Core Insights - The article discusses the significant changes at Li Auto following its Q3 financial report, highlighting CEO Li Xiang's admission of mistakes in the company's management approach and the decision to revert to a startup model from a professional manager system [3][4]. Group 1: Management Changes - CEO Li Xiang publicly acknowledged the failure of the professional manager system implemented over the past three years and announced a return to a startup model starting Q4 [3]. - The shift aims to eliminate redundant processes, shorten decision-making chains, and focus on user value rather than merely meeting mechanical targets [3][8]. - Li Auto has integrated its previously separate "Organization Department" and "Human Resources Department" into a unified HR department, signaling a return of core personnel authority to the founder [4]. Group 2: Departure of Huawei Executives - The departure of key executives from Huawei, including Li Wen Zhi and Yuan Chun Feng, marks the end of the management team that was brought in to implement the "learn from Huawei" strategy [5]. - This exodus reflects the broader organizational adjustments as Li Auto moves away from the Huawei-inspired management structure [5]. Group 3: Issues with Huawei's Management Model - The PBC (Performance-Based Compensation) model adopted from Huawei has been criticized for creating a toxic competitive environment, leading to issues such as cross-region order stealing and violations of commission rules [6]. - The overemphasis on sales metrics resulted in strategic misjudgments in the electric vehicle sector, prompting Li Auto to abandon the PBC model in favor of the previously used OKR (Objectives and Key Results) system [6]. Group 4: Historical Context - Li Auto's attempt to emulate Huawei began in late 2022 during a period of rapid expansion, driven by the need to address management deficiencies [8]. - The return to a startup management style is seen as a necessary adjustment, with Li Xiang citing that even leading companies like Nvidia and Tesla operate under similar models [8].

Core Insights - Ideal Automotive has officially ended its three-year "learning from Huawei" strategy, marking a shift back to a centralized management model led by its founder, Li Xiang [1][7] Group 1: Background and Initial Strategy - In September 2022, facing market pressures, Li Xiang initiated a "comprehensive learning from Huawei" strategy to leverage a mature management system for significant growth [3] - The company recruited several Huawei executives, including Li Wenzhi and Yuan Chunfeng, to implement Huawei's management practices, which initially led to impressive results, with 2023 deliveries reaching 376,000 units, a 182.2% year-on-year increase, and revenue surpassing 120 billion yuan [3][4] Group 2: Challenges and Internal Conflicts - Over time, the Huawei management model began to conflict with Ideal's corporate culture, leading to issues such as unhealthy competition among sales teams and an inefficient decision-making process [4][5] - By 2024, Ideal's sales growth stagnated, with cumulative deliveries of 329,000 units by October 2025, only 51.4% of its annual target, and a 38% year-on-year decline in October deliveries, highlighting the pressure to abandon the Huawei model [4][5] Group 3: Organizational Changes and Management Shift - In July 2025, Ideal began to abandon the Huawei PBC performance model in favor of the OKR management system, signaling the start of significant organizational adjustments [5] - The November announcement confirmed the integration of the organization and human resources departments, with Li Xiang taking direct control of personnel matters, marking a complete exit of Huawei's core management team [6][7] - The restructuring aims to refocus on user needs, reduce meeting frequency by one-third, and re-establish an efficient decision-making system [7] Group 4: Industry Implications - Ideal's experience illustrates that management models must align with a company's unique culture and growth stage, as the rigid application of a mature enterprise's practices can lead to inefficiencies and misalignment [7]