Subscribe
E-Paper
By Park Hyong-ki
It seems the government wants to be in the game to help the private sector, especially startups, create the next big thing before the big wave of the Fourth Industrial Revolution hits the country.
The finance ministry will be pouring tons of money into building ecosystems surrounding hot technologies such as driverless cars, smart metropolises and farming, drones and alternative energy.
Basically, it, too, wants what the United States has ― platform players such as Google, Microsoft, Apple and Amazon.
So, deviating slightly from the policy for raising wages amid the failure of trickle-down economics, the ministry will spare no expense in helping create the next Korean Google, Microsoft, Apple and Amazon in its very own kind of ecosystems for the new digital age.
And this would hopefully create thousands of jobs for the future generation.
It may have the dollars to pursue this even by promising lesser rules and regulations for the private sector to do something cool with AI, drones and clean energy.
But it doesn't seem to have the sense of what truly is an ecosystem and what kind of role startups should play for this society facing superfast aging population, rising inequality and suicide rate.
Like the previous administration, the incumbent one outlines its strategy for key technologies that could bring wonder and change to the world.
For most, it was a deja vu like Neo in "The Matrix" seeing the same black cat passing by twice in front of him.
Startups are not all about what sort of technologies they use for their business.
They embrace chaos and risk taking cultures through agility and mobility, and foremost, uphold Sun Tzu's warfare philosophy ― "A smaller, more mobile army can defeat a much larger one by rapid movement."
That is just a minor difference between what startups can do and what large conglomerates can't do.
Above all, they are problem-solvers.
Their ecosystems are built, developed and sustained by daring and rebellious entrepreneurs who want to start companies to provide solutions to problems people in society face every day.
Policymakers should respect this true nature of entrepreneurship and innovation.
They should not make policies from their narrow-minded prospective of how to lower the youth unemployment and revive growth stemming from sluggish corporate investment.
That is why the former government failed to achieve a "creative economy." It practically shouted to the young, "Hey kids, you can't find a job? Just start a company, we will help finance you and give you office."
It then also listed a number of potential technologies ― virtual reality, cloud computing, internet of things, big data.
This government is doing the same thing.
Startups should not play by the same rules that are followed by conglomerates or their smaller peers.
Once, a venture capitalist said when a big company asks for a rule book, a regulator gives it a very thick one that looks like a phone book.
When a startup asks for a rule book to see if it can go ahead and launch its product and service, a regulator gives it a blank piece of paper and says, "Knock yourself out."
This disparity indicates that startups should have the freedom to disrupt the market beyond people's wildest dreams and imaginations.
And this does not happen here as seen from news reports of startups looking elsewhere because there are too many rules hindering their creativity here.
To create this chaotic, risky and fast-paced innovation environment, the country first has to change its aging, broken education system for the young. But that's another story.
