Innovation in China

Discussion in 'China' started by nrj, May 11, 2012.

  1. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    The Great Innovation Wall of China

    Last week I was struck by two completely contrasting views of China today. They evoke an image of the Great Innovation Wall of China, one that constrains instead of sustains the domestic creation of disruptive ideas.

    First, the rise and fall of Bo Xilai—a story of what seems to be power at its worst. When any leader believes he or she is above the law, iron rule is an almost inevitable result. This desire to completely control the world has proved to be the undoing of one of China’s most successful and aspiring leaders.

    Second, the Prime Minister of China, Wen Jiabao, asserting to the world that China wants to become “a nation that is based on innovation.” As any country knows, innovation is the future. It is the basis for job creation and competitive advantage, at the country and company level. But innovation that matters, innovations that disrupt entire industries, cannot be controlled end-to-end—the way Bo tried to bully his province and people.

    Innovations that make a profound, positive difference surface when leaders create a space where insight emerges and people are engaged. Innovation, especially the disruptive type, comes from challenging the status quo, over and over. It comes from people making observations and being able to share them without fear of retribution. It comes from people talking to others who don’t see the world as they do. Finally, it comes from people willing to take risks, the inherent risks that go along with trying something no one else has ever tried before.

    There is a certain craziness to the current Chinese government, in that it thinks it can build a game-changing innovation powerhouse and at the same time exert deep behavioral control over people’s everyday actions. It’s a water-and-oil concoction that naturally separates no matter how hard you try to shake it.

    If a country (or company) injects excessive fear into a system, risk-taking evaporates, experiments shrivel, and disruptive ideas fail to emerge. Recent creativity constricting actions such as these (consider the ongoing saga of blind activist Chen Guangcheng) may very well form the new Great Innovation Wall of China.

    China is wading through the sludge of deep contradictions, especially when it comes to innovation, and must reconcile these opposing views (innovation aspirations vs. excessive controls) for authentic innovation to surface and succeed. Until it does, expect to hear the rhetoric of disruptive innovation, but don’t count on China to deliver the real thing.

    The Great Innovation Wall of China - Businessweek
     
  2.  
  3. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    From brawn to brain

    If China is to excel at innovation, the state must give entrepreneurs more freedom

    THE end of cheap China is at hand. Blue-collar labour costs in Guangdong and other coastal hubs have been rising at double-digit rates for a decade. Workers in the hinterland, too, are demanding—and receiving—huge pay increases. China is no longer a place where manufacturers can go to find ultra-cheap hands. Other countries, such as Vietnam, are much cheaper. What will this mean for China and the world?

    Contrary to conventional wisdom, it will not mean that companies close their Chinese factories and stampede to somewhere poorer. China is still a terrific place to make things. Labour may be cheaper elsewhere, but it is only one cost among several. Unlike its lower-paying rivals, China has reasonable infrastructure, sophisticated supply chains and the advantage of scale. When demand surges for a particular product, the biggest firms in China can add thousands of extra workers to a production line in a matter of hours.

    So China is not about to hollow out. But if it is to keep growing fast, it must become more innovative. At present Chinese innovation is a mixed bag. There are some outstanding private firms. Frugal engineers at private companies such as Mindray, which makes medical devices, and Huawei, a telecoms giant, are devising technologies that are cheaper and sometimes better than their rich-world equivalents. Manufacturers operating near China’s coast, whether home-grown or foreign, are adept at “process innovation”—incrementally improving the way they make things. And China’s internet start-ups, such as Tencent (a social-networking service) and Alibaba (an e-commerce company), have had a genius for copying Western business models and adapting them to the Chinese market.

    But innovation is about more than this. One way of defining it would be as fresh thinking that creates value people will pay for. By that measure, China is no world-beater. Though its sweat produces many of the world’s goods, it is designers in Scandinavia and marketers in California who create and capture most of the value from those products.

    China’s leaders know this, and are pouring billions of dollars into research and development. The current five-year plan calls for “indigenous innovation”, which the government thinks it can foster by subsidising “strategic” industries and strong-arming foreign firms to transfer intellectual property to budding national champions. That system of state capitalism worked when the aim was to copy and adapt other people’s ideas in the cheapest way possible. But can new ideas truly be created by fiat? Elsewhere governments have tended to run into two problems: the state is not a good innovator, and it gets in the way of others who are. Is China really so different?

