By Owen Trutwein

One country Koreans often look to as a good example of how things should be done is, perhaps ironically, Japan.

In the 1960s, when the Korean economy started moving after the stagnation of the Syngman Rhee era, it wasn’t thanks to a fascination with America’s practice of free trade or the free market.

It was achieved with great reference to the economic miracle that was enabling Japan’s post-war economic transformation under the guidance of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI), and with a strong emphasis on creating and then regulating state-supported industries that could become strong enough to force export-led growth.

However, among too many Korean entrepreneurs and businessmen, there seems to be the idea that the original Japanese idea of taking existing creations and then perfecting them is an end in itself. While Japan, a country far less inventive or entrepreneurial than the United States, rarely reinvents choosing instead to perfect the existing one, similarly, this has for too long provided the model for Korean businesses.

Where there is the Japanese ``Pokémon,” there is the Korean ``Powermon,” with the exact same art. Where there are Japanese ``Yamaha” motorcycles, so in Korea are there ``Yamuda” bicycles, with the exact same logo. Where Germany has ``Puma” with the relevant logo, so Korea has ``Pama,” with an identical puma for its logo.

Apple launches the iPad? Five months later Samsung comes out with the ``Galaxy Tab.” Apple invents the iPhone? Samsung comes hot on the heels with the identical-looking ``Galaxy S.” In any given survey, how many people will have even heard of, much less care about ``Powermon,” ``Yamuda,” or ``Pama”?

People are more likely to go with the Apple iPad or iPhone, knowing that they were the ones that established the genre. In many areas Korean companies are supplying products that are expected to compete in an already determined and overcrowded market, with more experienced, renowned, and ultimately richer competitors.

Second in the market, second in the mind of the consumer. Korean companies must avoid this violation of the laws of marketing and carve out new niches for itself to lead.

There is reason for optimism, however. Samsung was the company to release the world’s first 3D LED television, and as a result of being the first in the market, it looks capable of leading the market for the foreseeable future. This is an important step toward becoming the company of ideas, and not merely the company that makes fine products.

There is no question that Korean companies are producing some of the highest-quality technology in the world, the time has come for them to lead the way in inventive ingenuity, and to begin to create more categories if it cannot make the best product in an existing one.

While no one could possibly expect Korean small and medium enterprises to receive the same amount of governmental support and contracts as the giants of Samsung and Hyundai, SMEs are often far more creative, daring to differ from what’s already established, and for this reason there is always an understandable fear about them.

However, it must remain the responsibility of Korea’s politicians to keep a healthy balance of competition in the market, and to discover and promote and support the small but inventive businesses that can develop the next generation of ideas. When America’s most celebrated investor Warren Buffett gave a speech to MBA students at the University of Florida recently, he confessed to not seeing any great businesses in Japan.

The worry is that, without finding good role-models leading the line in technological progress, the same may one day be said of Korea.

The writer has been teaching English as a foreign language to Koreans over the past two years. He lives in Hanam, Gyeonggi Province, and can be reached at kengseng@hotmail.co.uk.