The purpose of this study is to examine the impact of Confucian concepts of feelings, especially paternalism and favoritism, on organizational culture in current Korean higher education. The writer uses a descriptive analysis method through the lens of a cross-cultural perspective to defend this study systematically. The influence of paternalism and favoritism on Korean institutional organizational culture is evident in the following: first, the absence of criticism is one of shortcomings in colleges and universities; second, factionalism rooted in family ties, regional relations, and school ties becomes an obstacle to the exchanging of scholarly knowledge as well as of academic information among universities, schools, departments, and faculty members; third, favoritism based on interpersonal ties and selfish feelings is another problematic practice; fourth, egoistic scholarship and worship of foreign knowledge are also problematic; and finally, a closed organizational culture is another dilemma in Korean higher education.
Confucianism, one of the major historical factors leading East Asian people to the path of the spiritual world, contributed enormously to the development of Korean society and culture. Traditionally, Confucian ethical concepts placed emphasis on moral social harmony in human relations through moral training. Particularly, the concept of feelings or emotions (?: ching) represented a vantage point from which to review Confucian thought because the early Confucian scholars and Neo-Confucians regarded feelings as part of human beings’ original nature (Chung, 1995).
As Confucianism has significantly affected the East Asian peoples’ sociocultural concept of the spiritual world, so Confucian philosophy encourages some Westerners to question, ethically and metaphysically, their most basic commitments to the notions of human nature as well as the meaning of life (Graham, 1986; Knoblock, 1988; Ozmon and Craver, 1990; Schwartz, 1985; Tongqi et al., 1995). In this vein, understanding the Confucian concept of feelings or emotions may provide Westerners with a refreshing and original philosophy regarding the nature of human beings and the meaning of Confucian ethical values.
Furthermore, paternalism and favoritism are two significant ethico-factors rooted in Confucian feelings that have also provided much guidance to the Korean people. Although both factors have different connotations: paternalism commonly connotes a positive implication that means “government as by a benign parent” (The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy, 1994, p. 279), whereas favoritism generally imparts a negative conception that suggests “the treating of one person, family, or class of men with special favor or partiality to the correlative neglect of others” (Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, 1986, p. 830). In spite of their different influences, these two factors have greatly influenced organizational culture in Korean higher education both positively and negatively. Accordingly, the examination of the theoretical context regarding the two factors is of equal importance. This exploration is intended to provide both Korean and Western peoples with an opportunity to review the theoretical source and practical impact of paternalism and favoritism on the Korean educational edifice.
Although Confucianism was introduced to the West, for the most part, by the Western Christian missionaries or priests a few centuries ago, in the late twentieth century Confucianism has increasing appeal to many Western scholars as an antidote for Western philosophical or educational complacency (de Bary, 1960, 1981, 1989; Deuchler, 1992; Graham, 1986; Griffiths, 1990; Hall and Ames, 1987; Hatton, 1982; Kalton, 1988; Ozmon and Craver, 1990; Schwartz, 1985; Weber, 1968). In practice, Confucian thought has already found a place in various fields and remains an attractive way of thought today.
To defend this study systematically, the author will use a descriptive analysis method combined with a cross-cultural approach outlined in the following steps. First, the concepts of Confucian feelings will be discussed in terms of the theories of some representative Chinese and Korean Confucian thinkers, and the concepts of culture and values in organizations will be illustrated in several Western sociocultural aspects. Second, the reflections of Confucian feelings on organizational culture, mainly paternalism and favoritism, in Korean higher education will be reviewed. Third, the problems of paternalism and favoritism based in Confucian feelings in Korean higher education will be analyzed. Finally, several keys to change the present organizational culture in Korean tertiary education will be suggested in the concluding section.
In order to understand the Confucian concepts of feelings, the author will review classical Confucian texts, such as the works of Mencius (371-289 BC), one of the greatest Confucian philosophers of the classical period in China, and the works of Xun Zi [Hsun Tzu] (300-230 BC), a Confucian philosopher of the classical period in China, as well as the works of Chinese and Korean Neo-Confucian scholars.
In the early Confucian texts, the Confucian term “feelings” originated from the Book of Mencius (2A: 6):
All men have a mind which cannot see the sufferings of others. The feeling of commiseration is essential to man...The feeling of commiseration is the principle [beginning] of benevolence. The feeling of shame and dislike is the principle of righteousness. The feeling of modesty and complaisance [courtesy] is the principle of propriety. The feeling of approving [right] and disapproving [wrong] is the principle of knowledge [wisdom]. (trans., Legge (1971), pp. 201-03)
Mencius points out that individuals have four principal feelings that are rooted in the human heart. Those four foundations are essential to the development of four conjoint ethical feelings: benevolence or humanity is rooted in the feeling of commiseration; righteousness is rooted in the feelings of shame and hatred; propriety or decorum is rooted in the feelings of modesty and complaisance; and knowledge or wisdom is rooted in approving and disapproving. Mencius regards these four ethical principles as the most important virtues for the kind of self-cultivation that esteem a value for education.
