network boss Sima Nan exposed the Lenovo Group incident of , Sima Nan used six episodes of video to question the load rate of Lenovo Group's high, insufficient core business competitiveness, and executive foreigners More than half of the salaries are too high and involve problems such as the loss of state-owned assets, but Lenovo Group did not give a positive response.
Just yesterday, Sima Nan updated the official account and disclosed that Liu Chuanzhi secretary asked Sima Nan to have tea. The screenshot of the SMS communication rejected by Sima Nan was considered as a response from Lenovo Group. How to look at this matter, most of the online public opinion still supports Sima Nan and advocates digging into the inside story of Lenovo . Now that this online debate has become a hot topic, I am afraid that the parties concerned cannot influence its development. So how do you think about Sima Nan's online voice? I want to talk about my opinion.
First of all, whether Sima Nan can question Lenovo, the answer is of course yes. Everyone in the society has the right to follow and supervise. This is a right granted to citizens by the Constitution. Both Sima Nan and ordinary people have the right to express their opinions on a certain social issue within the legal framework. There was a pair of voices on the Internet, pointing out that Sima Nan had a rhythm and confuses the audience, which is a mess. Moreover, the evidence presented by Sima Nan is all publicly released information or directly from Lenovo's own annual report data. How can it confuse the public? This is obviously untenable.
Second, can Lenovo Group be questioned? There is a strange argument on the Internet that Lenovo was once the light of the nation and the representative of national enterprises. It has made significant contributions to the country and cannot easily deny a company. This is also very strange, not to mention whether Lenovo is a national enterprise or not.Can it represent a national enterprise, even if it is so, can it not be questioned? History and reality need to be treated separately. Of course, the glorious history is respected by us. In reality, if we do not do well, we can of course be criticized. This is the case for enterprises and individuals, and this kind of supervision does not negate enterprises. It's just exercising the power of supervision to put forward one's own opinions. This should belong to two issues and should not be confused.
Third, what do you think about Lenovo's high debt, low investment in innovation, large number of foreign executives, and high salaries? In fact, if these issues are true, it doesn’t matter. Lenovo is a joint-stock company. As long as the decision is made through the procedures stipulated in the company’s articles of association, it belongs to the autonomy of the company’s business operations. Even the shareholders holding Lenovo’s shares can do nothing but no longer hold it. It’s just using stocks to express their opinions, and the more serious it affects the corporate image and even corporate profits. This is a legal category, and the people’s doubts remain at the level of public opinion.
Fourth, Sima Nan’s most deadly question is the loss of state-owned assets! This is a legal issue. It is no longer whether Lenovo wants to respond to the issue, but a clear response. There may be a lot of room for interpretation of doubts about the right of enterprises to operate independently, and they may even leave outsiders speechless. After all, this is the information held internally. These enterprises undoubtedly have the greatest right to speak, but the loss of state-owned assets may be involved. You can't wait to take it lightly. This is probably the key to Lenovo's delay in responding positively. Its lethality is too great.
Fifth, Lenovo’s crisis public relations capabilities are really not flattering. This matter has been fermented on the Internet, and it is still not a matter for both parties. The entire network is paying attention. Lenovo can respond openly and openly, or it can communicate with Sima Nan at the top, at least it shows that Lenovo’s attitude is positive. , Not taboo. Such a large international company even arranged for company secretary SMS to invite Sima Nan. Liu Chuanzhi and Yang Yuanqing avoided seeing it. This is not a sincere attitude. The content of the SMS was released by Sima Nan’s screenshots, and the impact was not small, and the Lenovo plan The third? Why! It is too low-level, it is difficult to imagine that this is the result of Lenovo's senior research, which also reflects the company's mentality from another side.
Sixth, because Lenovo’s attitude is known to the public, what is the truth of the matter?
.
