I was recently asked by the editors of Korea Herald’s The Investor magazine to comment on the Korean car manufacturers, in particular Hyundai Motor.
My policy is never to speak about clients, but instead provide a perspective from a cultural standpoint. I’d like to share in condensed form, as well as with an epilogue, the guest contributor article titled: New considerations loom as Korean car brands strive to become more global
I noted, globally, the car industry in 2017 is more competitive than ever due to market fluctuations, shifting demand from sedans to SUVs and predictions that US car sales have peaked.
According to the Detroit Free Press an average of three separate industry forecasts from Kelley Blue Book, Edmunds.com and LMC Automotive predict overall U.S sales are expected to fall about 1.7%.
That said, Korean brands have done exceedingly well on a global scale. I see this trend continuing as Korean OEMs (original equipment manufactures) seek out top talent and adapt to changing conditions, even in an era of potential Trump protectionism.
And while success continues, there are still issues, some of which are rooted in culture that can still be a hindrance to the realization of full potential.
For example, in regard to talent, the abrupt dismissal of a Korean carmaker’s top Western executive can draw considerable attention in the local market’s media and industry.
Sources say these sudden departures are most often due to a failure to meet sales goals set by the headquarters in Seoul. But what’s behind these departures might very well be the real story of interest.
Korean vs. Western Norms
First, tenure for top Korean senior C level executives, excluding chaebol family members, is usually just several years and, in some cases, not even a single year. The career path for long-term Korean employees is to continually move up the hierarchy through a narrowing pyramid, with fewer and fewer advancing to the highest levels.
Even then, Chosun Ilbo noted only one out of 115 staff are likely to rise to a management position–this according to a study of 184 listed subsidiaries of the top conglomerates by market researcher CEO Score.
Among management, logistically only a select few can achieve vice president level and an even smaller number can become president or CEO. Studies have shown the average Korean CEO is 58.8 years old, graduated from a prestigious university and took 25 years to get to the top.
These executives recognize that at some point in their career they will be asked to retire and exit, allowing their juniors to advance. Most often these organizational changes occur during the end of year restructuring.
These practices align with norms of a collectivistic society and the Korean executive accepts the decision based on the group goals taking precedence over his or her individual objectives and desires. The goals and needs of the group supersede the comfort and satisfaction of the individual.
Following a somewhat different model, Korean overseas organizations have at times opted to assign a Korean to oversee the local OEM subsidiary. These employees work as expatriates for 3-5 years and then return to Korea for reassignment, retirement or exit.
Cultural Expectations
At other times Korean companies will hire seasoned western professionals for the top leadership positions. Local industry expectations are that the westerners will stay on the job for an extended period until they retire or move to another company. A gap occurs when Korean cultural expectations are that the western leader would only hold the job for at most five years.
While year-end restructuring with promotions, retirements and dismissals are accepted Korean business norms, timing for the departure of a key western leader can be an issue. In particular, with a year-end exit the holidays allow little if any progress on recruitment.
Typically, companies, Korean or Western, are well into the new year before they can effectively interview candidates, review options, and consult with senior management before reaching such an important decision. Even if the search is internal, the process takes months.
What is concerning in today’s global market is a top proven leader of that caliber needed to head up a brand may be unwilling to accept a position so tied to achieving robust sales goals as well as being responsible for the overall business, when design, product mix and production targets are also set by the Korean HQ.
An Alternative Approach
I do see some alternatives. Termination of senior leadership goes with business. However, as Korean car brands strive to become more global, deep consideration is needed to determine the best way executives should leave. With a well-managed process there is little damage to the brand, and the field is opened to the best potential candidates for the job.
As an epilogue to The Investor article, and as a trusted industry friend and market leader reinforced… changing executives does come with the territory.
Nevertheless, we have seen in the case with American CEOs John Mendel of Honda, Jim O’Sullivan of Mazda, and Jim Press of Toyota—plus most recently Nissan’s Carlos Ghosn stepping down from the role of CEO, there is a success model of well-crafted exit notices (retiring, leaving for family reasons, resigning to seek other opportunities). These reduce negative press and promote a more balanced, attractive workplace culture.
Everything Korea, The New Year Episode: Gazing Back: A Look Forward
2016 in retrospect. 2017 before us.
From a string of weekly trips to OC/ Irvine, California, home to the U.S. HQ offices of Hyundai Motor, Kia Motors, Genesis, MOBIS Parts, Innocean and Hyundai Capital, to somewhat longer trips to a Vegas Dealer Show, NY and LA Auto Shows, HATCI R&D in Ann Arbor, KMMG and the Tier One’s in Georgia and Hyundai in Canada and even longer treks to Seoul, in 2016 I supported leadership across the Korean OEMs and their affiliates.
