Why is the management of enterprises in China mostly degraded?

Why is it downgraded? Is it because the management of Chinese enterprises has taken the initiative to decentralize and downgrade? It is by no means voluntary for the management of the enterprise to do so. Then why is this happening? First of all, the management of many enterprises in China don't know that they have degenerated, so they always insist on their "decentralized" state. Once these CXOs who have demoted themselves know the current situation of demotion and think that they have been demoted for no reason, they will definitely find their own leadership theory, and the biggest chairman will return to his post; Secondly, this is a chain reaction, because the chairman himself is downgraded first, and it is very natural for CEO, COO and CXO to be downgraded. In addition, the chairman of some China enterprises didn't trust the CEO he hired, so he decided the strategy for the CEO first, and the CEO only needed to implement the strategy, so the CEO was reduced to chief operating officer. It is the chairman's fault to degrade the use. It seems that the chairman is responsible for the degraded use of enterprise management, which is really a bit like it. What does the chairman of a multinational company do? There is a board of directors under the chairman, and the chairman has only one responsibility to lead the board of directors, that is, to find a CEO he trusts, recognize the strategy formulated by the CEO, and supervise the CEO to implement and complete the strategy approved by the board of directors within the time limit approved by the board of directors. Usually, the chairman and the board of directors are behind the scenes, the CEO is at the front desk, and the cxo who leads himself is only responsible to the board of directors. And the chairman of most enterprises in China rushed in front of the CEO to go into battle in person, isn't it too impatient? No wonder many China enterprises don't have CIOs? It turns out that the CIO has fallen somewhere. Downgrading creates a management vacuum. If the management of an enterprise is demoted from the chairman, it will lose the internal judgment and supervision mechanism for the leading group. It can also be said that there is a management vacuum layer or a sense of dislocation. On the surface, it is still the board of directors led by the chairman, managing the CXO team led by the CEO, but actually participating in the management. To use a simple metaphor, if a referee plays football, how can he whistle with the referee's eyes? Of course, as an enterprise, it is not enough to have only internal referees, but also external referees. Who is the external referee? It is stocks, shareholders, investors, analysts and the press that form a complete internal and external supervision ecology of enterprises. According to the above theory, does the demotion of management destroy the ecology of the internal management system of enterprises? Once the ecology is destroyed, enterprises should have problems. It is more difficult for enterprises to grow up when they are sick, and it is more difficult for multinational enterprises to treat diseases, otherwise it is difficult to grow up and it is even more difficult to grow into multinational enterprises. Why do you say that? It is easy to understand that a sick enterprise, like a sick person, is difficult to grow. If domestic enterprises want to go abroad due to illness, they will encounter such embarrassment: is it strange that the chairman replaces the CEO to meet customers, partners and government officials? Will it make people feel that this enterprise is going to abolish the CEO, and the chairman will boycott it for a while before replacing the CEO? In particular, the CEO of multinational companies came to visit the client enterprises in China, so the CEO of China enterprises came forward to receive them, and vice versa. However, the CEO of Chinese enterprises can't decide the specific matters they discuss, saying that if you go back and let the chairman rule, customers will definitely think that your company is sick! This should be the conclusion of the subtitle, it is difficult for enterprises to grow up when they are sick, and it is even more difficult to cross the border. Perhaps enterprises in China have no problem in China, because most enterprises in China have been downgraded, misused and have no internal judgment. However, it is no wonder that they grow slowly. There is a circumstantial evidence: the CEO and chairman of some township enterprises and private enterprises are CSOs (sales executives), and they have downgraded themselves to N-level use, and their development strategies and financing methods are even more neglected. Conclusion The situation mentioned in this paper is only the situation of some enterprise management. What's the hurry for enterprises that have not been downgraded? I didn't say you. There are 74 10000 enterprises in China. Even if only 1% enterprises have such degraded use, it is 74,000, not to mention more. China enterprises should maintain their internal and external ecology, while China enterprises should be transnational, and they should connect multinational partners and users. First of all, management should not belittle themselves.