Comments on: The Provinces to Beijing: ‘Piss Off’

By: Fred S.

Fred S. — Sun, 04 Mar 2012 00:36:45 +0000

These articles demonstrate the struggle of maintaining unity across an entire nation while promoting accelerated growth. The construction company I worked for last year on the west coast was undergoing similar unification difficulties when a larger firm on the east coast acquired it. Messages the parent company sent to get everyone on the same page would get diluted as they made their way down the chain. The main difficulty was getting the to cultures to mesh. There was a large age/culture gap in the west coast office between the senior managers that had been around for 30 to 40 years and the new hires. There was no middle group. We were getting mixed messages from our in-office managers and the parent company on the east coast. Eventually, once they economically justified it, the company created a program for new hires to spend a week at the new corporate headquarters on the east coast. Here, we met other new hires from area offices around the country and learned the history, culture, and future of the company. This was an effective way of creating a sense of belonging and unity amongst the various local offices with the central headquarters.

Another issue addressed in these articles was the difficulty in growing as fast as possible while maintaining efficiency and environmental regulations. Forcing these companies out of business or making them change their entire system does not promote quick growth, however offering incentives to do so creates a more organic change within the company. Many design build projects don’t just award the project to the bidder with the lowest price, but they instead award it the bidder that has the best overall package. An overall package that is a combination of price and environmental impact mitigation. This is a better way the central government can award efficiency instead of punishing companies by instating higher prices.

By: Keith Cody

Keith Cody — Tue, 28 Feb 2012 06:39:49 +0000

This is an easy one. I am against the Wall Street Journal website paywall. You have to pay extra to read it online. After about one minute of googling, I found a 1 step method to get around it. And it’s not even a hack. It’s just a different method of find articles on WSJ.com. This saved me money. Everyone will have a personal story like this.

Even though I’m a broke collage student, I found this recent UCB study interesting. Upper class people are more likely to cheat. “For instance, drivers of expensive vehicles such as Mercedes, BMW and Toyota’s Prius hybrid were seen breaking the rules more often at four-way intersections than people who drove a Camry or Corolla.” (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/02/27/upper-class-people-more-likely-to-cheat-study/

I’m inspired by NASCAR (Or Lance Armstrong’s or NBA referees, etc.) motto: “If there’s money in it, there’s cheating”.

By: Georgia

Georgia — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 00:34:03 +0000

Watching the SBS Dateline clip on the “Not so great mall” showcases the discrepancy between what the government wants and what the people need. Raising GDP by building, building, building helps short-term but leads to consequences down the road. It was stated that there are currently 64 million empty apartments, most at prices too high for citizens to buy. One of the Chinese citizens stated “owning a home should not be a dream but a basic human right.” It is hard to not jump to the conclusion that China doesn’t listen to its people. But I remember that “China is what it is” and then think about all the examples that showcase the United States’ inability to hear its people and I realize that it is not China’s issue, but something that every nation struggles with.
I work for a small poetry press, where success can be boiled down to what relationships you have. The publisher has owned the press for 45 years and is a recognized poet in her own right. Two years ago a new editor signed on with the desire to revamp the press. Well, the publisher wanted to publish specific poems solely due to the author being her friend. But the editor, who had final say on the poems included in the journal, was not up for this tradition. She wanted the new edition to be as strong as it could, and she didn’t include the weaker poems.
It is hard because we are taught that business is all about who you know, so how can you turn a request down? I think it was gutsy for the editor to stick to her morals and create a strong edition. She set a precedent for how she has behaved in all the other issues, and now it is not something that is discussed. I think that leaders are in the best position to set an example. Now when the rest of us on the editorial staff evaluate submissions we ignore the names and focus on the substance of the poem. It is important to acknowledge those who have helped you without degrading your work to do so.

By: Charles Dornbush

Charles Dornbush — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 02:11:29 +0000

Three years ago I served as the head lifeguard for the recreation department in my hometown. As head lifeguard I was in charge of scheduling over 35 lifeguards. My supervisor had only worked at the department for a few months. She had hired way more new lifeguards than were needed to meet our needs. Because of this the staff was upset because they were not getting as many hours as they were accustomed to. My supervisor told me to schedule all lifeguards an equal number of hours regardless of seniority.

This didn’t seem to me or the more senior guards, who had been working there for four years longer than she had. So I gave the most senior guards the most hours while still ensuring that all guards had at least one shift. Surprisingly this was met with no resistance, and pretty much all employees found this to be a fair system.

I think the reason why some plans in both the political and business arena don’t work is that the leader can’t get everyone to buy in. The people on the bottom level can’t see how a new policy will benefit them and refuse to join in. To implement these plans a leader must persuade everyone that is in there best interest to go along. China has obviously been unable to do this with their provinces. The past-neglected provinces want to catch up with the advanced provinces and feel they should be able to produce energy in an unregulated environment like the big cities did 15 or 20 years ago. The provinces don’t see the environment as a large issue, rightfully so since much of their population is very poor.

By: Ashley Tyra

Ashley Tyra — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 06:31:54 +0000

I have worked in many restaurants in the past, and there have always been issues with getting employees to work during downtime in between rushes. The owner of one restaurant I worked in gave the general manager specific “deep cleaning” instructions for servers to complete when they weren’t serving tables. At first servers were very reluctant to comply with the owner’s wishes. They would much rather work when they are earning tips from serving a customer’s direct needs. Servers were far more concerned with earning extra money for themselves rather than helping the restaurant as a whole by completing “deep cleaning.” Because it did not directly benefit them to perform grungy tasks, servers ignored the owner.

What type of a person has the best chance of eliminating or curbing issues like these? In this situation, the general manager wasn’t afraid to lead by example. His actions led to servers willingly cleaning. The reason why this turned into a great example of how to get employees follow instructions, is because the general manager was willing to scrub right along side the servers. When he had slow points in his day where he had nothing to do, he would clean the dirtiest thing he could find.

Although this may not work in large-scale situations, it worked in a small business. I believe that it is always important to understand what the repercussions of instructions are on the people that have to carry them out. The general manager knew that cleaning a restaurant is not easy work, and if he showed employees that he would do it then they would have no excuse not to join in themselves.

From watching the videos, anyone can see there is an obvious disconnect among the government in China and the needs of its provinces. The overarching problem in both of these cases is the disconnect between the top (the Chinese government or the restaurant owner) and the needs or goals of the bottom. Massive oversupply of new development will boost the GDP now, but this is creating a large problem for the future. In an attempt to keep a false sense of growth, the government has ignored the fact that these buildings are not being populated, nor will they be any time in the near future. Will China be able to escape the looming pop of the bubble? Only the future can answer such a question.

By: Jeffrey Brown

Jeffrey Brown — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 23:13:33 +0000

I worked in a company developing software where employees were asked to keep track of time based on what they were doing, in other words a system called “Activity Tracking”. Various types of work were put into different categories and in the end managers could see exactly how long employees were working on what. Employees were told that this information was not used to “spy” on them or punish those that weren’t working on the right things; rather, activity tracking was just for metrics purposes. I know many employees that either did not do it altogether (e-mails were sent out to those that did not comply every week, and I would assume those that just kept on not complying got a talking to) as well as employees that would just put in data for the sake of data (not actual time data). In many ways this relates to what it appears provinces are doing to the central government, which is either flat out ignoring their requests or doing just enough to keep them off their backs.

For something like activity tracking to be effective, employees need to benefit from it some way and/or see how it benefits the organization. In other words, motivation in the form of reward or evidence of how it is helping the company as a whole. This same tactic may be able to help Beijing and has worked in some instances here in the United States. I know of laws set by states that are, in reality, controlled by the national government through threats of removal of government funding for non-compliance (I think the drinking age is one of these). Though this is more of a negative consequence for not following through, perhaps something similar could help Beijing. If provinces are expected to abide by the central governments requests, they need to 1) have motivation for doing it 2) know that by complying they are helping the nation as a whole 3) either be rewarded for complying, or be punished for non-compliance (or a combination of the two).

On another note, I find the spread between supply and demand to be very interesting. One would think that the invisible hand would step in and balance the market, but that is coming from a westerner’s point of view. I have to wonder who is funding these ventures (the government?) and what the benefit is to keeping it going. I would think there is no way any of the real estate development mentioned in the articles could be turning a profit.

By: Daniel Fleek

Daniel Fleek — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 17:41:33 +0000

When I was first starting out as a cook, I would always be told to do all the work no one else wanted to do like cutting onions, spicy peppers, and restocking mayonnaise. However, after awhile a new cook was hired. The next time I was asked to cut onions, I told the new cook that he should do it to get experience doing it. Obviously this was not my true intention. I just hated how much cutting onions made my eyes burn so when I was told to do the job, I just figured the new cook should do it like I had to when I was new.
This phenomenon happened because I felt entitled since I had more experience than the new cook. Therefore, I felt like it was ok to tell him to do the work even though we were technically on the same level in the corporation. I felt like I had to do it when I was new so now you have to do it since you’re new. In many of my jobs, I have noticed this from the more experienced workers including myself. Personally, if there was a job that I did not like, the first thing I would do when training a new cook was to train him in the job I didn’t like so that they would be stuck doing that job instead of me. I believe this happens a lot in business organizations because as people gain experience, they feel entitled over people with less experience.
To eliminate or curb this practice, I believe there has to be strong leadership in a company. By strong leadership I mean people in upper management who are hard workers. A good leader should know when he can do a job and when he should ask others to do it without coming off as being lazy. That way, people under his authority will be more likely to react in a hard working way since their boss is working hard. A big reason why I would pass on work I should be doing to others was because this is what my bosses did to me. It seemed like to me that half the things my superiors asked me to do, they could have done themselves since they seemed like they weren’t that busy. Therefore, I believe if I would have had hard working superiors, I would feel like I would have to work hard too.

By: Vladimir

Vladimir — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 23:54:10 +0000

When I worked for a company that had 25 employees, the CEO was involved in micromanaging the entry-level employees, who were three reporting levels below him. He wanted us to use specific Excel functions, to follow strict printing procedures, to label our files a certain way, and so on. “If you don’t do it my way”, he would say, “you may think you’re getting the job done, but you open yourselves to problems downstream.” Sometimes, breaking his rules made our jobs easier, faster, or possible. As employees, our motivation was getting paid and developing our skills. While we were also motivated by contributing to the company, (It was a family owned business where non-relatives felt like outsiders.), this motivator wasn’t as great. We were even less motivated to follow the CEO’s procedures. It was a conflict of interests. There was a time when we couldn’t get a printout to look a certain way. Since the saved file didn’t matter, only the printout did, we were able to solve the problem by running the sheet of paper through the printer twice. The CEO said not to do this, but it got the job done without any problems downstream. Another time, I overheard heard two employees talking about how to bypass the CEO’s procedures to complete an assignment which would have taken more time if they had followed the procedures. If the CEO worked with us to ensure we were capable of making good judgments while giving us more freedom in completing our assignments, we would have been more likely to follow his procedures while accomplishing our tasks more efficiently. This would have served everyone’s interests. If, on the other hand, he raised the penalties for not following his rules perfectly (e.g. “If I ever find out you did something I told you not to do, however insignificant, you will lose 50% of your bonus.”) there would have been less rule breaking but also less productivity and employee satisfaction.

It looks like the Chinese government is not being realistic in balancing GDP growth and demand. From an American perspective, it’s ridiculous to keep building apartments when 75% of the units remain unoccupied and are predicted to stay that way. I can’t see this happening in America. Nor can I see a US mall staying open for years when most of its space is unoccupied and it gets very few customers. Does the Chinese government really see these newly built cities operating near capacity or does it have an ulterior motive for mismatching supply with demand? Quality of GDP growth is what needs to be incentivized, not quantity, at any cost, of GDP growth.

By: Kevin K.

Kevin K. — Mon, 19 Dec 2011 21:54:29 +0000

When I was co-head of the sports department at a newspaper I would often circumvent the wishes of the “News” department in order to make the sports department look better. This could be through the layout of the paper, photos or stories used, or just the ways we tackled stories. It was selfish at times, but I felt it was better for our section, which was what mattered to me the most.

Like many of the posts before mine that have correctly labelled this as the principal-agent relationship theory, I was more concerned with my direct work, rather than the overall goal of the newspaper. In other words, the sports department was my home and one that I looked to improve upon, while I found the News portion to be overbearing and uncaring about our section — which we were very dedicated to.

This continues to happen over time, as seen in China and in nearly every office ever because people care about what they can see, touch, and feel, and rarely do they see the overarching plans that unite them all. With this view people can see how their actions directly influence themselves and their own situation — and obviously how they benefit from said actions. The best way to curb this is by having a strong leadership that can influence others — perhaps through charisma — into believing in the good of the whole. If people, and I understand a billion is a lot of people, can really be united, their combined efforts will equal more than the sum of their parts. Some uniting, motivating driver seems to be the best way to positively effect this tendency. This is pretty difficult to achieve — perhaps unless you were in a cult — but nations and organizations have rallied around causes and leaders before. It just takes some convincing I guess.

By: Grant

Grant — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 17:15:42 +0000

I had heard of the real estate bubble in China, but didn’t realize the degree to which it existed. It is as though China saw Keynesian economics thrive in the west and did what it does with many products it copies, and simply mandated its creation. China seemed to follow the “Field of Dreams” philosophy. “If you build it, they will come.” But they didn’t come. Waging the dog doesn’t work. Capitalism doesn’t start with supply to create a demand. It first recognizes a demand and meets that demand with a supply.

There are two quotes that stood out. First, the analyst said, ” It’s not the quantity of GDP that matters, it’s the quality of GDP that matters.” That’s right. If the product is truly in demand, then the GDP is productive, however, in this case, the product is not in demand, so the Gross Domestic Product is an illusion. GDP includes the term product, which implies productive. There is nothing productive, in the long run, about meeting a demand that doesn’t exist.

The second quote was made by the gentleman who said, “Prices are too high, we need the government to intervene.” I’m afraid that sentiment is shared by people around the world. the truth is that we are in a mess because the Government has intervened too much already. They say that capitalism is failing, when it is not capitalism that is failing, because what we have is not capitalism to begin with. If it was capitalism, they never would have built products to begin with. The population is deceived when they think that it is capitalism that made the system fail, when, in truth, it is a fundamental problem with our economic philosophy. The gentleman who made the statement, along with every citizen who thinks the government needs to help us, fails to realize that the problem began with too much government trying to game the system. So the solution can not be for the government to continue gaming the system by intervening as the man said.

So I am left with the thought that the Chinese who share the man’s opinion are not all that different than the average American who expects the government to “intervene”. Granted, I assume that in the same way as in America, there are people who vary in terms of their philosophy. But for those who share that sentiment, they will be ultimately disappointed since the government cannot create wealth, all they can do is set an environment for wealth to change hands. It is up to the individual, whether they are Chinese, American, European, African, or otherwise, to see through the noise and seize the opportunity before them. We are living in exciting times and never before in the history of the world have such opportunities existed. There will be a great change of wealth in the next 50 years. The question for each of us is, is it going to flow to us or away from us.