The author is Zhao Jian, President of the Caesar Research Institute, Professor, Special Analyst of ta kung Pao, and member of the China New Supply 50 Forum. This article was published in the Ta Kung Pao Economic Observer column "Ze is Covered by Everything".
(This article is the 551st original article published by the Caesar Research Institute and the 513th original article by Professor Zhao Jian)
(2400 words in the main text, about 4-6 minutes to read)
Following the failure of Didi's listing to become the focus, Lenovo is now on the cusp of social opinion. How to look at Lenovo, how to look at the enterprises and entrepreneurs of an era, perhaps should also give a "historical resolution", otherwise, the new round of reform and opening up in the new era can not form a stable expectation.
The recent "Sima Nan Shelling Lenovo Incident" (Source: Radar Finance)
It can be said that lenovo's dilemma is the dilemma of a generation of Chinese enterprises. Liu Chuanzhi's plight is also the plight of a generation of Chinese entrepreneurs. An enterprise that developed in the era of "crossing the river by feeling the stones, holding the rat is a good cat, and getting rich first and getting rich later" must be full of "original sin" when it is measured and judged by the standards of the new era. Just as we look back at that era of turmoil and struggle, it is also the recklessness, fanaticism and ignorance of a generation, which is also the original sin of an era.
How do we question the rise of an era?
Especially for a country in transition, where the rule of law is still in progress, how do we define these special stages of behavior for businesses and entrepreneurs who have reaped the "reform dividend" in marginal and gray areas. If we settle accounts for that era, who is responsible for the original design and commitment? If we reconcile with that era, how can we account for this era?
Of course, this does not mean that the law violates the law and discipline, and in the original sin covered up by the times, "the law does not blame the public." Even if there are no violations of law and discipline, a large enterprise with international influence, a rich and prominent family, should have higher standards for themselves. Entrepreneurs must realize that when a business is large to a certain extent, when a family's wealth is only a paper number, it needs to care about the fate of more people and needs to assume certain social responsibilities.
For, in modern society, the essence of wealth and money is not the possession alone, but a relational link with other people. This relationship, first of all, is embodied in exclusivity, for private wealth, the possession of one person or a family means the exclusion of others. In the case that the cake is difficult to continue to grow, the world's resources are so many, if a certain part of the people have too much, others are distributed too little, how can the world be peaceful?
Second, wealth implies a potential trading relationship. Modern wealth often exists in the form of money and financial assets, yet money and financial assets, as a kind of number and contract, cannot be eaten or drunk, and do not bring real utility. For wealth and money to be converted into real utility, they must be exchanged for the value of other people's labor (the purchase of goods and services). This means that huge wealth is a powerful potential right to occupy the labor value of others, which is the basic rule of the game in the market economy and the commodity economy.
Therefore, the concern of large enterprises and large families for society and others is actually ecological harmony thinking in the modern sense. The larger the enterprise and the more family wealth, the greater the impact on the external environment, and the greater the dependence on the external environment. Imagine if the whole society is full of struggles and conflicts because of the excessive division between the rich and the poor, how can the enterprise be settled, and how can the wealth of the family be exchanged for value with others? The value and wealth of the enterprise can be realized, and there needs to be a normal and harmonious society, otherwise everything cannot be talked about.
In fact, in the thousands of years of china's historical evolution, such a symbiotic ecological culture has been formed, the so-called "gentry" system. The squire on the rich side, or the national entrepreneur with great influence, will undertake some local charity, public welfare undertakings, take the initiative to give back to the society, and repair the ecology (Zhang Wencai, a typical representative of the landlord bully recorded in historical records, is actually a very well-known philanthropist). Perhaps, they are not so noble, because these big landlords and tycoons know that only when the whole social environment on which they depend for survival is good, their wealth and power are meaningful. Otherwise, in a turbulent environment, wealth is nothing more than paper figures, gold and silver in cabinets. Wealth can only be manifested in the exchange of value between people.
After the founding of New China, the gentry culture withdrew with the demise of the old era, and Chinese society entered a tortuous modernization transformation. If we summarize these seventy years according to the direction of transformation, we can divide them into the pre-reform era (Mao Zedong era), the reform era (Deng Xiaoping era) and the post-reform era (new era of socialism). Regarding the inheritance, conflict and subtle tension of these three eras, I have written a detailed analysis three years ago. It can be said that without understanding the delicate relationship between these three eras, it is difficult to understand the general direction of China at present and in the future. All this is not accidental, but the inevitable evolution of society.
Lenovo's dilemma must also be understood in the "reckoning" of one era to another. If this is the original sin of an era, how should we make the judgment? Why is it that an enterprise with international influence, an enterprise that actively introduced foreign capital in that era, actively used foreign resources, and actively responded to the call of the state to go out and take the road of internationalization, turned into a comprador of imperialism and a sinner of the loss of state-owned assets in this era?
And Lenovo also seems to be living in the past era, the pre-modern obscurantist state of small businesses that compete to get rich first, grab rats, and "fish in muddy waters" while crossing the river by feeling the stones. In other words, although Lenovo has achieved the world leader by means of the east wind of the times, whether its mind, temperament, and pattern have been correspondingly improved. With an annual salary of hundreds of millions of dollars, has Yang Liu ever cared about the 600 million people in China who earned less than 1,000 yuan a month?
Of course, the "gentry culture" of benefiting one party and altruism has been buried in the old paper pile as an antique of agricultural civilization, but how to repair the social ecology sacrificed because of efficiency in the reform era? In particular, how to cure the spiritual harm and accumulation of hostility brought about by "everything is looked at for money", the worship of rights, and the rush for quick success. Otherwise, the trial of a large international enterprise should be completed by the "jumping beam clown" of another era, rather than a formal state instrument? And in the face of doubt and criticism, it has almost always been in a state of near-aphasia, and even to defend the reputation. If there is no wrong thing, how did it come to this point? In a country with a sound rule of law, who will be the protagonist in judging whether enterprises violate discipline or not?
The curtain of the new era has been lifted, and the discourse of common prosperity has been deeply rooted in the hearts of the people. Times have changed, and the objective laws of social evolution are not shifted by the will of the individual. The gentry culture of agricultural civilization has become ancient, how should the charity and public welfare undertakings of commercial civilization be established? If small businesses, small businessmen, and most ordinary people can refine egoism, large enterprises like Lenovo cannot be indifferent to social demands. In addition to employment and taxation, an effort can be made on three distributions. What's more, it makes people question whether the financial structure, excessive debt ratio, and whether it implies potential social risks are also a problem that cannot be avoided. Again, quantitative change brings qualitative change, and when an enterprise is large to a certain extent, it has the nature of a social enterprise.
This is the dilemma of Lenovo, the dilemma of the Liu Chuanzhi family, and the plight of a generation of Chinese enterprises and entrepreneurs. This dilemma can be seen as an individual reflection of the judgment of one era on the other in the process of the transformation of two eras. Unfortunately, too many people still live in the past reform era, living in the era when there was nothing but ideals and hopes, and everyone rushed forward to grab the rats and could only take care of their own wealth and have no time to take care of others and society. As if the times never change, as if the years never get old, China is always young.
(This article is reproduced from Caesar Insights, with permission)