Newsletter No. 62

CUHK Newsletter No.62 4th January 1995 5 CONSULTATION This is a forum for the free expression of opinions on specific topics — topics proposed by the CUHK Newsletter or by readers. Faculty and staff are welcome to suggest topics, contribute their comments, or respond to views expressed herein. The column starts off with an article on consultation submitted by Prof. David E. Pollard of the Department of Translation. three stages. These follow from the decision to consult, and are those of the expression of views, the transmission of those views, and the consideration o f those views. Danger lurks at all three stages: failure at any one may negate all good intentions. To b e o f any help, th e expression of views must be frank, full and honest. Whether it is or not depends on the mettle of those consulted, and o n how th e consultors are perceived by the consulted. With regard t o the transmission of views, if this is from the grass roots through a n intermediate authority to higher authority, there clearly arises the question o f the fairness and accuracy with which the views are represented. There seems to be no way of obtaining reassurance here, as no representative of the grass roots hears or sees the summaries that are passed up. As to the third stage, of how high authority receives the views transmitted, I have no information and have to pass. I return below to the first and second stages, but first I should mention another generality, which is that consultation may be about policies, but not infrequently it is about persons, i.e. who is best suited for a certain job. The latter is more sensitive. To expect that the expression of views should be frank, full and honest is, in the real world, a tall order. So as to achieve this desideratum, the principle of 言者無罪, or being able to speak with impunity, needs to be both proclaimed and believed. This principle has been proclaimed and betrayed in all parts of the world, but is more honoured in some cultures than in others. In China i t has had a chequered career, but at least intentions were originally good: emperors had officials a t their side whose job was specifically to remonstrate with them and criticize their words and deeds. Several of those watchdogs who faithfully carried out that task and were appreciated for it became legendary. On the other hand, scorching criticism scorched the critics too: others lost their heads in the same cause. Further down the ladder the same situation pertained. In the current issue of Renditions are published translations of letters from the Tang and Song dynasties dealing with the questiono f speaking up truthfully. In the Song letter, Sima Guang accuses the highly principled chief minister Wang Anshi of presuming on the tolerance of the emperor to say what he liked to him, but flying into a rage when other officials opposed his own plans. What we know of human nature tells us this could well have been true. In short, the lesson of Chinese history is that the ideal of speaking out is a fine one, but if you do speak out, don't be surprised if you get it in the neck. 1 Another factor relevant to Chinese communities is the respect for authority; i t is hard to think of another community in the modem world where the personal whims of superannuated leaders override the national constitution. As we are The Chinese University we have to take these factors into account i n assessing the efficacy o f consultation. We also have to take into consideration the word University. Here again there are advantages and disadvantages. Being a university, most of the personnel could be loosely termed intellectuals, and should have a lot of intelligent things t o say when consulted. The downside is that intellectuals have a bad record when i t comes t o displaying courage. In situations of stress observed in different parts of the world they have been the first to lose their nerve — well ahead of the artisan class. On our own pitch, it must be admitted that when in meetings an individual challenges the policy adopted by the leadership, he or she rarely gets any support, even though many present agree with the challenge. This leads us to the question already foreshadowed of how the consulting authority is perceived by the consulted; it is probably the key one. If the record of the institution has been to welcome contrary views or at least tolerate dissent in so far as i t does not discriminate against dissenters (let us not forget that dissenters are often proved right 2 ), there is every chance that it will get the benefit of full, frank and honest views when i t consults. I f contrariwise its practice has been to freeze out dissenters and favour by appointment to influential boards and committees and promotion in rank those who have nothing to contribute but their loyalty, then the response to consultation will be muted. To which side CUHK as an institution inclines might be the subject of future debate. Next we return to the matter of transmission. Let us assume the transmitter has enough of a conscience to transmit unequivocal views more or less faithfully; he or she can still control the consultation process by deliberately not asking direct questions, using instead the 'dragonfly skimming the water' technique, which will allow him or her maximum latitude to interpret. Let us imagine the following scenario as a test of good faith. An office-holder is deputed to consult members of a certain unit on who would