ‘how managers de facto implement HRM strategies and policies’ in order to explain the interrelation between HRM and organizational performance (Bjorkman, Ehrnrooth, Smale and John, 2011, p.1654). This emerging stream of research in effect has emphasized the necessity to involve line managers in HRM. Although it is generally considered that HRM is synonymous with the human resource (HR) department (Purcell and Kinnie, 2007), line managers in practice are usually and primarily responsible for the implementation of HR policies (Cunningham and Hyman, 1999). The involvement of line managers in HR responsibilities has been well documented in extant literature (Guest, 1987; Storey, 1992; Legge, 1995; Hutchinson and Wood, 1995; Hall and Torrington, 1998). Recent research has shown that the line seems to play a more important role in HRM since increasingly more HR functions have been devolved to them (Brewster and Larsen, 2000; Renwick, 2003). While whether devolution is a well-practiced pattern in the western world remains a heated debate (Brewster and Larsen, 2000; Larsen and Brewster, 2003), scholars so far have neglected the involvement of line managers in HR activities in the context of emerging markets, in particular China (Frear, Cao and Zhao, 2012). Among the literature regarding the Chinese line managers’ involvement in HR activities, based on a quantitative research of 618 managers from state-owned enterprises (SOEs), domestic and foreign-invested companies located in Jiangsu Province, research findings have indicated that middle-line managers are engaging in performing a limited number of HR practices, notably employee training and performance assessment, while devolvement seems a poorly-practiced pattern among front-line managers (Zhu, Cooper, Cieri, Thomson and Zhao, 2008). Overall, ‘the empirical evidence has indicated a lack of devolvement’ (Zhu et al., 2008, p.850).
respective national [institutional] contexts’ (Matten and Geppert, 2004, p.179). China has gradually converted from a centrally planned economy (Bajona and Chu, 2009) to a socialist market economy since 1978 (Hou, 2011) and has become more integrated into the global marketplace after the accession into the World Trade Organization (WTO) (Hou, 2011). Thanks to the process of market reform and global integration, China’s economy has experienced dramatic growth and is moving towards more decentralized and deregulated (Zhu et al., 2008). Institutional theory has argued that such radical social transformation will be reflected on the organization inevitably (DiMaggio and Powell 1983; Powell and DiMaggio, 1991; Scott, 2001, 2008; Frear et al., 2012; Zhu et al., 2012). Budhwar and Sparrow (1997) also have suggested that changes in the business environment would have important implications to large-scale restructuring in organizations. To exemplify, firms have a tendency to adopt HRM practices that are deemed natural and appropriate to the institutional environment in which they are located in order to achieve the legitimacy needed for survival (DiMaggio and Powell 1983; Powell and DiMaggio, 1991; Scott, 2001, 2008; Frear et al., 2012; Zhu et al., 2012). Therefore, it can be argued that, given the increasing dynamism of the Chinese business environment triggered by economic reform and global integration, there are substantial changes of HRM in organizations in adaptation to the institutional environment within which they are located, notably the transformation to a HRM system with market orientation under a socialist market economy (Zhu and Dowling, 1994, 2000; Chow, Huang and Liu, 2008). Also, ‘demands on the HR system are likely to increase in complexity’ as a result of the growing dynamism of the business environment (Zhao, 2001, 2005 cited in Zhu et al., 2008, p.843). Overall, it is suggested that within the context of China ‘HRM needs to be conducted at a strategic rather than operational level and devolvement of HR practices could be applied more widely as part of the strategic HRM practices’ (Zhu et al., 2008, p.843).
wrong to assume that the paternalistic people management regime that underlines hierarchical order does not play any roles in contemporary China’s society. Accordingly, the delegation and devolution of HR responsibilities to the line, in particular the front-line, might not be widely present in Chinese organizations. In summary, ‘the nature of Chinese HRM and the way Chinese firms implement their purported western HRM practices are significantly shaped, if not determined, by legacies of Chinese history and by China’s radical institutional transformation over the past three decades’ (Zhu, et al., 2012, p.3965).
It is believed that research in the context of China holds considerable meanings. To begin with, China has experienced sustained economic growth in recent decades, and now overtaking Japan becomes the second largest economy in the world (BBC, 2011). It is suggested that a new insight into management field in China would have important implications to not only the emerging markets, but also the developed countries and the least-developed economies (Xie, Zhu and Warner, 2013). Moreover, the openness of Chinese business environment has leveled up as a result of economic reform and global integration, and, thus, research on devolvement holds important implications to foreign firms who are operating or planning to have operations in China (Zhu et al., 2008).
Chapter 2. Literature Review
2.1 HRMModern organizations are under intense pressures from: growing competition in deregulated markets; government policies and legislation; and latest technology (McConville, 2006). Thus, it is suggested that constant adaptations and changes have to be made by the organization in order to cope with the changing environment (McConville, 2006). HRM has been increasingly viewed as the cornerstone for organizations to adapt and respond to environmental upheavals by offering a rich array of practices (McConville, 2006). Instead of reactive, prescriptive and administrative, HRM has become strategic, and human resources are assumed to be assets for investment, as suggested by Budhwar (2000a) and Buyens and De Vos (2001). Wright and McMahan (1992, p.298) has defined SHRM as the ‘the pattern of human resource deployments and activities that are planned to enable an organization to achieve its goals’. Basically, there are two dimensions of SHRM (Zhu et al., 2008). Horizontally, HRM practices are allowed to be integrated and supportive with each other. Vertically, upward integration refers to the formulation and implementation of organizational strategies, while downward integration is the devolution and delegation of HR roles to line managers (Currie and Procter, 2001).
that HRM is implemented, and their perceptions are likely to affect organizational performance indirectly through their affective commitment (Gilbert, et al., 2011). Therefore, it is suggested that the involvement of line managers in the implementation of HR practices is of exceeding importance to explain the relationship regarding HRM and firm performance.
