Tag Archive for Don Southerton author

Korea 2020: The Book, an Update

I’ve been in editing mode for the past few days. Plans are for an end of December release of my new book Korea 2020: A workplace in transition.

Many thanks to those of you who previewed the manuscript and shared comments. If you, too, would like to preview and comment, I’ll email you a draft copy.

Korea 2020

Korea 2020: the book, shares not only what’s behind the current corporate trends but also the impact of Change both in South Korea and for operations outside Korea.

Exploring this change is at the core of this new book. Topics include the restructuring of age-old corporate norms such as more casual dress, a simplification of workplace titles leading to flatter organizations, and the pushback against workplace bullying and gender discrimination.

It also drills deeper and provides readers with workarounds, work throughs, and insights.

Don https://www.bridgingculture.com

Relationships Korea 2020

As with past three books and those prior, I’ll be sharing chapter by chapter sneak peeks for comments, questions and in many cases your additional and much-needed thoughts. This is the third installment.   Missed past 2 posts?  Just let me know and I’ll share.  Comment welcome.  Enjoy.

relationships

Author Don Southerton

Chapter 2
            Favouritism prevails in our society due to strong political, academic and blood ties… It worsens social division, denies fair chances to ordinary people and therefore makes their social mobility more difficult.  Chung Seon-sup, Chaebul.com
Relationships
Relationships are the core of Korean society and business.  During a recent Seoul office chat a team member reminded me that Korean communication, too, was based on relationships. Although I am familiar with the Korean language use of honorification and recognize the elevated status, I gained some new insights as my colleague explained how a conversation is shaped by the relationship between the speakers. For example, how one communicates with another person is dependent upon the junior/senior relationship. Honorification is required towards a person who is senior in age or position.
Additionally, my colleague reminded me that while polite and respectful conversation is a plus, the power distance created in the use of honorification could distance co-workers and created inequality, which can be seen as detrimental to a modern workplace.
This conversation then shifted to how these hierarchical power distant relationships in the workplace reinforced by language also lead to a related issue — strong loyalty with juniors expected to support leadership and visa versa.
In the extreme a loyal subordinate may take the blame for a superior’s actions and even cover for a boss’s questionable activities—a surprisingly common occurrence in Korea.  Such loyalty in the past was expected to be rewarded with superiors sharing earned fortunes and opportunities with loyalists.
It is no surprise that to ensure a high level of loyalty, executives, traditionally, hired friends, acquaintances, and classmates to fill the managerial positions below them.   Additionally, the persons hired typically were associated with shared alma maters, such as Korea University, Yonsei, Sungkyunkwan,and Seoul National, creating a tight network. This was the rule, not the exception.
Today these past practices are viewed as favoritism and are now under considerable scrutiny.  More so, these hires are seen as irregular, circumventing the normal employment procedures others have to follow, and contributing to inequality. However, the main problem with these “prioritized” loyalties is they interfere with hiring and promoting competence, especially in areas requiring expertise.
            Seoul JUNE 4, 2018  South Korea’s President Moon Jae-in is struggling to ferret out widespread nepotism and cronyism that has plagued the country for decades after revelations of hiring practices that favor those connected with the wealthy and powerful.
 
            Despite Mr Moon’s reform efforts, allegations of favouritism in the jobs market continue to make headlines, dealing a blow to his key economic policy of boosting growth by creating jobs in the public sector and fuelling discontent among South Korea’s youth. 
 
            Nepotism in hiring is politically embarrassing for the liberal government and Mr. Moon, who was elected on a platform of tackling corruption, rooting out cronyism and promoting equality… 
 
            Young people’s frustration is building up even under this centre-left administration that is pursuing a fair society free of corruption, said Park Ju-geun, head of corporate analysis group CEO Score.
            But experts say Mr Moon faces an uphill battle in stopping favouritism as they suspect unfair hiring practices are even more prevalent in the private sector than in state-funded institutions, because it receives less public scrutiny. 
 
