When new ideas and new concepts emerge in an endless stream, they are either theoretical prosperity or chaos of understanding. This is the case around 1997, and so is the current.
Facing the great changes in China and the world, entrepreneurs with the right to speak and influence, propose new ideas, new concepts, predict general trends; theoretical workers who are sensitive to new phenomena, new ideas, new concepts, or inductive or deductive or Endorsing and rising to the theoretical or methodological level, proposing new logic and new systems.
It is undeniable that these efforts have had a huge positive impact on practice, giving directions and directions for innovation in the chaos. However, the problem is that various new concepts and concepts, new logics, and new systems that are becoming more and more popular, although using the same rhetoric, have inconsistent connotations and extensions. It is extremely easy to confuse and let companies In the chaos or incomprehensible, or in the end, to the extreme, exaggerating the difficulties faced by traditional industries, over-emphasizing the energy of emerging industries.
The strong rise of e-commerce
To what extent is the convenience provided by e-commerce to consumers? You can get an answer from a hug that people would rather forgive their fatal flaws but still have a passion. As a new thing, no matter from the macro or the micro, we don’t have to nitpick the e-commerce. Because it represents the direction and trend to a certain extent, it is indeed a new growth point of China’s economy. It is the most vivid case of “Internet +” and a feasible and necessary way for the traditional industry to rejuvenate.
But we should also see that all of this, unfortunately, has formed a discussion of the influence of the Internet as “politically correct.” So in the realization, the discussion of traditional industries and their innovative practices has become a ignorance of current affairs and a history of reversing.
Wang Jianlin, who is betting on Ma Yun, has entered the strategy passively. People are not even willing to go deep into the situation of Wang Jianlin and his commercial empire entering the “selling and selling” moment; Lei Jun and Dong Mingzhu’s bet, people even deliberately ignore the process of Xiaomi’s experience. Risk, while Gree is more calm and steady.
The reason why e-commerce has risen strongly is because it brings convenience and new consumer experience to people, and it brings hope to economic growth and the stalemate of the traditional economy. As for what kind of twists and turns it will undergo during its growth, what is constantly changing and perfecting is not so important, and even discussing these issues will be labeled.
E-commerce has been eager to embrace traditional industries. People don’t even want to ask seriously. This means that it is the only way for the survival and development of e-commerce, or the future trend of e-commerce winners.
Despite the national economy and the people’s livelihood, the traditional industries that support the national economy have become backward representatives for a time, and the symbol of bleak prospects, even the whole of which is the meat of the new economy or emerging industries.
It is a bit too much to say that the traditional industry is sorrowful, but it is a fact that it is generally pessimistic and disappointing.
Past and present of traditional industries
Before entering the theme, it is necessary to discuss traditional industries and traditional economies.
Traditional industries correspond to emerging industries. There is no doubt that a country that does not focus on emerging industries is as bad as a company that does not care about new product development. However, this does not mean that emerging industries are realistic in the national economy, national economy and people’s livelihood, and even the future status and role must be higher than traditional industries. It does not mean that traditional industries must be given to emerging industries in the long run.
If traditional industries and emerging industries are still easy to clarify, it will be more difficult to clarify the traditional economy and the new economy. I can’t figure out why I can’t figure out why Xiaomi is in the new economy. Gree is a traditional economy. I can’t understand why Xiaomi’s mobile phone has surpassed the market and looks better. Why is the label of the new economy, and vivo and OPPO not the new economy?
If everything is not an Internet-based economy, it is classified as a traditional economy; everything that is not based on the Internet is regarded as a traditional industry. Then, based on this discussion, it is doomed to solve theoretical problems in terms of understanding and practice. Methodological issues.
Based on the trade deficit, the United States launched a Sino-US trade strategy, which is obviously the wrong way to use the wrong medicine. The products that China exports to the United States are almost all products that the United States no longer produces. In the 1970s and 1980s, the United States shifted most of its manufacturing industries to the world and built its industrial chain on a global scale. According to the above division method, the traditional industries are transferred, and the traditional economy is formed.
As a factory in the world, China accepts traditional industries and forms traditional economies, so that Lang Xianping refers to Chinese manufacturing and Chinese enterprises as “international migrant workers.”
The biggest achievement of Chinese marketing is through learning and imitation, which not only regains the Chinese market of traditional industries, but also goes to the world with traditional industries. Unexpected results include the introduction of developed countries, especially the United States, to the ceiling in the global industrial chain.
Learning and imitation have limits. Probably in 2008, the learning and imitation of Chinese companies went to glory, and in 2013, it reached its limit. People have seen the difficulties experienced by China’s traditional industries in the past decade, but they have neglected the creativity that Chinese companies that focus on their own intellectual property rights have developed during this decade. Ignore the technological foundation on which China’s emerging industries are based, and it is also bred by traditional industries.
