Some "Asian values" are just fine (sort of)

■"Irreconciliable Differences: Foreign Partnerships in Thailand Dissolve as Economy Gains," by Shawn W. Crispin, Wall Street Journal, 21 September 2004, p. A20.

When the Asian Flu hit back in 97-98, a lot of foreign companies swept in and bought into partnerships with ailing local firms. The hope was that these European and U.S. firms would bring along with their ownership better accounting and management practices that would clean up the cozy-but-more-than-slightly-corrupt "Asian values" that dominated a lot of financial deals there. Did this occur? To a certain extent, yes, and I've cited plenty of articles along those lines. Does this mean that every marriage of convenience made sense? No, mergers and acquisitions fall all the time in the West, often at a rate much like real marriages, so it's not a bad sign that many of these partnerships ended up dissolved as Asian economies revived.

What's the number one reason cited? Western companies focus more on short-term profits, whereas Asian companies prefer a longer perspective emphasizing re-investment and enlarging market shares slowly over time. Is either view automatically better? No. It all depends on the local circumstances and the prospects for global markets. No all "Asians values" were bad, just the ones about cozy loan practices and a lack of transparency in markets. Asia has plenty to teach the Old Core about how to thin strategically across time and not just space. So integrating Developing Asia will ultimately change usóthe Old Coreóas much or more than it will change the New Core.

And that's just fine.