2.2 Positives and Negative Motives for Devolution
Extant literature has argued that the cooperation between HR professionals and line managers is of exceeding importance to the effective implementation of sound HRM policies (Guest, 1987; Storey, 1992; Currie and Procter, 2001; Kulik, 2004). One of the most frequently cited rationales for devolving HR responsibilities to the line is that HR specialists are usually out of touch with commercial realities, and therefore the decisions that they make may not be in the best interest of the organization (Whittaker and Marchington, 2003; Zhu et al., 2008). Moreover, HR specialists are considered as unresponsive and slow to act compared with the line (Whittaker and Marchington, 2003). Hence, by pushing HR responsibilities down to line managers who have knowledge of the local environment and employees (Zhu et al., 2008), decisions should be made faster and more tailored to individual circumstances (Budhwar, 2000; Bond and Wise, 2003, Whittaker and Marchington, 2003). In addition, devolvement of HR activities to the line could reduce the organizational operating expenditure as a result of less HR specialists required and an alternative to outsourcing. In particular, cost reduction holds considerable meanings to organizations whose profits shrink dramatically due to the recent financial crisis (Zhu et al., 2008). Furthermore, Budhwar (2000) has stated that the devolution of HR responsibilities creates more responsible line managers and improves the efficiency of people management. Devolving HR functions to the line also holds meanings to personnel specialists. By devolving HR tasks at operational level to the line, personnel specialists can be released from routine techniques to more strategic HR activities (Cunningham and Hyman, 1999).
p.271) has also claimed ‘the line do not see themselves as experts in HRM’, and their abilities to apply HR knowledge to employees fairly and consistently remain doubted. Furthermore, the line may not have institutional motives to implement the HR tasks that have been devolved to them as a result of exclusion of HRM on the list of the line’s performance assessment criteria (McGovern, Gratton, Hope-Hailey, Stiles, and Truss, 1997; Gratton, Hope-Hailey, Stiles and Truss, 1999). Also, devolving HR functions to the line possibly brings negative influences to the credibility of the HR department, as a consequence of less direct contact and lower level of trust between HR personnel and employees (Gilbert et al., 2011).
2.3 The Changing Business Environment and HR System in China
view from Budhwar and Sparrow (1997), changes in the business environment would have important implications to large-scale restructuring in organizations. Therefore, it is suggested that, in order to achieve the legitimacy needed for survival firms have a tendency to adopt HRM practices that are deemed natural and appropriate to the institutional environment in which they are located (DiMaggio and Powell 1983; Powell and DiMaggio, 1991; Scott, 2001, 2008; Frear et al., 2012; Zhu et al., 2012).
With regard to the economic reform, the Comprehensive Economic Reform (CER) that has been started since 1978 is representative of a shift in economic and social paradigm and ideology. Accordingly, at the organizational level, the government started to privatize and restructure state-owned enterprises that are considered as the legacy of the old command economy system by authorizing a certain degree of managerial autonomy through a profit retention program soon after 1978 (Lin, et al., 1998). With respect to the global integration, Hou (2011) has argued that China’s reintegration into the world can be actually divided into three phases: special economic zones (SEZs), foreign direct investments (FDIs) and WTO membership. In the initial stage (SEZs), substantial benefits have been given for those that have a willingness to invest in China and the chief aim of this period is to learn modern managerial mechanisms and to gather hard currency in exchange for capital, technology and resources that are desperately in need (Hou, 2011). However, only limited and experimental efforts have been made at reconnecting with the global marketplace in this period. By the mid and late 1980s, the essential concepts of HRM were introduced into China despite the fact that HRM practices were not applied to the society on a large scale (Zhao and Du, 2012). Overall, the initial privatization and reconstruction of the SOEs and the small-scale application of HRM were compatible with economic and social reform at that time.
initiated to deepen China’s openness to the globe (Hou, 2011). By the mid and late 1990s, the HRM practices have begun to be widely adopted by the China’s society (Zhao and Du,). In particular, the labour law that became effective in 1995 not only symbolizes the demise of workers’ ‘iron rice-bowl’ and the socialist employment regime but also offers a ‘legal foundation for marker-oriented labour management’ (Frear et al., 2012, p.4011). In summary, the deregulation and decentralization of the SOE and the wider adoption of HRM practices also conformed to the economic and social reform at that time.
In exchange for a seat in WTO, China has committed to deepening its reform in state-owned enterprises given the fact that China’s SOEs remain large, inefficient and heavily subsidized (Bajona and Chu, 2009). In December 2001, China became the 143rd member of the WTO after negotiations up to 15 years (Bajona and Chu, 2010). China’s accession into the WTO is considered as the final stage of the global reintegration (Hou, 2011) over the previous three decades. Scholars have argued that this is an extraordinary movement towards global economic integration (Bajona and Chu, 2010; Hou, 2011). Due to ‘the dynamic changes in the external environment during the 21st century, HR management reform is further growing and developing in an international, market-oriented and professional dynamic’ (Zhao and Du, 2012, p.180).
It appears that both the institutional theory and the path dependence theory can explain the nature of contemporary Chinese HRM. In other words, both marketism and paternalism would exert influence on the current HRM system in China. Therefore, on one hand, there are reasons to believe that devolvement should appear in China; on the other hand, there are also rationales to assume that devolution may not be widely present due to the challenges from a socialist economy with the paternalistic characteristics.
