What Is The Importance Of The Mixed Reform Of State-Owned Enterprises?

Mixed reform of state-owned enterprises is not equal to privatization.

Recently, Fortune magazine published the list of the top 500 enterprises in the world in 2015, with 106 listed companies in China, and 47 seats under the supervision of the SASAC.

along with

The top-level design is about to be released. How should the "elephant" of the state-owned enterprises go in the future?

Experts have warned that the reform of state-owned enterprises is an important part of the comprehensive deepening reform. We should comprehensively and objectively analyze the problems of mixed ownership reform, stimulate the vitality of state-owned enterprises, straighten out the salary system and so on. We should guard against one-sided use of extreme thinking to "deduce" and ignore the essence of this reform.

Mixed ownership is not equal to privatization.

Inefficient, overstaffed, overburdened, and slow market reaction.

These management defects have long been troubling state-owned enterprises.

In contrast, the reform of mixed ownership of private capital and even foreign capital in state-owned enterprises is undoubtedly an effective way to insert "wolf genes" into state-owned enterprises.

Well,

Is it equivalent to a comprehensive privatization in the eyes of some people?

In fact, the decision of the Central Committee of the CPC Central Committee on a number of major issues in deepening the reform has clearly pointed out that the mixed ownership economy, such as state capital, collective capital and non-public capital, is an important form of realization of the basic economic system, which is conducive to the amplification function of state-owned capital, value preservation and increment, and competitiveness. It is beneficial for all kinds of ownership capital to complement each other, promote each other and develop jointly.

He Vinda, director of the Department of economics and trade of the school of management, University of Science and Technology Beijing, said in an interview with reporters that the mixed ownership reform aimed at the phenomenon of too large share of state-owned shares. Through introducing private capital and foreign capital to diversify the ownership of state-owned enterprises, a competitive mechanism was formed to eliminate monopoly and stimulate the vitality of enterprises.

Therefore, it is wrong and harmful to regard the mixed ownership reform simply as privatization.

"China is a socialist country, and state-owned enterprises are the lifeblood of the national economy. This is an important institutional feature of China.

At the same time, different enterprises will take different measures in the process of mixed reform.

For example, enterprises such as aerospace and aviation may be more dominated by the state. "

He Weida said.

Private capital will not have no say.

Since the mixed ownership reform will still guarantee the state-owned property of enterprises, does it mean that the private capital and foreign capital of the late "joining the children" do not have the right to speak in the enterprise management and corporate governance?

Experts say that one of the important purposes of the reform of state-owned enterprises' mixed ownership is to improve the management mode and management structure of state-owned enterprises, so that social capital with a better market sense will play an important role in the decision-making of production, sales, layout and planning.

"According to the current mainstream one vote, the same shares with the same corporate governance structure, the addition of private capital and foreign investment can optimize the composition of the board of directors and form a balance force for the" dominance of state-owned capital ".

Of course, the size of such checks and balances depends on the specific equity ratio. "

He Weida said that a lot of important decisions of enterprises need more than 2/3 equity support. If private capital and foreign capital can account for 1/3, they can have a veto on major issues such as asset restructuring, project approval, executive compensation, accounting and auditing. Even if they fail to reach 1/3, they will have some influence within the board of directors.

In addition, insiders pointed out that, compared with the traditional introduction of social capital, the active participation of state-owned enterprises in the operation of good private enterprises is also an important way for the reform of mixed ownership.

If China General Technology (Group) Holding Co., Ltd. as a central enterprise, shares shares of the electrical equipment industry private enterprise Siyuan electric and becomes its tenth largest shareholder, it is a classic case.

The limit of state-owned enterprises does not mean "one size fits all".

With more diversified equity and better corporate governance structure, how to motivate talents and make good use of talents has become a top priority.

Experts believe that state-owned enterprises have the property of public ownership on the one hand. They belong to the property of the whole people. On the other hand, they must take part in market competition so as to maintain and increase the value of state assets. If the "one size fits all" salary limit is paid to employees, it is obviously another misreading of the reform of state-owned enterprises.

Gao Minghua, director of the research center of corporate governance and enterprise development of Beijing Normal University, said that according to the different nature of enterprises, state-owned enterprises are generally divided into 3 types: public welfare, monopoly and competitiveness.

Among them, public welfare state-owned enterprises include public pport, subway, environmental sanitation and so on. The salaries of such state-owned enterprises should refer to the salaries of civil servants.

Competitive state-owned enterprises are different from ordinary enterprises. For those appointed by the organization, civil servants' standards should be consults, and the executives hired from the market should be treated in a market-oriented way.

For those administrative monopolized state-owned enterprises that do not rely on competition, but rely on the special policies of the government, they should be reduced wages.

The reform of state-owned enterprises' salary system should not only narrow the income gap between senior managers and ordinary employees, but also be linked to the behavior of employees.

This will contain some locking times.

For example, 5 or 10 years.

In this way, the personal interests of employees are closely related to the sustainable development of enterprises, which is a truth for any enterprise. "