“…All five articles concerning the Chinese guanxi bear the similar implications that informal ties and networks are expected to continue and persist in China at least for now. It is worth noting that the two empirical articles in the specific sector of financial service (Chai, Chen, Huang & Ye, 2019;Luo, Rong, Yang, Guo & Zou, 2019) seem to imply that the existence of informal ties and networks can be explained primarily as a rational response to the lack of certainty due to the absence of established formal institutions, such as mature financial markets for borrowing and lending as well as venture capital investment in China, we would rather offer a distinctive explanation that the need for informal ties and networks could be twofold with the competing logics of both informal (e.g., cultural preference) and formal (e.g., the rule of law and state policies) institutions, largely because both types of institutions provide the necessary legitimacy above and beyond the iron cage of formal institution as the biased, incomplete view (Dimaggio & Powell, 1983;Scott, 2003). It seems that informal and formal institutions can be much more complementary than what had been recognized in the prevailing literature in the West (Chai et al, 2019;Horak & Restel, 2016;Li, 2007b;Lin et al, 2016).…”