2.4 Devolvement in China
Chapter 3. Methodology
3.1 Case BackgroundIt is believed that the examination of Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) is worthwhile. ICBC was officially established in 1984 as a limited company and became a formal member of International Savings Banks Institute in 1985 (ICBC, 2011). The first overseas subsidiary was opened in Singapore in 1992, while the first institution in Europe was not found until 1995 (ICBC, 2011). In 2004, a series of reform was initiated in the banking sector in the context of China, and specifically, the major state-owned commercial banks were authorized to become ‘shareholding entities with the state as the largest shareholder’ (Hou, 2011, p.423). As a consequence, under the approval from the state council, shareholding reform that intends to put modern equity system and corporate governance into practices was launched in the ICBC in 2005. As one of the China’s Big Four state-owned commercial banks (the other three are Bank of China, Agricultural Bank of China, China Construction Bank), ICBC not only takes a leading role in financial service sector in China, but also occupies an important position in the world. On December 11, 2006, government of China announced to ‘initiate full integration with the global financial system’ (Hou, 2011, p.423). In 2007, ICBC overtaking the US giant Citigroup became the world’s largest bank in terms of market capitalization (China daily, 2007). In 2011, ICBC made substantial efforts in order to build a commercial banking franchise system across different regions (ICBC, 2011). The global footprint of ICBC is evident by its global network comprising 239 overseas subsidiaries among 33 nations and the existence of 1553 correspondent banks up to 136 countries (ICBC, 2011). In 2013, the ranking of ICBC on Forbes Global 2000 list of world’s largest public companies (Forbes, 2013) and The Banker’s TOP 1000 world bank is number 1 (The banker, 2013).
devolvement, such as globalization (Heraty and Morley, 1995; Mayrhofer, Muller-Camen, Ledolter, Strunk, and Erten, 2004) and increased competition (Heraty and Morley, 1995). Therefore, within the research context – ICBC, it can be argued that, in responding to the changes (e.g. increased level of globalization and competition) in the business environment, traditional management mechanisms have been replaced by the SHRM practices and devolvement should be present as part of strategic HRM practices.
However, it is also important to point out that ICBC remains a state-owned commercial bank despite its economic achievement in the world. As discussed, the state-owned sector is generally regarded as more path dependent due to the higher levels of centralization and regulation in comparison with other types of organization remaining the most resilient and stubborn segment in China’s economic transition process (Lin et al., 1998; Hassard et al., 2006). Thus, according to the path dependence theory, devolvement may not be widely present in the ICBC due to challenges confronting SOE more than other firms with a more decentralized and deregulated managerial structure.
3.2 Data Collection
The purpose of this dissertation is twofold. To begin with, this thesis seeks to explore the pattern of devolvement in the state-owned enterprise within the context of China. Specifically, whether the pattern of devolvement in this research context is consistent with the claim made by Zhu et al. (2008) has been examined. Also, the investigation of the challenges to devolving HR responsibilities to the line has been made.
A case study method has been employed in order to collect rich and meaningful data and thus offers ‘a strong base for theory building’ (Yin, 1994). The primary reason ICBC has been chosen as the subject of this research is that a gatekeeper who can offer initial access to a sub-branch of ICBC located in Guangzhou is a friend of the researcher. Guangzhou is the third largest city in China (after Shanghai and Beijing) and the largest city in southern China. It is not only one of the most industrialized areas in China but also one of the five national central cities. In 2008, Guangzhou was awarded as a Beta World City by the global city index from the Globalization and World Cities Research Network (Foreign policy, 2008).
Guangzhou Branch Office, branch, and sub-branch. The top management level is the Guangzhou Branch Office that is equivalent to the head office of the ICBC in Guangzhou. Within the Guangzhou Branch Office, there are HR department and other departments (e.g. personal finance and credit). The chief of the Guangzhou Branch Office is also known as a senior manager. The middle management level is the branch, and there are approximately 40 branches in Guangzhou by the end of 2013. At this level, there are HR division and other divisions (e.g. personal finance and credit) that are under the supervision by the chief of the branch. The chief of the branch can be interpreted as a middle-line manager. The lowest management level is the sub-branch. Neither HR division nor other divisions exists at this level. Front-line supervisors are responsible for the day-to-day management of sub-branches. However, it is worth noting that the position of front-line supervisors at the sub-branch level is at the same level as supervisors from HR division and other divisions at the branch level. Each branch can decide how many sub-branches are needed according to individual differences while sub-branches are not allowed to decide how many non-managerial employees are appropriate to them.
and organization (refers to a particular branch or sub-branch). Invitation letter, consent form and all interview questions are initially conducted in English and then translated into Chinese to ensure the validity and credibility of candidates’ response. Afterwards, for the purpose of coding and data analysis, researcher has fully transcribed recordings into English. However, it is recognized that collecting the data in Chinese while presenting the findings in English may create research bias. Therefore, a pilot interview was conducted with the gatekeeper to eliminate translation-related bias by clarifying the interpretation of essential items (Warwick and Osherson, 1977), notably different levels of management. Moreover, researcher has consulted people who are bilingual in order to decide the best terms to be used during the translation process. In addition to the interviews, other relevant information from company websites and company magazines was also collected to validate the analysis and interpretation of the research findings.
Chapter 4. Results
4.1 Demographic Profile of ParticipantsThere are four participants voluntarily to take part in this research. Participant 1 is a female who has been working as a customer manager (non-managerial employee) for 8 years. She also has 5 years’ working experience in the targeted organization before the current position. Participant 2 is a male who has been working as a customer manager (non-managerial employee) for only 1 month. However, he has almost 3 years’ working experience in the personal finance division at the branch level before becoming a customer manager. Participant 3 is a female who has been working as a deputy supervisor (front-line manager) for approximately 15 months. However, her tenure in the ICBC is 8 years. Participant 4 is a male who has been working as a supervisor (front-line manager) for 10 years, and his tenure in the ICBC is 12 years already. Overall, both gender and position are equally distributed among the selected participants. The demographic characteristics of chosen interviewees are summarized in Table 2.
4.2 Pattern of Devolvement
Addressing the first research question, there is evidence of devolvement of HR responsibilities to the line. Front-line supervisors are notably engaging in performing job design, performance assessment, and training and career development. However, results of this research have illustrated that front-line managers are involving in these aspects in a detailed manner within the framework and under the instructions given by the top and the middle management. While external selection and recruitment appears an exclusive domain of the HR department at the highest management level, middle-line managers have been authorized to make a final decision regarding internal selection and promotion. Also, middle-line managers seem to heavily involve in the implementation of job design, performance assessment, training and career development, and the administration of pays and benefits. It is interesting to note that the concept of labour relations appears to remain new to the selected participants, as 3 of 4 respondents have expressed that they do not understand this term.
4.3 Challenges of Devolvement
the results of this study, although devolvement seems a relatively well-practiced pattern among middle-line managers in the selected organization, front-line supervisors whose position is at the bottom of the managerial hierarchy are less likely to involve in the implementation of HR practices.
Given by the respondents, one of the plausible explanations for this pattern of devolvement is the flat management model with state-owned characteristics. As discussed earlier, there are only three layers of management of the ICBC in Guangzhou, namely Guangzhou Branch Office (top management), branch (middle management), and sub-branch (front-line management). Notwithstanding the fact that the management style of the targeted organization may conform to the emphasis of the flat organizational structure with few or no levels of middle management (Rocco and John N, 1969), managerial power is concentrated between the top management and the middle management. This is also evident by the policy that each branch has been authorized to decide how many sub-branches are needed based on individual strategy while sub-branches are not allowed to decide how many non-managerial employees are appropriate to them.
Moreover, one of the respondents has claimed that there are only two layers of management in banks without the state-owned attribute, and it is assumed by the respondent that the pattern of devolvement in other banks may differentiate than state-owned commercial banks. Therefore, the presence of the middle management in the SOE may hinder the delegation and devolution of HR practices to front-line supervisors. In one word, the middle management has managerial autonomy to a considerable extent, and middle-line managers who serve as intermediaries between front-line supervisors and the top management within the organization are more likely to involve in HR practices than the front-line whose position is at the bottom of the managerial hierarchy.
Chapter 5. Discussion
5. 1 Pattern of Devolvement5.11 Job Design Aspect
When asked who is responsible for job design within the targeted organization, 3 of 4 participants have indicated that front-line supervisors are engaging in performing job design. Participant 2 and 4 have further explained that front-line supervisors are implementing job design in a detailed manner according to the framework and instructions from the HR department and the corresponding HR division at the branch level:
‘The supervisors in our sub-branch.’ (P1)
‘I think the chief at the branch level, HR division and other divisions at the branch level, and front-line supervisors they all involve in work design. However, front-line supervisors are responsible to refine the instructions given by the corresponding HR division.’ (P2)
‘The HR department, the chief at the branch level and the HR division they have already designed the job content for non-managerial employees. However, I am responsible for the actual implementation, so I am involving in this process as well. I operate in a more detailed manner within the framework given by the HR department and the corresponding branch’. (P4)
However, despite the fact that participant 3 is a deputy supervisor she has not committed any involvement in job design:
‘The HR department in the Guangzhou Branch Office gives instructions to the HR division, and the HR division makes adaptation accordingly. We do not have a HR division and we are not responsible for that’. (P3)
With respect to the devolution to middle-line managers, based on the evidence from participant 2 and participant 4 as shown above, middle-line managers are obviously involving in the job design practice. However, participant 1 and 3 are unable to confirm that:
‘I am afraid I do not really know that.’ (P1)
‘Probably, but I do not really know that.’ (P3)
According to the perspective from non-managerial employees, line managers’ knowledge of their subordinates is the primary reason for devolvement:
‘…Because they (front-line supervisors) are directly responsible for our day-to-day job so it is necessary for them to involve in the job design practice.’ (P1)
‘I think front-line supervisors they are familiar with their non-managerial employees while the chief at branch level knows front-line supervisors very well. So, the line knows their subordinates.’ (P2)
‘From the managerial perspective, this is compulsory; otherwise, it is hard to imagine how the line (middle-line and front-line managers) can work.’ (P4)
It is also interesting to note that one of the selected interviewees has described the linkage between the line and the HR department/division as a “point-area relationship”. He has explained that the line could be considered as a point within the organization responsible for the daily management of subordinates, whereas the HR department/division is standing behind the line coordinating every single point:
‘Actually, the linkage between the line and the HR department/division can be described as a point-area relationship. The line is responsible for subordinates’ daily management, while HR department/division is standing behind responsible for the whole picture.’ (P2)
5.12 Selection and Recruitment Aspect
There is little evidence of devolvement to the line with regard to the aspect of selection and recruitment, including front-line and middle-line managers. The HR department in the Guangzhou Branch Office is fully responsible for this HR practice:
‘…The HR department in the Guangzhou Branch Office is responsible for selection and recruitment. It is irrelevant to the sub-branch.’ (P1)
‘…Neither our sub-branch nor the branch is responsible for that. Selection and recruitment is only about the Guangzhou Branch office.’ (P2)
‘The head office. Neither the HR division nor the chief at the branch level is responsible for that…I am not responsible for that.’ (P3)
‘As far as I know, only the head office is involving in selection and recruitment.’ (P4)
Nevertheless, it is important to distinguish external selection and recruitment and internal selection and promotion. While both front-line and middle-line managers appear do not involve in external selection and recruitment, the middle line has been authorized to make a final decision regarding internal selection and promotion:
‘…Middle-line managers are responsible for internal promotion. To illustrate, the promotion from a bank teller or a customer manager to a deputy supervisor needs the involvement of middle-line managers.’ (P3)