    Although the Chinese government invests a fortune in research and development, too much of this cash is wasted, according to the OECD. Most of it goes into development; not enough into research. It is far too difficult for new Chinese ideas to move from the laboratory to the marketplace. And the pockets of research excellence that exist—for example, in genomics—tend to be disconnected and politicised fiefs. Meanwhile, the state’s efforts to pick technology winners have been patchy. Telecoms has been a success, but electric cars have not, and subsidising clean-energy manufacturers has had mixed results. As for trying to set up regional internet clusters, China seems committed, but so far Silicon Valley has proved far too complex and delicate a system for a bureaucrat to copy.

    Let me in to the dragon’s den

    If the argument that the Chinese state is uniquely innovative is at best unproven, the obstacles in front of a small private-sector innovator are clear. The most obvious is piracy. China’s intellectual-property laws are not bad on paper, but are enforced patchily and partially. Another problem is the way so many industries have been consolidated in the hands of favoured firms. Antitrust and competition laws are not applied vigorously to well-connected champions. State-directed banks take the Chinese people’s savings and lend them at microscopic interest rates to national champions. This starves clever but unconnected firms of capital, and cheats savers, too.

    Nobody expects the Chinese government to let the reins go completely, but it needs a less top-down approach that gives its citizens more space to experiment. It must let private investors risk money on ideas they think might work, and bear the consequences of failure. An obvious place to start would be to let firms build on what they already do well, such as process innovation. But the next Chinese breakthrough may actually come in an unexpected field. China was once a dazzling innovator: think of printing, paper, gunpowder and the compass. If its rulers loosen their grip a little, it could be so again.

    Innovation in China: From brawn to brain | The Economist
     
  4. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    China's lack of success in fostering innovation is no surprise

    How does the United States economy look from a Chinese perspective? Pretty good, actually.

    Yes, the US has its problems, which were laid bare by the financial crisis. But it is still the most innovative economy in the world and retains fundamental strengths that China, for all its recent success, can only envy.

    When China tore off the straitjacket of central planning and introduced market-oriented policies, a new class of private entrepreneurs took advantage of ready-to-use technologies and launched the so-called China Miracle.

    The country has enjoyed a "late mover" advantage for more than three decades, relying on cheap labour, land and imported innovations and ideas. That game obviously cannot go on forever.

    The rising costs of labour, energy and raw materials are already undercutting the competitiveness of Chinese companies. Some have responded by trying to raise prices but with little success. In a buyer's market, customers have refused to pay more, particularly since suppliers have failed to differentiate and upgrade their products and services.

    To put it another way: The Made-in-China advantage is quickly fading. In the future, the goal needs to be "Created in China".

    NEEDED: MARKET FOR NEW IDEAS

    That won't be easy to accomplish. Innovation requires far more than cheap labour. For starters, you need imaginative financiers, inspired entrepreneurs and first-class researchers. Even with all that, you need a culture that permits innovation to flourish.

    Some observers, both inside and outside of China, believe that central planning can effectively perform the function of innovation organiser and coordinator. They couldn't be more wrong.

    The process of searching for new technologies and ideas is a creative one, based on trial and error. Information and experience are crucial to innovation and can be gained only by being engaged in the process.

    Government officials can't help; they don't have the incentives to acquire information and experience that aren't relevant to their political careers and personal incomes.

    What ultimately drives innovation is an invisible yet powerful hand: The market for new ideas. In this market, those who dare to think the unthinkable and bear great risks are rewarded with wealth and fame. In this market, "to get rich is glorious", as China's former leader Deng Xiaoping once put it.

    But to transform new ideas into productivity and wealth, the market also needs the support of institutions such as private property, venture capital and the stock market - none of which are strong today in China.



    IMITATION AND PIRACY

    China's strategy of copying and imitating helped to narrow the gap with the developed world but the approach creates long-term problems. Too little value is placed on original research and intellectual property rights.

    Government policies only reinforce the problem. When firms face intellectual property disputes and litigation, growth-hungry local authorities too often offer sympathy and support to their pirating constituents.

    This disregard for IP rights produces short-term gains but also effectively kills hope for a flourishing Chinese research and development community and damages the country's long-term growth potential.

    It's no surprise, then, that China has had little success fostering innovation. A Chinese version of Nasdaq was created a few years ago to help fund start-ups but it soon became a channel for insiders to cash out quickly and profitably.

