3L Internal Mixer,3L Rubber Mixer,3L Plastic Mixer,3L Small Internal Mixer,3L Metal Powder Mixer Dongguan Zhenggong Electromechanical Equipment Technology Co., Ltd , https://www.mixer-cn.com
Not long ago, when discussing the supervision of state-owned enterprise managers, Li Rongrong, head of the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission (SASAC), mentioned that CEOs should change positions if they are "not in the state." This statement caught attention and raised thoughtful discussions. It's a perspective worth exploring.
Veterans of state-owned enterprises often face significant challenges, and legal actions can be taken against them if they violate regulations. However, determining how to evaluate and handle the performance of state-owned company CEOs is no easy task. What exactly constitutes being "not in the state"? Director Li didn't provide a clear definition. From an analytical standpoint, could this refer to not focusing on work, or even neglecting duties? If so, it's hard to justify such behavior. But if it's considered part of their role, then some CEOs might appear busy with meetings and visits, yet fail to focus on real business development.
Some CEOs follow local government directives closely, but end up lacking market competitiveness. Why do large investments lead to losses, and why do companies suffer significant financial setbacks? These CEOs may have contributed to GDP growth, but at the cost of poor governance and questionable decision-making. How can we hold them accountable?
It seems that "not being in the state" has become a common issue among state-owned enterprise leaders. Sometimes, these executives are more concerned with pleasing superiors than operating effectively. In contrast, when they truly focus on the market and act according to its rules, they tend to perform better. However, many still prioritize political connections over business acumen.
This "absent-minded" attitude highlights flaws in the current performance evaluation system and management mechanisms of state-owned enterprises. They still operate under a framework that prioritizes administrative control over market-driven efficiency. Simply replacing CEOs won't solve the root problem—it’s like treating symptoms without addressing the disease.
To truly improve the situation, state-owned enterprises need a performance evaluation and supervisory system aligned with market economy principles. Only then can their leaders fully engage in business operations, balance market demands with leadership expectations, and ultimately be "in the state." Otherwise, they will continue to be divided between political pressures and market realities—never fully focused or effective.