Re: Maybe a stupid question...
You may well be right, I think
you are wrong.
Chinese company was engaged because it is cheaper than to *train* people at home.
Many political leaders in China are engineers, why not?
In Japan, we have too many lawyers in politics (although their social standing and economic situation are very different to the west, qualification is through examinations, many of the failed revolutionaries of 45 years ago, many others since, choose law or para-legal, unless you are wanting to be appointed to the Napoleonic-style tribunals that are called courts, or be a judge, all you have to do is study and pass an exam) and professional politicians, but most companies are still run by people with a background in what the company *does*. If they are making games, a former game designer, if they are making tech, a programmer or engineer.
In UK, from what I see, management is all from rubbish studies, no exam law, arts ('humanities' or 'liberal arts', depending on place, nothing to do with 'art'), or even 'management studies', anything but the industry concerned.
USA is similar, with the few major companies founded by techies, but how many of them are still under techie control?
When Fiorina was ruining Hewlett and Packard's legacy, did anybody stop to think that she was a cretin when it came to technology?
I could continue, but will add, for the sake of human rights, that the career choice, other than legal or paralegal, of those who disagreed with Japan's imperialistic adventures, was teaching. They are good teachers.
The campaign to force them to do things they do not want to do has been running hotly for years, it is a great shame that the deprivation of rights for many Japanese schoolteachers is not recognised internationally.