Interview with Dr. Jing Liu

--by Xuqiong Wu (October 2000)

Xuqiong Wu: You said USTC still felt like yesterday. What do you mean by that? What kind of experiences or impressions do you have regarding USTC?

Jing Liu: I started my college life in 1988 after finishing high school. Going to USTC was almost a miracle for me since I wasn't really a "good student" back in high school. I spent most of my high school years playing soccer and daydreaming. I still remember one of my soccer buddies asked me whether I was confident enough to get into the top 100 in the class of 1988 in my high school. That question enraged me since I thought I was at least good enough to get into the top 50. I studied hard in the last year of high school. Miraculously I did really well (by my standards and my high school's standards) in the big tests. So my idealistic father, wanting his son to get the best thing for the test score, decided that I should go to USTC because it has a tough reputation in Xi'an and I should major in biology because it's going to be "the science for the next century."

Studying biology at USTC wasn't fun and after two years at USTC my life had come to a stage that I needed some dramatic changes. So I left USTC for the US after three years and became a transfer student. I am not sure whether I benefited anything, if at all, from my one year of intensive undergraduate study in a small southern college. Because compared with USTC, the quality of that US college was rather low.

USTC left a lasting impression on me. Although I only spent three years at USTC, and it was almost ten years ago, the whole experience feels like yesterday. Like I explained before, going to USTC wasn't easy for me. Whenever someone mentions USTC, I can still feel the pride of being part of a brilliant crowd once upon a time. The feeling is a bit like watching your favorite soccer team win, although you have almost no impact on the course of events, you feel the sadness and joy of everybody.

Xuqiong Wu: Why did you decide to pursue business school? What do you teach and research now?

Jing Liu: After two years of graduate study in Cincinnati, I decided that I needed another big change. I figured that I should either go to work for a few years and then decide what to do next, or go to business school since I could feel my interest in business/economics was strong. So I applied a handful of good business schools. Columbia took a gamble and accepted me, knowing that I have little training in either business or economics. Thank goodness this time I made a right decision, because not only did I find the subject I study interesting, but I found I was pretty good at it. So I spent five exciting years in New York. After graduation, I came to UCLA and started my first “real” job as an Assistant Professor. I teach accounting classes and do research in the field of accounting/finance. Most of the papers I have written have something to do with capital markets and stock valuation.

Xuqiong Wu: Although Chinese can do superlative research, teaching at a U.S. school requires much more people skills. Do you feel teaching U.S. students difficult?

Jing Liu: In most top US business schools, teaching and research are equally emphasized. A typical professor probably divides his/her time into 2/3 research and 1/3 teaching. Smaller schools require more teaching. The publication cycle for business/economics journals are normally longer than those in natural sciences. Therefore one often doesn't see business professors have long publication list as, for example, a biology professor.

Teaching is a difficult part for people from foreign countries. Unlike other fields where foreign accents are expected, MBA teaching requires substance to be delivered smoothly. If one has limited oral communication skills, teaching MBA classes would be a nightmare. However, if one does not have the language problem, and is reasonably versed in interpersonal skills, teaching shouldn't be difficult. After all, the professor knows much more on the subject than the best student in the classroom.

Xuqiong Wu: You have experiences in both life sciences research and business education. How do they differ, in what specific aspects?

Jing Liu: Fundamentally the difference comes from the distinction between social sciences and natural sciences. By definition social sciences deal with people and natural sciences deal with everything other than people. Consequently social sciences start with fuzzier assumptions and arrive at fuzzier conclusions. The logic used in social sciences is the same as in natural sciences, and increasingly the logic is usually expressed using the tool of mathematics. Economics is a branch of social sciences; business is applied economics with an emphasis on economic institutions. To understand economics/business you need first to understand people. The most important insights obtained all come down to “basic instincts.” The second important thing is to have good logic. This is the part one can get a lot of training in natural sciences. Therefore, we can probably conclude that if one is good at natural sciences and good at learning about people, one would be good at social sciences.

Xuqiong Wu: You have a Ph.D. instead of a usual MBA from a top business school. How do these programs differ in training and preparing students for future careers?

Jing Liu: MBA is the most applied mode in economics. A typical MBA curriculum covers many important insights in economics, but in a form of intuitive arguments rather than rigorous analysis where one starts with assumptions, then applies logic, and finally derives the conclusions. The Ph.D. program trains students to do the latter. Because of its applied nature, it is not surprising to find business Ph.D. students to find jobs in the industry. For example, in my years at Columbia, almost all finance students found jobs on Wall Street. The main purpose of the Ph.D. program is however training for future professors. Since business school professors are normally well paid, adding the important factor of flexible lifestyle, it's not surprising that for most graduates the first choice is academia rather than Wall Street.