Based on Mencius’ metaphysical or ontological view, Chu Hsi (1130-1200), one of the representative Neo-Confucian thinkers of the Cheng-Chu school that emphasized Learning of Principle, or Learning of Human Nature and Reason in the Chinese Sung Period (960-1279), claimed that humanity is the nature, and commiseration is feeling (Chu Tzu Chuan-shu, 45: 3a-19b; trans., Chan, 1986, p. 500). Chu Hsi also contended that the mind or heart embraces feelings, yet he distinguishes human nature from feelings. Specifically, he asserts that benevolence, righteousness, propriety, and wisdom belong to human nature, whereas commiseration, shame and dislike, courtesy and modesty, and right and wrong belong to feelings. However, Chu Hsi asserts that, “Although the spheres of human nature and feelings are different, their mutual penetration is like the bloodstream in which each part has its own relationship” (Chu Tzu wen-chi 67: 21a).
Considering both Mencius’ and Chu Hsi’s theories, the four principal feelings or the four beginnings are regarded by both Confucian philosophers as inherent moral virtues or great virtues. According to their theories, the feelings, including the four beginnings--humanity (?), righteousness (?), decorum (?), and wisdom (?)--are originally rooted in the human mind because the mind or heart combines and directs both human nature and feelings.
Likewise, Cheng Yi (1033-1107), one of representative Neo-Confucian thinkers of the Cheng-Chu school during the Chinese Sung Period (960-1279), also asserted that there are only the four beginnings in human nature that come from Heaven (trans., Chan, 1986, p. 473). Considering Mencius’ and Cheng-Chu’s theories, the writer asserts that the four beginnings are considered as moral feelings inherent in human nature or the principle of the Way (?) for moral self-cultivation.
The orthodox Confucian thinkers of Mencius, Cheng Yi, and Chu His disagreed with Xun Zi’s view that human nature is inherently evil. However, they agreed with Mencius’ view that human nature is inherently good. The Cheng-Chu school claimed that individuals could actualize themselves by overcoming their limitations through a conscious effort to understand the principle of Heaven as well as by cultivating their inner nature and feelings.
In addition, Xun Zi [Hsun Tsu] also noted that liking and disliking, pleasure and anger, and sadness and joy are referred to as the “feelings” (Hsun Tsu, Chapter 24). According to the classical Confucian philosophers, “the feelings” refer to physical and mental states that may be understood as basic human emotions, as well as human nature.
In the light of Chu Hsi’s theory of li (?) and chi (?), the four beginnings (??) are manifest from li (?: principle or reason), whereas the seven emotions (??) from chi (?: material-force). The first belongs to moral feelings, and the second belongs to selfish desires. According to Mencius’ epistemology, the four beginnings are moral feelings of the inherent goodness of human nature and aroused by li, and the seven emotions are physical feelings and are aroused by chi.
Two Korean Neo-Confucian philosophers, Yi Toegye (1501-1570) and Yi Yulgok (1536-1584), preserved the tradition of the Chinese Cheng-Chu school in the 16th century in the Korean Choson dynasty, by proposing the Four Principles [Beginnings] and Seven Feelings [Emotions] theses, on the basis of the orthodox Cheng-Chu school, as ethico-metaphysical methods with regard to feelings and desires.
Yi Toegye’s Four-Seven thesis focused on the ontological separability or dissimilarity between the principle (li) and material-force (chi). Toegye maintained the notion of dualistic systems of philosophical and ethical ontology concerning mind, nature, and feelings. Principle (li) is related to original human nature, moral mind, Heaven’s principles, and four principles [beginnings], whereas material-force (chi) is related to physical human nature, human mind, physical [selfish] desires, and seven feelings.
On the other hand, Yi Yulgok’s Four-Seven thesis focused on the ontological inseparability or harmony between the principle and material-force. He emphasized the harmonious or symmetrical relationship between li and chi: between the original human nature and physical human nature, moral mind and human mind, Heaven’s principles and physical [selfish] desires, and the four principles or beginnings and seven feelings. Briefly, Toegye’s method of self-cultivation based on the Four Principles [Beginnings] and Seven Feelings [Emotions] thesis shows the separability between li and chi in terms of metaphysically ethical ideas; Yulgok’s way of self-cultivation demonstrates the harmony between li and chi from a standpoint of pragmatically ethical ideas.
From an orthodox Cheng-Chu school viewpoint, both foundational Korean thinkers have distinctly different epistemologically views regarding the mind, human nature, and feelings, but the two Korean Neo-Confucian scholars ontologically adhered to the doctrine of the orthodox Chinese Cheng-Chu school, namely that li and chi are attributive to the moral mind and human mind, and the four beginnings and seven feelings (Chung, 1995, p. 35).
Based on the above Confucian thinkers’ theories, the concepts of feelings in the works of Mencius, the Cheng-Chu school, and the two Korean Neo-Confucian thinkers emphasized the core values of the principles and feelings as closely related to the human mind, nature, and principles. The mind, as a principle, is the master of the feelings that enables individuals to do good. The Cheng-Chu school and its followers viewed the four principles based on the feelings as the most important ethical values for self-actualization through the vehicle of education. In addition, they assert that individuals can achieve self-actualization by overcoming their limitations by making a conscious effort not only to understand the principle of Heaven but also to cultivate human nature and feelings.