    Regulators have turned a blind eye to irregularities in pre-IPO investments and trades, which has sapped public confidence.

    Share prices have fared poorly, especially because senior executives of the newly listed companies dump their holdings as soon as they can.

    Crony capitalism has triumphed at the expense of entrepreneurship and true innovation. In fact, most of China's top technology firms have been funded by overseas institutions and listed on Nasdaq.

    China's enormous economic strides have propelled the country forward. Nonetheless, the US, despite its own concerns about the future, remains the world's most competitive economy. It is driven by market forces, not central planning. It rewards innovation. It protects IP. It has trustworthy institutions that minimise corruption and cronyism.

    What Americans need most is to restore confidence in their innovation machine and to ignore calls for government intervention, which will only suffocate the creativity of the country's most talented people.

    © 2012 Harvard Business School Publishing Corp. (Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate)

    Xu Xiaonian is a professor of economics and finance at the China Europe International

    Business School in Shanghai.

    TODAYonline | Commentary | China's lack of success in fostering innovation is no surprise
     
  5. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    Why China won’t be innovative for at least 20 more years


    Xu Xiaoping, one of China’s most prominent angel investors, doesn’t think China will be able to produce its own equivalent of Steve Jobs or Bill Gates in this generation.

    On Saturday, I went to a Yale Club of Beijing talk by Xu Xiaoping (pictured above) at Peking University. He’s an investor in tech startups as well as in film and philanthropy. At the end of 2011, his angel fund Zhenfund announced its partnership with Sequoia Capital China to create a $30 million joint-venture seed fund. Xu is probably most famous for being the former co-founder and Vice Chairman of New Oriental Group, a NYSE-listed education company that helps prepare Chinese citizens to study overseas, mainly in America.

    The Yale Club discussion was focused on the lack of innovation in China. Xu said that while things are changing, it will take more time for creativity to become mainstream. Here are some of his reasons why China could take years to start truly innovating:

    1. China has a culture of education first, at the expense of passion
    We like to joke about Asian parents being strict and paranoid about their children’s education. Of course, not every Asian parent is like this, but there is some truth to the stereotype.

    In China, a number of factors feed into parents’ paranoia. The main one is fierce competition. With so many people fighting to get into the best schools and presumably best jobs, the only way-in besides guanxi (relationships), is through stellar grades. Xu explained that China’s most important high school and university entrance exam, called the Gao Kao, is a killer of passion and creativity — a rather bold statement.

    He explained his reasoning with the story of two people. The first was a Chinese boy in Canada who had a great passion for programming and was encouraged by his parents to explore his skills. This boy went on to do amazing things and created a valuable technology company. The second boy was in China. He also had a deep passion for programming and even invented something that Apple could have used. But his parents told him to stop working on it and instead focus on studying for the Gao Kao. Years of draining preparation sucked his passion away for programming and he eventually just became an employee of a large company. Xu believes that this traditional Chinese mindset of fighting to be accepted, rather than encouraging people’s natural curiosity and passions, deters China from reaching its true potential.

    Xu is convinced that China’s education system lags behind more Western countries such as America. That is why his former company, New Oriental, sends people from China overseas to study, broaden their perspectives, and discover themselves. However, as China’s economy booms, this trend is starting to slow.

    At the end of the talk, I asked Xu Xiaoping, “How long will it take until China can stop sending students overseas to become really creative and innovative?” He replied, “At least 20 years.”

    2. Chinese products and services need more soul
    Xu feels many Chinese tech companies and their products and services lack “soul.” For example, Steve Jobs was more artist than engineer. He believed his products needed a personality and evoke emotions in people. Xu said this way of thinking and intuition is largely missing from China and is a fundamental reason why China will not have a Steve Jobs in this generation.

    Lei Jun, the founder of Xiaomi Tech, is thought to be China’s closest contender for the role of China’s Steve Jobs, but even his friend Xu believes he isn’t the right guy. He explained that Lei Jun is an engineer at heart, not an artist. Now Xiaomi is looking for a CEO who can execute like an artist, but Xu believes it will be difficult to find that person in China. (Xu himself is passionate about arts and culture. He studied music and was a music teacher at Peking University.)

