ask is of the extent to which the leader’s own self-interest has been
subjugated and how that affects the effectiveness of the follower
transformation (Chenet al., 2007 ).
Distinctions, conduct propriety, and Weber’s bureaucracy
In reading Xunzi’s theory of social distinctions and the ability to
assemble, and noting his detailed attention to administrative propriety
through division of labor, a clear chain of command, and impartial
rules for the allocation of rewards, we are reminded of Weber’s theory
of bureaucracy, which incorporated Chinese ancient bureaucracy.
In his ‘‘ideal administrative system of organization,’’ Weber ( 1947 )laid
out, among other principles, work division, hierarchy in command,
and impersonal administrative rules and regulations. The difference,
however, is also striking in that Xunzi, while advocating rational merit-
based impartiality, nevertheless insists on maintaining ritualized conduct
propriety in accordance to roles and positions. While Weber criticized
clanship and excluded personal relationships in an organization for the
sake of efficiency and rationality, Xunzi took personal relationships
for granted in organizations and sought to establish mutual and reci-
procal obligations between managers and subordinates through defining
and operationalizing propriety in interpersonal and administrative
affairs. In so doing, Xunzi sought to maintain social bonds and harmony
in an otherwise impersonal bureaucracy.
Defining and building organizational culture
The ideal Confucianist society is one that is most humane, and the
Way (Dao) of humanity is primarily defined and manifested in terms
of benevolence, righteousness, and ritual propriety. More noteworthy
of Xunzi’s theory of kingship, humanity means culturedness resulting
from persistent and concerted cultivation, which differentiates not
only sage and noble individuals from small-minded ones, but also
sage leadership from mediocre or tyrannical styles, and humane,
harmonious, and prosperous societies and organizations from those
that are merely surviving or in peril. From the logic of the evilness
of human nature, culture is by definition humane, hence positive.
Negative or dysfunctional cultures as conceived by Western organiza-
tional researchers (e.g. Trice and Beyer, 1993 ) are extensions and
76 Yan-qin Peng, Chao-chuan Chen, and Xin-hui Yang