Content analysis of leadership in Asia‐Pacific organizations

Abstract

Cooperation Council (PECC) are two international organizations in the region of Asia-Pacific with similar goals but dissimilar organizational natures, properties, functions, and structures. Past studies researching APEC and PECC have mainly taken the perspective of macroeconomics or international relations. The intent when carrying out this study was to adopt a nontraditional approach to studying APEC and PECC by using a qualitative leadership and management methodology. By referring to identified leadership practices through content analysis and explored organizational paradigms through a narrative approach, this study recommends the application of suitable leadership and management practices to empower these two organizations and other similar organizations in the United States and other countries.

Advancing the Production Networks in East Asia

“…The Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) has been serving as this region's multilateral mechanism to coordinate diversities economically and politically. The goals of APEC are to promote economic liberalization, facilitation and cooperation (Chiu & Lao, 2008). The recent APEC activities designed to fulfill the goals and pertinent to regional production networks would be the "Supply Chain Connectivity" (SC) framework (APEC, 2009).…”

“…In the 2012 APEC Leaders' meeting, they stressed that it's confirmed by all to achieve a 10% improvement in supply chain performance by 2015, whereas the performance will be evaluated in terms of efficiency in moving goods and services in the region of Asia-Pacific with respect to diverse conditions facing regional economies (APEC, 2012b). APEC process is bottom up; APEC decision making is top down (Chiu & Lao, 2008). Since decision makers at the very top have openly announced an objective to be met, the working levels will take specific actions to improve the region's supply Both REI and APEC are mechanisms that can be utilized to improve production networks at the regional levels.…”

“…The differences are a) REI is binding and APEC is non-binding, b) REI is rule based, and APEC is voluntary, and c) REI is flexible on the number of members, and APEC is set with 21 members for the time being. Regional level solutions are ideal for resolving regional issues; however, the most challenging issue is that this region lacks of effective leadership to start concrete actions (Chiu & Lao, 2008).…”

“…To maximize or optimize the region's overall objective is not easy, because there are diverse interests of players. Decision makers, say APEC leaders, have their own domestic agendas that could be very different from the region's overall priorities (Chiu & Lao, 2008). For that reason, to improve the East Asian production networks at the economy level would be supported by a relatively stronger incentive, as a means to sustain the supply side of an individual economy's economic growth.…”

“…For that reason, to improve the East Asian production networks at the economy level would be supported by a relatively stronger incentive, as a means to sustain the supply side of an individual economy's economic growth. Decision variables derived from the regional level objective function requires leadership; decision variables obtained from the economy level objective needs incentives (Chiu & Lao, 2008).…”