Over the summer my brother had a friend visiting from Japan. Erina – this petite, normally quiet and demure Asian had a good hearty laugh at the fact that our major Canadian electronics retailer fancies itself as the store of the future. Personally, I always find a visit to the electronics shop to be quite exhilarating. I enjoy perusing the new gadgets, hanging out in the speaker room, and fantasizing about the sweet 52-inch Sony flat screens. But then again, I’m male, I’m 30, and I’m a Canadian. To a Japanese native whose expectations are clearly far more demanding, our entire technology industry is a bit comical. The futuristic gadgets that we find ourselves drooling over are already two or three generations old in Japan. In fact the digital camera that Erina walked into the store with was the latest model… too bad she bought it in Japan five years ago. To her, our technology was “soooo 2003.”
I bring up this little anecdote because it is relevant to some research I’m contemplating about Asian business revolutionaries and, in particular, the mobile industry. The issue is that, despite our global business environment, the disparity between North American and Asian product innovation and consumer expectations of innovation is, honestly, quite shocking. The electronics industry in this continent is a great example of the “culture of legacy” that we North Americans complaisantly support.
Our diminished expectations extend to the technology we accept from service providers like cable and cell phone companies (anyone use on-demand cable lately – the interface is circa 1985), from our governments (still waiting on that electronic ballot, e-polling, and efficient online service delivery), and from our corporate work environments (still operating on the assumption that 3- to 5-year lifecycles for employee workstations are acceptable and that iPhones aren’t “enterprise technology”). We do not demand better technology, and so we do not get it. It’s simple supply-and-demand; Economics 101.
Three-year contracts for cell phones are standard – the assumption being that our current technology is ‘good enough’ for at least that long. Flat panel TV’s are “all the rage” right now, but if I were to poll my own group of friends, fewer than half of them have made the investment. In fact, we in Canada are, to a certain extent, proud of being luddites. We exalt our “retro” technologies and some even pine for the ‘good old days’ before the hum-drum of always-on BlackBerries, satellite TVs, laptops, and instant messaging.
When two of my colleagues decided to wait in line overnight to get the latest iPhone, the response was a mix of jealousy and incredulity – that anyone would want to pay a premium for the latest and greatest technology, and to demand it so early is still seen as somewhat geeky and eccentric.
The culture of legacy extends far beyond consumer electronics. It’s a deeply-routed cultural problem we as North Americans have. Our business assumptions are based on it. Take for example the Hype Cycle – now an industry standard technology lifecycle model. Nothing is more damaging to the psyche of the corporate technophile than Gartner’s Hype Cycle which makes it not only okay to be a technology laggard, but in certain circumstances, actually preferable. Gartner has made a business around mitigating the perceived risk of being on the leading edge of technology adoption.
But, it all starts at home. My TV is seven years old (and I still don’t have a PVR), my home computer is getting on four years old, the three-year contract on my cell phone is almost up but I probably won’t renew anytime soon, my CD player is a relic of the 90’s, and the newest electronic device I’ve purchased is an iPod. We perpetuate our own culture of legacy by refusing to update. We generally feel that, even if our technology is behind the rest of the world, it’s still good enough for now. In the end, whose fault is it that our technology in North America sucks? Clearly, it’s our own.
Comments RSS
| TrackBack URI
This is very true, when I moved back from Japan it took me 3 months to accept that I would have to use a Canadian mobile phone. No electronic wallet, no tv on the phone, archaic texting… i could go on. nice article Naumi!
Comment by Eóin - September 15, 2008 2:06 pm
It’s interesting to me how we have grown accustomed to the sluggish pace of technological developments. Digital camera resolution is a perfect example.
Perhaps what we need to spur earlier adoption in this country is greater exposure to other countries like Japan and how advanced they are in comparison to us. That would likely cause a bit of clamoring amongst the public, hopefully persuading companies to import more “advanced” electronics.
Comment by Shaun - September 15, 2008 2:10 pm
I find it interesting that we complain at the pace of technological advancement, yet most of the gadgets referenced do nothing to enhance our standard of living.
In fact I’d argue that they lower it.
For instance why would I pay for the latest HD LCD tv when it’s going to quadruple my cable bill. Then with that fancy new screen I need to get a gaming device, enhance the streaming to all my connected gadgetry which are all clamoring for monthly payments.
It’s interesting that the easiest way to increase my cashflow is by eliminating my ‘need’ of these pesky material devices that pressure me to find yet an even better paying job. Heck it’s the best taxfree pay raise going.
It all feels like pointless cycle, kind of like chasing my own tail.
Comment by Graham - September 15, 2008 8:05 pm
Hey Naumi,
Makes perfect sense…but I find myself defending our Luddite habits - not as anti-technologists, but as frugal spenders. The reason both of us have 4-year-old PCs is that we don’t want to part with the money to gain the incremental benefit.
Why is it that we as a culture prefer to minimize our expenditures rather than stay current with technology? Perhaps more interestingly, what about these specific Asian cultures (South Korean, Singapore, Japan) leads Asian consumers to choose differently?
Write on, friend!
Vince
Comment by Vince - September 15, 2008 8:40 pm
Good points Vince and Graham - there’s certainly an opportunity cost related to buying technology. There’s a lot of things I could do with $1,000 instead of buying a flat panel LCD TV (like for example, renting a houseboat for a weekend with some friends).
I guess the point is, our culture simply doesn’t place the same value in the incremental value of technology that other cultures do. That, and in many cases the cost of our technology (i.e. the higher cost of mobile in NA versus other countries), forces us to make the trade-off.
Comment by Naumi Haque - September 15, 2008 9:56 pm
Japanese tend to worry a lot about the neighbour having a bigger TV than they do. Westerners are more interested in individual cost/benefit considerations. My TV is old and small but good enough.
Comment by Tel - September 21, 2008 7:38 am