‘However, it is worth noting that middle-line managers are responsible for internal promotion. They can make a final decision while I can only make an assessment as a reference.’ (P4)
‘…The head office needs to remain the standard of selection and recruitment consistent, so they would rather keep this power in hand.’ (P2)
Another explanation is that the object of external selection and recruitment is the bank teller whose position does not emphasize working experience but overall competence. Also, they will be formally trained if they have become members of the organization. Therefore, it is not necessarily to bother managerial staffs in this process. However, internal selection and promotion aims to select employees who already have working experience to a considerable extent, and usually, this process is regarding the promotion from non-managerial staffs to front-line supervisors. Therefore, middle-line managers who have valuable working experience have been authorized to involve in the internal selection and promotion procedure. In other words, whether middle line managers involve in the selection process depending on the nature of recruitment, according to the perceptions of both non-managerial employee and front-line supervisor:
‘The most important reason is that the target of recruitment is the bank teller. Our organization will formally train them if they have been hired. In other words, during the selection and recruitment process, the overall competence has been considered as the most important attribute. It does not matter even though the interviewees do not specialize in a particular area. So, it is not necessarily to involve people who have working experience in this process.’ (P2)
‘The target of recruitment is the bank teller and I do not see the point to bother the middle line in this. However, middle-line managers are responsible for internal promotion. To illustrate, the internal selection procedure is usually regarding the promotion from a bank teller or a customer manager to a deputy supervisor, thus, it needs the involvement of middle-line managers.’ (P3)
5.13 Performance Assessment Aspect
When asked who is responsible for performance assessment within the organization, all participants have demonstrated that front-line supervisors are involving in this HR practice. Similar to the job design aspect, the HR department is responsible for the formulation of performance assessment framework. Afterwards, branches will make adaptations within the framework based on individual differences. Front-line supervisors at the sub-branch level are operating in a detailed manner. Also, participant 3 who is a deputy supervisor has indicated that she is responsible for monthly and annual performance assessment of her subordinates, including the bank teller and the customer manager:
‘Actually, HR divisions they give instructions to supervisors, and then supervisors will do this in a
detailed manner.’ (P1)
‘To begin with, the HR department formulates the policy regarding performance assessment. Branches
‘I am responsible for the annual performance appraisal of my subordinates, including bank tellers and customer managers…I forgot to tell you that I also give them a performance assessment in monthly basis.’ (P3)
‘I am responsible for that.’ (P4)
With respect to the devolution to the middle line, 3 of 4 participants have indicated that the chief at the branch level is responsible for performance assessment of front-line supervisors:
‘…While the chief at the branch level is responsible for supervisors’ performance assessment.’ (P2) ‘I guess so. However, I did not receive any feedback from them so far.’ (P3)
‘They are responsible for part of my work design so they also have to give a performance assessment to me accordingly.’ (P4)
According to the non-managerial employee’s perspective, the force majeure in the actual implementation is an explanation to the current pattern of devolvement regarding performance assessment. Precisely, during the actual implementation, it is insufficient to completely rely on the quantitative standard designed by the HR department; otherwise, the organizational flexibility might be compromised. In sum, performance assessment comprises both quantitative aspects from the HR department and qualitative aspects from the line:
‘…It can be said that, the HR department makes a quantitative standard while the line is responsible
for qualitative aspects…There are many objective aspects involving in reality, therefore, the line needs to take these into consideration. Otherwise, the flexibility of the organization will be compromised.’ (P2)
Front-line supervisor has reaffirmed that the line’s knowledge of employees is the primary reason for devolvement:
‘I have more knowledge of my employees because I am responsible for monitoring their day-to-day performance.’ (P3)
It is also interesting to note that there might be a correlation between the job design aspect and the performance assessment aspect in terms of devolvement, according to participant 4 who is a front-line supervisor:
‘I am responsible for part of their (non-managerial employees) work design so I have to give them performance assessment accordingly...They (middle-line managers) are responsible for part of my work design so they also have to give a performance assessment to me accordingly.’ (P4)
5.14 Training and Career Development Aspect
development practice. Front-line supervisors have further explained that they are directly involving in this practice via the regular meeting on a daily basis. However, it is worthy to mention that front-line supervisors are once again operating within the framework and under the instructions given by the corresponding branch. Also, participant 3 has denoted that front-line supervisors are responsible for the daily training while the HR division and other divisions (e.g. personal finance and credit) are involving in professional areas:
‘Front-line supervisors will communicate that (training) with non-managerial employees under the instructions (from the branch).’ (P2)
‘We have a regular meeting every day, but I am only responsible for things that are quiet simple. The HR division and other divisions are responsible for areas that are professional’ (P3)
‘I am partly responsible for that…Yes. We have a regular meeting every day.’ (P4)
When asked whether the middle line is responsible for employees’ training and career development, 3 of 4 participants have demonstrated that middle-line managers are engaging in this process despite the fact that they may not directly involve in the implementation. Although middle-line managers may not have face-to-face involvement in employees’ training and career development, they in effect have influenced the direction and content of training to a considerable extent, simply through giving instructions to the HR division at the branch level:
‘The chiefs at the branch level may not directly involve in training but they will give instructions to the HR division. The HR division then gives instructions to other divisions and front-line supervisors…In one word, the chiefs decide what results are to be delivered and how, and passes the idea down the management level.’ (P2)
‘Probably. I think middle-line managers are also involving in this process. They give instructions to
the HR division when necessary. That’s why the HR division will design different types of trainings.’ (P3)
I think they should involve in it. They decide what types of business should be developed in a certain period. In order to develop a particular kind of business, the middle line will give instructions to the HR division, and then the HR division will organize other divisions to train non-managerial employees.’ (P4)
