2008-E-1
Integration or Estrangement ?
The Influence of Globalization on the Work Values of Students
at Elite Japanese, Chinese, and Korean Universities
Yasuyuki Kishi*, Sunao Mizuno**, Dan Pantumsinchai***, Shigeto Sonoda****Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies, Waseda University
May, 2008

Research Associate, Waseda Institute for Asia-Pacific Studies, Waseda University
MA Student, Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies, Waseda University***
MA Student, Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies, Waseda University****
Professor, Graduate School of Asia-Pacific Studies, Waseda University**Abstract

East Asia has been rapidly moving toward modernization, driven by the force of
globalization. The result of that process is that country values are converging from traditional ones tomodern ones. Countries have been congregating towards various ideologies, “meritocracy” inparticular, as they continue to modernize.
This study aims to shed light on how globalization influences the work values ofundergraduate students in Japan, China, and Korea. These three countries share a Confucian
background which produces many interesting findings. Samples collected from Waseda, Fudan, andKorea Universities are examined using statistical analysis methods, and conclusions are drawn.
While work values are converging, they are not completely integrated. Each country still
possesses its own unique set of characteristics that separate it from the other nations. However,Japanese and Korean students were found to possess similar work values when compared to Chinese
students.
Interestingly, Chinese students have two conflicting ideologies: one of “egalitariansocialism” that places emphasis on the equality between people, and another of “modern
meritocracy” that puts weight on individual development and reward.
How Chinese students will continue to reconcile this delicate balance as time goes by is afascinating topic for future research.

Keywords: East Asia, globalization, modernization, work values, meritocracy, egalitarianism

11. Introduction
There are two arguments on globalization. One contends that globalization has brought down
country borders and increased simple cross-border movements (Harvey, 1989; Tomlinson, 1999).
Contrarily, this has redrawn borders which have previously been based on ethnicity (Huntington,2002). In the modern East Asian context, many academics argue about the ability to build
cross-border relationships in such a situation.1 However in March of 2005, there was a large
dispute over the island called Takeshima (or Dokdo in Korean), and in April of 2005 there wereanti-Japanese demonstrations in China that caused increased Sino-Japanese diplomatic tensions.
Presently it seems that as globalization increases the flow of cross-border movement of people,
goods, and capital, it is undeniable that while some believe that this context will lead to increased
international relations, there are nonetheless large sectors in all societies that experience tension due
to incidences like the aforementioned Takeshima problem. In this context, it is meaningful to see
how values of the young generation in East Asia will be shaped. In East Asian (China, Japan and
Korea) region, how do inter-country values differ?
Rushing into the era of globalization, today’s East Asia has strived in areas such as politics,
economics, culture, education and other fields, to achieve an ever-increasing mutual understandingof cultural diversity. It is widely hoped that this understanding will foster an East Asianneighborhood. According to Stiglitz (2002), the rules of globalization must be equal for everyone.
There has to be a proper distribution of the benefits of globalization between the powerful and thepowerless, based on common sense and social justice. Therefore, it is a key that East Asian countries
strive to improve comprehension of their own traditional values in an objective sense and throughthis, discover which areas are similar and different from other countries.
This study will seek to analyze data gathered from the three-country International Joint Research
Project survey in 2007. The survey studied lifestyle changes through values in East Asia byquestioning undergraduates from three elite universities in Japan, China and Korea—Waseda
University, Fudan University, and Korea University, respectively. Therefore this paper will examine
how globalization affects the work values of Japanese, Chinese and Korea University students, while
also examining the possibility for improvement in inter-relationships within the East Asia region.
Finally the thesis will answer whether this mature process of globalization will result in
integration or estrangement in East Asia.

2. Analytical Framework
Sonoda (1992, 369) defines “modernization as an intentional collective process in which
individuals aim to reform themselves while still retaining the historical and political background ofthat society”. Consequently in non-western societies, modernization starts from traditional values,
and it is self-changing process. The destruction of patriarchy and the fermentation of rationalism is
1

For example, Watanabe (2005) discusses the East Asian cooperative system by using European Union as ananalogy; however those arguments are not enough to completely cover the differences and similarities of East Asianvalues.