In the light of organizational culture, as Chung (1995) points out, the Confucian concepts of feelings can be regarded as ethico-metaphysical methods, moral norms, or ethical values advising individuals to be good and unselfish in Korean society. Unlike the Ming Chinese and Tokugawa Japanese Neo-Confucians who were more devoted to a practical interpretation of the Wang Yang-ming school, the Choson Korean Neo-Confucians who came after Toegye and Yukgok devoted their energy to a more doctrinal reading of the Cheng- Chu school and were mainly interested in the specific issues of human nature and feelings (Chung, 1995, pp. 35-36). For this Korean Neo-Confucian tradition, paternalism and favoritism were the most deeply rooted of Korean values, and served as the primary Confucian ideals to adjudicate positive or negative social functions (Hangyeore, 2000; H. Lee, 1999; S. Lee, 2000).
In terms of the theories of the two Korean Neo-Confucian thinkers, paternalism based on the concept of benevolence is referred to as moral feeling, li, whereas favoritism relied on the concept of approving or disapproving is referred to as physical or selfish desire, chi. In other words, paternalism is a positive factor that embraces humane ethical values in organizations, while favoritism is a negative factor that promotes selfish ethical values in organizations. In practice, favoritism is a valuable ethical value in private affairs, but it is a negative value in public affairs (H. Lee, 1999; S. Lee, 2000, p. 18-19). However, in spite of the opposing ethical values, humanity rooted in the feeling of commiseration is closely related to the theoretical source of both paternalism and favoritism: paternalism is dependent upon humane feelings that include charitable involvement, provision of amenities, and benign attitudes, whereas favoritism relies on special favor or partiality of an individual or a group. In this vein, both paternalism and favoritism must be understood as being both inseparable and deeply engrained in the fabric of contemporary Confucian culture in Korea.
Culture has been defined in many ways. In order to understand the various notions of culture, the author first of all examines the meaning of culture from its classical Greek and Chinese sources, and then introduces the assertions of Western theorists regarding the concepts of culture and value. In A Greek-English Lexicon, three words constitute the notion of culture: paideia (mental culture, education, or learning), georgia (agriculture or farming), and philotechnia (enthusiasm for art or ingenious construction) (Liddell and Scott, 1968). Although the spelling changed in classical Latin, the original meaning of culture derived from the Greek word georgia. Accordingly, in the English or the German language, the meaning of culture or die Kultur derived from the Latin implications of the cultivation of soil. On the other hand, in the classical Chinese language, wenhwa (??) suggests the process of true human cultivation. Xun Zi, a Chinese philosopher in the third century B.C., used culture (??) in his text (Lee, 1997). Unexpectedly, both classical languages embrace the similar meanings of culture, cultivation. The concepts of culture can also be applied to other ethnic or cultural groups.
Culture has been observed by Western social scientists (Garfinkel, 1967; Geertz, 1973, 1976; Hannerz, 1969; Keesing, 1974; Kluckhohn and Strodtbeck, 1961; Valentine, 1968) as the subject of ethnocentric or cross-cultural studies since the late 1950s. Particularly, in the 1980s, culture was used to describe anything from artistic activities (Becker, 1982), science (Latour, 1987; Star, 1989), religion (Neitz, 1987), law (Katz, 1988), media and popular culture (Gitlin, 1985), work organisation (Lincoln and Kalleberg, 1990; Sackman, 1991), organizational culture (Deal and Kennedy, 1982; Geertz, 1973; Schein, 1968, 1984; Tagiuri and Litwin, 1968; Van Maanen, 1976; Van Maanen and Schein, 1979), values, styles, and ideology of day-to-day conduct (Swidler, 1986).
Thus, the concepts of culture have many different meanings and connotations as culture is used as a different tool in the various fields, organizations, and ethnic groups. Culture is defined in the following ways: the entire way of life of a people, including technology and material artifacts (Geertz, 1973); made up of symbolic forms through which people experience and express meaning (Keesing, 1974); consisting of symbolic vehicles of meaning, which includes beliefs, ritual practices, art forms, ceremonies, and cultural practices such as language, gossip, stories and rituals of daily life (Swidler, 1986). According to Hofstede (1980), culture is usually reserved for societies, or ethnic or regional groups, but it can be applied equally to other human collectivities or categories: an organization, a profession, or a family (p. 26). Similarly, Sackman (1991) points out that culture may be seen as constituting the structural and developmental elements and may be conceptualized as the collective construction of reality through the use of sense-making mechanisms. Trice and Beyer (1993) also define cultures as collective phenomena that embody peoples’ responses to the uncertainties and chaos which are inevitable in human experience (p. 2). Hence, culture is generally defined as the collective programming of the mind (Hofstede, 1980). Synthetically, the author views culture as the transformation of the visible and invisible entities collectively existing in the human affairs (Lee, 1997).
