The China Venture

The China Venture The China Venture

11.12.2012 Views

This evaluation does not rate SMEs’ bargaining power; it rather shows the importance of the relation for SMEs’ operations. Not all of the identified relations are real bargaining relations. The SME may be in such a weak position, that it is forced into compliance with the given environment and existing rules. This is particularly true for all relations with the central government and financial institutions. In terms of bargaining power a single SME is a lightweight against these “partners” and most likely has to comply with the rules. This section will shed some light onto four of the more promising and interesting bargaining situations, i.e. relations where SMEs are expected to have at least some bargaining power: 1) SME – local Chinese authorities, 2) SME – Chinese joint venture partner, 3) SME – trading house/distributor and 4) SME – technology recipient. First, the interests of both bargaining partners are briefly summarised for each of the given situations. Second, conflicting interests are identified. In a third step an estimation is given about the relative bargain ing strength of the SME. To come up with a reasonable estimate it is imperative to understand the sources of bargaining power. 3.3.3.1 Bargaining Situation I: SME – Local Chinese Authorities High-Tech SME Local Chinese Authorities • Efficient authorities, fast approval procedures • Adequate infrastructure • Free choice of legal vehicle • Protection of technology, e.g. long license periods • No export quota • Free repatriation of profit • Attracting high-tech companies into the province • Ensure absorption of high tech � joint ventures preferred • Personal benefits such as gifts and international travel • Comply with central government’s rules • Tax collection TABLE 3-14: Interests, objectives and expectations between High-Tech SMEs and Chinese Authorities As local authorities are empowered to approve investment projects below 30 million US$, they are in charge of most applications made by SMEs. To speed up approval procedures in the special economic zones, there are tight review deadlines for the approving authorities. If they cannot come up with an decision in time, the application is automatically considered approved. Growing competition among local government in their attempt to lure FDI into their province lead to this streamlined approval process (Foreign Investment Administration, 1995). However, issuing the required business license still may take many months. Local governments, especially in the coastal provinces have realised that high tech companies have special requirements in terms of physical infrastructure. Beside the industrial parks which usually provide a good infrastructure, specialised “high-tech parks” are currently set up 118

in the most advanced provinces and municipalities. Only technology based companies are eligible to set up operations in such privileged areas. In these parks which are often foreign planned and sometimes administered 115 with foreign help, power supply, water quality and telecommunications facilities are on par with Western standards. Everything seems to be nicely set up for foreign SMEs, but conflicting interests exist when it comes to the question of technology transfer. On the one hand SMEs tend to be secretive about their proprietary knowledge and are reluctant to share it with a partner. On the other hand that is exactly one major goal of the Chinese side: full and rapid assimilation of the technology. Therefore, joint ventures are clearly favoured by the Chinese side because technology transfer to the Chinese Partner is inevitable. License periods are limited by law to a maximum of ten years, Chinese workers must be given compulsory training (Chen, 1993), extensive guarantees by the SME are specified in a technology transfer contract. The technology offered is by far the single most important source of power during negotiations. The more a SME is willing to share, the better is its position in negotiations. As the competition among regional governments is fierce, many questions are negotiable. Although the preferred legal vehicle is the joint venture, it is no problem to set up a company as WOFE. High-tech companies are usually able to negotiate a 0% export quota regardless of the legal form chosen (Foreign Investment Administration, 1995) 116 . Longer license periods have been granted in some instances and repatriation of profit made in China is partly possible. Ample time for negotiations, high profile negotiation teams, flexibility and a clever way to deal with unofficial requests (gifts, international travel) are other elements that strengthen the SME’s negotiation power. To sum up, SMEs have a relatively good position in dealing with local authorities, provided they offer genuine high-tech, that has a high priority on China’s “technology shopping list”. 115 Example: Suzhou Industrial Park, a Singapore – China joint venture, jointly run but planned by Singapore’s Economic Development Board. 116 Companies with foreign held equity usually have to export a certain percentage of their production, depending on the type of product and the legal form. 119

This evaluation does not rate SMEs’ bargaining power; it rather shows the importance of the<br />

relation for SMEs’ operations. Not all of the identified relations are real bargaining relations.<br />

<strong>The</strong> SME may be in such a weak position, that it is forced into compliance with the given<br />

environment and existing rules. This is particularly true for all relations with the central<br />

government and financial institutions. In terms of bargaining power a single SME is a<br />

lightweight against these “partners” and most likely has to comply with the rules.<br />

This section will shed some light onto four of the more promising and interesting bargaining<br />

situations, i.e. relations where SMEs are expected to have at least some bargaining power: 1)<br />

SME – local Chinese authorities, 2) SME – Chinese joint venture partner, 3) SME – trading<br />

house/distributor and 4) SME – technology recipient. First, the interests of both bargaining<br />

partners are briefly summarised for each of the given situations. Second, conflicting interests<br />

are identified. In a third step an estimation is given about the relative bargain ing strength of<br />

the SME. To come up with a reasonable estimate it is imperative to understand the sources of<br />

bargaining power.<br />

3.3.3.1 Bargaining Situation I: SME – Local Chinese Authorities<br />

High-Tech SME Local Chinese Authorities<br />

• Efficient authorities, fast approval procedures<br />

• Adequate infrastructure<br />

• Free choice of legal vehicle<br />

• Protection of technology, e.g. long license periods<br />

• No export quota<br />

• Free repatriation of profit<br />

• Attracting high-tech companies into the province<br />

• Ensure absorption of high tech � joint ventures<br />

preferred<br />

• Personal benefits such as gifts and international<br />

travel<br />

• Comply with central government’s rules<br />

• Tax collection<br />

TABLE 3-14: Interests, objectives and expectations between High-Tech SMEs and<br />

Chinese Authorities<br />

As local authorities are empowered to approve investment projects below 30 million US$,<br />

they are in charge of most applications made by SMEs. To speed up approval procedures in<br />

the special economic zones, there are tight review deadlines for the approving authorities. If<br />

they cannot come up with an decision in time, the application is automatically considered<br />

approved. Growing competition among local government in their attempt to lure FDI into<br />

their province lead to this streamlined approval process (Foreign Investment Administration,<br />

1995). However, issuing the required business license still may take many months.<br />

Local governments, especially in the coastal provinces have realised that high tech companies<br />

have special requirements in terms of physical infrastructure. Beside the industrial parks<br />

which usually provide a good infrastructure, specialised “high-tech parks” are currently set up<br />

118

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!