What does Internet Plus have to do with Zhang Zhidong? Is it another case of 'Guan Gong fighting Qin Qiong' (anachronistic comparison)?
No one dares to ignore the Internet now, but there are two contradictory views about it: One: The Internet is disruptive and overturns everything. Two: The Internet is just a tool; the essence has not changed.
Such a debate also occurred after the Opium Wars. Before the Opium Wars, China regarded itself as the Celestial Empire and dismissed all things Western. After losing multiple wars, China had to admit its technological inferiority but was unwilling to concede entirely. Thus, Zhang Zhidong proposed a seemingly 'best of both worlds' formula: Chinese learning as the essence, Western learning for practical use. 'Chinese essence, Western utility' seemed to be the greatest common denominator of Chinese society at that time.
In today's terms, it means Western learning is just a tool, while Chinese learning remains fundamental. In other words, no matter how society changes, 'the essence does not change.' Zhang Zhidong's 'Chinese essence, Western utility' was very popular during a period of great transformation.
Zhang Zhidong's way of thinking can be described as a panacea; it works in many situations, is always applicable, and is difficult to refute.
The reason I think of Zhang Zhidong again is the trouble caused by Internet thinking.
Has the essence changed with Internet Plus?
Since the advent of Internet portals, the Internet has been completely changing our lives. Ma Yun (Jack Ma), Liu Qiangdong, and Lei Jun have fueled the hype around Internet thinking. The emergence of Uber has given us an even newer understanding of the Internet.
So, the question arises: How do we understand this phenomenon?
One view holds that the Internet is just a tool; the essence of marketing and business has not changed, and Internet thinking is a business gimmick. 'All changes are within the same framework'; current phenomena can be explained by classic theories.
Another view holds that the Internet is disruptive, and the Internet era requires new 'underlying thinking' and new knowledge systems. For example, Professor Li Shanyou believes that the Internet era is based on quantum mechanics logic, different from the original Newtonian mechanics logic.
This is not a simple disagreement; it involves a major judgment about the era. Zhang Ruimin has a view on innovation: one is sustaining innovation, and the other is disruptive innovation. According to this, is the Internet era a continuation of industrial civilization, a disruption of it, or even the beginning of a new civilization?
Has civilization been disrupted?
Some say we are in the Internet era, but I think it is more accurate to call it the information civilization era. Just as internal combustion engines and electricity opened the industrial civilization era, internal combustion engines and the Internet are tools of an era, even tools of the early period of an era; naming an era after them is clearly inappropriate.
Each era has its own logic. Internal combustion engines and electricity initiated industrialized mass production, so the values and knowledge systems of that era revolved around industrialized mass production. This is a set of values and knowledge systems different from agricultural civilization. In the industrial civilization era, clinging to the values and knowledge systems of agricultural civilization would lead to backwardness and defeat, as in the late Qing Dynasty.
The widespread adoption of smartphones worldwide has opened the information civilization era. The information civilization era will also have its own values and knowledge systems; clinging to those of the industrial civilization era will likewise lead to backwardness and defeat.
Internet thinking is somewhat of a gimmick
The concept of Internet thinking is indeed hard to believe, especially for those with deep traditional foundations.
1Internet thinking generally has too strong a commercial tint
It is merely popular because Ma Yun, Lei Jun, and others have achieved commercial success and are admired by the public. In particular, successful business figures in the Internet field are generally good at business chicken soup for the soul. The methods of Internet thinking have become commercial communication, which I call 'marketing of marketing.'
2Most Internet thinking is still in the marketing or business domain
Thinking in these areas remains shallow. If thinking about an era is limited to business or marketing, then such thinking is certainly hard to accept, even if it gains broad recognition in business.
Of course, there are also people who think deeply about Internet thinking, such as Zhang Ruimin. Zhang Ruimin's thinking is not only in the business field but more importantly about the changes the Internet brings to social relations, such as the reconstruction of interpersonal relationships, inter-enterprise relationships, and individual-enterprise relationships. Haier's transformation of the entire company into a platform is a result of deep thinking about the Internet. Unfortunately, Zhang Ruimin is no longer a prominent figure in the Internet era and has lost his voice.
