|
Industry WatchSome provocative thoughts on marketing Canadian forest productsBy Jim Stirling During Forest Expo held in Prince George, BC last May,
Logging and Sawmilling Journal met John Alderliesten. He's completed the second year of a four-year
Forest Resource Technology program at the College of New Caledonia's Vanderhoof campus as a mature
student. He entered an essay writing contest sponsored by Forest Renewal BC in which he delivered some
provocative thoughts about how BC (and by extension other provinces) can become more assertive and
proactive in the global market for forest products. (What FRBC is doing in this role is debatable, Mr.
Alderliesten notwithstanding, but then it's probably better than the forest industry helping underwrite the
BC Millenium Book Project's traipse across the province seeking residents' signatures for who knows what
purpose). Alderliesten's contention is that wood product manufacturers need to be taught what they
can sell rather than sell what they can manufacture. This is not revolutionary stuff, but it is pertinent and
Alderliesten accurately identifies a growing need. He has an idea how to satisfy it. "I believe we need
market facilitators. We need someone to bring the buyers and sellers together. We need someone to tell us
what the customers' needs are and tell the potential customers what we can produce. Even the general
public needs to become more aware of how the wood we produce is being used," writes Alderliesten.
Having got our attention he pursues his point. He notes a traditional Japanese home contains more than 20
different metric sizes of dimension lumber. The Japanese also use BC wood to package car and machinery
parts. Asia has a market for softwood flooring. Germans love our edge grain Douglas fir window stock
and the Swedes use BC wood pellets to power and heat their cities. That's what we know. But it's the tip
of the proverbial iceberg theory. What about the people in Singapore, Spain or Bahrain? "What role does
wood play in their daily lives?" he asks pointedly. He believes market facilitators-the new
middlemen-would share information on emerging (current and future) market trends. Making sales teams
and the public aware of other countries' use of wood and some of the legal and cultural barriers that might
or do restrict entry to a market would be useful information. "Tell us what it takes to make connections in
Germany. Every country has its own unique set of conditions and preferences. By putting the spotlight on
those markets, our people get ideas on products to make, what will sell and what might sell ."
That's a good point. Information on what markets not to pursue can be as valuable as knowing which ones
a wood product manufacturer with a specific fibre source, processing equipment and people might
reasonably access. Understanding, appreciating and accommodating another country's "wood culture"
is an imperative, especially with increasingly important niche marketing strategies. Not everyone wants
generic McDonald's hamburgers. "Even with the Internet and the era of multiculturalism," writes
Alderliesten, "our kids are not learning enough about how other cultures live and work. You need to know
this to market products to them ." Alderliesten can't resist taking a deserved swipe at the learning
resources his college class has to use. Its forest products textbook was written in 1935. At least it's the
third edition, printed in 1981. "Are they saying the world hasn't changed?" he asks. Wouldn't it help if we
understood GATT, NAFTA, WTO and MAI and how forest certification and the soon-to-be-defunct
softwood lumber agreement affect how wood product manufacturers go about their business? Again,
Alderliesten raises a valid point, one that educational institutions should take to heart. Given that
Alderliesten's on to something with his market facilitator information sharing proposal, the questions
become more pragmatic. Where do these market facilitators come from and who will train them and pay
their salaries? Alderliesten is leery about handing the issue over to government: he knows more than just
how to compose a useful essay. That leaves the options of using an existing group/agency or establishing a
new one. The latter option is unappealing and would require a supportive bureaucracy. FRBC is too close
to government to be independent and frankly lacks credibility. The organization has proven most
adept at spending the forest industry's money, especially in sustaining itself, but overall has proven a
disappointment. More promising is the BC Council of Value Added Wood Processors, and the Council of
Forest Industries of BC and regional affiliates like the Northern Forest Products Association. These
organizations have marketing experts and an information disseminating network. However, they respond
to and are supported by their member companies. A key element in Alderliesten's suggestion is for a
market information system with broader access. Perhaps that's not an insurmountable problem and a
mechanism could be formulated to move toward Alderliesten's thesis. At the very least, the notion is
worthy of further discussion on a wider basis. Our ability to sell forest products is elemental to the
industry's development, job provision ability and our economic wellbeing.
|
|
This page and all contents
�1996-2007 Logging and Sawmilling
Journal (L&S J) and TimberWest Journal. This page
last modified on Tuesday, February 17, 2004 |