Strikingly, evidence so far (Volvo, Teck Resource, Addax amongst others) suggests that the Chinese owners pretty much leave the situation unchanged. In the case of Volvo, they left the management team untouched (except for the CEO) and only want to have a say in the global strategy and expansion of Volvo’s brand.
This is refreshing, especially when compared to how the Japanese used to treat acquired companies back in the ‘80s. Somehow this is also embedded in the Chinese culture, in which 2 sometimes opposite systems can perfectly well exist in parallel (for more on the subject I’d suggest to take 15 minutes to listen to professor Martin Jacques at a TED conference).
This looks like a clear strategy of Chinese companies that invest in Western companies. But it is also exemplified by the localization policy of Chinese multinationals. Telecom equipment company Huawei is a case in point. They just appointed a purely local Board of Directors in their Australian operations.
It’s quite interesting to hear one of these Directors discuss the lack of transparency of Chinese companies as well as the ties between Chinese business leaders and politicians. According to him, Huawei is opening their books for audits (though it doesn’t have to), and Chinese business leaders have to stay clear of political influence if they want to be successful globally:
(a sign that things don't change that quickly after all? the Youtube video embed function was disabled by request... clicking the pic beneath will bring you directly to the Youtube location)
I wonder of this is a strategy that will be sustained, but there’s no reason why it shouldn’t. I’ll follow this one closely nevertheless.
No comments:
Post a Comment