With respect to the stabilizing of cultural patterns, Hofstede (1980) analyzed a system of social norms, consisting of the value systems shared by major groups within a population. According to Hofstede’s theory, the origins of cultural patterns are traceable to a variety of outside influences and ecological factors such as geography, economy, demography, genetics/hygiene, history, technology, and urbanization. “The societal norms have led to the development and pattern maintenance of institutions in society with a particular structure and way of function” (Hofstede, 1980, p. 26). The structure and functioning of institutions include family patterns, role differentiation, social stratification, socialization emphases, education, religion, political structure, legislation, architecture, and theory development. Hofstede asserts that norms or cultures evolve in response to ecological factors rather than to outside influences or values. In his theory, Hofstede views culture as an attribute of collectivity, whereas norms or values are an attribute of individuals and collectivities.
In addition, Swidler (1986) proposed an alternative three steps analysis of culture: an image of culture as a “tool kit,” culture’s causal effects, and culture’s causal significance. In the process of the alternative analysis culture, Swidler (1986) judges cultural values as more highly articulated and explicit in unsettled periods, whereas settled cultures constrain action over time due to the high costs of cultural remodeling to adopt new patterns of action in settled periods (p. 284).
Like those of culture, values are defined many ways. Hofstede (1980) defines a value as: “a broad tendency to prefer certain states of affairs over others” (p. 19) and “a conception, explicit or implicit, distinctive of an individual or characteristic of a group, of the desirable which influences the selection from available modes, means and ends of actions” (ibid.). Hofstede (1980) distinguishes values as the desired and the desirable. He evaluates that the norms of values are statistical and pragmatic in the former case, whereas they are absolute or deontological in the latter case.
On the other hand, Swidler (1986) views values to be inseparably related to culture because culture is actually a combination of values and practices in our society. Swidler (1986) contends that culture affects human action through values that direct it to some ends rather than other (p. 274). Accordingly, values are enduring beliefs that the specific modes of conduct or end-state of existence are personally or socially preferable to the opposite or converse modes of conduct or end-state of existence (Rokeach, 1973, p. 5). Values indicate common preferences among who share similar outcomes in their lives and for certain types of conduct (Borgatta and Borgatta, 1992). The conduct is valued by individual or groups because it leads to the individual needs or the societal needs.
Therefore, the conception of cultural values is a means of balancing members’ needs against the needs of society to maintain and enhance itself (Parsons and Shils, 1951). In this vein, the Confucian concepts of feelings may be regarded as cultural values. In current Korean society, paternalism and favoritism based on Confucian principles and feelings may be viewed as stabilized cultural patterns by an individual or a group in the private or public affairs (Hangyeore, 2000; H. Lee, 1999; S. Lee, 2000).
Organizational culture is closely aligned with the concepts of culture and value. In modern organizations, the relations between culture and values are inseparable. The concepts of organizational culture simply repeat the insights of the human relations perspective on industrial and educational relations because organizational culture is interrelated with most other concepts in administration.
Similar to the concepts of culture, the definitions of organizational culture are various: espoused values (Deal and Kennedy, 1982), observed behavioral regularities such as customs, traditions, and rituals (Goffman, 1959; Trice and Beyer, 1993; Van Maanen, 1976), formal philosophy (Ouchi, 1981; Pascale and Athos, 1981), norms (Homans, 1950), rules of the game (Ritti and Funkhouser, 1982; Schein, 1968; Van Maanen, 1976), feeling or climate (Schneider, 1990; Tagiuri and Litwin, 1968), habits of thinking and linguistic paradigms (Douglas, 1986; Hofstede, 1980; Van Maanen and Schein, 1979), shared meaning (Barley, 1984; Geertz, 1973; Smircich, 1983), root metaphors or integrating symbols (Gagliardi, 1990; Schultz, 1991), and shared values and basic assumptions (Schein, 1992).
In an analysis of organizational culture, Schein (1992) delineates three levels of culture: (1) artifacts include visible organizational structures and processes; (2) espoused values are strategies, goals, and philosophies; and (3) basic assumptions are unconscious, taken-for-granted beliefs, perceptions, thoughts, and feelings.
However, the process of creating a new organizational culture is not simple. Generally, organizational heroes, rites and rituals, social norms and values, assumptions, and communication networks play key roles in creating organizational cultures (Deal and Kennedy, 1982). Once an organizational culture is created, a number of mechanisms help solidify the acceptance of the values and ensure that the culture is maintained or reinforced (Lunenburg and Ornstein, 1991). Organizational cultures sometimes need to be changed because they are different according to each organization, institute, society, and country. Thus, the organizational culture of Korean society is different from that of Western society. The former is mainly based on Confucianism (Deuchler, 1992; Fairbank and Reischauer, 1989), whereas the latter is based on Hellenistic Judeo-Christianity (Gutek, 1972).
In organizational culture in American postsecondary institutes, Burton R. Clark (1970) emphasizes an organizational saga which is a collective understanding of a unique accomplishment based on historical exploits of a formal organization, offering strong normative bonds within and outside the organization (p. 178). To establish an organizational saga in higher education, Clark (1970) suggests two stages: initiation and fulfillment. He notes that initiation takes place under varying conditions and occurs within a relatively short period of time; fulfillment is related to features of the organization that are enduring and more predictable (Clark, 1970, p.180).