    This partly explains why there is so much cloning in China. Most Chinese startups are not founded by designers or artists, but by engineers who don’t have the creativity to think of new ideas or designs. For now, cloning works because it speeds up the time to market, but even people in China are starting to criticize such blatant copying. (The latest example is DianDi, an exact clone of popular mobile-journal app Path.) If people revolt against copying more, the copiers could be forced to change their strategy.

    3. Innovators are discouraged by giants that want to crush them
    In America, and especially in Silicon Valley, there is a startup culture of build-to-acquire. Meaning many startups create a product that a big company like Facebook, Google, Apple, or Microsoft will want, and then sells it to them. Sometimes, the big company just wants the talented team. Other times, the big company saves money and time by acquiring the startup technology instead of building something from scratch.

    However, in China, many big companies like Baidu, Sina, and Tencent can afford to hire a big team to crank out the product rather than buy a startup. Often, if it sees a Chinese start-up working on something with big potential, the large company will just copy the product and pump it up with its huge amounts of existing-users, eventually crushing the original startup’s offering. These types of threats from big companies discourages people from innovating and trying their luck.

    But Xu said things are starting to change. Companies like Tencent are attempting to be more equitable, and instead of sharing only 10 percent to 20 percent of revenue with game developers, it is taking a more developer-friendly stance with 70 percent revenue sharing. Hopefully things continue in this direction.

    Curious about Xu’s thoughts on what can speed-up China’s journey to innovation, I asked “Does China need a top-down approach from the government or does it have to happen from a bottom-up approach from people leaving China and coming back?” Xu answered that it will be somewhere in between. Of course, trying to change something so engrained as culture and thinking is extremely difficult, and can only happen from a top leadership position. On the other hand, since China does not promote creativity and free thinking in the same way as other countries, the innovations will continue to come from people who are exposed to other countries and cultures.

    China was able to accelerate its economic transformation and overcome poverty within 30 years, so transforming China to become more innovative in 20 years seems possible.


    Why China won’t be innovative for at least 20 more years | VentureBeat
     
  6. nimo_cn

    nimo_cn Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2009
    Messages:
    3,491
    Likes Received:
    592
    Do you know why Apple can only be born in America? Because Americans have the ability to manufacture the best chips.

    It is the combination of innovation and manufacturing that makes Apple possible, and I believe manufacturing is the foundation.
     
  7. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    Apple designs processor. They are manufactured by Koreans :dude:
     
  8. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    Why China Lags on Innovation and Creativity

    China’s rise as an economic power has been staggering. Its manufacturing prowess is well-established, having earned it the moniker, "the world’s factory." Roughly half of its population now lives in urban areas, up from less than one in five three decades ago. Over 100 of its cities have populations of one million or more.

    More than half of Americans already believe China is the world’s most powerful economy, according to Gallup polls, and a growing chorus of commentators believes that it will overtake the U.S. as the world’s largest economy by 2030. Some are projecting this to happen as early as 2016.

    How rapidly can China's economy move up the development ladder and become genuinely innovative and technology-driven?

    Xu Xiaoping, one of China’s leading investors, “doesn’t think China will be able to produce its own equivalent of Steve Jobs or Bill Gates in this generation,” according to a recent article in The Washington Post. He expects that it will take “at least 20 years” before China’s economy becomes truly innovative and creative.

    Surely its policies are directed toward that end: China has rapidly expanded its spending on universities and research and development; it has attracted R&D centers from abroad; and its level of innovation (as tracked by patents) has increased substantially.

    A recently published study I conducted with my colleagues Charlotta Mellander and Haifeng Qian from Cleveland State University suggests China still has a long way to go before it becomes an advanced center for innovation and creativity. Our study, published in the journal Environment and Planning, assessed the knowledge economy across China’s major regions, tracking levels of college grads, the creative class, high-tech industries, and major universities and examining their effects on regional economic performance. Using the statistical technique of structural equation modeling, we gauged the effect of those factors over time, teasing out their strengths both individually and in combination with other factors.

    [​IMG]

    China’s knowledge economy is incredibly spiky. Its college grads and members of the creative class are even more geographically concentrated than they are in the United States and other advanced nations. (The maps above and below by Zara Matheson chart the shares of human capital or college grads and the creative class across China's major regions).

