We can make it to the top . . .

The Forbes World’s Billionaires 2011 list is out and four Filipinos made it to the top. It used to be many things were measured just within the confines of the US or the West; and with a globalized economy, for the first time, Asia has more billionaires than Europe. And American dominance is waning wealth-wise, as in most other measures – which would continue. In a universe, changes in its elements would change their distribution.

The Aquino Administration is pursuing an investment-led economic growth agenda, tapping the outside world to invest in the Philippines, especially in the strategic industries we’ve identified and their requisite infrastructures. And we are learning as we go along. For instance, foreign investors are telling us to spread the projects over a wider timeline so that more parties would be encouraged to participate. The reality is everyone would only bite what they could chew. But the important thing is we are learning and gaining from the experience.

The object of the exercise remains: To deliver against the incremental $100 billion export revenues the Trade Department is planning by 2016, for example, there must be a high probability that there is a market for these products – i.e., they are competitive. But we’re still riding the learning curve and so there would be slip-ups. And it is important that we invest in the building blocks of competitiveness – e.g., technology and innovation. The good news is the electronics industry, our biggest exports, is generating continued investments. And while semiconductors remain the bulk of the business, they are looking at the production of higher value-added segments (e.g., PV and solar, auto electronics, mass data storage), reports the Manila Bulletin. But they’ve raised their own issues: “The loss of most of the industry’s IT engineers and programmers to foreign employers; and the need to bring down the cost of power and make the Philippines conducive to foreign investors”.

Slip-ups are a reality. Reality is never a problem; it is how we respond to reality that is the problem. Boston and Philadelphia have to deal with sex abuse cases costing the faithfuls tons of money – but they remain faithful, while the church pursues reform. In investment the key is sustaining success, and global business costs money – as the writer’s Eastern Europeans friends have learned, with difficulty – e.g., investing in state-of-the-art technology versus fabricated machineries. Poor countries like India or us (e.g. jeepney) have to overcome a similar mindset. But India, while in car manufacturing for decades, recently invested in premium brands – Jaguar and Land Rover – to move up the value chain; these brands bring with them the building blocks of competitiveness: technology, innovation, talents, product development and markets! India is demonstrating how to move up the competitive ladder.

Everything starts in the mind – but must come down to the heart and to the gut to make it instinctive. The Aquino Administration’s economic growth agenda is predicated on moving from a parochial to a global mindset? Are we prepared to embrace the global economy? In the technology and innovation arena, for instance, whether at the academic or public sector level, our frame of reference has to expand from local to global – beyond being geared to support local initiatives, local products, and local markets?

In business education, our private sector and academic community have established the Asian Institute of Management, which we proudly advertise as the Harvard Business School of the East. Do we need a similar initiative, like the MIT of the East? MIT is acknowledged by industry as an ideal partner in the pursuit of ‘sustainable, high-impact industry-university collaboration’. And their successes have been quantified, equating to numerous successful ventures (e.g., aerospace, IT, automotive, software, consumer electronics, materials, pharma) that have made direct contributions to the global economy at mindboggling levels. But that may be looking too far out.

Those in the public and private sectors and in higher education have to embrace the 21^st century globalized economy, and move beyond local orientation – in technology and innovation especially? If we can make it to the top in individual wealth, there is no reason why we can’t make our industry competitive, and our economy moving and accelerating forward?