One of my favorite topics in modern day China – 山寨, the Shanzai phenomenon. (aka 山寨, shanzhai, shānzhài, shanzhaiji depending on where you come from)
At every speech, roundtable discussion, networking event, or conference in China almost always touch on the topic IP protection across industries in China – from apparel, healthcare, luxury retail, automotive, consumer electronics, the Chinese design community itself, and on and on. Aside from the cost of doing business, IP is the biggest lost revenue stream for almost all international brands trying to be successful in China.
I’m constantly asked what I think of this topic, and admittedly my position has shifted in the 3.5 years I’ve lived in China. I know that, to many Chinese, Shanzai is actually a nuanced form of innovation – as a westerner I struggle with this logic still.
Whereas it was initially easy to dismiss the “mountain bandits” (as “山寨” translates), I’ve learned over time they’re doing things that no one else has the guts to try. Sometimes interesting, ridiculous, offensive, inspiring. And now I lean toward thinking that the entire shanzai movement is one of the most interesting debates in modern China.
The three eras of Shanzai
Let’s start with a history lesson, though, with an over-simplification the evolution of Shanzai down to three main eras of Shanzai evolution.
Era one, they have copied, and made really bad copies at that. But the aim was never to create something for the west here, it was to produce something of value for their own market, their own culture, which might not have existed before when companies weren’t paying attention. These companies worked at deconstructing the design of an object in order to reconstruct that same object – along the way learning through interpretation the materials, processes and philosophies behind a designed object. Sounds a lot like the way western schools teach design, no?
Era two, and this is the era we are still in today, they are not only becoming faster and better at the exact copy (check that iPad prototype on the market in 19 days), but they’re creating crazy newness that actually has some kind of market (it’s somehow everyone still wants my Michael Jackson phone even if it has a horrible UX and his estate never sees the profits). And while they knockoff products, the government lacks enforcement mechanisms to slow them down and the overall industry is actually growing. But for the record, China’s not the only country that has protected it’s industries in such a way while they’re allowed to grow, even at the cost of breaking so-called acceptable international standards. And it’s not the only time
Era three, and we haven’t reached this one quite yet. One company (or a few) will undoubtedly put together the right combination of talent, determination and luck (note: international talent optional) to understand the China market (or another market) so well that they become inspired to create something wholly unique, and it turns out to be better than any original. Who will this company be, and in what industry? Will it unseat a major Chinese brand? Or erode international competition like MediaTek in Taiwan has? Or overnight create new IP and disrupt the industry like when Canon added micro-computers to cameras? My guess is that this might not happen in your typical consumer electronics because the software design gap with the rest of the world is still so large as compared to the hardware capabilities. Perhaps it’ll be a partnership though?
Certainly, much of this evolution fits squarely within the unique and unprecedented modernization China is undergoing from perspectives of international labor, openness to the outside world, consumerism, and manufacturing and supply-chain innovation. But from the perspective of creating new ideas, it’s not so much different from other examples in history. Not all drive-thrus are owned by In-N-Out burger. Google doesn’t pay Apple for the rights to an application marketplace. And I’m pretty sure no one claimed a fee for the first remix. But others can speak to this better than I can. Which loosely gets at my next point…
The protection of ideas
The larger question is, as the time & cost to bring an idea to life approach zero, who really owns the idea and what makes it so unique?
Does copying occur in the west? Sure it does. As many like to point out these days, everyone who makes electronics is copying Apple. But it’s not the detailed design per se that’s the important thing being emulated here. It’s their ecosystem model and service strategy which is responding to an ever-increasing base of customers willing to pay for a better experience.
No singular authority is ever going to define what makes good and bad ideas, let alone what makes bulletproof design or IP. Are design-driven patents enforceable? Not 100% in China. There are cases to both sides of this debate. To quote Ravi Chhatpar, frog design’s Strategy Director in Shanghai, “You just need to out-innovate the competition.” To an extent this is very true – being faster at bringing better ideas to market.