In the face of the Chinese economy, if we deliberately ignore the strong basic role of the so-called traditional economy and traditional industries, the harm to the national economy must be far greater than the large-scale transfer of traditional industries to the United States.
The United States is squinting and confused. It must know the reasons for the trade deficit between China and the United States. What it wants to encircle is not the traditional Chinese industry itself, but the creativity that Chinese traditional industries are accumulating and will eventually erupt. In the past five years, the number of effective invention patents in China has increased by two times, and the annual technical transaction volume has doubled. Not long ago, institutions such as the World Intellectual Property Organization released the 2018 Global Innovation Index, ranking 17th in China, up 18 places from 2013.
Without the strong foundation of traditional industries, the continued rise of emerging industries will lose their support. If there is no strategic convergence, it will also cause technological innovation to form a fault. Back to the level of consumption, people’s lifestyles will change with the formation of emerging industries (service industry rapidly rises and lead manufacturing), but the evolution of traditional industries that constitute the material basis of lifestyle must be a change from quantitative to The relatively slow process of qualitative change is by no means a drastic change. Therefore, it is unreliable to make conclusions by simply comparing the rapidly developing emerging industries with the traditional industries that are undergoing painful changes.
The evolution of people’s material life is a relatively stable upgrade process. By comparing the product differences between China and developed countries, it is easy to draw such a conclusion. It is also relatively easy to find real gaps and efforts in all walks of life in China.
Ma Yun and the new marketing tell the traditional industry that if they don’t follow the new routine, “tradition” means demise. This not only explains the development trend to a certain extent, but also the propaganda momentum of “the ass decides the mouth”. Ma Yun’s “five new” is said to be worn, and it is mainly the “business” (new retail) and “production” (new manufacturing) in the traditional industry. Its arguments and ideas are tailored to the evolving needs of e-commerce ideals.
The problem is that it is not necessarily the only direction of development of traditional industries, and it may not even be the ideal direction of development.
The fate of traditional brand enterprises
The “manufacturer family” is at least a good wish in the past, and it is the marketing language of the other party. Since the channel has been changing, the game of manufacturers is the fact that has been happening all the time.
Once, the emerging supermarket industry, the scene for the manufacturing industry is “to enter the business super death, not to enter the business super death.” Today’s fact is that brand enterprises have entered the room and established the status of the industry with the development of Shangchao. Coincidentally, the leading enterprises in China have developed the “one red to die” spell with the development of Shangchao. Those “Muji” also eventually became a blessing for Taobao people in Shangchao.
At present, one of the arguments that is becoming a topic is that “brand companies are becoming the object of robbery for new retail” or “new retail will turn brand companies into ordinary suppliers”.
China’s Shangchao industry, which is preparing to slaughter brand enterprises, has not done it. It is not as strong as those of Wal-Mart. It has not done for multinational company brands and has not done for Chinese brands. If the new retail has the ability to turn the Chinese brand enterprise into an ordinary supplier, or eventually encircle the Chinese brand enterprise, then at least two basic conditions are required: 1. It has the ability to create a first-class product that goes beyond the brand enterprise; Chinese brand companies are all muddy, or they are willing to let people kill.
In this regard, I am more willing to make the judgment that if the new retail can not find a win-win model with the brand, then the new retail dominates the future market is a false proposition.
“The right to speak is moving from manufacturers to retailers,” a topic that was very popular in the 1980s. But this shift is irreversible (manufacturing becomes a supplier with no voice) or just as the environment changes, the vendors need to re-divide their interests without giving any conclusions. On the contrary, with Wal-Mart rising to the top of the world’s top 500 and the strong rise of e-commerce, people have strengthened their previous conclusions.
Any kind of business form, if you put it in a position with the brand enterprise, you have no way to live. The opposite is also true. Unless the brand of the brand company loses the support of strong product power, it digs the grave.
To discuss the way out for a brand enterprise, we first need to understand how the brand is formed and the survival mechanism of the brand. This is the underlying logic that determines the future of the brand. The brand itself is just a name and has no value. What makes it worthwhile is valuable products and proprietary intellectual property that supports value. Chinese brand companies are therefore passive. The real reason is that although they have a high reputation, brands lack the support of their own intellectual property rights and lack strong product support. This is also the fundamental reason why Chinese brand enterprises are at a loss in the face of the three-phase superposition and the rise of the Internet. It has nothing to do with the rise of the Internet. Instead, the Internet provides them with an opportunity to solve inherent problems, not just threats, but also a crisis that has been swallowed up.
