Abstract: 0 this study examines how, to what extent, and with what effect the indigenous cultural con

Table 3:
Empowerment adoption: An emic-etic role comparison
Relevant cultural dimensions/
practice facet
emic—
Kreng Jai
Etic/comparative
Practice facet (i) empowering 
subordinates
Action: Reticence, ceremonial-
assent adoption
n/a
Attitude: Consideration and 
compassion for subordinates, 
loathe to overburden them
Practice facet (ii) empower
-
ment adoption
Action: Reticence, ceremonial-
assent adoption
Action: Reticence, ceremonial 
adoption
Attitude: Consideration for 
superior’s feelings re: taking 
on his responsibilities
Attitude: Belief in inherent 
inappropriateness of taking on 
boss role/authority based on 
‘social-order’ role assumptions 
( 
high power distance
)

---

75
Understanding Organizational Practice Adoption … 
Performance appraisal
The process of identifying and developing human performance in organizations has 
broadened considerably in recent years to incorporate the views of multiple stakeholders 
in a 360-degree account of employee competence (e.g., Van Gennip et al. 
2010
). Inher
-
ent to this approach is that appraisers include one’s peers, one’s subordinates (termed 
as ‘reverse appraisal’) and even oneself. At the cross-national level, however, many 
researchers have questioned the applicability of such feedback (Chiang and Birtch 
2010
) 
where the notion of subordinates appraising superiors runs counter to the elevated hierar
-
chical distance between organizational ranks (Mead and Andrews 
2009
).
In Thailand, given the paternalistic nature of indigenous superior-subordinate rela
-
tionships employees have always strongly avoided direct negative performance feed
-
back (e.g., Komin 
1990b
; siengthai and Bechter 
2004
; Yukongdi 
2010
). As observed by 
Andrews and Krairith “…in Thai culture there is no such thing as challenging the ideas or 
giving constructive arguments to superiors…(so that) bosses do not lose face in front of 
others…” (
2009
, p. 281). Even when the practice is mandated (as in an MNE subsidiary) 
it engenders typically nothing more than a ritual performed without meaning or conse-
quence (Andrews et al. 
2003
).
Preliminary interviews uncovered the widespread belief among Cesaritt senior manag
-
ers that 360-degree feedback was being completed largely as a meaningless ceremony 
rather than a source of valued information. The idea of evaluating one’s superior was 
viewed as a form of undue assertiveness (against a backdrop of deference and loyalty). 
across our informant sample
 kreng jai
was stated as the prime feeling to describe the 
ensuing discomfort, especially where there was genuine dissatisfaction with one’s boss. 
As one HR officer expressed it: “…whatever the reason, I don’t like to do like this…it’s 
not comfortable for Thai to write thing about the boss, we never do like this ….but ok if I 
say the good thing and it comes from inside it is better than to say I have a bad feeling…
about writing the bad thing it’s impossible I think for Thais, even if people are not happy 
with the boss about many things nobody is going to write about this….”
Kreng jai
was also proffered as the main factor inhibiting the appraisal of peers and 
subordinates, as illustrated in two anecdotes. The first concerns the appraisal by an HR 
manager of a peer, where 
kreng jai
played a significant role in the content (especially the 
wording) of the appraisal given. According to the appraisor concerned “…I don’t want to 
say…(that) she (is) not worth her position, she cannot speak English, she cannot use com
-
puter, so her job is basically like admin function….because I feel 
kreng jai
say like that 
because she here longer than me, she older than me I must to respect her…so I say she 
a valuable member of the team…”. As Yukongdi (
2010
) notes, there is a Thai “cultural 
expectation” that the younger supervisor would show respect to the older subordinate. 
Kreng jai
in this case acts both to express a deeply-held value (respect for seniority) and 
to provide the link between a societal level norm and an individual-level behavior.
The second illustration concerns the appraisal of an administrative junior where the 
manager in question felt 
kreng jai
to write the ‘truth’ about her incompetence but would 
go through the motions of providing a satisfactory review nonetheless. “Her father was 
work here before”, he explained. “He was my boss for long time but then he have acci
-

---

76
T. G. Andrews and N. Chompusri
dent, so now cannot walk, cannot speak, just stay home. So for _____ (his daughter) I feel 
kreng jai
to write much about negative thing….I 
kreng jai
her father.”
in these cases 
kreng jai
adds its distinctive influence to the usual behaviors associated 
with a high-power distance, relations-based work environment and provides a specific, 
more detailed construct to help bridge broad, universalist cultural descriptions with the 
indigenous individual actions that ensue. As outlined in Table 
4
, when appraising 
superi-
ors
and peers, respondent 
kreng jai
acted to reinforce the influence of prior comparative 
constructs. However, when appraising subordinates 
kreng jai
acted once again in exclu-
sivity, i.e., without support from the major etic dimensions.