Internet thinking is still understated
Internet thinking is still understated; I more agree with the statement that the information civilization era has arrived.
First, industrialized mass production, a feature of industrial civilization, is gradually being marginalized in multinational corporations due to the modularization of the world economy and the rapid development of professional outsourcing organizations like Foxconn.
One of the two pillars of the industrial civilization knowledge system, Weber's organizational theory, is being challenged; the prevalence of small micro-owners and makers is a challenge to traditional organizational theory. Even super-large enterprises like Apple have very small core departments.
Second, as a result of industrial civilization, social wealth is abundant, leading to a large amount of social redundant resources.
For example, Uber and Airbnb are built on the full utilization of social redundant resources.
Third, due to the comprehensive popularity of smartphones, information is everywhere, readily available, and highly transparent.
Do not underestimate the power of information; information can break through all resource barriers. The scale, resources, and channels of the industrial civilization era can be penetrated solely by transparent information. Now, companies that disrupt industries mostly come from outside the industry; they do not compete with existing companies on resources but rather render accumulated resources obsolete and devalued.
Chinese essence, Western utility: a panacea
Since the exclusive reverence for Confucianism, Confucianism has been omnipotent; everything can be tested and interpreted by Confucianism. This has become a habit of Chinese intellectuals. More importantly, China has established regimes under 'foreign' peoples multiple times, but the cultural bloodline has not changed. This is the natural confidence of Chinese culture.
Although the Opium Wars were lost, they did not initially defeat the confidence of the Chinese people. Many thought it was like past invasions by 'foreign' peoples, not realizing that this time the confrontation between Western new civilization and traditional civilization was different from the past confrontation between backward nomadic civilization and advanced agricultural civilization.
No matter how powerful Chinese traditional culture is, it is ultimately a product of agricultural civilization. It was no match for Western industrial civilization. This was the 'lesson' taught to China by the great powers with guns and cannons.
Japan, with shallow agricultural civilization roots, simply 'left Asia and entered Europe,' while China, with deep traditional culture, had immense traditional power that could not be changed by a few advocates of the Westernization Movement. Thus, 'Chinese essence, Western utility' became a compromise, preserving face while accepting change; it was the greatest common denominator of that era.
In social life, traditional things are certainly passed down. But look at the content of the current college entrance examination; except for Chinese and history, all subjects are from the industrial civilization knowledge system. University courses, except for a few majors, are also from the industrial civilization knowledge system. 'Chinese essence, Western utility' is just self-deception.
Has the essence changed or not?
The currently popular Internet thinking is indeed mostly about tools, such as extreme products, dimensionality reduction attacks, and 'only speed matters,' which do not even qualify as Internet thinking. Calling these Internet thinking and expecting people to believe they are disruptive is hard to accept.
At the level of currently popular Internet thinking, the essence indeed has not changed. Not only has it not changed, but it is even a different expression of the same old thing.
If the claim that we are moving from industrial civilization to information civilization holds, then the essence must be changing, and new knowledge systems will certainly be born.
Knowledge systems in the business field, such as management, strategy, and marketing, have been mature since the 1980s, with few innovative theories emerging. Current Internet practices also confirm that traditional theories are no longer applicable; for example, Uber and Airbnb are difficult to interpret with traditional theories.
Whether the essence has changed depends on the perspective.
1From a social relations perspective, some say the post-90s generation are 'natives' of the information society; social relations are indeed changing.
2From a strategic perspective, mature strategic theories are now facing challenges in an uncertain era; strategy is changing.
3From a management perspective, the two pillars of industrial civilization, Weber's organizational theory, are being challenged; management is indeed changing.
4From a marketing perspective, at least the 4P framework is no longer applicable; although marketing methods still have traces of the past, the marketing system has indeed changed.
If you want to learn more about Mr. Liu Chunxiong's latest views on management, agricultural materials, and new marketing, please click the title above to follow 'Teacher Liu's Forum' or directly search the WeChat public account: liuchunxiong1964.
(If you wish to share, please indicate the author and source.)
-END-
Featured Content Click the title below to read directly: [Line Sales Representative Practical Operation Guide (with full PPT download attached)]