Home / Comments and Opinions / Danko Sučević: The Private Sector Should Not Change, the State Should Change

Danko Sučević: The Private Sector Should Not Change, the State Should Change

Image by: foto Getty Images/istockphoto

In response to the increasingly loud calls for public sector reform, digitalization, automation, and increased productivity, a counterargument often arises that the Croatian private sector is not at the level of the economies of competitive countries and that the problem of Croatia’s developmental lag is actually a problem of poor Croatian entrepreneurs. This highlights a deeply rooted misunderstanding of entrepreneurship, particularly pronounced among state-paid officials.

An important, and perhaps the most important, characteristic of entrepreneurship and a market economy is failure! Business ventures and companies fail. Entrepreneurs and directors fail. Only sufficiently good ideas, sufficiently good entrepreneurs, and sufficiently good directors survive in the market. Only sufficiently good workers keep their jobs. If a company is growing and developing, if it is successful in the market, it means that the products or services of that company are desired by its customers and that it is well-managed. This does not mean that it is digitalized, automated, and maximally productive. No, it simply means that it is aligned with the needs of its customers. When those needs change, and they certainly will change, then the company’s management must react and adapt the products and services to the needs of the customers. Or it will fail. And it is good that it fails.

The failure of a company in a free market simply means that customers have already turned to some competing company. The private sector does not need to change as long as it is in a free market. It will change as customers change, as competitors change. No state initiative or law is needed to force private entrepreneurs to change, to digitalize, to increase productivity.

Unnecessary State Application

This Sunday, we saw yet another example of misunderstanding the role of the state in society. The Ministry of Agriculture paid for the development of an application that ‘promptly informs citizens about the withdrawal or recall of products from the market that pose a risk or danger to human and animal health or may adversely affect the environment,’ which was downloaded and installed 2397 times in a month.

If it were a private company that invested its money or the money of its owners in the development of such an application, no one would have anything against it. If such an application were downloaded by a negligible number of citizens, the company would likely conclude that it was a failed project. However, this is about investing the money of Croatian taxpayers in a project that has nothing to do with the function of the Ministry of Agriculture. If the employees of the Ministry were clear about their role, they would ensure timely provision of information and allow anyone to create an application from it. As, for example, the Court Register does.

If they faced the fact that no one wants it, that no private company is willing to invest its money in the development of the application, it would likely become clear that no one needs such information. The key difference between the Ministry of Agriculture and a private company is that the Ministry will not fail! No one in the Ministry will lose their job because they spend money on applications that no one needs. It is particularly ironic that such behavior comes from a ministry that has distributed forty billion kuna in subsidies over the last ten years, while the annual value of agricultural production has fallen by four billion kuna.

Hybrid Form of Business

And here we come to the hybrid form of business. Farmers are mostly in the private sector. However, this private sector is firmly tied to the state. As much as thirty percent of their income comes directly from the state through subsidies, and sometimes the state is their largest buyer. This saves them from failure, so everyone survives. The whole story from the beginning of the text simply ‘does not work’ because it is not a market but a poor imitation of a market.

Because of this, there is no progress, innovation, digitalization, but rather production and sales are decreasing, falling behind, and in the end, what happened to shipbuilding occurs. A similar situation exists with other sectors or companies that receive a large part of their income from the state. The market determines which companies will be successful. If the market is closed and limited, under state control, if the judiciary does not work, if bankruptcies are rare and difficult to enforce, then we get a situation where corruption, nepotism, and protectionism flourish. Only in such a market can companies that steal, cheat, and deceive be successful. Therefore, we must insist on reducing the influence of the state on the economy, on accelerating and improving the judiciary, and on full transparency of all decisions and the movement of money. Our money. 

{embed_digitalno_izdanje}{/embed_digitalno_izdanje}