2

an example of the transition from traditional values to modern values.
The role of culture has gradually come to be emphasized in recent years within the field of
research studying people’s outlook on work.
Chiba (2000) analyzes the differences in work values in the pre-unified Germany and finds that
East Germans focus on external rewards while West Germans focus on internal rewards. Chibainterprets the differences in West and East Germany through revision of Inglehart’s theory (1997).
In addition, the modern individual has been increasingly influenced by commercialist
materialism, and this has led to a focus on rational endeavors towards improvement in the quality oflife through the realization of one’s individual values existing in material goods. Indeed, social andcultural heritage has formed values that are of permanent influence, while also influencing economic
development through the value shifts in a large portion of the population (Inglehart, 1997).
However while society shifts from an impoverished to a wealthier state, the idea of decisive
economic decisions that include things worldly and rational and put focus on the individual, is thesame as the concepts of “post-materialism” and “post-modernism.” This shows, however, only one
side of arguments existing in other areas. Because the population of a given country inherits their
way of thinking, viewpoints, and other subjective values from history, it is questionable whether
values can easily change. It is worth conjecturing about whether traditional values can exist within
modernization or whether these values will be forever lost. It is important and worth considering
the values of people within the context of modernization.
Parsons (1954) modeled cultural and value systems along two axes of “achievement” vs.
“ascription” and “universality” vs. “particularism.” Achievement focuses not on the value attributed
to the individual as much as the improvement and performance of achievements. In contrast to this,ascription judges people based on the individual value of a person. “Achievement” has various
meanings, thus in this paper “achievement” will be referred to as a more specific term,“meritocracy.”
Bellah (1957), who used Parson’s cultural and values structure, regarded Japan as a value systemof achievement (political domination), and because of this Japan is the first Asian country in which
modernization took root. According to Bellah, the United States of America is a universal
achievement (economic values) country, while China is a particular ascription (total values) country.
He suggests that if a country is orientated towards the value of “achievement,” it is possible to obtain
modernization regardless of whether a country is universalist or particularist.

Table 1 Structure for Bellah’s Classification of Social Values
Japan[Particularism][Meritocracy](Political domination)

America[Universality][Meritocracy](Economic values)

China[Particularism][Ascription](Total values)

In his “modernization theory”, Weber (1992) indicates that the convergent power ofmodernization is rationalization and it also highlights “achievement” aspect of values.

3This paper utilizes two arguments in the formation of its hypothesis. First, based on thearguments of Bellah and Weber, we assume that modernization and globalization is a cause oftransition of university student’s values from particular collectivism to universal individualism. The
second argument is that the convergent power of modernization based on “achievement” of values,
has shifted values from ascription to meritocracy.
This research is a comparative analysis of work value differences among university students inthree countries (Japan, China, and Korea) as a result of globalization. It is important to define axes toperform a comparative analysis and in this study, the main axes are common variables. To put it
simply, we assume that those are “Confucianism” as “traditional” values and“westernized/Americanized” as “modernized” values. Expediently, the former can be thought of as“traditional Confucianism” and the latter can be thought of as “westernized modernization.” This
research tries to test whether convergent values are formed when traditional Confucian values shift
to modernized values.
Confucianism has performed an important role in the formation of lifestyle choices and one’s
sense of value in Asian countries such as China, the Korean peninsula, and Japan. Ethical andpolitical precepts, like the idea of indebtedness for favors, respect for justice, and filial piety, play animportant role in the epistemological formation of Confucianism. It has been more than 2,500 years
since the moral thought of Confucianism was established by Confucius around the fifth century BC.
The philosophy spread from China to the Korean peninsula, Vietnam, and by the beginning of
the 5th century, it also spread into Japan. After this initial flourishing, it gradually spread to other
Asian countries while influencing their histories, cultures, politics, and morals. Conversely, asConfucianism spread throughout each nation, its value system changed to fit the context of thecountry. Especially after modernization, each country developed at different rates, and this causedsocial unrest. As a result, values particular to each country formed in East Asia while still
maintaining the basic precepts of Confucianism throughout such unrest. For example, after the Meiji
Restoration, Japan started moving on a divergent path from its route under the influence of westernmodernization.
However, Hofstede (1984), who conducted research on world business culture throughinternational comparative research, insists that there are several common points within the roots ofConfucianism in East Asian countries. His time series comparative research found that the top 5scores from the 23 country survey were China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan and Korea. Questions
concerning perseverance, status, hierarchical orders, savings, and shame were asked.
In addition, according to Gordon Redding (1992), there is a “5-dimension recipe of importantfactors to manage business and the economy in the world and 3 of them are from Asia.”2 These are
the management systems in Japan, Korea and China. He explains that these three management
systems are influenced by Confucianism, which creates a dynamic group for the unique maintenanceof tradition. These traditional values have come out of use in tandem with spread of globalization,and require the reformation of existing management systems in each country.
The aim of this paper is to examine and place the three countries along the “traditional-modern”
axis to show how value unification might have occurred or might still be occurring. First of all, it
2

The other two are “multinational business” and “business under national influence.”4

will study university students in the three countries to analyze their work values and look at thedifferences from the viewpoint of economic and cultural backgrounds.
This International Joint Research Project began in 2007 and is the third round of data collection,
which will make a comparison of the different structures in work values in the three countries ofChina, Korea and Japan. By examining the work survey questions, it will be possible to extract themodern way of collective thinking about work values in the three countries. Ultimately thisinternational comparative research will promote future inquiries on political, cultural and economic
growth and development in East Asia.