    Both college grads and the creative class are heavily clustered in three major city-regions - Beijing, Shanghai, and Tianjin. These star regions boast great universities and have much higher levels of urbanization (70 percent or more) than the rest of the country. Beijing is the leader by far, where slightly more than one in five adults hold college degrees and roughly one in ten are members of the creative class. Shanghai and Tianjin have significantly lower levels of both, with roughly 15 percent of adults holding college degrees and just 5 percent of the workforce in the creative class. This is far, far below the levels of global cities in the advanced nations, many of which boast creative class shares of 30 or 40 percent or more.

    [​IMG]

    China has faced considerable difficulty converting its knowledge-based assets (college grads and the creative class) into economic value-added. What high-value, high-tech industry it has developed remains extremely concentrated in Beijing, Shanghai, and Tianjin. When we looked across all China’s regions, our analysis turned up little, if any, connection between their stock of human capital and their ability to generate high-tech industries and improve their regional economic output. This stands in contrast to the pattern of the United States and other advanced nations, where human capital and technology are the key drivers of innovation and economic growth.

    [​IMG]

    When all is said and done, China remains an industrial nation. Its creative class and human capital levels are minuscule by the standards of advanced economies and heavily concentrated in just three super-star city regions. Those regions appear to operate as self-contained entities; their levels of human capital and innovation have not spilled over to other regions or to the national economy as a whole. Worse, China’s overall technological and economic performance appears to be disconnected from its human capital and knowledge-based assets. Moving forward, China is likely to face substantial obstacles in transitioning from its current industrial stage of development to a more knowledge-based economy.

    Xiaoping is right: it will be at least a couple of decades if not more before China can compete as a truly innovative and creative economy.

    Why China Lags on Innovation and Creativity - Jobs & Economy - The Atlantic Cities
     
  9. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    This is what mckinsey has to say -

    A CEO’s guide to innovation in China

    Dynamic domestic players and focused multinationals are helping China churn out a growing number of innovative products and services. Intensifying competition lies ahead; here’s a road map for navigating it.

    A CEO's guide to innovation in China - McKinsey Quarterly - Strategy - Innovation
     
  10. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    You cannot have innovations if you have 'Mind Control' and 'Behaviour Control'.

    To be able to innovate your mind should be 'free like a leaf in the breeze' - floating and free.
     
  11. s002wjh

    s002wjh Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2009
    Messages:
    1,209
    Likes Received:
    126
    all you need to do is have a proper education, skills, experience. invention/innovation has nothing to do with political/religion freedom, soviet, nazi, japan pre WWII all have good products. however china education today are mostly memorization, lack creativity of western part, but some school are changing and incorporate western teaching style into existing chinese style of teaching.
     
    Avenger likes this.
  12. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    While China is hardly a mekka for innovation, she just happens to be significantly superior to india in this regard:

    according to Global Innovation Index 2011 China ranks 29th whereas India is 62nd

    To the guys above. maybe before you find time to ridicure China for her perceived lack of innovation, you should first question yourself how come India, a country with 1.2+ billion people, fares so miserably here?
     
  13. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    Apperantly this topic is about China & not some stick measurement contest.
     
  14. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    The answer is simple.

    You innovate when you have poor products that don't work.

    If you have world class stuff, you don't require to innovate. It is there for your asking!

    If one has gourmet food every day, does he have to learn how to cook?
     
  15. tony4562

    tony4562 Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2009
    Messages:
    836
    Likes Received:
    49
    you better not fire a gun when you don't have the right ammunition cause it it could back fire on you any time. My suggestion to you is that since India sucks so bad on the innovation front even compared to China, you should (as the moderator) delete this thread and start a similar thread named "india innovation or the lack of it" in the indian economy subforum instead. Highly recommended!
     
    thecurryguy likes this.
  16. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    Suggestion disregarded. Move on.
     
  17. Dovah

    Dovah Untermensch Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    3,273
    Location:
    Modindia
    You should shut the ---- up! Highly recommended.
     
  18. LurkerBaba

    LurkerBaba Staff Administrator

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    Messages:
    6,769
    Likes Received:
    3,678
    Location:
    India
    Thread cleaned up. Offtopic posts will be deleted
     
  19. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    Beijing Is Stifling Chinese Innovation

    'Indigenous innovation' policies scare away the foreign-owned research labs that would spur creativity.

    China's indigenous innovation program, launched in 2006, has alarmed the world's technology giants more than any other policy measure since the start of economic reforms in 1978. A recent report from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce even went so far as to call this program "a blueprint for technology theft on a scale the world has not seen before."

