Search results

The purpose of this paper is to estimate the real urbanization level in China so as to provide a measurement that can be compared with the international level.

Taking into consideration 300m residents living in the administrative towns (300m residents here are referred to the population in administrative towns, including those in all counties), the gap between the urbanization rate of China and that of the world average becomes much wider.

China, however, implements the administrative system of government at the central, provincial, municipal, county and township levels. By city, it means the jurisdiction at and above the level of county, which includes the municipality directly under the central government, prefecture-level municipal and county. By town, it means the jurisdiction below the level of county (including the Chengguan Town, or capital town, where the county government is located) and exclusive of rural townships.

China has witnessed rapid development for 40 years since the reform and opening up in 1978. Nowadays, China has already stepped into the period of post-industrialization, with its urbanization rate (UR) of permanent population reaching 58.58 percent. However, on the basis of registered population, the UR is 43.37 percent, which is not only far below the average level of 81.3 percent in high-income countries, but also lower than the average of 65.8 percent in upper middle-income countries which are comparable to China in terms of per capita income. (The classification of state income level is based on the data of national income per capita and division standards in 2016 from the World Bank, in which annual revenue per capita in high-income countries reaches over US$12,736 and that in upper middle-income countries between US$4,126 and US$12,735.)

The purpose of this study is to examine the implementation of human resource management (HRM) practices that facilitate innovation in the public sector in a developing country.

Qualitative method was engaged whereby a semi-structured interview was conducted to get the responses of two groups of employees which are top management and executive in two types of public organizations which are awarded and non-awarded. The collected data was later analyzed thematically.

The results show that there are differences and similarities among the public agencies in terms of their implementation of HRM practices that facilitate innovation. Apparently, the awarded public agencies do follow HRM practices that really facilitate innovation such as local training, provide more types of rewards to their employees and set a higher minimum level of innovation in their performance evaluation.

This research confines only 10 public agencies in Malaysia. Future studies might want to include a larger sample size to make the findings more extensive. It also would be interesting to know different approaches in HRM implemented in the private organizations as well as to examine their influences on performance and other organizational factors.

Good and fair HRM practices such as training, reward and performance appraisal practices that focus on innovation facilitate and produce more innovative employees and organization innovation. Thus, public managers should implement them to a higher extent.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study that aims to engage the qualitative method in understanding how HRM practices can facilitate innovation in a developing country.