3. Survey Outline
Questions in this year’s joint project are designed by Japanese-Chinese-Korean joint project
members and involve several big themes in order to discover the values of undergraduate students inEast Asia where globalization has occurred. These themes are business, media, and historicalproblems, and these factors are essential in understanding globalization in East Asia. In order toanalyze the student work values in the three countries, a number of sources were utilized for thesurvey3.
The survey questions focusing on work values are based off of Hofstede’s 1984 international
comparative survey and are modified to suit the target students. A number of survey questions arealso from past International Joint Research Projects. Additionally, questions concerning
Confucianism relating to traditional values are based on Zheng’s (2005) East Asian International
Comparative Survey in 2003. These question items are statistically screened out from last year’s
analysis results and this year’s pre-test analysis results, and distilled. Screening methods included
finding similarities using cluster analysis and performing factor analysis to extract underlying
factors.
Each school collected 400 valid samples of data spanning a one month period during
December 2007. The target sample consisted of Japanese undergraduate students who attendedWaseda University. In order to obtain a proper representation of each school’s student population,
quota sampling was utilized. Factors such as grade, sex, and department were proportionately
calculated and collected accordingly. Samples were obtained through distribution in a various
number of ways: campus organizations, classrooms, and cafeteria/lounge areas. In all cases, students
voluntarily agreed to fill out the questionnaires.
For this project it was only feasible to obtain samples from university students that the
researchers had access to. In addition, each of the three universities can be considered elite
institutions within their respective countries. Thus the validity of generalizing findings to all youths
in East Asia can be called into question. However in terms of feasibility, issues such as time andfinances were major limitations for the scope of the project. Regardless, the data and findings can beused to examine a part of the East Asian youth demographic, and that in itself is a valuable endeavor.

3This survey was financially supported by Global COE Program “Global Institute for Asian Regional Integration.”54. Differences between Japanese-Chinese-Korean Students’ Work Values
In order to examine the differences between the work values of students in the three countries,
various questions were asked. Questions regarding work values from Hofstede, and related questions
from previous International Joint Research Projects were used. Some of the questions were modified
in order to make them suitable for the Japanese-Chinese-Korean student respondent group. 11
questions were asked regarding work values, and are listed in their entirety below. The chartfollowing them displays the responses to 11 questions.
····

Promotion should be based on one’s length of employment
I am a cautious person who generally avoids risks
Age should be a big factor in promotion
Company rules should not be broken even when the employee thinks it is in the company’s
best interest

·
·
·
·
·
·
·

Society should be fair without competition
Salary gap between the highest and lowest paid should be as small as possible
People should work alone rather than in large groups
I want a job which leaves me sufficient time for my personal or family life
Promotion should be based on personal achievement
Individual satisfaction of employees leads to the overall prosperity of a company
It is unfair for newly recruited employees to receive less pay than older employees

The two black squares in the chart highlight two questions: “I want a job which leaves me
sufficient time for my personal or family life” and “It is unfair for newly recruited employees toreceive less pay than older employees”. These questions were found to have no statisticallysignificant difference between the three countries (see Figure 1). However, other than the two square
marked questions, the results of all other inquiries were found to have some kind of statisticallysignificant difference within them (significant at the 0.01 level), and demonstrated the dissimilarity
in values between the respondents in the three countries.

6

WasedaIt is unfair thatolder employees
are better paid
than newSatisfaction of all
the employees
leads to thesuccess of thePromotion andsalary increase
should be basedon one'sKorea

