Wu Yingqiu: The development of electric vehicles, how about the same starting line?

Not long ago, the 2012 Blue Book on the Chinese Automobile Industry was released. The report believes that the gap between the development of China's electric vehicles and foreign countries is widening. This judgment has caused quite a lot of controversy in the industry. Immediately afterwards, many people in the industry further questioned whether it was true that several years ago, everyone agreed that China’s electric cars and foreign countries were on the same starting line. However, I think it's okay to say it now, even if it's at the same starting line.

In the 1960s, Korean cars began to take off. At that time, it could be said that they were on the same starting line with China, and even China started a decade ago. However, after decades of development, especially after entering the new century, the influence of Korean cars in the world has risen rapidly, and there has been a great momentum of entering the “first group”, leaving China far behind. This history fully shows that the same starting line can not decide anything.

Comparing the past development history of China and South Korea, I believe that an important reason for the widening of the gap is the system.

In the past few decades, China’s autos have been state-owned and administratively oriented until today. In the past, whether the “three major three small micro” or “heavy truck base” and “light truck base” were all the result of planning; today, all kinds of forums involving the core interests of the industry are still the main players in state-owned enterprises. However, the accumulated achievements of the state-owned auto companies are limited, but there are many accumulated losses. Many state-owned enterprises are "small businesses and big societies," and institutions are overstaffed, people are overstaffed, and efficiency is low. Once, when talking with a boss of a state-owned auto group, he frankly stated after summing up the gains and losses of his predecessor: "The main task of my appointment is to 'adjust'." I think that you are still adjusting when others are making innovations and striving for the first time, which shows that there have been a lot of problems accumulated in the past.

Another deadlock in the state-owned system is the lack of real accountability, and it also fails to foster true entrepreneurial and entrepreneurial spirit. Although in recent years, the SASAC began to reform the state-owned enterprise personnel system, many of the past implemented two separate chairman and general manager. But in reality, there is still no answer as to who is really responsible for the company. As a result, once the emperor and the courtier, as long as I completed short-term goals, get performance, which tube after the big waves.

The system determines the strategy and the mechanism determines the tactics; the system determines the long-term and the mechanism determines the moment. Without a good system, the personnel mechanism, salary mechanism, innovation mechanism, and even the best mechanism setting will eventually fail. Li Shufu once said that the hope of Chinese cars is in the private sector. This sentence is worth pondering again from an institutional perspective.

Return to electric car. Looking at the development of electric vehicles in China in the past few years, the main problem is also the system. It can be said that the direction and strategy for the development of electric vehicles is almost a government department has the final say, and several leaders have decided on an industry. As a result, despite the bright spots of the new energy vehicle development plan that has just been introduced, the industry still believes that many of the settings are too rigid, open, and lack market awareness. Industry authority and academician Guo Konghui proposed that the setting of the electric vehicle speed and mileage of 100 kilometers is too rigid.

Therefore, the long-standing institutional problems of China’s autos have not been solved. What we can say about the “same starting line” can only be grandstanding and opportunistic.