The invincible product power is the brand, which is our basic understanding of the brand. It is a generation of generations that makes competitors daunting, so that consumers can enjoy the super-class products, create the brand, support the brand and polish the brand. Apple 1 to Apple 9, the product and brand integration; Q7, Q5, Q3 and X5, X6, once again confirmed this trend.
These logics will never change – for retailers, you can choose the best supplier, but it does not have the ability to kill the best manufacturers. For brand companies, not working with the best retailers, “there is no way to go when the car is good”, making sales redundant and never making retailers redundant.
If you don’t rationally and fairly embrace the brand, is Ma Yun’s choice for fans the best or the most economical choice? This is a question that deserves serious consideration.
What are the challenges faced by traditional brand companies?
The Internet will profoundly affect the economy and its elements. Any behavior that reverses the trend of the Internet means suicide. But in a drastic environment, figuring out which elements are constant and tightly grasped, and doing it well is as important as understanding insights and adapting quickly, and even more important than understanding and adapting to change.
As far as marketing is concerned, I don’t think there is any insurmountable gap in the adaptation of traditional industries to change. German and Japanese brand companies have not fallen under the impact of the Internet. Therefore, the reason why Chinese brand enterprises are so passive, and the Internet full of opportunities even poses challenges to them. The reason is not how difficult it is to adapt to the Internet, but the existence of Chinese brand enterprises. Inherent problem.
1. Productism in the absence of target customer demand preferences
In the long-term development process, even the so-called customer first of Chinese brand enterprises is limited to “product quality, function, cost performance and sales, after-sales service”. This is essentially different from the “productism” of international brands. The latter is based on a deep understanding of customer needs, based on the creation and provision of unique values based on proprietary intellectual property.
In the past, as a learning and imitator of multinational corporations, Chinese companies only need to find the products and imitation points that they imitated, and then do the promotion and sales work, and basically they are done. Understanding customer and value proposition has always been a matter for multinational companies. This kind of deficiency will be highlighted when the leading enterprises in China are unable to continue to develop rapidly through learning and imitation.
2. The brand name is far-reaching but there is no technical barrier
Without technical barriers, there is no strong brand. Without a strong brand, there can be no qualified industry leading companies. For example, Maotai and Wuliangye are leading enterprises in the liquor industry? No. They have no ability to take the industry forward. For example, Master Kang, the lack of innovation, eat the old. Although they are not rich and expensive, although they are not excellent, they are the products of history, but they are not capable of creating new history.
Further, their followers are no longer following the market pattern after they have been shaped, because they are weak in innovation and do not follow the value. As a result, there has been a stalemate in the industry competition – the entire industry is dead.
3. Opportunities and threats are all derived from “Chinese-style manufacturing + Chinese-style sales”
Chinese-style manufacturing has achieved large-scale production, industrialization in a large country dominated by agriculture, and in developing countries, the highest level of manufacturing, the most complete industrial chain, and the most complete industrial support, so that in the context of globalization, Further achieved a unique and stable supporting position. Chinese-style sales have achieved the ultimate in sales, gaining a global market share for Chinese-style manufacturing. The United States launched a trade war against China and the European Union launched a dumping investigation on Chinese companies, which also proved the power of Chinese-style sales.
However, it is undeniable that both Chinese-style manufacturing and Chinese-style sales are staged achievements. If they do not rise to Chinese-style creation and Chinese-style marketing, the growth of the lighter is weak and the heavy ones are unsustainable.
4. Chinese brand companies are not strong enough to rob the channel dealers, but they are not weak enough to be robbed by the channel vendors.
Even in the age of shortage, Chinese brands have not been able to establish professional relationship with manufacturers because of the inconvenience of Chinese goods; and as soon as the rise of Shangchao, brand enterprises were passive, but eventually established professional relationships and won the most value together. The growth of the current e-commerce, the embarrassing e-commerce, the desire to squat the Internet advantage, condescending the integration of brand enterprises, from the overall and long-term perspective, should belong to the snake swallow, not realized.
Robbery and being robbed have always been one of the melody of Chinese-style manufacturers. I believe this will ultimately be a win-win result. In the face of national and global markets, for brand companies, although many experts make predictions, it is unimaginable to want to achieve direct sales through the Internet.
It is ridiculous that there is no division of labor and collaboration, a company that plays a show and dominates China and the global market.
5. Value service (not after-sales service) is insufficient, and it has always been the top of Chinese brand enterprises.
Regardless of whether the right to speak is in the hands of brand owners or distributors, it is impossible to establish a stable and efficient business ecosystem if a win-win system cannot be achieved. Brand-based companies will be inevitable if they have no ability to build an integrated value chain. And the downstream channel dealers are destined to have no future if they think they can smash consumers to make brands.