Western brands looking in, Shanzai companies looking out
Ultimately, I wonder can any 山寨 manufacturer or even name brand Chinese company realize that a better experience doesn’t just mean slapping another feature on a product? Will they understand how to use a holistic approach to create a product and service experience that stands out as being not just unique, but remarkably better than the competition? Will they determine where competitors weaknesses can be exploited – whether those be a cultural aesthetics, new modes of interaction, physical forms, underlying technologies, or service partnerships within a larger roadmap for differentiation…? These are the questions at the heart of whether Shanzai can survive in the long term if, as expected, China eventually plays alongside international norms of IP protection.
In the interim, foreign companies must still find ways to operate in China while being a part of the IP conversation. The value at stake is too high. Controlling production, instilling a strong culture within your organization, using the law, and being careful with suppliers and partners are all fundamental methods of protection which every company should take in China. But the real question is, will the balance shift toward protection of copyright, trademark, and patents? Possibly so, especially as more and more large Chinese companies begin to attempt to create their own IP.
And if the balance doesn’t shift, or shifts too slowly for some, what will it all mean for the international companies whose margins (and designs) are diminishing in the largest single market in the history of civilization? What can the Nokia’s, Nike’s and Toyota’s learn from the supersonic prototyping labs, the rapid responsive manufacturing, the open-source building, and faster brand creation of these upstarts?
If brands like these really aim to be platform-minded (not to be confused with brand platforms) in China, then shouldn’t they create constructs for remixing their products at a more fundamental level than just “build your own X”? If brands like these want to acquire some new thinking, try acquiring a shanzai company – I’m sure it’ll cost far less than typical CMO or R&D budgets.