I value my private
live

The difference
between thelowest and thehighest salary in a

Fudan

People should
work alone rather
than in groups

Society should befair withoutcompetition

One should neverbreak one's
company rules,
even if it would

Promotion andsalary increase
should be basedon one's age

I am a cautious
person who
always avoids
risks

5
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1

Promotion andsalary increase
should be basedon one's lenght

Figure 1 Japanese-Chinese-Korean Students’ Work Values

Questions in the chart marked by a triangle –“I am a cautious person who generally avoids
risks,” “Company rules should not be broken even when the employee thinks it is in the company’s
best interest” and “Individual satisfaction of employees leads to the overall prosperity of a company”
showed a unique set of results. While no significant difference between Japanese and Korean
students could be seen, their differences from Chinese students were statistically significant.
On the other hand, questions in the chart highlighted by a circle ,“Promotion should be based on
one’s length of employment,” “Society should be fair without competition” and “Salary gap between
the highest and lowest paid should be as small as possible”, demonstrated various significant
differences between the three countries.
The remaining three questions each resulted in different outcomes.
“Age should be a big factor in promotion,” showed significant differences in thinking between
Japanese and Korean students, but between Japanese and Chinese, and also Chinese and Korean
students, there were no significant differences observable. For question item “People should work
alone rather than in large groups,” there were no significant differences between Japanese andChinese students, but significant differences in the responses of students in those two countries andKorean students was apparent. Finally for “Promotion should be based on personal achievement,”
significantly different statistics were not found between Chinese and Korean students, thoughsignificant differences were seen between the students in those two countries and Japanese students.
4–1. Ambivalent Work Values of Chinese Undergraduate Students
When outlining the differences between work values of undergraduate students in Japan, China,
and Korea, it is clear that Chinese students possess a unique ambivalence not found in either of theother two countries. This distinct thought pattern is revealed when examining the data.
Firstly, responses to the statement “Society should be fair without competition” were very
similar between Korean students and Japanese students, with both respondent groups disagreeingthat a more fair society with less competition was ideal. However, Chinese students’ answers showed
a completely opposite pattern. They believed that fairness and less competition was important andnecessary in society.
Secondly, “Salary gap between the highest and lowest paid should be as small as possible”
produced similar findings. Japanese and Korean students responded on average that they did not
believe there should be as small salary gap as possible. Chinese students did not agree with this pointof view, electing to respond on average the opposite stance. However at the same time when looking
at responses to, “Promotion should be based on personal achievement,” students from all three
countries agreed with this statement on average.
Japanese and Korean students who had been of opposite opinions with Chinese students in theprevious two questions all came to agree on the importance of recognizing achievement when it
came to salary and promotions. Chinese undergraduate students possessed values of an “equal andlow competition,” as well as a “fair results” view towards society, but at the same time had workvalues based off of the idea of “meritocracy.” This demonstrates the ambivalent nature of Chinese
students work values. It becomes clear that despite modern day China’s “socialist market economy”
7system, the reflected work values do not match perfectly.
4–2. Similarities between Japanese and Korean Students’ Work Values
In contrast to Chinese students who possess an ambivalent set of work values, on the surface
level Japanese and Korean students appear to have startlingly similar views towards work. After
performing an analysis of the variance, results showed that of the 11 questions asked in the survey, 5questions were found to have no significant difference in responses between Japanese and Korean
students. Thus when examining the data of the three countries, Japanese and Korean students workvalue responses appear to be very similar in contrast to the response patterns of Chinese students.

5. Results
5–1. Three Extracted Factors: “Traditional Ascription,” “Egalitarian Socialism,” and “Modern
Meritocracy”
Next a factor analysis (method: promax rotation) on the 11 questions regarding work values was
conducted to extract underlying factors behind the variables. However two of the variables, “People
should work alone rather than in large groups” and “It is unfair for newly recruited employees toreceive less pay than older employees,” did not have sufficient factor loads and thus were excluded
from the analysis, bringing the final tally of variables to 9. The factor analysis yielded three separate
factors: “traditional ascription,” “egalitarian socialism” and “modern meritocracy,” (patternmatrices are referenced in the Appendix). The three factors are explained below (see Table 2).

Table 2 Work Value Factors and Factors Important in Job Correlation Table
Traditional Ascription

Egalitarian Socialism

Modern Meritocracy

Salary-.110**.186**

Job security.260**.145**

Promotion opportunities.099**.230**

Training opportunities.066*.172**

Atmosphere of workplace.276**-.087**-.235**

Individual performance appraisal.316**

Reputation of the company

-.112

**

.092**

Job content.126**.218**

Suitable for my development-.126**.098**.214*** p<.05 ** p<.01“Traditional ascription” refers to the notion that promotions, salaries, and raises should follow ahierarchical pattern, based on continuous years of service in the company, and leans towards

8

prioritizing “organization” group principles. This type of belief is reflected as a kind of “if you try
your best you will be rewarded” type of mentality. Time is a very important factor in this notion, as itis the main determinant of the hierarchy. Personal achievement is not considered as important as thegroup identity. This type of Confucian ideology about sustaining long term patience and enduringhardships are an important basis for this kind of thinking. These values are also considered as what
Western society refers to as “typical Asian values.”“Egalitarian socialism” refers to the idea that it would be ideal for society to contain lesscompetition, and be fairer to all in general. In this case, factors such as personal differences andpersonal achievements should not cause large discrepancies between people.
On the other hand, “modern meritocracy” refers to a very different idea. Promotions and salaries
should be based off of personal achievement; it does not matter how long one has worked in thecompany to an extent. Just having the greatest amount of service years does not guarantee thehighest position and salary in the company and results matter much more in this case. The
importance of one’s personal life is also emphasized in this view. Thus within the “Modern
Meritocracy” system, it can be said that the “individual,” rather than the “organization” takes priority.
In other words, modern day expressed work values demonstrate the desire of people for “individual”
consciousness and personal development, as opposed to an “organization” group identity.
In order to explain the three factors more deeply, the following table displays the results ofrunning a correlation analysis on how they affect the data items concerning “factors that areimportant in a job.”
The chart denotes which questionnaire items were found to have significant correlation
coefficients. Even at this point it is possible to explain similar tendencies. “Traditional ascription”
places a large positive emphasis on “security,” while not giving much weight towards “personal
development” and “salary,” instead leaning towards long term employment. Interestingly,“egalitarian socialism” was found to have a negative correlation with “individual performanceappraisal,” which raises the idea of a contradictory thought pattern. “Modern meritocracy” for themost part stresses the importance of all the variables, showing the ambitious motivation of people.
While the correlation coefficients are still low, meaning it is not possible to say that all factors
are applicable, items “individual performance appraisal,” “job content,” and “promotion
opportunities,” reflect interest in personal achievement and have a large influence on values.
“Atmosphere of workplace” was also found to be of great importance. “Atmosphere” in this caserefers to notions of working from a young age, and properly rewarding personal achievement; inother words, not the old-fashioned corporate image.
Figure 2 organizes the three factors found in the three countries, and creates an average value
based off of the total calculated scores. Statistical significance was found to exist between all three
countries with regards to the factors. As can be observed in the graph, at the “traditional ascription”
factor, significant differences between Fudan University and the other two schools can be seen. No
significant differences exist between Waseda and Korea Universities under this factor. At the“Modern Meritocracy” factor, no significant differences can be seen between Fudan and Waseda
Universities, but between them and Korea University there existed significant statistical differences.
Finally at the “egalitarian socialism” factor, statistical significance was seen between all three
countries.
9