In addition, Clark (1992) suggests that an institutional innovation in the initiation stage may be attempted under three main conditions: new organization, crisis in an established institution, and evolutionary openness in an established institution (p. 237). In the fulfillment stage, the key elements in colleges are the personnel (senior faculty), the program, the external social base (alumni), the student subculture, and the imagery of the saga (Clark, 1970). In conclusion, Clark (1970) evaluates that an organizational saga is a powerful means of unity in the formal place (p. 183).
In terms of Korean higher education, Confucian saga has been strongly apparent in organizational culture in higher education institutions. Particularly, paternalism and favoritism based on the Confucian principles and feelings have enormously effected on educational administration both positively and negatively. Paternalism and favoritism positively strengthen the solidarity between or among organizational members, while both isms negatively promote a closed administrative system (Korean Council for University Education, 1992; 1995). However, there are numerous problems concerning administrative systems, social values, and organizational culture. From this point, the author will review the reflections of Confucian feelings on social values and organizational culture in Korean higher education and analyze the problems in the following next two sections.
According to the theory of a system of social norms (Hofstede, 1980), the Confucian principles and feelings have been developed and maintained as individual values, collectively cultural values, societal norms with a particular social structure, or societal organizational institutions by a variety of outside influences and ecological factors. Such factors include an authoritatively male dominant society, a hierarchically vertical organizational structure centered on an age-ranking system, an authoritatively rigid organizational structure grounded on Confucian ethico-political principles and rules, a stratified socio-economic society based on societal strata such as scholar, farmer, artisan, and merchant (Deuchler, 1992; Fairbank and Reischauer, 1989; Lee, 1999b). The structure and functioning of institutions developed the desirably absolute or deontological values rather than the desired statistical or pragmatic values by means of the following factors: family patterns centered on consanguineous ties, factionalism according to social strata, role differentiation on account of rank, age, and sex, social stratification due to socioeconomic positions, political structure according to organizational status, discrimination of academic attainments, and geographical or regional structure (Hart, 1993; Kihl, 1994; Lee, 1999b; Yun, 1996).
The above cultural values based on Confucian rules and concepts, according to Swidler’s (1986) theory of cultural values, were formed by embracing ethico-political principles under the absolutely formalized organizational structure in the unsettled Choson (1392-1910) Kingdom period (Fairbank and Reischauer, 1989; Lee, 1999b). In contemporary Korean society, what is referred to as the settled period, the Confucian cultural values, on the one hand, have been remodeled into new socioeconomic stratified structure with an influx of Western thought and culture, but on the other hand, have been succeeded by the following socio-ecological factors: paternalism based on Confucian ethical codes and concepts, blood ties grounded on family relations or kinship, regional ties centered on individual birthplace, school ties according to individual’s affiliated schools, and factionalism by means of various internal or external ties (Deuchler, 1992; Lee, 1999b; .S. Lee, 2000; Yun, 1996).
In particular, paternalism among the traditional cultural values planted humane culture that emphasized mutual fraternity as well as interpersonal geniality or commiseration between superiors and subordinates, administrators and faculty members, teachers and students, seniors and juniors in school, and colleagues in Korean higher education institutions (Lee, 1999b; J. Lee, 2000). In addition, favoritism based on blood, regional, and school ties promoted homogeneous coteries, who sought socio-economic interests as well as academic advantages, with special favor and partiality (H. Lee, 1999; Lee, 1999b; Pyo, 1999).
Thus, within the boundaries of organizational culture, both paternalism and favoritism, based on Confucian principles and feelings, may be regarded in terms of the three levels of culture. Schein (1992) contended because both concepts, as cultural values, were already commonly spread out in Korean higher education. In the context of an attributive characteristic in organizational culture, the two concepts were formed by various socio-ecological factors, such as social norms and values, rites or rituals, philosophy and feelings, assumptions, organizational heroes, etc.
In current Korean higher education, both paternalism and favoritism have introduced a negative influence rather than a positive one. For instance, there are faculty inbreeding, closed faculty appointments, and personal connections in school affairs (Pyo, 1999, p. 79). In practice, the renovation of fixed traditional values and customs is not simple, but the Korean people require progressive renovation in order to create new organizational culture in Korean tertiary institutes. In this vein, the author will specifically discuss paternalism and favoritism as negative forces on Korean higher education and suggest some ideas with which to overcome or improve these problems in the following section.
First, the absence of criticism is a big problem in Korean colleges and universities. In general, one who shares a personal relation with his or her superior usually overlooks his or her significant mistake during one’s duty due to personal ties (Korean Council for University Education, 1992, 1995; Lee, 1999b). Owing to these interpersonal ties, persons related by special favor or partiality have a correlatively negative impact on others. In the case of academic affairs or scientific activities between teachers and students, as well as between senior and junior faculty members who are concerned with an academic clique, students or junior members rarely criticize their teachers’ or seniors’ assertions or theories on the basis of Confucian interaction patterns (Lee, 1999a). Teachers generally control their students through both legitimated authority and moral norms that are somewhat analogous to those between parents and children; students believe that they are indebted to their teachers for benefits bestowed just as daughters and sons are indebted to parents (Lee, 1999a, p. 17). Based on these Confucian values, students usually follow their teachers’ instructions without any criticism, and junior faculty members rarely raise any objections to senior faculty members’ assertions in current Korean higher education.