    The goal of the indigenous innovation program is to accelerate China's move up the technology ladder. Using a variety of mechanisms (such as making access to China's market dependent on transfers of leading-edge technologies and R&D labs to China), the program supposedly helps Chinese companies assimilate, absorb and re-innovate upon the proprietary technology developed by foreign companies.

    Virtually every assessment of the indigenous innovation program has framed it as a win-lose proposition—a win for China and a loss for foreign multinationals. Our analysis, however, suggests that indigenous innovation measures have been counter-productive for China itself. Instead of inducing technology giants to shift leading-edge R&D work to China at a faster pace, its effect has been exactly the opposite.

    China today hosts about 1,000 foreign-owned R&D labs. Yet, with rare exceptions, these labs focus primarily on local adaptations of innovations developed elsewhere, rather than the development of leading-edge technologies and products for global markets.

    Tech company executives are eager to leverage the quality and scale of China's talent pool. However, given the indigenous-innovation measures, they do not trust China as a secure location for leading-edge R&D.

    A comparison with India is illustrative. India has no equivalent to indigenous innovation rules. The government also is content to allow companies to set up R&D facilities without any rules about sharing technology with local partners or the like.

    These policy differences appear to have a significant influence on corporate behavior. Consider the top 10 U.S.-based technology giants that received the most patents from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) between 2006 and 2010: IBM, Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, Micron, GE, Cisco, Texas Instruments, Broadcom and Honeywell.

    Half of these companies appear not to be doing any significant R&D work in China. Between 2006 and 2010, the U.S. PTO did not award a single patent to any China-based units of five out of the 10 companies. In contrast, only one of the 10 did not receive a patent for an innovation developed in India.

    India also has proven more fertile territory for these companies. For the 10 tech giants taken together, India-based labs received more patents (1,119) than did China-based labs (886) during this period.

    At a company level, the difference can be even more striking. For the seven out of 10 companies where Indian units received more patents than Chinese labs, the aggregate numbers were 978 vs. 164. Only a strong showing for China from two outliers, Microsoft and Intel, pulled up its aggregate filings—Chinese labs at those two companies secured 722 patents compared to 141 from Indian labs.

    Those exceptions to the rule are revealing. Unlike the others, both Microsoft and Intel have near-monopolies in technology platforms for the global PC industry. Since software applications are designed to run on these platforms, Microsoft and Intel have far less reason to be concerned about technology appropriation by competitors. While software piracy by potential customers is a concern, it is mostly a short-term challenge. In short, Microsoft and Intel leverage China as a global research hub precisely because these companies don't have to worry much about the downsides of indigenous innovation.

    The R&D disparity is all the more striking given China's three seemingly major advantages over India. With a GDP more than three times larger, China offers a much bigger market than India. China also spends four times as much as India on R&D. And China produces a much larger number of Ph.D.s.

    Yet Beijing is standing in the way, because it's looking at the problem from the wrong angle. Instead of trying to extract technology from foreign firms today, it should be creating a hospitable environment for these firms to create and train world-class innovators.

    When a tech giant sets up an R&D lab in a new location such as Beijing or Bangalore, more than 95% of the researchers are hired locally. Over time, many of them leave and use the expertise they've acquired to start new ventures or join other, often local, companies. This kind of personnel "spillover," far more than sharing individual technologies, has been key to thriving innovation ecosystems like Silicon Valley.

    If it wants to become a global technology leader, China needs open doors, strong intellectual property protection and no stacking of the deck in favor of Chinese companies—a policy mix exactly opposite to some of its current indigenous-innovation measures.

    Sep 2011

    Business Asia: Beijing Is Stifling Chinese Innovation - WSJ.com
     
  20. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,543
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Curryguy,

    If you have a point please do not use one liners or posts that conveys nothing appropriate to the thread.
     
  21. huaxia rox

    huaxia rox Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    1,401
    Likes Received:
    103
    its abolutly correct to say china needs more innovations or china now lacks innovations....but the problem is compared to whom???if compared to the US or japan i think yes the gap is obvious and we r trying to remedy the situation.....but prc is already doing better than many other countries......

    i just dont know if the next make believe senario sounds funny..........in a basketball match the chinese team cant match the amercan NBA all star team and lost the match then an indian guy jumped out saying....look....chinese dont know how to play basketball.......
     

Share This Page