Another important issue that deserves to be mentioned is that non-managerial employees who have outstanding working performance may directly involve in the training and career development practice, as documented by participant 3 who is a customer manager (non-managerial staff) under the supervision by front-line supervisors:
‘They will pick up some employees who have outstanding working experience to train the new recruit, and I was one of them (trainer).’ (P3)
The administration of pays and benefits appears a poorly-practiced pattern among front-line supervisors, as there is little evidence of devolvement to the front line with regard to this aspect:
‘…The HR department and HR division.’ (P1) ‘Sub-branch is not responsible for that.’ (P2) ‘This is the domain of HR department.’ (P4)
With regard to the devolution to the middle line, while participant 2 has indicated that the HR department under the Guangzhou Branch Office is responsible for the policy formulation and branches only operate within the framework given by the HR department, participant 3 has shown that the framework of compensation is designed by the HR division at the branch level under the permission of the middle line. Although respondents have different views regarding which management level is primarily responsible for the policy formulation, it appears that middle line managers are engaging in the administration of pays and benefits:
‘The HR department under the Guangzhou Branch Office has formulated a framework, and then branches (the chief included) operate within this framework while some adaptations will be made in order to cope with individual differences.’ (P2)
‘The HR division designs the framework under the permission of the middle-line. However, I think the
head office has instructions for that and the HR division only operates within the instructions given by the head office... I did not involve in the design of the framework.’ (P3)
When asked why front-line supervisors are excluded in this domain, participants 1 has referred that the administration of pays and benefits is of essential interest to the organization:
‘I think, personally, this is of essential interest to the organization.’ (P1)
The reason given by participant 1 is also indirectly supported by the front-line manager, as participant 4 has indicated that the delegation and devolution of the administration of pays and benefits might be hierarchy position based. To combine these two views, it can be argued that the organization would prefer to centralize this power since the management of compensation is of essential interest to the organization, and therefore, the lower the position within the organization, the less likely will be delegated a role with regard to this HR practice: ‘Emm…maybe because of my position.’ (P4)
‘Well, I don’t really know that, maybe due to the absence of the HR division at the sub-branch level.’ (P2)
5.16 Labour Relations Aspect
With regard to the administration of labour relations, 3 of 4 participants have referred that they are unfamiliar with this term:
‘Sorry, I do not really understand labour relations.’ (P1) ‘What is that…I do not really know that.’ (P2)
‘What are labour relations?’ (P4)
According to the perspective from non-managerial employees, both front-line and middle-line managers are seemingly not responsible for the management of labour relations. Participant 2 has further explained that not only the line but also non-managerial staffs are too busy to manage this practice even though the organization devolves this practice to them:
‘I guess they are not responsible for that.’ (P1)
‘Actually I think the line, including me, are too busy to manage this job. Emm, we are already over-burdened. So, even though the organization would like to devolve this practice to the front-line, we are too busy to implement.’ (P2)
Evidence from front-line supervisors have shown that they are not responsible for labour relations, however, the middle line is probably involving in this practice:
‘I am not responsible for that. However, I know the president of the union is a chief at branch level.’ (P3)
‘Probably.’ (P4)
5.2 Challenges of Devolvement
5.21 Perceived Challenges of Devolvement
hierarchy position based, and thus, the lower the position within the organization, the less likely will be delegated a HR role:
‘I think it is about your position.’ (P1)
‘I think…the management style in our organization is also known as the flat organizational model with
state-owned characteristics. As far as I know, there are only three layers of management. This is why the middle management is responsible for many aspects of HRM. Alternatively, you can say that although there are not many layers of management, power is basically retained until the middle management.’ (P2)
‘I am a front-line supervisor while they are in the middle management level. That’s the biggest
difference.’ (P3)
Participant 4 has even described the branch as a subsidiary company of the Guangzhou Branch Office, which also demonstrates the considerable managerial autonomy of middle-line managers:
‘Actually, I think the branch can be alternatively called as a subsidiary company because it can decide how many sub-branches are needed. Therefore, it is natural for the middle line to involve in HR work. They are the chiefs at the branch level.’ (P4)
5.22 Pattern of Devolvement in the SOE
As the selected respondents have indicated that the flat management model with state-owned characteristics is the main reason that contributes to the current pattern of devolvement, which in turn has stimulated the researcher to explore whether this is a common phenomenon in the state-owned sector. Evidence from all participants has shown that state-owned enterprises, in particular the other Big Four commercial banks (Bank of China, Agricultural Bank of China, China Construction Bank), may share a common pattern of devolvement with the ICBC:
‘More or less the same. State-owned sector is usually more centralized.’ (P1)
‘I think they are more or less the same. State-owned banks are usually more centralized.’ (P2) ‘Probably the same.’ (P3)
‘As far as I know, flat management model is a typical management style of the SOE.’ (P4)
Participant 2 has further denoted that the SOE may prefer to retain the power of essential interest to the organization in hand due to its economic and social importance to the country, which constitutes another challenge to devolving HR functions to front-line supervisors: ‘They would rather to keep the power that is of essential interest to the organization in hand...I think one of the possible explanations is that the SOE is closely related to the root of our country, no matter from economic or social aspects.’ (P2)
According to participant 3, there are probably only 2 layers of management (top management and front-line management) in other banks without the state-owned attribute. In other words, the presence of the middle management in the SOE may hinder the delegation and devolution of HR practices to front-line supervisors:
‘However, I think the private bank may differentiate than the Big Four…’ (P2)
‘However, other joint-stock banks may be different. They may not have a branch level in their
management system. In other words, they only have two layers of management.’ (P3)
5.23 Perceived Trend for Devolvement
Notwithstanding the results of this study have indicated that the devolution of HR responsibilities to front-line managers is not as evident as the middle line within the targeted organization, all selected participants have perceived an increasing trend for devolving HR functions to the front-line management.