Second, factionalism is a significant problem. Factionalism rooted in family ties, regional relations, and school ties becomes an obstacle to the exchange of scholarly knowledge as well as academic information between universities, schools, departments, and faculty members (Pyo, 1999; Lee, 1999b). In addition, factionalism creates new cliques or factions, bears egoistic scholarship between individuals or among schools, and hinders academic development in a presumably open competitive system. According to the Dong-A Ilbo dated on September 21, 1999, a ratio of teaching faculty members affiliated with an individual’s alma mater in three prestigious universities showed that Seoul National University was 95.6 percent, Yonsei University 80.3 percent, and Korea University 60.1 percent (A 21). This demonstrates that the appointment system and customary practice for the selection of college or university teachers are related to faculty inbreeding. In addition, the appointment of university teachers was heavily influenced by regional and school ties. For example, Pusan National University in Pusan city was 47.9 percent, and Cheonnam National University in Kwangjoo city [Cheonnam Province] was 51.6 percent (The Dong-A Ilbo, A 21, Sep. 21, 1999).
Third, favoritism based on interpersonal ties is another problem. According to the Dong-A Ilbo (September 21, 1999), the rate of inequitable appointment for faculty selection showed: the despotism of the president or the governing body was 24.3 percent; giving and receiving money or other-valuables was 15.2 percent; and the request of influential persons was 6.5 percent (A 21). Judging from the statistical results, favoritism hinders the openness in educational administration by promoting a closed or partial administrative system. For this reason, there is lack of equity and openness in educational administration, in particular personnel management.
Fourth, academic career and clique-oriented doctrines are also significant problems. These doctrines have aggravated not only new school-ties based on an individual’s affiliated school but also homogeneous academic coteries who seldom exchange or interchange their knowledge with heterogeneous academic groups. Also, the doctrines cause homogeneous academic coteries to monopolize socio-economic interests. Between October 27 and 28, the Hangyeore 21(2000) surveyed the culture of one’s academic career and clique in current Korean society. According to the result of this survey (Hangyeore 21, 2000), 63.4% of 700 persons answered that “without academic career and clique, there is no success in Korea” (p. 18). In addition, 64.4% of 700 adults responded that “if you want social success in the future, it is important to be graduated from prestigious universities” (Hangyeore 21, 2000, p. 18).
Finally, a homogeneously closed organizational culture is another problem in Korean higher education. Homogeneous collectivism based on blood, region, and school ties ignores an open organizational system which embraces internal or external communication network because of a homogeneous group that intends to maintain its vested interests regarding academic activities and other valuable affairs (Korean Council for University Education, 1992, 1995; Lee, 1999b; Pyo, 1999). In practice, the majority of financial support for the promotion of “knowledge-base society” as well as for the enhancement of academic quality is commonly monopolized by prestigious university teachers although the Korean government invites the public to join in government projects for the acceleration of a knowledge-base nation (Hangyeore 21, 2000, p. 21). The Project , “BK21” (Brain Korea for the 21st century) is an adequate example. For this project, the Korean government has yearly contributed 200 billion Won--on November 17, 2000, 1 U.S. dollar was estimated 1,200 Won-- for 7 years from 1999 until 2005 to promote science and technology. Seoul National University occupies 45% of the total budget (Hangyeore 21, 2000, p. 21). In current Korean higher education, the public subscription of scientific activities as well as the evaluation criteria of scientific activity outcomes are still unfixed openly or competitively.
As presented in this article, the concepts of Confucian feelings related to paternalism and favoritism have had a great impact on organizational culture in Korean higher education both positively and negatively. In the current Korean higher education system, however, a negative influence is more greatly apparent. In order to improve or change this negativity, the author proposes several basic recommendations or opinions as follows.
First, in order to change the absence of criticism, the writer suggests that wisdom, one of Confucian four principles based on moral feelings, should be stabilized as social norm to distinguish what is right or wrong. In addition, with the concepts of “right” and “wrong” as basic assumptions, each person or group in universities should actively create a new organizational culture, that is, “discussion culture” as well as “criticism culture” interpersonally.
Second, in order to minimize factionalism, a closed educational administrative system founded on family, local, and school ties should be changed into an open system through eliminating a person’s vested interest and creating a democratic climate. Also, egoistic scholarship, worship of foreign knowledge, and factionalism should be minimized through reciprocally institutional cooperation and knowledge exchange. In addition, every constituency of universities should exert all possible efforts to promote academic quality and scientific development both internally and externally.
Third, in order to correct favoritism, a closed and an unfairly partial administration based on personal ties should be opened through restructuring the organizational structure of university administration democratically, effectively, and rationally. In other words, educational administrators or planners should create a new administrative system to secure the impartiality of personnel management, to ensure the transparency of appointment committee, and to guarantee each constituency autonomy and democracy.
Fourth, in order to change a closed organizational culture, a multi-culturally open organizational culture centered on diversity and uniqueness should be enforced through building the responsive campus. As the first step for creating a new institutional culture, the writer suggests that three main conditions asserted by Burton R. Clark (1992)--new organization, crisis in an established institution, and evolutionary openness--should be applied to higher education institutions in Korea.
