1. A Note on the Similarities and Differences
A Note on the Similarities and Differences between Chinese Guanxi-Networks and Korean Yongo-Networks
21st Century Human Value Forum
Andong, 29. Mai 2015
Prof. Dr. Markus Taube

2. Informal Social Networks Are they all the same?
Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen

3. Space for Variety: Parameters for Idiosyncratic Network Design
Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen

4. Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen
guanxi- and yongo-Networks Common Ground: Reciprocity and Club-Characteristics
Cooperative behavior becomes the dominant strategy in one-period games (unique transaction between club members) since these unique games are bound up in an iterative system of multiple games (transactions) with other club members.
The fast flow of information among network members is crucial for the ordering mechanism to work efficiently.
Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen

5. guanxi- and yongo-Networks Core Difference: Tie-base
Identity – Perceived Similarity
guanxi networks are in principle based on personal relations marked by specific identity creating elements which are either “natural” or “created”: - origin in the same village or region, - served in the same military unit, - belonging to the same party unit, - graduated from the same school,
- same experiences in life and/or work - friendship and acquaintance
- overlap of friends and acquantances etc.
Identity – Naturally Determined Segregation
yongo networks are pre-defined, “natural” structures into which individuals are born. There is hardly any possibility of conscious, goals-oriented yongo-”creation”: - hyulyon family and blood ties
- jiyon ties based on same hometown - hakyon ties based on attending the same educational institution (at the same time or not)
guanxi
yongo
Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen

6. guanxi- and yongo-Networks Differing Architectures: Network Character
Egocentric network architecture
Decentralized network architecture
Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen

7. Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen
guanxi- and yongo-Networks Differing Functionalities: Network Principle
Utilitarian – Purpose-based
guanxi-networks are not simply ‘brotherhoods of friends’ bound by loyal friendship and free of any economic interest.
It is rather the mutual exchange of services and the acceptance of abstract debt obligations that provides the main integrating force within a guanxi-network.
Outsiders are discriminated against, but not alienated as they are potential new network members
-> Weak particularism!
Immutable and Irreversible – Cause-based
yongo relationships are not purpose-based by nature but rather conventional social relationships individuals are born into
Cooperation and the provision of services to co-network-members is a natural obligation and independent from any bilateral credit/debt balances
Outsiders are strictly discriminated against. They cannot become network members in the future. -> Strong particularism!
guanxi
yongo
Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen

8. Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen
guanxi- and yongo-Networks Further Differences: Openness – External Bridging
yongo-networks are rigid.
They are based on life-long lasting “natural” relationships. An existing set of network-relations does not change in the course of time.
There exists virtually no possibility to establish formal bridges/alliances with other yongo-networks.
However, the three dimensions HHJ may allow for overlaps and cross-network links
guanxi-networks are amorphous. The reach of a guanxi network can be expanded by the inclusion of new members as well as shrunk by neglect of network relations or expulsion.
Bridges/alliances with other guanxi- networks are possible.
Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen

9. guanxi- and yongo-Networks Towards the future – Open Questions
Given their significant structural differences as well as varying roles in society and economy, in which direction will guanxi- und yongo- networks develop in the coming years?
Are changes in the external environment (rising economic complexity and fragmentation; growing individualisation, etc.) impacting on the viability of these networks?
What importance does the functional value of network-transactions play?
How strong is the social embeddedness of these networks and in how far will this determine their prevalence in changing societies?
Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen

10. Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen
Mercator School of Management
IN-EAST, Institute for East Asian Studies
Chair of East Asian Economic Studies / China
Prof. Dr. Markus Taube
Markus Taube – University of Duisburg-Essen 10