This said, it was a challenging year for both the western and Korean overseas teams. Bluntly, we all felt the frustration; the common thread—the need to hit steep sales targets. Layered on top was mounting anxiety from South Korea over a declining export economy and a weakening Won. Not to mention, the political scandals touched to the heart of Korean Groups—their Chairman called into the National Assembly and probed if pressured to contribute monies in exchange for special presidential treatment.
Sadly we also saw the abrupt exit of Hyundai Motor America’s CEO Dave Zuchowski, our long time friend who we advised on all things Korea. Still we are honored to support so many in leadership who come to us for advice and perspective—a role we take with utmost seriousness and hold in deep confidentially.
With 2016 also came new clients and a range of projects, among these working on the PyeongChang Winter Olympics. Equally appreciated were the opportunities to share my thoughts and perspective to a wide audience including groups like KOTRA NYC, and in media– Branding In Asia who both highlighted work in an interview as well as published a number of commentaries.
So what’s before us in 2017…Trump, the Korean Presidential Election and Succession?
“Trump?”—a name and an uncertainty that surfaces often. I constantly field questions from both Korean and American business leadership on the impact of the election and the new administration. Who would know I would be asked to speak in December about Trump to 45 Korea executives. I also find it interesting that diverse Trump scenarios tied to possible renegotiation of the North American Free Trade Accord by the new administration were mulled at the Hyundai Motor global strategy summit in Seoul.
Looking forward, trade agreements, US military support for South Korea and dealing with North Korea’s nuclear buildup still top the list. On the trade agreement front, my expectation is at some time during the next year it will be looked at deeper by the Trump administration. However, until there is a South Korean president in office, with the impeachment waiting to be upheld by the Courts, we’ll see no Trump-Korean President summit to drill deeper.
Korea’s Presidential Election 2017
What I will be probing for is the “tone” of presidential hopefuls—2017 an election year in South Korea. One candidate, for example, is already demanding the Chaebol model be dismantled.
In particular, my thoughts were summed up in Forbes, a timely December Frank Ahrens’ article remarking it was likely an incoming Korean president could ride into office on a wave of populist anger directed at the nation’s elites. Still, says veteran South Korea business consultant Don Southerton, “a new administration will need chaebol support to drive the economy and jobs or quickly lose public support.”
I’d add we have experienced decades of “love-hate” between the Korean Groups and the government. One minute mandating new rounds of regulations such as restrictions on mutual investments and loan guarantees to curtail chaebols—the next minute persuading chaebol leadership to spur growth. The reality is Group support by Samsung, Hyundai, LG, Lotte and SK is needed to create jobs, invest in R&D and support an incoming president’s initiatives to grow the economy.
Less likely considering the emergence of a more cynical generation that may threaten to upend an old system, nevertheless seeing disruptive politics emerging globally, we could even a new president promising change but openly allied with the chaebol as engines of growth. We’ll have to wait and see. That said, at least in the short run post-scandal I see Groups coming under pressure in laws and regulations designed to increase financial transparency and accountability of family members.
Finally the Succession issue…
What stood out at the recent National Assembly grilling of the top chaebol Chairman, many men in their late 70s, was the targeting of now defacto head of Samsung, who has assumed his father’s role. With the mantle of Samsung now handed to the third generation of the Lee family, we may see similar at Hyundai and the other top Groups. In fact, South Korea’s textile giant Hyosung just announced with year-end the ushering in the era of the group’s third-generation management. I expect more announcements in the weeks to come…
What will this new generation bring forth? For one, Samsung’s successor Jay Y Lee has promised to abolish the conglomerate’s “control tower” the Future Strategy Office in response to criticism about the office’s role in the group-wide business command and control operations. No major decisions such as acquisitions or entering new businesses without the FSO’s scrutiny. On a side note, Hyundai Motor Group is one of the few groups that doesn’t operate a de facto control tower. Unlike more diversified chaebol, Hyundai core business is automotive with its affiliates already aligned in supporting a common interest.
As for succession at Korea’s second largest conglomerate, Hyundai Motor Group’s heir E.S. Chung continues to take a more visible leadership role. For example, E.S. Chung has sought to break away from the old model of a strictly Korean leadership team to more diverse international team as part of his strategy to better position their brand. More recently he re-structured the annual year-end global strategy meeting of 50 Hyundai and Kia Motors Korean executives from their overseas branches. What stood out was the collaborative, open discussion based structure of the summit vs. an older conservative and hierarchical format in which the head of each overseas branch would give a one-way briefing to the Chairman.
We can assume E.S. Chung will continue to follow his design-loving passion, and consensus-building management style in 2017.
Summing up
2017 may be seen as a year of uncertainties—both domestically in Korea and internationally with the potential for a weakening global economy, more disruptive politics and tightening of budgets and spending. The later is concerning since cutbacks would only hamper sales in what may be a tough market.