 In a so-called flat world, Thomas Friedman is a man who has received as many brickbats (there are no hills, valleys or mountains hindering the thrower) as he has plaudits. But, whatever your view – does he write opportunistic claptrap or prescient deconstructive analysis? – he found some elements of a theory that many people were unwilling to accept, fused them together and wrote them up.
He then plugged the theory relentlessly through his globally syndicated columns, and set off around the world to speak, speak and speak some more to anyone who would listen – and countless thousands have. Flatworldism was born, and is now a guiding mantra for MBA students the world over.
China, of course, is a little more sceptical. Friedman got a pretty rough ride last year in Shanghai. One local journalist said, to Friedman’s face, that he wrote “American-centric, cliché-ridden garbage.” A perplexed audience member asked why he continually referred to “Red China.”
When it comes to China, of course, western- as well as American-centric, cliché-ridden garbage is rather prevalent. The people at Access Asia, in particular, regularly highlight and lampoon poorly analysed and, often, laughable attempts by western businesspeople, writers and commentators to understand the scale, pace and scope of economic and societal change in China. A particular bugbear is consultant reports that are expansive, wordy and largely useless, offering nothing more than a barely disguised pitch for work to prospective clients. From this view, China is now a level, though difficult, playing field, so “Game On.”
Flatworldchinaism shouldn’t exist. There is no single theory that ever has or ever will explain China, nor its economic systems. Yet even as we apparently move beyond Worldfactoryism and Itsallaboutiprtheftism towards Movinguptheglobalfoodchainism, much of what we read about business in China is little more than Waybehindthecurveism and, sometimes, Howmuchdotheyreallygetpaidforwritingthatism.
Thank you, then, to InterChina Consulting, who are yelling loudly that: “It’s time for a wake-up call.” In a new essay entitled Dramatic Changes in China Require Drastic Strategy Shifts for Western Companies, InterChina’s co-founder Jan Borgonjon lays it on the line.
“Many business ‘truths’ established during the first 20 years of China’s open-door era are being turned on their heads,” Borgonjon writes, adding that even successful companies must quickly change their strategy in China “or risk losing their advantage.” He then says the previously unsayable: “[Some companies] might have to give up on the Chinese market.”
Borgonjon continues by assessing the large-scale changes in Chinese consumer markets, the growing strength of Chinese brands, as well as MNC management mistakes. Though he doesn’t traverse any flat virgin territory, and much of what he says has been said elsewhere before, there is a hint of Friedmanism here. Find a theme that most people have thus far been unwilling to accept, fuse it together and write it up. We await news of the Jan Borgonjon world tour.
To read the full InterChina essay, visit: www.interchinaconsulting.com
Last update : Wednesday, 01 August 2007
|
|
|
News & Interviews 
(0 vote)
