A St. Bonaventure University management scholar brings a new governance framework to an international conference in Hong Kong
A Governance Question With Global Reach
In June 2026, the Strategic Management Society will hold a Special Conference in Hong Kong, one of the leading international gatherings of scholars studying how organizations compete, adapt, and survive. Among the research papers to be presented is one with a title that speaks directly to a fundamental challenge of institutional design in an era of concentrated power: “Rotating Co-Governance: An Innovative Framework for Executive Power Transition.” The paper was co-authored by Dr. Jinjing Zhu, associate professor of Management at St. Bonaventure University in New York, and its acceptance for presentation at the Hong Kong conference reflects the global reach of academic inquiry into how power is transferred, shared, and constrained in organizations.
What Rotating Co-Governance Proposes
The concept of rotating co-governance addresses a well-documented problem in organizational management: executive transitions are among the most dangerous moments in an institution’s life. Poorly managed successions have destroyed companies, destabilized governments, and hollowed out civil society organizations. The traditional model — one leader, one term, then succession — creates problems of accumulated power, reluctance to yield, and institutional disruption during the handover period. A rotating co-governance model proposes instead that executive authority be shared between incumbents and successors in a structured transition period, reducing the shock of handover while creating accountability mechanisms that prevent any single leader from consolidating unchecked control. The implications extend well beyond the corporate boardroom.
Why This Research Matters for Understanding Hong Kong
Hong Kong itself is a case study in the consequences of governance transitions managed without transparent accountability. The 1997 handover from British to Chinese sovereignty was designed under the Joint Declaration framework to preserve the city’s institutional continuity for 50 years. The mechanisms for ensuring that transition — independent courts, a free press, elected representation, protected civil liberties — were the governance guardrails meant to prevent any single authority from concentrating unchecked power over the city. Those guardrails have been systematically dismantled. The national security law imposed without local legislative process in 2020, the electoral overhaul of 2021, the prosecution of opposition politicians and journalists, the closure of independent media — each represents a governance failure of the kind that rotating co-governance frameworks are designed to prevent. Freedom House’s annual assessment of Hong Kong documents the erosion of the institutional checks that the 1997 transition was meant to preserve, providing a detailed record of what happens when governance transitions lack enforceable accountability mechanisms.
Hong Kong as a Conference Venue for Governance Research
The choice of Hong Kong as the venue for a Strategic Management Society conference is noteworthy. Hong Kong’s universities — the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Chinese University of Hong Kong, and City University of Hong Kong — remain among the best in Asia. Their management and business faculties continue to produce and host internationally recognized research. The Academic Freedom Index has recorded a significant decline in Hong Kong’s academic freedom scores since 2020, with faculty expressing concern about self-censorship, the boundaries of permissible research topics, and the security implications of international collaboration. The Strategic Management Society’s decision to hold its conference in Hong Kong reflects an ongoing calculation by international academic institutions that the city’s research infrastructure makes it worthwhile to continue engaging.
The Value of Management Research in Politically Fraught Contexts
Research on executive power transition is particularly valuable when conducted near contexts where power transitions have gone badly. The lessons of organizational governance — that concentrated power without accountability produces worse outcomes than distributed power with checks — are lessons that apply to cities and governments as well as corporations. The fact that such research will be presented in Hong Kong, a city grappling with the consequences of exactly these dynamics in its own governance, gives the academic work a resonance that extends beyond the conference room.
The Broader Significance of Academic Exchange
International academic conferences in Hong Kong serve a function beyond the exchange of research findings. They maintain the city’s connection to the global community of scholars and ideas. They create opportunities for local researchers to engage with international colleagues. They signal that Hong Kong’s intellectual life has not been entirely absorbed into a politically defined framework. The city that once attracted researchers from around the world because of its openness, its rule of law, and its position at the intersection of East and West retains those attractions in diminished form. Each international conference that chooses Hong Kong as its venue is an implicit argument that the city’s academic and intellectual infrastructure is worth preserving and engaging.
Senior Journalist & Editor, Apple Daily UK
Contact: athena.lai@appledaily.uk
Athena Lai is a senior journalist and editor with extensive experience in Chinese-language investigative reporting and editorial leadership. Educated at a leading journalism school in the United Kingdom, Athena received formal training in fact-checking methodology, editorial governance, and international media standards, grounding her work in globally recognized best practices.
She has held senior editorial roles at Apple Daily and other liberal Chinese publications, where she oversaw coverage of Hong Kong civil liberties, diaspora politics, rule of law, and press freedom. Athena’s reporting is distinguished by disciplined sourcing, cross-verification, and a clear separation between factual reporting and opinion, reinforcing reader trust.
Beyond reporting, Athena has served as an editor responsible for mentoring journalists, enforcing ethical guidelines, and managing sensitive investigations. Her newsroom leadership reflects real-world experience navigating legal risk, source protection, and editorial independence under pressure.
Athena’s authority comes from both her byline history and her editorial stewardship. She has reviewed and approved hundreds of articles, ensuring compliance with defamation standards, accuracy benchmarks, and responsible language use. Her work demonstrates lived experience within high-stakes news environments rather than theoretical expertise.
Committed to journalistic integrity, Athena believes credible journalism is built on transparency, accountability, and institutional memory. Her role at Apple Daily UK reflects that commitment, positioning her as a trusted voice within independent Chinese media.
