Leadership styles, school effective, needs of 'mien' (face) behaviour: the interactions in Hong Kong private schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
National cultures vary and the variations challenge the conventional wisdom of the Western management theory and practice in other cultural contexts. Specifically, the national characteristic of 'face(mien) behaviour' is immensely important at all levels in Chinese interpersonal communications. The notion of 'mien' permeates every aspect of interpersonal relationships in Chinese culture because of the culture’s overarching concern with relationships. This study examines the nature of 'mien' behaviour, explores how 'mien' functions in the Hong Kong educational context, and how leadership styles of secondary school principals interact with 'mien' as perceived by their teaching staff and how, eventually, these interactions influence the effectiveness of the schools. Whenever Chinese behaviour is discussed, the social philosophy of Confucianism is relevant. The Confucian ethical system regulating social behaviour has three principle ideas: ren(), yi() and li(); benevolence, righteousness or justice, and propriety or courtesy. This study also examines how these three principles nurture 'mien' and considers whether any alternate style of leadership in Hong Kong context can be formulated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".