Favor (Renqing): Characteristics and Practice from a Resourced-Based Perspective (Report‪)‬

Researchers have long considered relationship, or guanxi, to be a core concept in understanding Chinese social behavior (Chen&Chung, 1994; Hwang, 1987; Leung, Wong&Wong, 1996; Liang, 1987; Wen, 1988; King, 1985; 1991). Although a variety of theoretical approaches to it have been fruitful, such as the investigation of guanxi using concepts from indigenous social psychology (e.g., Bond&Hwang, 1986; Hwang, 1987; Yang, 2002), theories of paternalistic leadership (e.g., Cheng, Chou, Farth, 2006), rituals of social activity (especially social eating) (Bian, 2001), social network analysis (e.g., Wellman, Barry, Chen, Wenhong&Dong, 2002), and theories of cultural capital (e.g., Lin, and Erickson, 2008), criticism yet abounds of the conceptual and methodological laxity present in studies focusing on guanxi. Critics of guanxi studies focus on several problem areas. On the one hand, critics tend to identify the absence of an integrated and comprehensive theoretical model of guanxi-centered communication (Lee, Pae,&Wong, 1999). According to such critics, serious problems arise from inconclusive conceptual definitions of guanxi, the unresolved debate over the selection of indicators and dimensions of measuring guanxi (Chow&Ng, 2004), and the lack of attention to intra-cultural variation in the wake of intensive research on cross-cultural comparison (Liao, Fu,&Fu, 2005). On the other hand, objections grounded in the disciplines of sociology and cultural history cite the diminishing significance of guanxi in contemporary Chinese societies (Bond&Hwang, 1986; Guthrie, 1998; 2001) and the continuous transformation/ adaptation to, and shaping of, new social institutions and structures (Millington, Eberhardt&Wilkinson, 2005; Yang, 2002), as well as the controversial debate over whether guanxi provides a complement to, or a substitute for, contract law (Luo, 2000; Chan&Dasborough, 2006).