In light of the view from participant 1, there is no feedback mechanism for non-managerial staffs to make comments on policies designed by either the middle management or the top management before 2010. However, non-managerial employees are allowed to provide personal opinions to policy formulators regarding a particular policy via the feedback mechanism (usually a survey), and their perspectives will be taken into consideration and adaptations will also be made accordingly. In other words, it is perceived that the organization is attempting to facilitate the communication from bottom up. As a consequence, participant 1 has indicated that the devolution of HR responsibilities to the front-line management is an increasing trend:
‘Probably increase. As I told you, we did not have a feedback mechanism 3 years ago.’ (P1)
Participant 2 has claimed that the China’s accession into the WTO is an important catalyst to transform the contemporary management structure of the ICBC. To exemplify, the decentralization and deregulation of the financial sector required by the WTO is likely to give rise to intensive competition among the financial industry in China, which in turn becomes a driving force for the ICBC to adopt a management style that is more compatible with the increasing dynamism of the institutional environment in which it is enrooted:
The claim made by participant 2 is also evident by participant 4:
‘I think it will also increase, as decentralization is a foreseeable trend. Although I do not have any working experience in other banks, I know that decentralization is indeed happening there.’ (P4)
According to participant 3, the level of devolvement to the front-line management will increase providing the fact the cost of human capital needs to be taken into account. As discussed, front-line managers at the sub-branch level are not allowed to decide how many bank tellers and customer managers are appropriate, which in effect compromises the efficiency of the front-line management. She has further explained that the organization has an intend to empower front-line supervisors with regard to this aspect, although she cannot confirm when it will be realized:
Chapter 6. Conclusions
While the involvement of line managers in the implementation of HR practices has attracted a great deal of scholarly attention in the western world, it appears that this topic remains new and under-researched in emerging markets, in particular China (Frear et al., 2012). Recent research conducted by Zhu et al. (2008) has illustrated that while middle-line managers are engaging in a limited number of HR practices, there is little evidence of devolvement to the front-line manager. By drawing the institutional theory and the path dependence perspective, on one hand, there are reasons to believe that the devolution of HR functions to the line might be widely adopted by the organizations in China by considering the increasing dynamism of the Chinese business environment; on the other hand, there are also rationales to assume that devolution may not be widely present due to the challenges from a socialist economy with paternalistic characteristics. This dissertation seeks to explore the pattern of devolvement and the challenges to devolving HR responsibilities to the line within the context of China from the perceptions of front-line employees in a state-owned commercial bank. Results of this research have demonstrated that there is evidence of devolvement to both front-line and middle-line managers in the chosen organization. Nevertheless, although front-line managers are notably engaging in job design, performance assessment and training and career development, they are operating within the framework and under the instructions given by the HR department in the Guangzhou Branch Office and the corresponding HR division at the branch level. While selection and recruitment appears an exclusive domain of the HR department at the highest management level, middle-line managers are decision makers regarding internal selection and promotion. The middle-line is also involving in other HR aspects, including job design, training and career development, performance assessment, and the management of compensations. Moreover, it is interesting to illustrate that labour relations seems a relatively new concept to the respondents, as 3 of 4 selected participants have expressed that they are unfamiliar with this term.
There are also challenges to devolving HR responsibilities to the line, in particular the front-line management. The challenges of devolvement given by the chosen interviewees are basically surrounding the attribute of the targeted organization – state-owned enterprise. According to one of the interviewees, the SOE is closely relevant to the root of China, no matter from economic or social aspect. Therefore, given by the economic and social importance to the country, the SOE tends to centralize the power of essential interest to the organization. Also, although the targeted organization has adopted a model that may conform to the emphasis of a flat organizational structure with few or no levels of middle management (Rocco and John N), managerial power is mainly concentrated between the top management and the middle management. In other words, there is only one layer of middle management, but this level of management has managerial autonomy to a considerable extent. As a consequence, it is assumed by the respondents that the presence of the middle management in the SOE may hinder the delegation and devolution of HR practices to front-line supervisors; meanwhile, front-line managers are more likely to engage in performing HR practices in banks probably without the middle management level, such as private banks and joint-stock banks. Evidence from this study has also shown that state-owned enterprises, in particular the other Big Four commercial banks (Bank of China, Agricultural Bank of China, China Construction Bank), may share a common pattern of devolvement with the ICBC.
Chapter 7. Implications for Research & Practices
Chapter 8. Limitations
Appendices
A. Invitation letter in English2013 Oct
Dear Participant:
I am writing to request your help with an important project. I am a postgraduate student who is currently doing a Masters in International Business and Management at the University of Groningen and Newcastle. As part of the requirements of my degree, I am conducting a research project about the challenges to devolving HR responsibilities to the line in the context of China, with a particular emphasis on the perspective of the HR specialists and line managers in state-owned enterprises. This project is under the supervision of Dr. Tracy Scurry and Dr. Rudi de Vries.
This project seeks to explore the pattern of devolvement among front-line and middle-line managers and what are the challenges to devolving HR responsibilities to the line in targeted organization within the context of China. A semi-structured interview will be scheduled at a mutually agreed upon time via telephone or Skype, and should last about 20 to 30 minutes. If appropriate, the interview will be audio taped. The tapes will only be reviewed by researcher and her supervisors Dr. Tracy Scurry and Dr. Rudi de Vries.
Any written output will not be identifiable in order to ensure confidentiality of individual and organization (here refers to a particular branch). Your respondent key will be used for tracking purposes only. You and your organization are assured of complete confidentiality. Should you wish to know the findings of the research, the faculty will gladly send you a summary of the results.
Taking part in this research is your decision. You do not have to be in this study if you do not want to. You may also withdraw from the study at any time without giving reasons or decide not to answer any question if you are not comfortable answering.