be the best person to head that unit. The members request permission to hold a secret ballot, not to decide the issue, as they are aware that that power rests with higher authority, but to express their preference unambiguously (and relatively safely). The office-holder turns down the request. Can there be any explanation for this refusal other than that unambiguous views are the last thing the office-holder wishes to hear, as they would inhibit his freedom to interpret and report as suits his own designs? I cannot think of one. Such management o f consultation can only make the whole business a bad joke. Lastly, let us look at the role of consultation in a process that affects the longterm well-being of a university, that of appointment to chairs and directorships. There are two opposing models. The first sets up a selection board composed of generalists on the one hand and specialists in the relevant area on the other, the latter forming a substantial proportion, and including external members respected in the profession; then the choice of candidate is made in formal session, after due deliberation, all members having heard all the arguments. The second sets up an ad hoc advisory group composed of senior office-holders, some of whom are deputed to consult informed opinion inside and outside the university; the advisory group then arrives at a preference, without further reference to informed opinion. The difference is between a comparatively limited direct representation of informed opinion (by virtue of membership of the board) and a comparatively broad indirect representation of opinion by means of consultation. Which is preferable? Given the hazards attendant on the collection and transmission of views via consultation, I don't think there can be any doubt. For all I know, CUHK may have evolved a third model. If so, it would be nice to know what it is. As is proper in introducing a subject, I have confined myself to general issues, but the general is made up of particulars, and one could cite instances of where consultation has failed, such as where the senior academic in a department has not even been informed that assessment of a colleague is taking place, let alone been consulted. CUHK being so large and diverse, it is hard to say how typical such abuses are. Perhaps the first step in finding out would be to distribute a questionnaire asking all colleagues to rate consultation as they know it on a satisfaction scale of 0-10. A detailed follow-up would be a good topic for a research student in the social sciences. David E. Pollard Endnote: T h e fact that d e s e r v e d ly u n p o p u l ar H o n g K o n g p o l i t i c i a ns h a ve expressed a preference f o r a p p o i n t m e n t v i a c o n s u l t a t i o n o v e r a p p o i n t m e nt b y e l e c t i on i m p l i es c o n f i d e n ce that c o n s u l t a t i on c a n a l w a ys be so m a n i p u l a t ed as to p r o d u ce a d e s i r ed result: t o p ut i t bluntly, t o tell lies rather t h an the truth. I s there a ny v i e w o f c o n s u l t a t i on that i s less depressing? 1 This lesson was dramatically reinforced in the 1950s, when terrible retaliation was visited on those who responded to the invitation to criticize the Chinese Communist Party. 2 Witness the recent UGC research assessment exercise. The very few who dared to say it would be an expensive waste of time were surely proved right. Though it was conducted in the name of public accountability, the results were not even divulged. Responses to this article s h o u ld reach the Editor b y 21st January 1 9 9 5. T o p ic for the next f o r u m: Impressions of CUHK — the Expatriate Perspective ； 400-600 w o r d s; d e a d l i ne 2 9 th January 1 9 9 5. New Publication s o f th e H ong Kong Institut e o f Asia-Pacifi c Studie s ‧ Occasional Paper No. 40 The Politics of Laissez-faire: Hong Kong's Strategy of Industrialization in Historical Perspective' by Stephen Chiu (Department of Sociology), 107 pages, paperback, HK$30. The first part of the paper claims that compared to other late-industrializers, Hong Kong's brand of laissez-faire is more thorough; there was never even an attempt at interventionist development strategy during the colony's postwar industrial take-off. The paper attributes this phenomenon partly to the capitalist and colonial nature of the Hong Kong state, and partly to the alliance between the colonial bureaucracy and the financial and commercial bourgeoisie in the 1950s. The second part of the paper attempts to substantiate such claims by citing the political deteat or manufacturers over two policy proposals, one for state allocation of industrial land at preferential terms, and one for the establishment of an industrial bank to supply long-term credit to manufacturers. • Reprint Series No. 17 'Press Response to Rapid Social Change in Hong Kong' by Paul Sui-nam Lee (Department o f Journalism and Communication), 14 pages, paperback, HK$5. The paper investigates the response of local newspapers to social changes in the last two decades. It finds that Hong Kong newspapers are generally reconciliatory and non-critical towards the Hong Kong and the Chinese governments and insensitive to both local and world changes. 陳錦成陶藝展 Clayworks Exhibition by Chan Kam Shing 逸夫書院 大講堂展覽廊 Exhibition Hall Shall College Lecture Theatre 一九九五年一月十三日至廿七日 上午十時至下午六時 13th-27th January 1995 10.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. 逸夫書院主辦 Presented by Shaw College