Chinese adolescents' perceptions of success factors in society

7 Relationship between Society and Success in China In answering the research question, “What factors do Chinese adolescents think affect their success in China?” the text from three interviews with Chinese students was analyzed using thematic analysis technique. For this study, 2 11th grade girls in an urban school and one 11th grade boy in an urban school were interviewed. Their remarks were transcribed and thematically analyzed in order to identify themes that could explain their perception of the relationship between society and success in China. This paper will examine the themes that emerged and show how they explain the adolescents’ perceptions. To identify themes, attention was paid to 1) repetition, 2) indigenous categories, 3) metaphors and analogies, 4) transitions, 5) constant comparison and differences, 6) linguistic connectors, and 7) silence or missing data, in accordance with the recommended practices of Guest, MacQueen and Namey (2012). By focusing on these characteristics within the responses of the participants, themes that are important to the interviewee can become more noticeable and therefore meaningful to the researcher. Using thematic analysis presupposes that the researcher already has a perspective in mind (the subjective approach to obtaining information) and this is framed by the types of questions that are asked: these questions serve as the doorway or pathway by which data is retrieved from the participant. In this way, the structured interview essentially serves as the frame for the themes that are likely to emerge, though it does not necessarily define the themes or limit them in terms of how the participants express themselves. For example, with the first participant the question “Do you think everybody who has talent/capabilities in China will actually succeed?” is asked at line 24. The response is negative in the sense that the theme which emerges expresses a concept that opposes the view projected by the interviewer. In other words, the interviewer presupposes that talent and ability is all that is need to succeed in China. The student responds that talent and ability are not necessarily all that are required. The keywords that pop out of the response and that are consistent (i.e., repeated among the other participants in the study) throughout the data set are “relationship” and “opportunities.” Right away the first theme that is key to understanding the adolescents’ perspective is one in which the framing device of the interviewer is opposed: talent and ability are not all that are required to succeed in China. The role of society, in terms of how well one has established relationships with others in business or the extent to which one has an opportunity to succeed, is paramount in the view of the first adolescent. The second also shares this perspective, which is evident from the use of words like “recognition” and “fair” which are also expressed in a negative (i.e., oppositional) regard to the same question. Talent and ability, therefore, is viewed skeptically by the two adolescent girls. The adolescent boy responds in the same way, using the same phrase, “Not necessarily,” as the first participant to the question; and, again, this is another negative confirmation that the approach of the interviewer to the topic has set a frame by which the adolescents reject the assumption underlying the question and propose an alternate view on the subject: that relationships—used again by the third participant, recognition and, in his case, “funds” are also crucial to success. The second adolescent girl interviewed also used the phrase “financial situation” to express another reason why talent and ability alone are insufficient to obtain success, implying that one’s finances must be well-off to start with. In short, the three adolescents reject the idea that talent and ability is all that is needed to succeed in China. Thus, the first theme to emerge from the text is that the adolescents are skeptical about the extent to which talent and ability alone will lead to success in China. They respond negatively to the question, repeat the same concepts again and again—namely, that relationships and recognition—outside assistance from individuals who are already successful—play a significant role. In short, the adolescents view themselves as outsiders in China and that in order to succeed they must be given a break that allows them to get inside the business world. The adolescents also make comparisons that are helpful in understanding their perspective. All three participants make comparisons to reinforce the points that they try to make to the interviewer’s questions. The first adolescent compares her situation with a student in Inner Mongolia who is further removed from the life of activity and business in the city of Shanghai. Such a student who lives in the rural countryside of China will have to work harder (the adolescent notes that she knows a person who must get up much earlier and work much later in Inner Mongolia than she must do in the city—and the assumption here is that the adolescent believes this is primarily because of the fact that the student is handicapped by her geographical location). There is a degree of inconsistency in the logic presented by the girl; for if connections and relationships are more important than ability or talent, why does she explain the long school hours in Inner Mongolia as being an outcome of this distance from Shanghai. Would it not simply make more sense for the students to be sent to Shanghai where they can make connections? The second adolescent compares her situation with a student in America who is more likely to have his or her talents recognized and appreciated because, the assumption underlying this response, is that America is fairer and there are more opportunities for individuals to engage in upward mobility based on their own hard work and work ethic. This assumption is best explained by the missing data that is not stated but that is clearly informing the adolescent girl’s perspective—that is, the sense of the American Dream, which has told the story that people in America can achieve success simply by working hard and doing a good job. In America, one can rely upon oneself, one’s skills, one’s talents and ability in order to succeed. In American, independence is celebrated and appreciated; whereas in China, the system is not fair because it is operated by people who have built strong relationships and have a monopoly on all aspects of life so that if you want to succeed, you must buy your way into the system or know someone who will be willing to let you in. The idea that hard work, skills, talent and ability will get you access to success is denied in this sense, and the comparison that the girl makes to life in America reinforces the skeptical perspective she holds. The third adolescent also makes a comparison. He compares his situation to what he sees on TV: he asserts that there are “many factors” that determine whether a person is successful in China. Funds and relationships are important variables in that determination and the adolescent explains by giving an example of a farmer who has a son and a department head who has a son. The adolescent says that the son of the peasant will have a much harder time being successful in society than the son of the department head—primarily because of these two variables: funds and relationships. The peasant is unlikely to have either while the department head is likely to have both. Thus, talent and ability have nothing to do with, as far as this adolescent is concerned: he has learned from watching TV that those who are successful in society come from families that have already been successful in prior generations. Success is thus passed down from one generation to the next, as is poverty for those families who were not born into the higher echelons of society. In order to succeed, one must have good relationships to higher society and one the correlation to this is that one must have funds. The assumption underlying the student’s perspective is that success is passively received, like a birthright, and is not really the outcome of hard work and perseverance. In conclusion, conducting thematic analysis with regard to the transcripts of the adolescent students and their perspective on the relationship between society and success reveals that the students have a skeptical perspective on what goes into obtaining success. By identifying analogies, indigenous categories, repeated concepts and terms and phrases, and understanding the missing data not supplied but assumed and projected by the adolescents, the themes that emerged were clear to see. The students viewed the relationship between society and success as exclusive: if one was not born into high society or did not have access to good connections, one would not achieve success. The concept of forming a “back door business” as expressed by the first adolescent showed that relationships serve as a type of prerequisite to success; one cannot expect to succeed in society unless one has had a chance to develop connections and to be recognized. For that reason, those who are not raised in the echelons of society are less likely to achieve success, even if they work long hours and study hard: if they are from a region like Inner Mongolia they must find ways to stand out, which is why they will spend all their time trying to be the best that they can be in their disciplines so that their scores speak for themselves and serve as a sign of what they can do and how they can be of service to society.