My 50th post here—though I have lost count of the number of blog posts in total. (I do know that I posted the 500th at the Beyond Branding Blog.) And it’s a brief one, though poignant, as it refer to a post that addresses (partly) why globalization has so many upset: politicians failing to state what is actually needed.
   I also think a lack of innovation is to blame. By all means, shift some jobs overseas—but have something for your own people.
   A lot of South Korea’s growth was due to the duty by a corporation or chæbol to provide lifetime employment by law. Thus, if a job was to be moved abroad, then the corporation needed to innovate and create something that could make use of the home country’s core competences.
   Some may say that that led to inefficient corporations, and Korea has since changed its law—from what I recall under dubious circumstances. The result, nevertheless, is that Koreans can fire people like most western economies can.
   But Toyota seems to be doing all right. It’s just shown a very flash Lexus at the Detroit Auto Show, with 19 speakers, room for 4,000 songs on its hard drive, and an eight-speed automatic gearbox—a real leap ahead. There’s a promise of a hybrid model—an even bigger leap for a full-size luxury car.
   The car might look as dull as dishwater, but the business model is clear: the Lexus will be made in Japan, where the company can be assured of its quality, and Toyota is quite happy to shift production of lesser models to plants nearer their customers, in Red China, India and the Czech Republic. Just like Fiat did, once upon a time.
   This is not clever or new stuff, but it keeps a company growing. Downsizing is necessary sometimes, but I wonder if it’s as often as Wall Street-pushed companies make out in order to keep quarterly results high.
   The old ‘Japan can do it’ lesson is still there to be relearned. Never mind the early days were subsidized and exporting to Japan is still a tough thing to do. There are areas where we can absorb the lessons without letting go of the free-trade ideals that many economies live with.
   If we had kept innovating at the pace we were expected to in the 1960s, we might just have wound up with that futuristic vision of the more optimistic films then. I am being a little facetious, but let’s face it: a car built in 2006 is not as big a leap over one made in 1986, as that car was a leap over one made in 1966. And it’s far easier to write about the solutions than to implement them.
   However, we do need to start thinking of others: companies on the stock exchange are there not just for stock holder gains, but for the betterment of their communities. When they win, we all win, through the multiplier effect alone—and who cares if the short-term price is down if there’s a clear, long-term path that you know will work out? Watch your instinct before you watch the tickers. Posted by Jack Yan, 00:13  permalink

comments

Post a Comment  Links to this post