Finally, in order to create strong organizational culture and to promote academic development, any favoritism and factionalism, as well as a negative influence of paternalism based on blood, regional, and school ties in Korean higher education should be abolished or minimized through changing a closed system and traditional collectivism into an open system and Western democratism.
Acknowledgments:Most parts of Sections III and IV in this article were cited from the author’s doctoral dissertation and revised. The author is thankful to the suggestions and comments of the reviewers of this paper.
Barley, S. R. (1984) Technology as an Occasion for Structuration: Observations on CT Scanners and the Social Order of Radiology Departments (Cambridge, Mass.: Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
Becker, H. (1982) Art World (Berkeley: University of California Press).
Blackburn, S. (1994) The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Borgatta, E. and Borgatta M. (1992) Encyclopedia of Sociology. Vol. 1 (New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company).
Chan, Wing-tsit, ed. (1986) Chu Hsi and Neo-Confucianism (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press).
Chu Tzu Chuan-shu, 45: 3a-19b; 45: 4a.
Chu Tzu wen-chi, 67: 21a
Chung, E. Y. J. (1995). The Korean Neo-Confucianism of Yi T’oegye and Yi Yulgok. Albany, New York: State University of New York Press.
Clark, Burton R. (1970) “The Organizational Saga in Higher Education,” Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 17: 178-184.
Clark, Burton R. (1992) The Distinctive College (New Jersey: New Brunswick, Transaction Publishers).
de Bary, W. T. (1960) Sources of Chinese Tradition, Vol. 1 (NY.: Columbia University Press).
de Bary, W. T. (1981) Neo-Confucian Orthodoxy and the Learning of the Mind-and-Heart (NY.: Columbia University Press).
de Bary, W. T. (1989) The Message of the Mind in Neo-Confucianism (NY: Columbia University Press).
Deal, T. E. and Kennedy, A. (1982) Corporate Culture: The Rites and Rituals of Corporate Life (Reading, MA; Addison-Wesley).
Deuchler, M. (1992) The Confucian Transformation of Korea: A Study of Society and Ideology. Harvard-Yenching Institute Monograph Series 36 (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press).
Douglas, M. (1986) How Institutions Think (Syracuse, N.Y.: Syracuse University Press).
Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. (1986) Webster’s Third New International Dictionary Volume I (Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.).
Fairbank, J. K. and Reischauer, E. O. (1989). Yi dynasty Korea: A Model Confucian Society, in East Asia: Tradition and Transformation. Boston: Houghton.
Gagliardi, P., ed. (1990) Symbols and Artifacts: Views of the Corporate Landscape (New York: de Gruyter).
Garfinkel, H. (1967) Studies in Ethnomethodology (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall).
Geertz, C. (1973) The Interpretation of Cultures (NY: Basic Books).
Gitlin, T. (1985) Inside Prime Time (New York: Pantheon).
Goffman, E. (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (New York: Doubleday).
Graham, A. C. (1986) Review of the World of Thought in Ancient China by Benjamin I. Schwartz, Times Literary Supplement (London).
Griffiths, P. J., ed. (1990) Christianity Through Non-Christian Eyes (Maryknoll, N. Y.: Orbis Books).
Gutek, G. L. (1972). A History of the Western Educational Experience. Prospect Height, Illinois: Waveland Press Inc.
Hall, D. L., and Ames, R. (1987) Thinking Through Confucius (Albany: SUNY Press).
Hangyeore 21 (2000). Moodeumggaji-ganda Dangsineui-Hakbeol. Hangyeore-sinmoonsa: Seoul, Korea.
Hannerz, U. (1969) Soulside: Inquiries into Ghetto Culture and Community (New York: Columbia University Press).
Hart, D. M. (1993). “Class Formation and Industrialization of Culture: The Case of South Korea’s Emerging Middle Class,” Korea Journal, 33(2), 42-57.
Hatton, Russell (1982) Chi’s Role within the Psychology of Chu Hsi, Journal of Chinese Philosophy, 9 (4), pp. 441-469.
Hofstede, G. (1980) Culture’s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications).
Homans, G. (1950) The Human Group (Orlando, Fla.: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich).
Hsun Tzu: Basic Writings, trans., Burton Waston (1964) (Columbia University Press).
Kalton, Michael C. trans. (1988) To Become a Sage: The Ten Diagramms on Sage Learning by Yi Toegye (New York: Columbia University Press).
Katz, J. (1988) Seductions of Crime: Moral and Sensual Attractions of Doing Evil (New York: Basic Books).
Keesing, R. M. (1974) “Theories of Culture,” Annual Review of Anthropology, 3, pp. 73-97.
Kihl, Y. W. (1994). “The Legacy of Confucian Culture and South Korean Politics and Economics: An Interpretation,” Korea Journal, 34 (3), 37-53.
Kluckhohn, F. R. and Strodtbeck, F. (1961) Variations in Value Orientations (New York: Row, Peterson).
Knoblock, J. (1988) Xunzi: A Translation and Study of the Complete Works, Vol. 1., Books 1-6 (Stanford University Press).
Korean Council for University Education [KCUE] (1992). A Study of University Administrative Management and Organization for Improving Its Structure. Seoul, Korea: KCUE.
