Because of the Singaporean (Asian) Inferiority Complex
June 14th, 2007 by whysgentrepreneurssuck
There is perhaps still a prevalent white superiority complex in the world: more prominent in developing nations, less perhaps in Singapore, but arguably still very much in existent in a developed country like ours - even if Singaporeans/Chinese/Japanese/Asians have proven themselves to be comparable if not better than the West in certain technological areas which are usually considered to be the benchmark of superiority. Why then, do we still retain a certain feeling of being inferior to the West? Resident contributor, whysgentrepreneurssuck speaks about (our) the tendency to look up to the West, perhaps much more than we should.
Ask any Singaporean entrepreneur how good they think their company is compared to their peers - chances are, you’re probably not going to hear a lot of backslapping.
In fact, apart from the founders of successful Asian companies such as Tata, Samsung, Huawei and *cough* Temasek Holdings *cough*, as well as pockets of entrepreneurs from China (the Wenzhou folks) and India (that bunch of fierce nationalists), few Asian entrepreneurs, and by that extension, Singaporean entrepreneurs would put themselves on the same pedestal as their Western counterparts. Asian companies are caught in the vicious cycle of playing catch-up.
If you’re not convinced, ask yourself or your entrepreneur friends who they benchmark against in their field. If you’re in the system integration space, you’re likely to compare yourself against EDS, IBM and Datacraft. If you’re into consumer mobile phones, it’s gonna be Nokia, Sony Ericsson and Samsung. Asian societies have shaken off the bonds of colonialism and western subservience post-WW2, but Asian/Singaporean businesses appears to be comfortable living in the shadows of their western counterparts till this very day.
I gotta make my usual disclaimer by stating that there’s absolutely nothing wrong with measuring against the best. The problem only starts rearing its ugly head when such comparisons instill an inferiority complex among the minds of our Singaporean businessmen. Let’s face it - we’re largely a nation of quitters. What do quitters do when faced with stiff global competition? They take the easy way out and lower the price of their products and services! Our Singaporean businessmen and their Asian brethren fall into the trap of commodity pricing and excess capacity.
It’s a lot easier for a brand associated with luxury and price premiums to lower its price, than for a commodity-priced product to move up the value chain. Just look at Pierre Cardin. When I was a small boy, Pierre Cardin was the Louis Vutton of the day. Sometime in between, their management decided to lower their prices and expand their product offerings, opting for higher volume to drive growth. However, the converse does not hold true. Creative Technologies began the MP3 player war in pole position and chose to bet on selling technology and features. Since it lost its position to Apple and its iPod-totting lifestyle, Creative has been fighting an uphill battle for every decimal point of its market share since. Once people buy your product at a low price, it’s a lot harder to move them up the utility curve again.
To all you Singaporean entrepreneurs out there, drop that loser mentality of yours right this very moment! You’re never going to go very far whining about the lack of aid *plays Oliver Twist’s “Please Sir, I want some more.”* from government and complaining about how tough it is to earn a living. Stop walking in the footsteps of other giants, and dare to dream of your own pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Believe in your vision and stride forth with confidence - even if you’ve failed, you know you’ve tried. You’ll feel a lot better than an entrepreneur who’s been at it doing the same old shit for donkey years.
Or is it donkey ears? Hmm I think they taste better deep-fried - kinda like that pigs’ ears snack you get in the Mama store at the HDB void decks of yore.
After all, entrepreneurship is a game of high risks and high returns - cowards and risk-averse peeps need not apply.
Loading ...
To ‘lose’ that inferiority complex, may be we need more successful examples. How do we have more successful examples if a lot of Asians are obsess with safety or ’sure win’ bets? I think the obsession is a part of Asian culture. To lose that obsession, a lot of time is required and nobody can control the evolution process. BTW, I have one suggestion for whysgentrepreneurssuck : after bashing Asian entrepreneurs for a few more months, may be the person should consider to create/gather materials for Asian entrepreneurs to succeed in Asia markets. Currently most of the materials related to entrepreneurship are written by Americans for North America. Some of the proven tactics are not applicable for Asian entrepreneurs and/or Asia markets due to different stage of development. I think positive demonstration/coaching has better ROI in changing mindset than ‘bashing’
hmm, I quite disagree with this: “successful Asian companies such as Tata, Samsung, Huawei and *cough* Temasek Holdings *cough*, as well as pockets of entrepreneurs from China (the Wenzhou folks)” and this: “Asian companies are caught in the vicious cycle of playing catch-up.”.
If you really go find out more about China, you’ll find plenty of very successful companies such as Lenovo (which bought the PC line of IBM many yrs ago), Haier (another international home electronics brand), Sina, Sohu, Baidu, Alibaba, Tencent (its IM client QQ was one of the first Instant Messengers in the world, and dominates the billion china market. Its wide range of money making services & products today, I would say far outweighs many global players), etc, etc.
My trip back to China this holiday brought me tons of surprises, especially the speed of growth & innovation taking place everywhere - food, clothings, entertainment, IT, etc. This is probably the 8th time I’m back, and it’s the first time I can confidently say the life here(in beijing at least) is better than that in SG.
So I’d say that “Asian companies” or at least “China companies” are “NOT” caught in the “vicious cycle” of playing “catch-up”. They may play the role of catching up (or rather call it - learning from) successful western companies. However, the rate they innovate upon that, is stunning. If we really have to call it a “catch-up” game, then I’d rather call it the “beneficial cycle” of “catching up” and “overtaking” in China.
[…] interesting comment from one of our readers Encik Wan prompted me to write this post. In particular, my personal view resonates with his point to the […]
As Orius (aka whysgesucks) cannot post his comment, he has tasked me to place it here as a reply to Encik Wan and Wu Di
— Orius’ reply —-
Encik Wan, your point is entirely valid. However, there’s plenty of such resources around the web. I am not a negative person by nature. It’s just that we’ve not been spending enough time looking at the other side of the coin - too many sites offer how to do be a better entrepreneur, but few really examine why Singaporean entrepreneurs fail to succeed. That is my positioning in the blogosphere, and while I do not rule out adding useful resources on how things can be done better, it’s certainly not going to be the majority of my work.
Wu Di, those ’successful Asian companies’ were not intended to be comprehensive. There’s plenty of large and successful Chinese corporations, as you’ve rightfully named. Sure, Chinese entrepreneurs may not be subjected to the inferiority complex that the rest of their Asian brethren do. However, let’s not forget that Chinese entrepreneurs have plenty of 先天(in-born) advantages such as a large domestic market and their fierce sense of nationalism, that their Singaporean brethren don’t. MNCs are forced to share technology just to gain access to the lucrative China market.
These advantages allow Chinese startups to scale, get past the ‘catch-up’ phase and effectively ‘cross the chasm’ a lot easier than their peers.
Hi Bernard,
You’re right. China entrepreneurs have plenty of in-born advantages, especially the ease of crossing the chasm. I guess what’s lacking here is the well established entrepreneurship infrastructure and government support (like what S’pore has). If that’s fulfilled, I foresee the rise of those under-developed cities in the near future.
Hi,
With regards to your point on Singapore having well-established entrepreneurship infrastructure and govt support for high-tech startups, I beg to differ.
In terms of debt financing, govt funding schemes are not ‘proactive’ ventures, but can only match any third party’s investments dollar-for-dollar. There are no ‘pure grant schemes’ like those available in the U.S.. Commercial banks in Singapore are conservative - loans require not only the guarantors’ assurance but also their collaterals. For equity financing, I believe many reputable VCs in Singapore only talk about investments for companies that are ‘revenue generating’, certainly not the case for start-ups in the tech development stage.
Thus, Singapore may not be the best place to do a high-tech start-up.
“After all, entrepreneurship is a game of high risks and high returns - cowards and risk-averse peeps need not apply.”
Says it nicely. You still have to make smart decisions and reduce the risk to increase the likelihood of your success, but that’s good. Nice article.