It is misleading to equate flexibility with easiness. I believe it's probably much tougher to be a professor than be a trader on Wall Street. Industry practice means that one applies similar things over and over again. Academia means that one needs to create something new every few months. It requires a lot of creativity and a lot of perseverance. The US tenure system further put extra pressure on young people.

Xuqiong Wu: USTC and Washington University at St. Louis are trying set up an international MBA program together. Other Chinese and US schools have been trying the same thing. What's your view on this?

Jing Liu: The opportunities for business education in Asia/China are enormous. The Chinese economic system won't function well without western know-how. I would argue that western style soft knowledge and institutions are more important than western technology, interpreted in the traditional sense. To educate a new generation of Chinese business leaders, one can not solely rely on the US business schools. The Chinese market should allow at least 10 to 20 good business schools to coexist. Sure, one should also expect intense competitions.

Xuqiong Wu: The Alumni Foundation is committed to helping promote USTC's international reputation. What do you view as USTC's strengths and weaknesses and how should we approach them?

Jing Liu: If you think of the university as an institution, you should probably first think of what constitutes the institution. In my opinion the faculty is the cornerstone of the university. In this regard all Chinese universities including USTC have problems. To attract a world-class faculty you need world-class bank accounts. In China, that can not be done, at least in the immediate future. So realistically speaking, there can not emerge any “world-class” universities in China in the next twenty or so years. However, rather than being a “world-class” university, you could opt to be known for something else, such as producing “world-class” students. USTC has been successful in doing that in the past and could succeed in the future. The solution to the problem of course comes down to one simple notion of competition with other good schools in China. I think the Caltech model is probably a good model for USTC.

On further reflection, I think USTC, like other Chinese schools, suffers from the problem that two much emphasis is put on knowledge acquisition (and test taking). My current view is that knowledge is probably of secondary importance in education, the most important skill students need to learn is how to think. I suspect that if one were to do a test on the correlation between college grades and postgraduate career successes, the correlation probably is positive, but would be undoubtedly small. This would be especially true in the Chinese education system, since in that system students need to deal with too many courses that are “required” and in which they have absolutely no interest.

I think USTC would be dramatically improved if we could change the strategy from, say, competing with other schools on national tests (such as English level 4], to competing with other schools on how to prepare students to be successful in their chosen careers. Things like attracting the provincial number ones in College Entrance Exams are probably of little relevance other than for marketing purposes. This is also true for the special Class for the Gifted Young – we know by definition geniuses do not appear in hordes, why is that important to create a special class only for by in large smart teenagers who mature early? I am not disputing the marketing effectiveness of these programs. My point is that these programs do not fundamentally improve the strength of the school. Ivy League schools in the US did not achieve their prominence because their students have the highest SATs, they achieved their prominence because they produced leaders in business, political and intellectual fields in the greatest numbers and with the highest quality. This means giving the opportunity to a student who may not rank within 1000 in his/her province, or who may even be likely to drop out in two years and start a computer company with 90% probability to fail. If we view, as we should, the business of education as a long-term game, I don't see any other way of conducting this business.

Xuqiong Wu: Finally what would be your advice to our audience/readers at different stages of their lives?

Jing Liu: I often reflect things in life. The following is a small list. “Of course these are just my opinion, I could be wrong.” (Dennis Miller, the comedian)

1) Life is just an “experience”. Therefore every minute counts.

2) Have a priority list. You will be amazed how many things you do; you do it against your wishes.

3) Work on something you love. You should realize you spend more time working than with your wife.

4) If you don't like your current work, switch. You have to recognize the time and effort you put in the current work is a thing of the past. In economics it's called sunk cost.

5) Know your position. You should realize with probability one you are neither the best nor the worst. Therefore attempts to achieve either would be futile.

6) Know your position again. You should realize on the day you win the Nobel Prize, or on the day someone called you an idiot: you are no different from the day before.

7) Do not fear. You waste large amount of mental energy if you do. In crisis, the correct biological response should just be “be alert”.

8) In dealing with others, always remember to give is to receive.

9) You should be happy. If you are not, get a new life.

This is all I have to say. Best wishes to everyone.

Copyright © 2001, USTC Alumni Foundation