Figure 2 Compiled Factor Score Average Values
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
Traditional Ascription Modern Meritocracy Egalitarian Socialism
Fudan

Korea

WasedaBy examining each country’s factor score averages it becomes apparent that compared toundergraduates at Waseda and Korea University, Fudan University’s undergraduates possess anegative association tendency towards Traditional Ascription. On the other hand, concerning“modern meritocracy,” all three countries have a relatively high positive association with the factor.
However among the three schools, Korea students have the strongest tendency towards this factor.
Fudan students in comparison to Waseda and Korea students do possess a negative tendency towards“traditional ascription,” but at the same time possess a very strong positive association with“egalitarian socialism.” It is at this finding that an interesting phenomenon regarding Fudan
undergraduate students can be seen.
5–2. Confucian Values
If modern day values are changing and defining themselves from traditional ones, then bylooking at the “traditional-modern (post-traditional)” axis, notions such as “traditional ascription,”“modern meritocracy,” and “egalitarian socialism,” can explain the relationships and structure of thesituation. Six questions from the “Confucian values” scale (Zheng, 2005) based on Confucian
ideology were utilized in order to examine the origins of traditional values. A factor analysis(method: promax rotation) was run on the six questions and they are listed below. From this analysis,
at least two underlying factors were discovered: the “loyalty-filial piety scale,” and the “patriarchal
authority scale.” Unifying the two factors was the overarching factor of “Confucian traditional
values” (pattern matrices are referenced in the Appendix).
First Factor – Loyalty-Filial Piety Scale··

One should pay respects to one’s ancestors
One should listen to one’s parents when choosing a spouse10·You should obey your elders

Second Factor – Patriarchal Authority Scale···

Sons are crucial to sustain one’s family tree
The wife should obey her husband
It is rational for men to work, and for women to stay home, do housework, and take care ofchildrenFigure 3 displays the synthesis of “Confucian values” and “traditional ascription” between thethree countries in a scatter diagram (as different characteristics cannot be seen regarding “modern
meritocracy”). Higher points on the “Traditional Ascription” axis mean less inclination towards
ascription, and lower points result in more inclination towards it. Points further to the left on the“Confucian values” axis mean that there is a greater inclination towards traditional values, while
going further to the right means there is less inclination. Therefore points on the X-axis havetendencies towards “traditional values” on the left, and “modern values (post-traditional)” on theright.
Figure 3 “Traditional Ascription” and “Confucian Values” Scatter Diagram

The figure clearly shows that as “Confucian values” become negative, so too do “ascription”
principles. Thus a positive correlation between the two factors can be observed. Therefore, as thedefined post-Confucian “modern values” become more widespread, employment views agreeing
with “traditional ascription” begin to disappear. As well, this correlation between the three countries
in “traditional ascription,” however much may be left of it, is an observable phenomenon. Thus if
notions of the opposing forces of ascription, and meritocracy are recognized, it is possible to11

understand how post-traditional modernity, like Webber’s theme, has affected the values ofmeritocracy.
5–3. Main Causes of “Traditional Ascription,” “Egalitarian Socialism,” and “Modern
Meritocracy”
In order to further the analysis, a regression analysis was performed on the three extracted
factors. They were treated as dependent variables in order to see if they were being influenced byother factors. After conducing the analysis, it was found that there were 16 items influencing thethree factors of “traditional ascription,” “egalitarian socialism,” and “modern meritocracy.” These 16
items were treated as independent variables and are listed as follows: 1) globalization index4, 2)
Confucianism index5, 3) English ability, 4) gender, 5) social class, 6) foreign residence experience,7) important factors in job selection (9 items), and 8) desire to work for American companies.
Using the listed 16 items as independent variables, the 3 extracted factors were used as
dependent variables, and a multi regression analysis was performed. The results are displayed intables 3 and 4 below.

Table 3: Three Factors Multiple Regression Analysis
Traditional Ascription

Egalitarian Socialism

Modern Meritocracy

Globalization index

-.020

-.049

-.011

Confucianism index.273**

.070*

-.012

Gender.040.108**-.013

Foreign residence experience-.050.318**-.034

English ability.089**-.099**-.071*

Social Class.080**-.126**.029

Salary

.030

-.064

.059

Job security.232**

-.023

.016

Promotion opportunities-.162**.165**.090*

Training opportunities

.029

.020

-.031

Atmosphere of workplace.087**.039.149**

Individual performance appraisal.025-.271**.167**

Reputation of the company

.010

.004

-.061

Job content

.018

-.015

.090**

Suitable for my development-.143**.095**.048.000.104**.068*.182**.250**.171**

I would like to work for an
American company
R²* p<.05 ** p<.01
4

The index was created based on adaptations of questions regarding globalization in “AsiaBarometer 2003” (alpha =0.525).
5
The index was created based on adaptations of questions regarding Confucianism (alpha = 0.736).

12

Table 4: Three Factors Multiple Regression Analysis (Country)
Traditional Ascription

Egalitarian Socialism

Modern Meritocracy

Waseda

Korea

Fudan

Waseda

Korea

Fudan

Waseda

Korea

Fudan

Globalization index

-.060

-.033

-.037

-.050

.064

-.008

.011

.023

-.029

Confucianism index.272**.357**.314**

.091

.115*

-.103*

-.068

.060

-.017*

Gender

.034

.089

-.037

.054

.080

-.011

-.003

.045

-.043

-.044

.035

.052

.028

.067

.069

-.059

.013

.026

English ability

.081

.039

-.018

-.047

.111*

-.077

-.062

.008

-.111

Social Class

-.022

.003

.043

.016

-.021

-.000

.084

.023

.006

Salary

.062

-.050

.062

-.034

-.214**

-.025

.115

-.007

.026

Job security.296**.192**

.068

.022

.111

.111

.016

.055

-.014

-.139*

-.056

-.077

-.050

-.089

.193*

-.015

.086

.109**

.136*

-.116

.035

.002

.040

.007

-.009

-.071

.016*

.018

.123*

.081

.106

-.040

.116*

.011**.160**

.138

-.075

-.112

.036

-.024

-.064

-.090

.326**.211**

.052

.050

.020

.004

-.103

-.032

-.105

-.063

-.088

-.051

-.001

-.057

.030

.019

.054

.104

.056

.100

.095

-.074

-.060

-.125*

-.106

-.059

.199**

-.054

-.027

.195**

-.012

.088

.085

-.018

.054

.108*

.018

.076

.061*

.260**.228**.158**.048.101**.251**.228**.135**.222**

Foreignresidenceexperience

Promotion
opportunities
Training
opportunities
Atmosphereof

workplace
Individual
performanceappraisal
Reputation

of

the

company
Job content
Suitableformydevelopment
I would like to workforanAmericancompanyR²* p<.05 ** p<.01

Table 3 shows the analysis results of all the respondents from Waseda, Fudan, and Korea
Universities. “Traditional ascription” is being influenced by the “Confucianism index” and puts
emphasis on the importance of “job security,” rather than “promotion opportunities” and “personal
development.”
The greatest influence on “egalitarian socialism” was found to be “foreign residence
experience.” Those individuals who did not have any experience living abroad in another country
were discovered to possess a very strong inclination towards “egalitarian socialism.” As well, while13

“individual performance appraisal” was found to be unimportant, “promotion opportunities” were
found to be significant. Females were more likely to be inclined to leans towards “egalitariansocialism,” as where those people who had desires to work in American companies.
Finally “modern meritocracy” was found to be strongly influenced by “individual performanceappraisal” and “atmosphere of the company.”
Table 4 displays even further detailed analysis of the three factors.
Examining “traditional ascription,” it becomes apparent that all three countries are strongly
influenced by Confucianism. This means that despite differences between the three nations, they all
share a common trait in being influenced by Confucianism. Japan places a high weight on “training
opportunities,” while Korea instead finds that the “atmosphere of workplace” is more vital. Bothcountries place a strong importance on “job security.” “Promotion opportunities” in Japan and“personal development” in China do not seem to have much importance in each country
respectively.
For “egalitarian socialism,” Japan did not seem to be influenced by any of the variables.
“Salary” was found to be unimportant in Korea, while “promotion opportunities” and “personal
development” were found to be a key for China.
Finally, “modern meritocracy” also had interesting results. In Japan and Korea, “Individual
performance appraisal” was found to be important. In China’s case, “personal development” wasfound to be an influencing factor.