Or will there be a the long-tail of faster, cheaper manufacturing that will survive, and force the larger mass-market brands to adjust their traditional models of product development? Or better yet, will there be another future coinciding with all of the above – bespoke product creation?
Chinese version published in Economic Observer:
“山寨”猛于虎？
“山寨”已经不是个新名词。随着近年来“山寨”势力的壮大，从服装、医疗产品、奢侈品、汽车到电子消费品，各行各业都将知识产权侵犯视为收益流失的罪魁祸首。更有人为“拷贝之风盛行导致民族才智枯竭，国家创新能力积弱”而忧心忡忡。在众人眼里，“山寨”一时如同洪水猛兽。
对任何现象加以评论最忌讳的就是以偏概全，妄下定论。事实上，一旦摘下了“山寨产品等于粗制滥造”的有色眼镜，去重新审视那些或充满灵气令人眼前一亮，或荒唐不羁让人啼笑皆非的大胆试验 （比如苹果皮(ApplePeel)这个产品，其硬件模块由深圳一位22岁的年轻工程师研制），人们就会发现，在市场生存法则下，“山寨”经过不断进化，早已不是仿冒的代名词了。这种进化横跨不同阶段，齐头并进，造就了目前“山寨”现象的多元化和复杂局面，也反映出中国产业重心 “从制造到创造”这一过渡时期的生机与多变。
“山寨”的初级阶段是模仿，而且是拙劣的模仿，不过这些仿冒品并非为了吸引在中国的西方消费者。通过融入鲜明的本地色彩，仿冒品生产者试着发现和把握先前被忽略的本地市场的特定需求。他们解构设计，但又通过材料的运用、过程的演绎和哲学内涵的诠释，重塑设计对象。这和西方学校教授的设计理论如出一辙。
但随着仿冒经验的积累，“山寨”开始不满足于以更快的速度做出更精妙的仿品（比如原作发布19天后就震撼上市的山寨iPad）。此时的“山寨”进入了进化的中级阶段，也是目前的主要状态：在拷贝基础上，捣鼓出一些颇受欢迎的疯狂发明，很多设计甚至引起大公司开发团队的注意，虽然在用户体验方面仍令人不敢恭维。艾美图推出的迈克尔·杰克逊（MJ）手机就是个很好的例子——它在手机背面用激光刻上MJ的形象，受到了对MJ有追思之情的用户的追捧。由于缺乏政府监管机制，整个产业目前不但没有被打压，反而在一天天壮大。但从过往来看，中国并不是唯一不惜打破所谓国际惯例来保护产业，并换取经济增长的国家。
“山寨”的高级阶段，目前已有所触及，但尚未完全打开局面。在未来，“山寨”或许能依靠人才、决心和运气来真正把握中国市场的特质，打造出独一无二甚至超过原作的产品。这样的超级“山寨”会出在哪个行业？是否会引发中国品牌的改朝换代，或者像MediaTek在台湾那样对国际大牌造成冲击？又或者新的知识产权保护规则因此横空出世并颠覆现有的行业规则？这些至少不会发生在消费电子行业，因为比起硬件开发能力，“山寨”的软件设计和世界一流水平还有相当的差距。
这样看来，“山寨”作坊里产出的远不止是低劣的仿品，而充满了创新的萌芽与雏形。但为何“山寨”依然为人所不耻呢？因为随着“山寨”创意产生的时间和成本趋近于零，那些耗费大价钱和精力的“正规军”创新项目的产出与投入之比势必大打折扣。但这种“不耻”很难形成集体意识，到底谁才是新想法的拥有者，它又凭什么能保证自己是独一无二的呢？这些问题，就好像坏主意和好主意的定义一样，没人能给出明确的答案，更不用说什么才是无懈可击的设计或者知识产权了。由此说来，我认为，至少在中国，建立设计专利制度在短期内并不完全可行。青蛙设计策略总监RaviChhatpar曾说，“你唯一的选择是比你的对手更具新意”。因此，以更快的速度将新想法变成现实，才是目前原创保卫战最现实且有效的策略。
西方有抄袭吗？当然有。现在做消费电子产品的很多公司都在向苹果偷师，但它们拷贝的对象不是具体设计,而是其整个品牌生态系统和服务策略，因为现在愿意为品牌体验付费的顾客越来越多。而中国的“山寨”或许要意识到，打造更好的体验并不意味着添加更多花俏的功能，而是善于整合来创造新的产品和服务，使它们不仅独特而且比同类竞争者更有优势；而且应当利用对手的弱势，不管是审美文化和交互模式，还是外在形象、内在技术和服务合作，来规划产品的差异化发展。如果中国能够如人所愿，遵守国际知识产权保护的游戏规则，“山寨”是否具备创造性的制造能力，将是其未来存亡的关键。
此前，在华外企必须在遵守国际知识产权保护规则的同时适应本地环境，否则会付出高昂代价。一些最基本的保护手段包括：控制生产，建立强大的组织文化，重视法律武器，谨慎对待供应商和合作伙伴。鉴于越来越多的中国企业试图积累自己的知识财富，未来的政策导向可能会有利于版权、商标、专利的保护。
但如果外部环境很难改变，除了眼睁睁看着利润和原创设计被人类历史上规模最大的市场所吞噬，那些跨国巨头还能做些什么呢？其实“山寨”超音速般的样机研究、旋风式生产跟进、开放型组织结构，以及作坊的品牌形象建立都值得研究和学习。再者，收购“山寨”公司开展零散的创新项目，比请代工企业或者自行研发便宜得多，这样就能把更多资源放在品牌体验整合上，在中国市场进行更深入和广泛的探索。还有一种选择，那些大浪淘沙后留下的精英 “山寨”会带来长尾效应，迫使原来的市场老大们调整传统的产品开发模式来适应更为激烈的竞争。
如果做一个乐观的总结，即使“山寨”真的猛于虎，其“猛”也是指它反映出的“从制造到创造”的转型之势，以及它带动和激发创新的潜在之力。
（作者分别为青蛙设计创意总监、传讯专员）
