A Comparative Research On The Internationalization Approaches Of Universities Of U.S.A And China From The Perspective Of Change Management

The three functions of modern universities are Teaching, Research and Servering theSociety. In an era of economy internationalization, to better fulfill the three functions, whichis to better cultivate students with international vision and competitiveness, better developmodernized technology and provide better intellectual service for the advancement of nationaland local economy and society as a whole, Internationalization has become an importantdeveloping opportunity and challenge for Chinese Universities in the21stcentury.How to find out or sketch out the approaches of University Internationalization? Stonesfrom other hills may attack the jade. After considering the representativeness and convenienceof chosen universities, the author of this paper compares the internationalization approachesof three universities from China and the USA: Yale University, South China University ofTechnology and Pittsburg State University. Change Management theory is used all through theanalysis and comparison of their Internationalization approaches. It is found out that all of thethree universities’ internationalization approaches nearly cover the eight steps of Kotter’sChange Management theory, that is: breed the urgency to internationalize, build upinternationalization leading group, form the strategy and map of internationalization,communicate the vision and possible measures of internationalization, anthorize staff(teachers, students and other staff) to take action, create short-term wins, consolidate the fruitsand push more action, and finally root the culture of internationalization into the universityorganization. More than that, three are three common elements in all the three universities’internationalization process: visionary leadership, procedural planning, and inductivelearning.Although the exsiting common eight steps and three elements in the three universities’internationalization process, however, three are many differentiations among them, forexample, their internationalization expression forms, levels of internationalization, depth andwidth of internationalization, emphasis of internationalization and the financial sources ofinternationalization are different. Through the comparison and analysis of theinternationalization approaches of the three universities, this paper primarily concludes thegeneral mode of university internationalization approach, and the different ways to realize iton the part of the three universities: Yale is good at communicating internationalization ideasto its insiders and outside world through Open Course and Yale World Fellow Program,and it also details the institutes of internationalization and strengthens the contact with alumni;South China University of Technology emphasizes on cultivating leaders in internationalization by sending them overseas to learn internationalization managementpractice, it also takes great efforts to build internationalized faculty; Pittsburg State Universityfocuses on providing good service to international students and fostering harmoniousinternationalized environment.Hopefully it will deepen the research and practice of university internationalization tosome extent.