6. Conclusion
This paper focused on the analysis of work values of students from elite universities in Japan,
China and Korea.
While the narrow respondent group is a limitation of the study, many interesting and important
conclusions can still be observed from the analysis of the data. From the viewpoint of the analysis
among three countries there are generally many commonalities between Japanese and Korean
students. On the other hand, there are several differences between them and Chinese students. An
especially big difference between Japanese/Korean and Chinese students is that the Chinese students
surveyed have a strong “equality consciousness”. Although it is incorrect to draw general
conclusions from specific data, the result of this research leads to some inferences.
China has greatly shifted from a planned economy dominated by the autocracy of theCommunist Party to a free market economy. As a result, “achievement” and meritocracy haveappeared in the moral modernization of social policy. In this context, there have arisen problems ofinequality between the cities and the rural areas. This study’s survey population consisted of students
from Fudan University that have high social capital through their education and are considered thesocial elite in the competitive Chinese society. They have somehow been influenced by the social
gap arising from economic inequalities that have created social problems. Therefore the Chinese
students are clearly different from their Japanese and Korean counterparts in the data results. In otherwords, Chinese undergraduates possess a modern meritocratic view towards work values, but at thesame time also have a social ideology that creates a double thought structure. It is possible that this14

could be a special characteristic of the inquired Fudan students in this research.
Also, there are no remarkable differences between the three countries with regards tomeritocracy values. For students in these countries the important job factors were discovered to be
individual performance appraisals, promotion opportunities, and various company policies. At thesame time, the idea that people do not just wish to live for work appeared in the three countries,
demonstrating that a strong inclination towards individual orientation exists.
As Webber refers, Figure 4 demonstrates that the function of meritocracy in the process ofmodernization and the idea of universalism commonly exist in the three East Asian countries which
are influenced by Confucianism.

Fig. 4 – Meritocracy Model in Japan, China, and Korea
There is a convergence of values in the globalizing East Asia.
“Meritocracy” has been converging and does so more
rapidly than other values (such as Egalitarianism, etc).

Equality consciousness

China

Other values
Other values

Korea

Convergence

Meritocracy
Japan

Other values

Equality consciousness

Confucianism
SphereTraditional

Post-Traditional
Modernization (accelerated by Globalization)

ModernAs this research mentions, the convergence of modern values has occurred with globalization in
Japan and Korea. This is the meritocracy that Webber touched upon, and this is the result from theconvergence towards it. Therefore the value regarding meritocracy converges more rapidly thanother value factors, based on results found after examining Chinese society ideology. Observing how
Chinese student’s work values will change is a very interesting endeavor. It depends on the Chinese
elite students whether they move away from traditional values like Japanese and Korean students, or
continue to maintain their current mix of social ideologies and meritocracy.
At very least, from the viewpoint that globalization enables the change process of
post-traditionalism to modernization, the number of younger generations who possess a modern
morality as meritocracy will increase. This explains the convergent process of globalization in East
Asia, and from that viewpoint meritocracy has lead direction of the integration.
15

References
Bellah, Robert N. (1957) Tokugawa Religion: The Cultural Roots of Modern Japan, The Free Press.
Chiba, Takayuki (2000) “Work Life Value Differences in the Former Pre-unified Germany” in
Hiroki Sato, Hiroshi Ishida, and Ken’ichi Ikeda (eds.) Secondary Analysis of Social Research,
Tokyo University Press.
Harvey, David (1989) The Condition of Post Modernism: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural
Change, Basil Blackwell.
Huntington, Samuel (1996) The Clash of Civilizations and the Remarking of World Order, Georges
Borchardt, Inc.
Inglehart, Ronald L. (2003) Human Values and Social Change: Findings from the Values Surveys,
Brill Academic Publishers.
Oh, Tai K. et al. (1983) "A Comparative Study of the Influence of Confucianism on Japanese,
Korean, and Chinese Management Practices" Proceedings of the Academy of International
Business, Asia-Pacific Dimensions of International Business, December pp.18-22, Honolulu,
HawaiiParsons, Talcott (1951) Toward a General Theory of Action Theory, Harvard University Press.
Redding, Gordon (1992) "Capitalist Cooking Lessons" Asian Business, November, pp50-52
Stiglitz, Joseph E (2002) Globalization and its Discontents, W.W. Norton & Company Inc.
Sonoda, Shigeto (1992) “The Structure of Modernization in Chinese Character Cultural Bloc: A Caseof Late-starting Modernization” in Yuzo Mizoguchi, Kenichi Tominaga, Mineo Nakajima, andTakeshi Hamashita (eds.) History and Future of Chinese Character Cultural Bloc, Taishukan
Shoten.
Tomlinson, John (1999) Globalization and Culture, Polity Press.
Watanabe, Toshio (2005) Japan’s Strategy toward East Asian Economic Integration: Hopes andAnxieties,Toyo-Keizai Shimposha.
Weber, Max (1978) Power and Control – Introduction to Political Science. Translated byHamashima, Akira, Yuhikaku.
Zheng, Yuejun (2005) “Cross-national Comparison of Transitions of Traditional Values in Eastern
Asian Countries” Categorical Behavior Science. 32: 161-172.

