|
Korean Slogans Comical to Foreigners
|
By Tom Coyner
Korea Times
October 15, 2008
Tom Coyner
As someone who makes a living helping foreign companies come into the Korean
market and being successful in their sales activities, I often find myself
almost negotiating with foreign executives over the phone as to their timing
of entering the Korean market, as opposed to their going into Japan and
China first.
There is a strong argument of why Korea should be considered a first entry
point into the large Asian markets where English is not a national language.
|
|
Compared to Japan, with its multiple economic centers, most business
opportunity is concentrated in the greater Seoul metropolitan area and
thereby offers simpler marketing and distribution.
China offers the greatest statistical attractions, but it is by far Asia's
most hazardous market where rule of law is more a concept or convenience
than a reality and where caveat emptor is taken to exasperating lengths.
In fact, I regularly advise that Korea is a great place to learn how to do
business in the real Asia that lacks a Western colonial legacy.
The costs of experience are relatively low and even the strategic costs of
failure are less than having things go sour in China or Japan. Ultimately,
if one cannot succeed in Korea, one is hardly likely to do better in Japan
or China.
Given that, one may think Korea would be a more popular place for foreign
companies to invest. The reality is that Korea remains, even today, a
secondary market. Korea is too often regarded as an introspective society
with flash points that Western observers are often too quick to describe as
being xenophobic.
In fact, Korea is probably not substantially less introspective or
xenophobic than many other countries, but it definitely suffers being a
relatively small country between two of the world's largest nations with
similarly sized economies. At the same time, Korea retains a robust economy
that many other countries may envy ― even during times when the economy
suffers by Korean standards, when in fact most countries would be satisfied
with similar GNP growth in good years that Koreans complain as representing
their bad years.
Nonetheless, there are some real, concrete issues ― many of which are not
entirely in the public view. But their collective results are discernable,
such as the drop in foreign direct investment (FDI). According to the Korean
Ministry of Knowledge Economy (an English translation that illustrates part of
the problem), FDI has dropped from $12.79 billion in 2004 to $7.42 billion
so far this year.
During the past few years, this FDI drop has coincided with the Lone Star
saga of troubles in trying to sell Korea Exchange Bank.
The problem of Korean government agencies standing in the way of Lone Star's
repeated sales attempts, often trying to come up with retroactive rules for
taxation of Lone Star profits, has surely given pause in many overseas board
rooms.
Furthermore, as zany an impression the irrational anti-mad cow disease
demonstrations may have made on foreign executives earlier this year, what
probably was more significant was President Lee having to order his
subordinates to return to Washington to renegotiate the terms and conditions
of the U.S. beef imports resumption agreement.
More than many Koreans may realize, Korea suffers an image problem when it
comes to contractual compliance. To be fair, this is one aspect of how
Koreans conduct business amongst themselves.
Yet in a global economy, while one needs to act locally, one also needs to
think globally when it comes to the basics of business. And that includes
the validity and reliability of consummated contracts.
When President Lee sent his representatives back to Washington to
renegotiate the beef import agreement, many foreign business managers
recalled unpleasant memories and stories about misadventures in doing
business in Korea.
After all, if the word of the Korean head of state cannot be trusted, what
may one expect in working out a deal with a Korean company's CEO?
Given this, Korea needs more effective national branding. Rather than the
current practice of various bureaucracies sending out non-complimentary
messages about Korea, one would think Korean government decision makers
collectively need to return to the basics of Marketing 101.
That is, beyond each bureaucracy establishing growth targets and inductively
rationalizing what needs to be done, there should be greater consideration,
on a national government basis, of the needs of Korea's targeted countries
and companies.
In other words, government planners need to better think in terms of what
potential investors may desire, vis-a-vis competing nations' offerings,
rather than what Koreans think foreign investors would be satisfied in
finding here.
Admittedly, some of this type of thinking has been in play during recent
years, but that is where things seem to stop.
If planners dusted off their old marketing text books and looked at Kotler's
Four P's of marketing and then considered Asia-Pacific as the entire market,
they might do better in defining Product (what Korea has to offer), Price
(what kinds of tariffs, taxes and investment incentives to provide), Place
(what kind of distribution and logistics and related costs Korea offers both
domestically and internationally) and finally, and only after serious
consideration of the first three Ps, Promotion (what kind of message does
Korea wish to consistently send out to the rest of the international
business community).
Back in 1981, Al Ries and Jack Trout came out with a fifth P, Positioning.