Traditional brand enterprises are still the backbone of China’s economy
In addition to the general discussion of the way out and direction in principle, no one can give the traditional industry a secret recipe that can be used as a single medicine. Faced with the overall transformation and innovation of China’s traditional industries, just telling them how to launch Internet and mobile Internet marketing is also a matter of asking for a fish, and can’t solve the real problem.
In the face of environmental upheaval, if an industry is unable to redeem itself, its fate will either die or be robbed. The “new jungle rules” formed by the rise of e-commerce are spreading and even sought after in China’s business ecosystem. Those new business giants with the right to speak are trying to transcend value creation, redefining value and dividing value.
When people believe in the rumor, eagerly embrace the “new economy”, and focus more on emerging industries and BATs, the cultivators who are obsessed with traditional industries have quietly created history and made great breakthroughs.
Wealth creation is one thing, wealth sharing is one thing, and wealth partitioning is another. While the United States divides the world’s wealth by virtue of its technological superiority and financial hegemony, the whole world is arguing with other countries because of agricultural and sideline products. Beginning with Obama, the United States began to revive the manufacturing industry. Trump is pushing the return of its own manufacturers on the one hand, and forcing other companies with the United States as the market to invest and build factories in the United States. Everything is nothing more than an increase in the creation of American employment and wealth.
It seems that even if developed, such as the United States, if there is no strong manufacturing (whether quantity or quality) as the basis, the global economic status will be threatened, and the prosperity of the domestic economy will be affected. Therefore, China should give great respect to those entrepreneurs who adhere to the industry. Because they are the true creators of wealth. Others are either sharers of wealth or may be looters of wealth.
In the 1970s and 1980s, Japan’s global expansion was unprecedented. The United States feels the threat, and it does lose its advantage in many industries. Many American scholars have even begun to doubt the US economy and turn to research on Japan and its businesses. I hope to use the Japanese experience to revitalize the US economy. Other American scholars believe that although facing the strong competition of Japan and Germany, American companies need to transform, but they believe that through transformation, they can be strong again. Later history proves that these scholars’ views are correct. Japan subsequently experienced a loss of more than 20 years, and the US economy once again dominated the world.
At that time, American companies were keen on the “rational model” and “enterprise strategy paradigm” that dominated the management ideological circle. Professional managers and MBAs were accustomed to planning models and accurate financial analysis. They were high on the top, giving orders and losing the grasp of the nature of management. Seriously neglect or even distort the most basic management principles. The so-called ideas and concepts go beyond marketing and management, quality and service, and become the sought after objects of the corporate world, which in turn leads to the loss of American companies and the loss of self-confidence.
Tom Peters and Robert Waterman spent years in the United States, went deep into the company to conduct research, integrated the first-hand materials of hundreds of large and small companies, and finally selected 43 excellent “specimens” for anatomy. And inquiry. The sample covers manufacturing, information, services, sales, transportation, food and many other industries, including the famous IBM, General Electric, HP, 3M, McDonald’s, P&G and so on. Finally, the book “The pursuit of excellence” was published. In the eyes of the authors, the “excellence” standard means that companies have a high degree of innovation in addition to their long-term financial performance. The author believes that although each outstanding company has a different personality, it has many qualities in common.
We believe that the experience accumulated by China’s outstanding enterprises emerging in the process of China’s economic rise – the fact that China’s economy can still maintain a relatively high growth rate in the complex environment of the three phases – can also prove that it will be able to go out for traditional industries. The current turbid environment provides assistance. Just because people are too happy and tired, they are too hopeful to seize the opportunity of the Internet and realize the overtaking of the Chinese economy, ignoring the value and role of these enterprises, so that they generate too many unrealistic ideas and judgments, even I am blindly pursuing emerging companies and ignoring the efforts and achievements of traditional enterprises.
Leading companies in the traditional industry are now the backbone of our national economy for the foreseeable future. Emerging industries will undoubtedly innovate their way of life, but clothing, food, housing, and rice, oil, salt and vinegar tea will always be the cornerstone of any lifestyle. As for how to sell them, innovating them is another issue.
What are the concerns of multinational companies’ innovation? How are the sought-after Chinese companies innovative? There is no limit to innovation, but there is an underlying logic of innovation. Innovations that go beyond the underlying logic will eventually prove to be unconventional, or simply slick.
There are two basic directions for corporate innovation: technological innovation and fashion (popular culture) creativity. This is not only the direction of the efforts of traditional leading enterprises, but also the direction of the efforts of emerging leading enterprises. In these two aspects, whether it is an emerging or traditional Chinese industry leading enterprise, the distance from the world is still very large, there is no proud capital, let alone a temporary practice or a number of non-multiple rounds of competition. The conclusions of the proven corporate practice are raised to theory and methodology to guide the practice of the entire Chinese enterprise.