            “If favouritism is tolerated, competent human resources are not allocated to the best places, weakening the country’s economic efficiency and social justice,” said Park Sang-in, a professor of public administration at Seoul National University .
Regarding public scrutiny, the tide has turned. Media coverage of what is now seen as unfair practices has been quite extensive. Government agencies, financial institutions and private industry have been cited, with their leadership coming under investigation and being prosecuted.
We see this systemic overhaul to fix unfair hiring practices as another aspect of the change in the Korea workplace.  That said, many of these changes such as honorification, seniority, and loyalties are deeply rooted in tradition and practice.
In particular modern Korean society still is challenged to part from the ways of Confucianism–the Confucian emphasis on the importance of the family and the group over the individual that had been extended to South Korean business.
Employees once were expected to regard the workplace as a family, with loyalty to the head of the company as the patriarch who enjoyed exclusive rank, status and privileges. Importance was also placed on attributes such as age, kinship status, gender, education, and sociopolitical standing.  All today seen to be in conflict with a modern and fair workplace. Still relationships matter.
###

Korea 2020 The Progressive Workplace

This is the second of many sneak previews of my latest work in progress Korea 2020.  Comments welcome on the progressive workplace.

progressive workplace

Author Don Southerton

Even if a company implements a casual dress policy and does away with honorifics to facilitate communications, managers still won’t listen to us.  They are just old fogies in jeans.  A junior manager, 2017 Survey Korea Chamber of Commerce and Industry and McKinsey Consulting   
Chapter 1 A Progressive Workplace
In November 2015, I was asked by a journalist researching an article for The Economist to comment on the Korean workplace. The journalist’s premise as a foreigner was that significant change had already occurred.  I shared two points—first, office change was underway.  The best example of a progressive workplace was a firm I knew well — Hyundai Capital Services, a financial arm for the Hyundai Motor Group.  And two, due to stiff competition in Korea’s key overseas markets, in lots of cases, I saw the opposite of a liberalization of the workplace. In fact, new stricter policies were in place.
These points shaped the article. Addressing the first point, the progressive Hyundai Capital, the article revealed some of their policies.  I quote….
            MEETINGS to last no more than 30 minutes;
             junior staff allowed to speak freely with superiors; 
            a cut in bonuses for bosses whose teams do not take enough holidays. 
     
 My second point was that even though the new generation of workers sought change and companies’ endorsed change, older generations remain in firm control, especially in their overseas operations. Again I quote The Economist:
            Don Southerton, who advises South Korean businesses on how to manage their foreign operations, says many have been “going back to basics” since the slowdown in China and other big emerging markets. Their Korean staff has reverted to working longer hours and straining to hit short-term targets, under pressure from the bosses back in  Seoul.
 
            More South Korean companies appear to be tightening the screws at home, too: a  portal, found that almost half felt their company was disciplining them more than before: making them stick to a strict lunch hour, for example; or asking them to arrive   at the office an hour earlier; or in stricter dress codes.
 
            Relapsing back into old ways is unlikely to work, however, given the reluctance of younger employees to tolerate the strictures of the typical South   Korean workplace. Their expectations are “totally different” from those of their parents…
Fast-forwarding three years to 2018
Today, I do see a transition underway—a lessening pushback, too.   Companies have become more sensitive to work-life balance and many have broad mandates in place. Samsung and SK Group, as examples, have introduced a more simplified corporate hierarchy. Lotte Group has introduced stricter policies to support work-life balance including shutting down the company’s computers after working hours and requiring male workers to go on paternal leave.
 
More radical, workers are now boldly voicing publically concerns when policies are not upheld. Korean daily, Joongang News noted:
            When Kim Hyo-rin, 25, started her first job at a conglomerate, she soon realized that the company wasn’t as progressive as she thought it would be. 

            “Even though my company practices flextime and has a 40-hour workweek policy,  our department boss always looks at us badly if we come to work after 9 a.m., even though I work the full 40 hours,” said Kim.

            When she started the job, Kim was optimistic about working at a company with policies that seemed so worker-friendly.

            “Our company also has a policy that prevents senior colleagues from texting juniors about work-related issues after working hours and during weekends, but that rule is always ignored,” she added. “Nonetheless, our entire office is covered with posters  promoting these campaigns, which I feel are just for show.”


Change is underway.
Although implementation may be slow to take root in a growing number even leadership in the private sector, academia and government continue to stress the benefits of the progressive workplace.  Advocates point out the goal is a workplace in which employees are intrinsically motivated and evaluated according to their performance, not their seniority.
###