16

【Appendix】[Factor Analysis of 9 Variables Regarding Work Values]
Pattern Matrixa
Factor1
Promotion and salary increase should be basedon one's age
Promotion and salary increase should be basedon one's length of employment
I am a cautious person who always avoids risks

2

3

.782

.147

-.077

.768

-.029

-.019

.522

-.063

.158

.386

-.029

.053

-.092

1.004

-.018

.105

.517

.076

-.137

.058

.631

.111

-.017

.589

.138

.042

.461

One should never break one's company rules,
even if it would result in a large profit for thecompany
Society should be fair without competition
The difference between the lowest and thehighest salary in a company should be thesmallest possible
Promotion and salary increase should be basedon one's accomplishments
Satisfaction of all the employees leads to thesuccess of the whole company
I value my private live
Extraction Method: Maximum Likelihood.
Rotation Method: Promax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 4 iterations.

17[Extracted Confucian Value Factors]
Pattern Matrixa
Component
1

2

It is rational for a husband towork and a wife to take care of

.942

-.181

.800

.152

.785

.087

-.058

.864

.037

.805

.022

.597

the house
A wife should obey her husband
A son is indispensable forcontinuing one's lineage
One should listen to one's
parents when choosing a spouse
One should obey one's elders
One should respect one's
ancestors

Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
Rotation Method: Promax with Kaiser Normalization.
a. Rotation converged in 3 iterations.

18

【Main Data Items】
Q7 What are your personal views on the common cultural values below? Please express youropinion by checking one answer for each question.
Strongly

PartlyPartly

Agree
agree

Strongly
Disagreeagree

disagreedisagreeA

One should pay respects to one’s ancestors

1

2

3

4

5

6

B

One should listen to one’s parents when choosing a spouse

1

2

3

4

5

6

C

You should obey your elders

1

2

3

4

5

6

D

Sons are crucial to sustain one’s family tree

1

2

3

4

5

6

E

The wife should obey her husband

1

2

3

4

5

6

F

It is rational for men to work, and for women to stay home, dohousework, and take care of children

1

2

3

4

5

6

19

Q13 Let’s change the topic to your views on employment. Do you agree with the following
statements? Please express your opinion by checking one answer for each question.
Strongly

PartlyPartly

Agree
agree

Strongly
Disagreeagree

disagreedisagreeA

Promotion should be based on one’s length of employment

1

2

3

4

5

6

B

Age should be a big factor in promotion

1

2

3

4

5

6

C

Society should be fair without competition

1

2

3

4

5

6

D

Salary gap between the highest and lowest paid should be as
small as possible

1

2

3

4

5

6

E

I am a cautious person who generally avoids risks

1

2

3

4

5

6

F

Company rules should not be broken even when the employee
thinks it is in the company’s best interest

1

2

3

4

5

6

G

Individual satisfaction of employees leads to the overall
prosperity of a company

1

2

3

4

5

6

H

People should work alone rather than in large groups

1

2

3

4

5

6

I

I want a job which leaves me sufficient time for my personal orfamily life

1

2

3

4

5

6

J

It is unfair for newly recruited employees to receive less pay thanolder employees

1

2

3

4

5

6

K

Promotion should be based on personal achievement

1

2

3

4

5

6

20

Q14 Suppose you were looking for a job. How important would you consider the following
factors? Please check one answer for each question.
Strongly

PartlyPartly

Agree
agree

Strongly
Disagreeagree

disagreedisagreeA

Salary

1

2

3

4

5

6

B

Job security

1

2

3

4

5

6

C

Promotion opportunities

1

2

3

4

5

6

D

Training opportunities

1

2

3

4

5

6

E

Atmosphere of workplace

1

2

3

4

5

6

F

Individual performance appraisal

1

2

3

4

5

6

G

Reputation of the company

1

2

3

4

5

6

H

Job content

1

2

3

4

5

6

J

Suitable for my development

1

2

3

4

5

6

Q15 Do you agree with the following statements regarding employment? Please express youropinion by checking one answer for each question.
Strongly

PartlyPartly

Agree
agree

Strongly
Disagreeagree

disagreedisagreeA

I would like to work for an American company

1

2

3

4

5

6

C

I would like to work for a Japanese company

1

2

3

4

5

6

I would like to work for a Chinese company

1

2

3

4

5

6

I would like to work for a Korean company

1

2

3

4

5

6

E
G

21

GIARI Working Paper Vol. 2008-E-1,
May. 30, 2008
Published by Waseda University Global COE Program
Global Institute for Asian Regional Integration (GIARI),
Waseda University, Nishiwaseda Bldg. 5F#507 1-21-1
Nishi-waseda, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-0051 Japan
E-mail: affairs@waseda-giari.jp
http://www.waseda-giari.jp
Printed in Japan by International Academic Printing Co.Ltd
22