Xiaomi Corp. has dismissed Wang Teng, but the manner in which the dismissal was handled demonstrates considerable professional restraint and courtesy.

Many observers have criticized Xiaomi for handling the situation harshly. However, a closer examination reveals that Xiaomi actually conducted the dismissal in a remarkably dignified manner, showing consideration for past contributions and relationships.

Two key details highlight Xiaomi's restrained approach in this matter.

First, Xiaomi's official statement focused primarily on "conflict of interest" rather than data leaks, with the final determination being "dismissal." While this effectively ends Wang Teng's career trajectory and impacts his professional reputation, the consequences remain relatively measured.

In typical corporate internal audit scenarios involving significant conflicts of interest, there are generally two outcomes: internal resolution with asset recovery followed by resignation, or legal prosecution. Xiaomi chose a middle ground - public dismissal as a warning to all employees, but without pursuing legal action or additional penalties. Past contributions were acknowledged, with the situation treated as a balanced settlement.

The key point is not what a company says, but what it does. Despite the public dismissal, the company essentially drew a line under the matter, indicating restraint in potential further actions.

Second, Wang Teng's social media response demonstrated considerable humility, accepting full responsibility, apologizing, and acknowledging wrongdoing. He denied receiving any monetary benefits and even continued promoting company products during this period.

Wang Teng's acceptance of this career-damaging outcome with such a humble attitude suggests that the underlying issues, if fully pursued, could have been significantly more serious than publicly disclosed.

Together, these factors indicate that Xiaomi chose to show mercy. While the dismissal certainly impacts Wang Teng's industry prospects, the company refrained from legal prosecution, essentially ending the matter with this action alone.

Given Wang Teng's insistence that no monetary exchange occurred, the most likely scenario involves relationships with suppliers - possibly through family members or close associates becoming suppliers or sub-suppliers. Such situations are extremely common in corporate environments.

In corporate internal auditing experience, such conflicts of interest are routine rather than exceptional. The handling typically depends on the specific circumstances: some cases involve recovering benefits and peaceful separation, while others may result in more serious consequences.

Xiaomi's approach - dismissal without prosecution - typically applies when the situation is serious enough to warrant public action for deterrent purposes, but where past contributions merit consideration. This represents internal warning combined with external restraint.

This measured response demonstrates Xiaomi's ultimately compassionate handling of a difficult situation.