They argued only after careful analysis of the first four P's can anyone
effectively establish the position of one's product, company ― or country.
Turning back to current realities, too often it seems we witness trade and
tourism promotions trying to position Korea without adequate appreciation of
how non-Koreans may view the first 3 Ps. As such, the promotions fall flat.
In fact, promotions such as "Hi Seoul," "Korea Sparkling" and "Dynamic
Korea" don't seem to hit the intended targets. At worse, and too common,
these slogans seem even comical to many foreigners.
So why is this? Korean bureaucrats are not stupid. They are highly educated
and often spend money on international marketing companies.
The problem seems to be that the tried and generally true approaches by
these PR and marketing companies are mangled in the bureaucracies, often at
inception.
The necessary investments that other, less affluent countries are willing to
pay for proper research and launch of national branding are arbitrarily
dismissed as being too expensive by Korea's all wise and powerful
bureaucrats.
Instead, and too often, cheap short-cuts are implemented that rarely, if at
all, adequately survey what foreigners perceive Korea to be and what
messages may positively impact on foreigners.
Instead, any sort of market research is generally done within Korea, often
involving Koreans who have little or no overseas experience.
And as potentially lame as that approach may be, I know of at least one
major campaign where even that kind of domestic research was apparently
discarded in favor of a bureaucrat's ``bright idea'' so that bureaucrat
could boast to others in private that he came up with the slogan by himself.
So it seems to come down to much of Korea's image problem may be traced to
competing egos among senior officials who often unwittingly, and possibly
callously, place the nation at a disadvantage ― be it in terms of
interpreting financial and taxation regulations or determining national and
city branding.
While most foreigners may not have a clue as to why Korea seems to
continuously act against its overall best interests, they could care less.
It takes real intellectual fortitude on many foreign investors' parts to see
past the nonsense of what many government officials throw up, which hides
the genuine and often incredible business opportunities within Korea.
Sometimes, as in the case of Lone Star, there is indeed good reason for
foreign investors to be wary. But more often than not, the nonsense is
greater than the market reality.
Unfortunately, egotistical government officials, when often making
off-the-cuff decisions, seem only in retrospect, if ever, to understand the
damage they are doing to Korea.
The good news is this kind of problem is not part of the ``Korean DNA.''
Private industry has shown itself to more likely to pay sincere attention to
outside professionals' advice.
It is no wonder. Private companies properly understand how hard it is to
earn money and generally invest more wisely than many government officials.
That is why brand names like Samsung and Hyundai are now globally respected.
In contrast, consider the frequent giggles generated by ads touting "Korea
Sparkling" and "Hi Seoul."
|
Who is Tom Coyner?
Tom Coyner is president of Soft Landing Consulting, Ltd. He studied
at Waseda University in Tokyo and at UCLA. He has a BA in Japanese
literature from University of Colorado and an MBA in international
business from the University of Southern California. In 1975, Tom
first came to Korea as a Peace Corps Volunteer in the same group as
US Ambassador Kathleen Stephens. Since then, he has worked in both
HR and high tech sales & marketing in Korea, Japan and the United
States. Soft Landing Consulting focuses on improving sales results
of primarily foreign firms in Korea and Japan.
|
|
Policymakers Need to Apply Basics of Marketing
Korea offers excellent investment opportunities for foreign direct
investment in Asia. Korea is in some ways the best, first market for
foreign firms to enter among the major Asian economies. Yet, the
nation suffers from a significant image problem that inhibits market
entry. Part of the problem is negative stereotyping by foreigners,
but more often the problem can be traced back to government
officials and bureaucracies in how they represent Korea abroad or to
foreign investors. Too often there seems a reluctance to apply the
basics of good marketing in favor of senior bureaucrats'
off-the-cuff decisions.
Korea needs a common national branding, that cuts across all
government boundaries, to give a consistent message abroad. At the
same time, Korean decision makers should follow other countries'
better examples in adequately investing in professional public
relations and marketing companies and applying outside advice to the
final decisions. Too often to date, decisions have been based on
poorly thought out expediencies and even egotism.
In contrast, some of Korea's leading companies have successfully
achieved positive global recognition in corporate images and
branding. Korea's poor image is not a matter of cultural differences
but a lack of applied common sense.
|
Tom Coyner is president of Soft Landing Korea (www.softlandingkorea.com),
a human resources and sales-focused business development firm, and co-author of Mastering
Korean Business: A Practical Guide.
|
