The Volkswagen scandal has raised questions about the German model of production. If the success of the company’s diesel-powered vehicles was due in part to fraudulent efforts to conceal the amount of harmful pollutants they emitted, will similar revelations at other companies call into questions the nation’s transformation from “the sick man of Europe” to an export-driven economic powerhouse?
Fortunately, the answer is almost certainly no. Germany’s competitive advantage has less to do with chicanery than with how its firms are structured and the culture in which they operate. Germany’s leading automaker is an exception to the manufacturing rules that have driven the nation’s success, not an example of them.
Indeed, Germany’s success is frequently cited as a model that other nations should emulate and rightly so. Since the beginning of the century, the nation has grown to become one of the world’s leading exporters, outstripping all other major European nations.
Illustration: Yusha
From 2000 to 2013, Germany’s exports grew by 154 percent, compared with 127 percent for Spain, 98 percent for the UK, 79 percent for France and 72 percent for Italy.
The leading explanation for Germany’s impressive recent export performance is wage restraint. However, as a comparison with Spain reveals, faster wage growth elsewhere cannot be the entire story. To be sure, from 2000 to 2008, German wages increased by 19 percent, compared with 48 percent in Spain, but after the 2009 financial crisis, the roles were reversed. From 2009 to 2013, German nominal wages increased by more than 14 percent, compared with 4 percent in Spain. And yet, despite the more rapid rise in German wages, the nation’s exports rebounded faster than Spain’s — or those of any other EU nation.
The most important factor behind Germany’s success is that the structure of its firms improves the quality of their products. German exporters are organized in a way that is less hierarchical and more decentralized than other European firms. This gives them several advantages.
Decentralization enables employees at lower levels of the corporate hierarchy to devise and implement new ideas. As these employees are often closer to customers than those higher up, their collective knowledge about what the market is demanding is an important source of value.
Tapping this knowledge allows Germany to compete on quality, not price. Indeed, if wage restraint were the main factor in Germany’s success, it would be hard pressed to outperform Italian, French, British and Spanish exporters, who compete mainly on price by offshoring production to low-wage nations.
Instead, the German focus on quality allows its firms to charge higher prices and gain new customers. When exporters are asked to rank their products relative to a market average, 40 percent of German exporters classify their goods as top quality, while only 10 percent of French exporters do so.
Decentralized management has helped German exporters triple their share of the global market for top-quality goods compared to those firms that did not reorganize their management models. Indeed, when the top 1 percent of German exporters were studied — the nation’s export superstars — it was found that they more than doubled their share of the world export market when they opted to decentralize their organizations.
This focus on quality could explain why German exports rebounded quickly after 2009, despite the rise in nominal wages. Quality makes exporters less vulnerable to changes in price — including those driven by rising wages. By contrast, those nations in which firms compete on price might have felt more pressure to move production abroad as domestic wages rose.
Germany’s relative insensitivity to rising costs could also explain why its government is comfortable with a strong euro, whereas France and Italy, which do no share Germany’s indifference to increasing costs, have been calling on the European Central Bank to weaken the currency.
Volkswagen, it turns out, took a different approach from that of most other German firms. Rather than decentralizing power, former chief executive officer Martin Winterkorn sat at the head of a centralized, command-and-control organization in which he acted as a patriarch. His desire to take the company to the very top of the global car industry, surpassing Toyota, put enormous strain on his managers to deliver growth.
The result — a decision to cheat on emissions tests — says less about Germany’s culture of manufacturing than about rot at the car company, beginning at the very top.
According to the Sweden-based World Value Survey, Germany is a high-trust society, in which citizens have confidence in one another’s behavior and act accordingly. Indeed, the lesson of the Volkswagen scandal is that this culture might be necessary for its export model to work.
French and Italian exporters that introduced decentralized management did not increase their share of the global market for top-quality goods. The likely reason is that providing division managers with greater autonomy not only frees them up to respond to market demands; it also allows them to put their own career interests above the well-being of the firm.
If Germany is to maintain its economic dominance, it has to do something far harder than keeping wages in check or restructuring hierarchies. It has to ensure that the culture of integrity underlying its success remains unchanged by the pressures of global competition.
Dalia Marin is chair of international economics at the University of Munich and a senior research fellow at Breugel, the Brussels-based economic think tank.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath