On Three Characteristics of the Chinese Style Management Held by Zeng Shiqiang

Making Rational Adjustments Based upon Changing Circumstance 
To Prof. Zeng, another foregrounding characteristic of Chinese management is its “mobility”, which 
can also be reflected in the organization structure
[1][2][5]
. Look at the following example. As you walk 
into a company and ask a consultant: “Do you have an organization chart?” To be sure, the answer 
must be positive “yes”. But when you ask them to let you have a look, they will give you one, and 
then remind you simultaneously: “This is an old one, and the new one is now under duplication.” 
Why such answer? Because organization transformation and personnel change are quite common. 
To Prof. Zeng, that everything has to be done under schedule is only an elegant speech.
[1][2][5]
In 
fact, changing is bound to occur in actual circumstances even after the plan is settled, so the 
plan-executor has to carry out the plan in a changing manner in order to deal with its ever-occurring 
changing situation. Take personnel changes as the example, an inevitable change in the Chinese 
management soil. It is a fact tact that Chinese enterprises often have a rapid turnover of staff, since 
even to like-minded people, spectacular differences may occur both in their goal and in their opinions. 
In that case, Chinese people would throw an excuse like “Each has his own ideal,” and then leave the 
work. Personnel dynamics, also called the personnel flow rate, in the Chinese style organizations, is 
much more common than that in Japan, and less than the United States. The phenomenon of the job 
changing can be taken as an example to account for the fact that Chinese people value more about 
staff’s “versatility” than “professional”. The Chinese tend to admire the versatile people, because 
they are thought to be more flexible and qualified when dealing with the work changing, which, of 
course, is a necessity in creating a prosperous business. 
Here is another explanation for personal change. Once the chief leader of a business company is 
replaced by a new one, all things would change in the wake of it, including the company institution, 
organization structure and personnel. To avoid being resisted or criticized, the chief leaders would 
promise that they are going to strictly follow the established rules of the predecessor on the blob. 
However, most new leaders are inclined to make great changes in order to stand out their leading 
status, revealing the fact that new broom sweeps clean. Chinese people don’t care about changing, as 
long as the change does not bring about any negative effect on them. In fact, Chinese people like 
changing, which can be looked upon as one of their most salient features, and also reflected in the 
Chinese management. 
It is true that everything is in the changing process, including the plan, which is to undergo constant 
modifications and adjustments, however, in the direction of more reasonable condition. When the 
plan is made, the person who is responsible to execute it would move his head to think about how to 
carry it out in a flexible way by making some improvements based upon the constantly changing 
circumstances. The actual circumstance changing will certainly lead to corresponding flexible 
adjustments and modification in management, which, in fact, constitutes the foundation of the 
success of Chinese style management. However, the Chinese style management advocates 
“reasonable change”, and if changing is based upon reasoning, then it is an appropriate changing. 
The Chinese prefer to tread a middle course, and believe that both “changing” and “stabilization” 
exists simultaneously in a complementary manner. 
[8]
In other words, there is a dialectical relation 
between “changing” and “stability” in 
that “Changing” dwells 
in “stability ”, 
in 
the 
same 
way, “stability ” also dwells in “changing”, which entirely matches the “golden mean” that Chinese 
people have desired for steering a middle course in order to obtain a reasonable degree and ideal 
condition. So there is no fixed model, as long as changing is rational, whatever type of change is 
acceptable for the Chinese. That can be thought of as the basic trait of Chinese management. One 
Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 352
76

---

thing that has to be emphasized is that every change must be based upon reasoning rather than upon 
passion or arbitrariness. 
Prof. Zeng regards the reasonable change according to constantly changing situation as the highest 
wisdom of Chinese management and makes a further explanation from the following three 
perspectives. 
First of all, the emphasis of reasonable changes does not mean pursuing thoroughly novel changes 
blindly. 
The book of changes
tells us that 80% of changing turns out badly, by comparison, only 20% 
have achieved satisfying results. We are always saying that “More often than not things don’t work 
out the way you thought they would.” That is to say, changes will occur in our lives inevitably, 
however, in most cases the result is not as good as people have expected, especially for those blind 
and arbitrary changes. What should be really advocated is to pay the focus on reasonable changing 
instead of changing at random. In fact, only the reasonable changing strategy can help a company 
realize its overall goal of the management and achieve perfection. 
Secondly, reasonable changes have to be carried out by following “coping with shifting events by 
sticking to a fundamental policy of unchanging or stability”. Only standing in the solid and stable 
position to think about the possibility of the dynamic change is it possible to have a reasonable 
change. Supposing a company is running well under the guidance of existing rules and regulations, 
then why still making changes? If insisting on doing so, then it must be an irrational change. 
Therefore, only under such a circumstance that the company does not really work well in the 
framework of existing rules and regulations, will the company have to make corresponding changes. 
In this condition, it’s easier to be changing in the right and reasonable direction. In conclusion, think 
carefully before managers decide whether to make changes or not, including which parts of the work 
need changing and which parts needn’t, above all, how to make smart and effective changes by 
assessing the situation earnestly and seriously. 
Thirdly, reasoning change emphasizes the nature of change: reasoning. So first try to ascertain 
whether it is justified in the option of changing. The critical difficulty for this problem lies in the fact 
that different people hold different opinions about it. What’s more, the criterion of reasoning would 
be changing with time and space, which requires people to move their heads and think profoundly 
whether they have got ample justification for taking the strategy of change. 
Strictly speaking, being reasonable change seems to contain a considerable degree of contradiction. 
However, for Prof. Zeng, this world is full of contradictions, such as “Yin” and “Yang”(According to 
Taoism, yin should always exits as the complementary of yang). Prof. Zeng argues that it has to be 
noticed that it is just this contradictions that help to build up healthy reasoning.