[MUSIC] Now, in light of the relative success of the policies of these ministries, the Communist party decided that it was going to step into the program. And so beginning in May 2002, the CCP, the Chinese Communist Party, introduces the outline for building the ranks of nationwide talent. In December of 2002, the director of the CCP's organization department. Which is really the personnel department of the party, promulgates the idea that the party should manage all top talent, not just talent within the Chinese communist party. In June of 2003, the Politburo establishes a central leaderships small group to coordinate the work on talent I just call up the LSGT, the Leadership Small Group on Talent. And localities throughout the country also establish their own leadership groups on talent. Then at the end of December in 2003, the new General Secretary, Hu Jintao, reinforces the idea of a shift from the Communist Party just managing officials managing cadres to the CCP actually managing talent. Now, even with the party getting involved, I would say that we find only limited success. I did a survey in 2002 with my friend Chen Chung Wei. And we found that mainland ex-patriots, the mainland overseas, they favored a systematic reform of China's policies on human talent, rather than giving them special privileges. A web survey done in 2004 of 3,000 respondents found that the strongest force stopping people from returning was what is called the complicated role of human relations in Chinese society. In other words, to get a hold of top position, a good position, to get a grant or to be promoted, one needs to spend a lot of time building ties to people in positions of authority. Because they were the ones who controlled it, this was not done on merit. And so in fact by 2007, a shocking 93% of Chinese who received an American PhD in science and engineering in 2002 were still in the United States. And this was, as you can see, the most shocking. The worst case of any country in the world. Even 11% higher than India, 37% higher than Canadians. This really to me 2007, this is really a shock. So they get their PhD in 2002, they're still in the US in 2007. That means they may not be coming back. So what this triggers is a systematic shift that really begins in 2007. And a woman name Chen Zhili who was the State Councilor responsible for education in March 2007. She admits that the universities do not have enough talent to make China a quote unquote, creative society. And she argues that China needs new ways of thinking about actually bringing people back. More mature, world class professors, new methods to bring people back and then they have to start using more of the monies that the state has, as it's getting richer to put into these programs. And then an important changes in October 2007, Li Yuanchao becomes head of the Central Committee's Organization Department and the head of the Leadership Small Group. And he sees human talent as a strategic resource. And argues that bringing people back from over seas is a strategic investment that is critical to making China an innovative society. And he puts forward his own ideas including for example, that he calls on officials within China to create a more relaxed, a more tolerant, and a more lenient environment so people will be more willing to return. He tells business executives that they should appeal to the overseas Mainlanders' love of their careers, their need for self-esteem, a lot like Maslow. And to not believe that Patriotism, love of country will actually bring them back. A little bit of a risky thing for one of the top leaders of the Ccmmunist party to say. He says that if you bring these people back you have to put them in leadership positions. Trust them, because if they feel trusted they'll come back. And he's very much wedded to the idea that talent is the core of a nation's global creativity and global competitiveness. And he applauded the National Institute of Biological Science. He goes to visit in January of 2009, and he applauds it for introducing world standards in hiring an allocating funds to research teams based on merit, not based on personal relationships.