KCUE. (1995). A Study of the Reorganization of University Administrative Organization. Seoul, Korea: KCUE.
Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press).
Lee, H. (1999). Modernity, Asiatic Value, and Globalization. Seoul, Korea: Moonhak
-gwajiseongsa.
Lee, J. K. (1997) A Study of the Development of Contemporary Korean Higher Education, Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation (The University of Texas at Austin).
Lee, J. K. (1999a) “Problems in the Culture of Korea’s Higher Education System,” International Higher Education, Number 16, p. 17.
Lee, J. K. (1999b). “Historic Factors Affecting Educational Administration in Korean Higher Education,” Higher Education Review, 32 (1), 7-23.
Lee, J. K. (2000). “The Administrative Structure and Systems of Korean Higher Education,” Higher Education Management, 12 (2), 43-51.
Lee, S. H. (2000). “Argument of Asiatic Value and the Future of Confucian Culture,” in Korean Identity in the New Millennium (5 Section). pp. 12-27. Seoul, Korea: The Academy of Korean Studies.
Legge, J. (1971) Confucius: Confucian Analects, The Great Learning, and The Doctrine of the Mean (New York: Dover Publications).
Liddell, H. and Scott, R. (1968) A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: The Clarendon Press).
Lincoln, J. and Kalleberg, A. (1990) Culture, Control, and Commitment: A Study of Work Organization and Work Attitudes in the United States and Japan.
Lunenburg, F. and Ornstein, A. (1991) Educational Administration: Concepts and Practices (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company).
Mencius, The Works of Mencius, ed. and trans., James Legge (1970) (New York: Dover).
Neitz, M. (1987) Charisma and Community: A Study of Religious Commitment within the Charismatic Renewal (NJ: New Brunswick).
Ouchi; W. (1981) Theory Z Reading (MA: Addison-Wesley).
Ozmon, H. and Craver, S. (1990) Philosophical Foundations of Education (New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Company).
Pascale, R. T., and Athos, A. G. (1981) The Art of Japanese Management (New York: Simon & Schuster).
Pyo, S. Y. (1999). “Educational Reforms of Universities through Evaluation,” in Diaognosis and Vision of Educational Reform Policy. pp. 71-85. Seoul, Korea: Hanguk-kyoyukhakhoy.
Ritti, R. R. and Funkhouser, G. R. (1982) The Ropes to Skip and the Ropes to Know (Columbus, Ohio: Grid).
Rokeach, M. (1973) The Nature of Human Values (New York; Free Press).
Sackman. S. (1991) Cultural Knowledge in Organizations: Exploring the Collective Mind (Newbury Park, CA: Sage).
Schein, E. (1968) “Organizational Socialization and Profession of Management,” Industrial Management Review, 9, pp. 1-15.
Schein, E. (1984) “Coming to a New Awareness of Organizational Culture,” Sloan Management Review, 23, pp. 55-68.
Schein, E. (1992) Organizational Culture and Leadership, 2nd edition (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers).
Schneider, B. (Ed.). (1990) Organizational Climate and Culture (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass).
Schultz, M. (1991) Transition between Symbolic Domains in Organizations, Copenhagen Business School Papers in Organization, No. 1 (Copenhagen, Denmark: Copenhagen Business School).
Schwartz, B. I. (1985) The World of Thought in Ancient China (Cambridge: Harvard University Press).
Smircich, L. (1983) “Concepts of Culture and Organizational Analysis,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 28, pp. 339-358.
Star, S. (1989) Regions of the Mind: Brain Research and the Quest for Scientific Certainty (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press).
Swidler, A. (1986) “Culture in Action: Symbols and Strategies,” American Sociological Review, 51, pp. 273-286.
Tagiuri, R. and Litwin, G. (1968) Organizational Climate (Boston: Division of Research, Harvard Graduate School of Business).
The Dong-A Ilbo (A 21, September 21, 1999) “Hakyeon...Chiyeon...”[School Ties...Personal Ties...] (Seoul, Korea: Dong-A Ilbo).
Tongqi, L., Rosemont, H. Jr., and Ames, R. T. (1995) Chinese Philosophy: A Philosophical Essay on the “State-of-the Art,” The Journal of Asian Studies, 54 (3), pp. 727-758.
Trice, H. and Beyer, J. (1993) The Cultures of Work Organizations (Prentice Hall).
Valentine, C. A. (1968) Culture and Poverty: Critique and Counter Proposals (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Van Maanen, J. (1976) “Breaking In: Socialization to Work,” In R. Dubin (Ed.), Handbook of Work, Organization and Society (Skokie, III.: Rand McNally).
Van Maanen, J. and Schein, E. (1979) “Toward a Theory of Organizational Socialization,” Research in Organizational Behavior, 1, pp. 209-264.
Weber, Max (1968) The Religion of China: Confucianism and Taoism, trans. H. M. Gerth (New York: Free Press).
Yun, S. (1996). Confucian Thought and Korean Culture, In Jungwon Kim (Ed.), Koreana: Korean Cultural Heritage, Vol. II. Thought and Religion. Seoul, Korea: Samsung Moonhwa Printing Co.
© Radical Pedagogy