In this study, we analyze the core assumptions and ideals of social network characteristics in East Asia and the West. By using an analytical frame derived from the literature and consisting of key antecedents of social networks, we find differences between the conventional assumptions of social network characteristics when comparing them with those found in East Asia. Moreover, we find remarkable intra-regional differences. Among these, and contrary to common beliefs about social networks, we find weak ties are neither truly effective nor preferably used in East Asia, where strong ties are both more preferred and more powerful. Further, social ties tend to be rather consummatory and networks rather closed. Also, depending on the nature of the network, bridging either does not work or is not intended. We recommend further studies explicitly taking local context into account in order to refine or reframe extant knowledge on social networks.

Currently, the mechanism in which informal institutions, recently discovered as an influential, new paradigm in business and management studies interact with and shape formal institutions remains unclear. Helmke and Levitsky (2004) proposed an outcome-based typology for the interaction of informal institutions with formal ones. By using a structured approach for literature aggregation, we test the proposed typology of Helmke and Levitsky by applying this method to 74 empirical studies to investigate the influence of guanxi on formal institutions. We conclude that guanxi fits into none of the proposed categories perfectly. As a result, we propose the relationship between guanxi and formal institutions as auxiliary as well as competing concurrently, leading to convergent and divergent outcomes, respectively. Moreover, we propose a third category to add to the existing typology, namely 'formal institutions in transition'. We furthermore incorporate a dynamic aspect to the model by adding two further categories, concerned with the direction of the development. We believe the resulting extension to the original typology of Helmke and Levitsky accurately accounts for the dynamic nature of informal institutions as well as their important role in shaping effective formal institutions.

No abstract

No abstract