Thank you in advance for your participation in this important project. If you have any queries about the administration of this survey, please contact triangel1219@hotmail.com or Dr.
Tracy Scurry - tracy.scurry@newcastle.ac.uk or Dr. Rudi de Vries - r.w.de.vries@rug.nl
Faculty of Economics and Business
University of Newcastle (UK) & Groningen (Netherlands) 0031-686278399
B. Invitation letter in Chinese 邀请函 尊敬的先生／女士,您好 我们在此郑重请求您的协助来完成一项重要课题。 作为格罗宁根大学和纽卡斯尔大 学的国际商务管理专业的研究生, 应学位要求之需我们正在进行一项研究课题。此项课 题，我们旨在从国有企业的人事部门主管和中层／基层管理者（line manager) 的视觉出 发，研究人力资源活动被指派到中层／基层管理者的情况以及人力资源权力下放所遇到 的挑战和困难。 本次研究是在 Tracy Scurry 博士和 Rudi de Vries 博士的指导下开展。
我们会在一个双方同意的时间点上通过电话或者 Skype 进行大约 20 到 30 分钟的采访。 在受访者同意的情况下，采访将会被录音。录音内容将会被严格保密，仅限在研究员及 其导师之间流通。 本次课题将会对您和您公司的信息完全保密。您的采访资料将仅用于检查溯源。 您 无需担心此次研究会对您和您公司造成任何不良后果。 如果您希望获取研究结果，敝 学院十分乐意将研究成果的总结发送给您。 是否参与此次研究完全取决于您。 本课题 研究并非强制，如您无意向可不必参与。在研究过程中，您也可以随时退出本课题，或 者拒绝回答部分敏感问题。 我们在此先感谢您对本重要课题的支持和参与。如果您对此次研究有任何疑问，请与 我 直 接 联 系 triangel1219@hotmail.com 或 者 联 系 Tracy Scurry 博 士
tracy.scurry@newcastle.ac.uk或 Rudi de Vries 博士 r.w.de.vries@rug.nl
真诚的感谢！ Gillian Li
University of Newcastle (UK) & Groningen (Netherlands) 0031-686278399
C. Consent form in English
Informed Consent Form
Participant Identification Number:
I, the undersigned, confirm that (please state 1 if appropriate; otherwise please state 2 if not appropriate):
1. I have read and understood the information about the project, as provided in the Invitation letter dated ________________.
2. I have been given the opportunity to ask questions about the project and my participation.
3. I voluntarily agree to participate in the project.
4. I understand I can withdraw at any time without giving reasons and that I will not be penalized for withdrawing nor will I be questioned on why I have withdrawn.
5. I understand that all data will be coded so that my anonymity will be protected in any research papers and presentations that result from this work.
6. I understand that the following interview will be recorded.
7. The use of the data in research, publications, sharing and archiving has been explained to me.
8. I, along with the researcher, agree to sign and date this informed consent form.
Participant:
________________________ _________________________ ________________ Name of Participant Signature Date
Researcher
F. Transcripts - Participant 1 (P1) in English
R: Do you know who is responsible for job design in your organization? P1: Well, this is my superior’s job.
R: Do you mean that your superior is responsible for your job design? P1: Yes.
R: Could you tell me who is your superior? P1: The supervisors in our sub-branch.
R: How about the people from the branch? Are they involving in job design? P1: I am afraid I don’t really know that.
R: Do you know why supervisors are responsible for that?
P1: I think, emm, because they are directly responsible for our day-to-day job so it is necessary for them to involve in job design.
R: Could you describe your job?
P1: Sure. I am the front-line employee and my job is facing customers. I am not allowed to involve in job design, but sometimes our organization will allow us to give feedbacks through a survey. We can tell in what areas the situation can be improved. R: Do you mean there is a feedback mechanism in your organization?
P1: Correct.
R: Do you think it works? Why?
P1: Just sometimes. You know, it is just a feedback from front-line employees.
R: How about selection and recruitment? Do you know who is responsible for that in your organization?
P1: Usually, the HR department at the Guangzhou Branch Office is responsible for selection and recruitment. It is irrelevant to the sub-branch.
R: Do you mean that only the Guangzhou Branch Office is involving in selection and recruitment?
P1: I think yes. R: Do you know why?
P1: I think, well, because each department has its own functions. R：What do you mean by “own functions”?
R: Do you know performance assessment? Who is responsible for that in your organization?
P1: I think our supervisors they are doing this job. Actually, HR divisions they give instructions to other divisions, such as personal finance and credit divisions. These divisions will give instructions to supervisors, and then supervisors will do this in a more detailed manner.
R: How about the chiefs at branch level? Are they involving in performance assessment.
P1: I am afraid I don’t know. I can only tell you what I know.
R: Okay. As you said, you have been working as a customer manager for 8 years. Do you perceive any difference during your tenure?
P1: Well, I think actually the situation is improved. Now they (policy makers) will listen to our comments and make adaptations accordingly.
R: Do you know when this feedback mechanism has been launched in your organization?
P1: Almost 3 years ago.
R: Do you know who is responsible for training and career development? P1: I think the HR division is responsible for that.
R: What about supervisors and the chiefs at branch level?
P1: I think the HR division is primarily responsible for that. However, the HR division will also organize other divisions to do employees’ training.
R: Could you explain it more detailed?
P1: Well, I think the HR division is responsible for personnel training while other divisions will do the employees’ trainings in areas in which they specialize under the instructions by the HR division.
R: What do you think about employees’ pays and benefits? Who is involving in this area in your organization?
P1: Also the HR department and HR division. Neither the chiefs at branch level nor the supervisors at sub-branch level is responsible for that.
R: Do you know why?
P1: Well, that’s a tough question. I think, personally, this is of essential interest to the organization.
