Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This article critically investigates the networking practices, known as guanxi in China, employed by private tutoring entrepreneurs amid China’s Double Reduction Policy that strictly regulates the private tutoring industry. Drawing from a 16-month narrative study in Chongqing municipality, this article examines the role of sensemaking in the initiation, maintenance, and termination/mutation of guanxi networks among private tutoring entrepreneurs, a process shaped by dynamic interactions embedded in cultural, institutional, and structural contexts. The findings reveal previously under-researched mechanisms within the guanxi networking process, highlighting its multifaceted and evolving nature. Theoretically, we contribute to guanxi scholarship by reframing it as a dynamic interpretive process rather than a static resource and extend sensemaking theory beyond intra-organizational to multiple inclusions. Practically, our distinction between legitimate reciprocity, ethically ambiguous favors, and regulatory evasion implies that policy efforts should target specific misconduct rather than guanxi as such.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Li et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: