What do you feel you will bring to the chamber given your legal background?

 I suppose the role I can play is to certainly be a bridge between Korean and American industry. Having lived here for so long and because of my language fluency you get a unique insight into the culture and thought processes and what motivates. One learns how to communicate and how to avoid misunderstandings where there are cultural and language differences. One of the skills I've learned is to be an effective negotiator and bring about happy resolutions.
 One of my goals is to fulfill the obligation of the chamber to enhance the economic prosperity of Korea, because our role too is to contribute to the economic growth and success of Korea. By doing so, American business succeeds in Korea. This is one of our prime objectives. In the past AMCHAM had an image of being an adversary of the Korean government and something of a troublemaker. We want to eliminate that image. The chamber now has to work with government and industry to improve the prosperity of the nation and the standard of living of Koreans. In the process our members will be profitable, ensuring more investment and jobs.
 We hope to play a small role in Korea's growth and recovery from the crisis.

Is there a particular significance to your election, given your background, Korea's increased need for foreign investment, and the increasing proportion of M&As in FDI?

 I suppose my election is fortuitous, since I have developed an understanding of what investors need and their concerns, which helps me explain to government what's needed to enhance the business climate and hence economic activity. I believe our goal for the coming year is to provide constructive suggestions about policy and regulations to improve the climate in Korea so foreign investors will feel welcome. Importantly, I think the government has done a great job in liberalizing the economy, and we want to produce a climate in which business can expand, contribute to growth, and so speed recovery and enhance everybody's living standards and lifestyle.
 The very positive steps government has taken toward liberalization allows the chamber to work on improving the business climate, on what regulations will enhance opportunity, rather than always fighting about barriers.

What sort of initiatives are you suggesting to the government?

 It depends to a great deal on the sector because each has its own issues. On a broad base, here are some points which are very important to the business climate and the long-term health of the economy.
 First, the Korean government has made remarkable strides on being open and on providing data on the economy. This creates an environment of transparency and permits investors to have confidence, and will do so even after the recovery. We'd like to see this continue.
 Secondly, There is a need to foster predictability and consistency in the way regulations are implemented. Foreign investors demand this approach since arbitrary implementation of regulations really inhibits the predictability and consistency of running a business.

 Third, we'd like to see a continued fostering of an environment in which foreign investors are welcomed and regarded as part of the economy. President Kim Dae-jung has done a great job in this respect. It's very important in giving foreign companies confidence to come here, sell their goods, and be treated fairly and openly.
 Finally, we'd like to see a wider acceptance of the concept that making profits is healthy. Heretofore, there has been an attitude which is anti-profit oriented. Many times in the press, companies are criticized for making too much money. Certainly, if they are gouging they shouldn't be doing it, but there should be encouraged a climate where companies are not penalized for making a profit. After all, profit is what keeps them alive and permits the development of new technology and growth.
 We need to see awards given to those companies which achieve new profit levels rather than being ridiculed. We see stories in the press about foreign banks making excess profits, foreign companies taking dividends out of the country. Sure, they do send profits and dividends home but they also leave them here to reinvest and make profits from which they pay taxes.

There is criticism of the speed of the government's reform. Do you have any comments to make on this issue?

 I do have comments to make but not to criticize. You have to distinguish first between the public and the private sectors.
 In talking about the public sector, it's necessary to include the banks since they must supported by government to prevent panic and loss of savings and it is through them reforms will be implemented. A basic plan has been set for this sector and the speed at which it is going is good. The reforms are not complete but it is important to be careful not to create unrest. In comparison with other Asian nations, reform in this area has been very rapid.
 Private sector reform will lag for two fundamental reasons. First, under current market conditions, where demand is down and business performance is sluggish, assets aren't what they were worth one year ago. Emotionally, it's difficult for people in business to sell those assets for less than what was invested in them. It's like buying a house at the height of the market and being forced to sell at a loss. Anyone will hang on until the last possible moment so you have to be sympathetic to their plight. However, assets are being sold and investors are moving in, but not at speed.
 The second reason is that once the financial sector reform is put in place, reform in the private sector will naturally follow because of the new demands of the banking system. Companies in future will receive credit based on strict analysis of the viability of their projects. So credit, which will shift dramatically after reform is implemented, will determine which companies will survive and which won't, so dictating the pace and change of reform in the private sector.

What is your ideal vision of the future for the chamber and your members?

 I think what we have to hope for is a setting in which banks operate on a very healthy profit basis, and government imposes regulations to ensure the banks do just that. Before, the banks operated as a developmental tool - part of the political system. By severing those links, and allowing the financial sector to operate on the profit principle, will be the first step to achieving full recovery.
 In addition, we'd like to see an environment which encourages profit, ensures corporations are responsible, and where government and industry work together to ensure corporations can invest and protect their investment and work in a context to provide predictability and consistency. Such an environment will enable corporations to react to market conditions rather than political factors or non-economic reasons.

by Charles Duerden