The crisis Hyundai Motor faces in autonomous driving is not, at its core, a technological one.
Nor is it a matter of insufficient capital or a shortage of talent.
The problem is simpler—and more troubling: decisive leadership is being smothered by institutional hesitation.
Hyundai’s real competitors today are no longer other carmakers. They are Tesla, Google’s Waymo and Apple—companies that do not merely manufacture vehicles but accumulate data, write software and continuously evolve.
They have redefined the automobile not as a machine, but as a moving platform. The moment a company misunderstands that shift, the contest is already over.
Masayoshi Son, the founder of SoftBank, once described the most dangerous posture in corporate management as “talking about ten years from now while refusing to move today.” Son always thought in 30-year horizons. And once he could see the future, he did not negotiate with organizational doubt or internal compromise. What mattered more than a perfect plan was recognizing the wave—and knowing that if you didn’t get on it immediately, it would pass you by.
Elon Musk’s approach is no different. Tesla’s autonomous driving system is still far from complete. Yet Musk never allowed imperfection to become an excuse for paralysis. He chose to deploy, to gather real-world data, to convert failure into learning—and, in doing so, to widen the gap with rivals. For him, perfection was not a prerequisite for departure; it was the product of accumulation.
Steve Jobs, too, was no apostle of consensus. Apple’s defining decisions were made amid fierce internal resistance. Committees did not provide direction, and collective agreement did not produce innovation. Jobs chose imposition over compromise, and that choice transformed Apple from a follower into a rule-maker.
These leaders shared one defining trait: they listened to advice, but they did not outsource decisions.
Inside Hyundai today, the dominant vocabulary is different: “risk management,” “brand protection,” “safety first.” None of these concepts are wrong. But in the current phase of the autonomous-driving race, they have become rationalizations for delay.
Autonomous driving is not a competition over polish or completeness. It is a race measured in data volume, real-world driving hours and who captures the platform first. Fall even a step behind, and the gap cannot be closed by engineering excellence alone.
Yet many senior executives at Hyundai continue to treat autonomous driving as a future research-and-development project. This is not prudence. It is closer to a quiet abdication of responsibility.
Korean corporate history offers a clear lesson. Samsung’s leap in smartphones did not begin with executive consensus, but with Lee Kun-hee’s uncompromising decision-making and relentless speed. LG Electronics’ failure, by contrast, began with the collective caution of “let’s wait and see.” Today, Hyundai resembles the latter more than the former.
What Chairman Chung Euisun needs now is not persuasion but proclamation; not coordination but decision; not consensus but accountable resolve.
The autonomous-driving organization must be structurally separated from the logic of existing business units. Partnerships with external technologies should be pursued without hesitation. Failure should be tolerated; delay should not. If “safety” is invoked, then speed must be demanded in equal measure.
Most of all, Chung must beware the comfort of agreeable advisers. Those most deeply embedded in organizational inertia are often the first to say, “This is for the chairman’s own good.” The decline of large corporations has often begun quietly, wrapped in precisely such assurances.
Tesla will not wait for Hyundai. Google does not calibrate its ambitions to Korean-style decision-making timelines. Apple has never shown respect for the logic of incumbent industries.
This is not a battle of technology. It is a contest of speed, resolve and the lonely burden of leadership. In the age of autonomous driving, the survivors will not be the best-prepared companies—but the ones that move first.
And the responsibility for making that move, here and now, rests squarely on Chairman Chung’s shoulders.
*The author is the President of Global Economic and Financial Research Institute (GEFRI)
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.