Face (sociological concept)

About: Face (sociological concept) is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 5171 publications have been published within this topic receiving 96109 citations. The topic is also known as: Lose face & Face (sociological concept).

Impact of personal and cultural factors on knowledge sharing in China

Abstract: Knowledge sharing has been the focus of research for more than a decade and it is widely recognized that it can contribute to the success of an organisation However, in comparison with other countries, relatively little work on this topic has been done in the Chinese context Knowledge sharing is particularly interesting to study in the Chinese context at the individual level, given the unique social and cultural characteristics of this environment In this paper, we develop a theoretical model to explain how personal factors would affect people’s intention to share their knowledge The Theory of Reasoned Action and Social Exchange Theory are used in this paper, as are the time dimension of national culture, face, and guanxi A survey methodology is used to test the model Face and guanxi orientation both exert a significant effect on the intention to share knowledge Theoretical and practical implications, as well as directions for future research, are discussed

Politeness: Is there an East-West Divide?

Abstract: The theory of politeness of Brown and Levinson (1978, 1987) has remained the most seminal and influential starting point for cross-cultural and cross-linguistic contrastive pragmatics. Yet is has also provoked countervailing arguments from Ide (1989, 1993), Matsumoto (1989), Gu (1990), Mao (1994) and others, pointing out a Western bias in Brown and Levinson's theory, particularly in their construal of the concept of 'face', in their overemphasis on face-threat and their assumption of individualistic and egalitarian motivations, as opposed to the more group-centred hierarchy-based ethos of Eastern societies. This leads to the question in the title of this article: Is there an East-West divide in politeness? The following argument will be presented. There is an overarching framework for studying linguistic politeness phenomena in communication: a common principle of politeness (Leech, 1983, 2002) and a Grand Strategy of Politeness (GSP), which is evident in common linguistic behaviour patterns in the performance of polite speech acts such as requests, offers, compliments, apologies, thanks, and responses to these. The GSP says simply: :In order to be polite, a speaker communicates meanings which (a) place a high value on what relates to the other person (typically the addressee), (MAJOR CONSTRAINT) and (b) place a low value on what relates to the speaker. (MINOR CONSTRAINT). It is clear from many observations that constraint (a) is more powerful than constraint (b). The following hypothesis will be put forward, and supported by very limited evidence: that the GSP provides a very general explanation for communicative politeness phenomena in Eastern languages such as Chinese, Japanese and Korean, as well as in western languages such as English. This is not to deny the importance of quantitative and qualitative differences in the settings of social parameters and linguistic parameters of politeness in such languages. A framework such as the GSP provides the parameters of variation within which such differences can be studied. Hence this article argues in favour of the conclusion that, despite differences, there is no East-West divide in politeness.

Sequential and Institutional Contexts in Calls for Help

Abstract: In this paper we argue that the organization of citizen calls to emergency services reveals how the sequential machinery of conversation is adapted by speaker-hearers to organize, coordinate and exhibit to one another their knowledge and purposes on particular occasions. It is in the way such knowledge is brought to bear, and purposes at hand made evident, that recurrent sequences of interactionally and institutionally relevant activity are built out of local and particular materials. Thus, the sequential organization of conversation is a fundamental resource for social activities directed to matters outside of, but addressable through talk, and for achieving regular, recurrent patterns of action in the face of varying details and circumstances.

One More Time: Do Female and Male Managers Differ?

Abstract: Executive Overview There has been a dramatic change in the “face” of management over the last two decades. That face is now female more than one-third of the time. What are the implications for the practice of management? Most of us are aware of traditional stereotypes about male-female differences, but how well do these stereotypes apply to the managerial ranks? Do male and female managers differ in their basic responses to work situations and their overall effectiveness (and if so, in what ways), or are they really quite similar? This article reviews the research evidence gathered on these questions since women managers were first noticed by researchers in the mid-1970s. The implications of this review are discussed, and contrasted with recommendations offered in recent articles by Jan Grant in Organizational Dynamics and Felice Schwartz in Harvard Business Review. The title of the article is styled after the title of Frederick Herzberg's classic 1968 Harvard Business Review article, “One More Time: How...