Who Is Our Research For?
As the university pursues "deepening reform, striving for greatness, and reaching new peaks of excellence," research capability and output play a critical role. We must make strong efforts in securing major projects, major achievements, major funding, and major talent. But the precondition for all of these "majors" is that our research is oriented in the right direction, and this is also the foundation of the School's push for organized research.
When discussing research, people tend to think first about "what problem to study." Management research, however, must go a step further, from "what to study" to asking "who we are studying for." Only by identifying whom we serve can we pinpoint the pressing problems that real-world actors need solved, and then translate those practical problems into well-defined academic questions. Management is a social science. Unlike basic mathematics or philosophy, its core mission is to support managers in making effective decisions. Management research must not be detached from the practical needs of the nation, society, and enterprises, nor should it simply follow a purely academic or purely scientific orientation. This principle matters even more when we carry out organized research.
The "Four Orientations" put forward at the Fifth Plenary Session of the 19th CPC Central Committee are the top-level guiding principles for China's scientific and technological innovation. Applied to management, they mean conducting research oriented toward industrial development, corporate practice, and health and social well-being. Whether we become the School that governments and enterprises "think of first" when they seek management collaboration is, at its core, a question of whom our research serves.
We do not reject free exploration driven by personal interest or purely academic research, and we encourage faculty to pursue such work in moderation. But the School's funding, space, brand, and other resources are limited and cannot be supplied without bound, so free exploration should not become the mainstream of resource allocation. Organized research is not only an adjustment to how research is organized but also a shift in the logic of resource allocation: resources should be concentrated on key problems and directed toward our core beneficiaries. Only by integrating into the mainstream of development can we build a first-class discipline; otherwise, it will be hard for the School to become a preferred partner for government and industry.
Public fiscal resources are finite. Basic research that bears on scientific progress and cultural transmission but has no clear market buyer, along with research commissioned by the government, is supported by public funding. Management, as an applied discipline, will inevitably draw its major funding increasingly from those who need its results. Major projects and large-scale funding mostly originate from the real demands of various organizations. This requires us to consolidate our research directions and proactively engage with enterprises, industries, and government departments. Holding to this orientation allows us to deepen interaction with practitioners and creates the conditions for major projects and funding to take root. It also allows outstanding talent to grow, and to be recognized, by solving real problems and creating real value.
Our research needs to deliver a dual value: serving practice and cultivating talent. Integrating research and teaching is the necessary path for talent cultivation in research universities, and also an important way to safeguard the core value of teachers in the age of AI. If a classroom merely relays other people's existing findings, without drawing on the teacher's own original research, that kind of information compilation can be done entirely by AI and is unlikely to inspire students. The integration of research and teaching should run through the entire process of talent cultivation, in classroom instruction, graduate thesis topic selection, and undergraduate curriculum design. We should use genuine research to guide students toward valuable outcomes, bring practical problems into teaching, and strengthen students' employability and capacity for innovation and entrepreneurship. Part-time learners such as MBA students come from the front lines of practice, and our distinctive research areas, including healthcare management and technology business, are important testing grounds for the practical value of our research.
Resource allocation and talent cultivation must focus on those we serve, and talent evaluation should follow the same logic. In assessing talent, what matters is the actual value a person creates in resolving real-world problems. A truly high-level talent should be someone who can shoulder major responsibilities, create major value, and earn broad recognition, and all of this comes back to the fundamental question of "who is our research for." Once the direction of development goes astray, talent will be misplaced, and projects and outcomes will drift off course. This holds for talent development, and it holds equally for the School as a whole. Only by focusing on those our research serves, staying closely aligned with the needs of the times and of practice, and producing tangible contributions can the School truly enter the mainstream and become first-class.
