Koreans love to use acronyms. The proven expertise in acronyms can serve as a barometer for one’s intellect as is the case with Rep. Choung Byoung-gug of the Grand National Party.

During the Sept. 29 parliamentary inspection of the Korea Press Foundation (KPF), the lawmaker drew ridicule upon himself when he innocently questioned the definition of ‘NIE’ with the KPF chief who was giving a briefing on the organization’s mission.

NIE is the acronym for ‘newspaper in education,’ a lesser-known concept conceived decades ago by the U.S. newspaper industry to advance the writing and reading skills of school children. In addition, NIE is meant to tap into the youth consumer base and increase newspaper subscriptions. But the industry proposal somehow found its way into Korea in the mid-1990s and has become a worthy topic of the local newspaper industry. Who but some disillusioned Koreans would care about the jargon of its dubious purpose?

Many Koreans may look to the grandiose symbolism and pedantic impression naturally associated with acronyms. In addition, the Korean language itself allows for a greater room for making words shorter with key meaningful syllables. For instance, the abbreviated moniker, ‘hanjon’ is short for ‘hankuk jonryok kongsa’ or Korea Electric Power Corporation, and the National Agricultural Cooperatives Federation is called ‘nonghyop’ with ‘nong’ meaning ‘agricultural’ and ‘hyop’ implying ‘cooperatives.’

However, acronyms as brand identity can do more harm than good. Brand names should be memorable, and initials are arguably the most difficult form of brand name in which to create meaning and therefore they contribute little to the company’s image. Acronyms lack information, differentiation and personality.

Whereas the company itself may hope that its name exudes symbolism and sophistication, in reality, nothing can be inferred from a random grouping of the Roman letters, reducing the impression on the audience to a cryptic symbol just one notch above ‘‘wingding’’ fonts on the MS-Word program. Many acronyms are based on the first letters of the company’s full name. For example, SK stands for the company’s Korean name, ‘‘SunKyoung.’’ Despite this simple logic that most Koreans will probably understand, to a non-Korean, the name might as well be a hard nut to crack. Even more absurd is the growing practice of inventing acronyms based on perceived “cool” sound effects. The GS Group, Korea’s seventh largest conglomerate spun off from LG, has come up with the random selection of G and S, which stand for ‘good service,’ ‘ great success,’ ‘ great satisfaction’ or any possible combinations of positive words beginning with these letters. The trade name of the STX Group, which used to be Ssangyong Heavy Industries, was picked up from such generic words as ‘system,’ ‘technology’ and ‘excellence’ _ in a move to ‘‘generate grandiose sound combination effects.’’ Beware that it is not the KTX bullet train service.

Empirical evidence also points to the wisdom of using an actual name instead of an acronym. Experts and academics say that names are 60 percent more memorable than acronyms. According to a recent article in BusinessWeek magazine, 68 percent were able to remember names of companies that were not made up of acronyms, while only 49 percent could recall the name when it was an acronym.

Korea is not the only country guilty of this global branding fantasy. However, many acronyms came about after the original name had already been established and then later evolved into something more palatable. For example, IBM was at one time more popularly known as International Business Machines, until industry cohorts found the name to be a mouthful. The American Telephone and Telegraph is now simply AT&T, and so has been GM or GE.

Other cases reflect the company’s vision. The company formerly named Kentucky Fried Chicken changed its name to KFC (though whether to avoid negative connotations of the word ‘‘fried,’’ or regional associations with Kentucky, or to allow products other than chicken remains a subject of speculation); British Petroleum changed its name to BP to emphasize that it was no longer only an oil company (captured by the motto ‘‘Beyond Petroleum’’).

No matter what the logic behind the renaming, the crux of the argument is this; the use of acronyms should be decided by the marketplace or consumers, not by the company itself.

Given that, the Korean companies which chose to be referred to as meaningless jumbles of letters are disobeying global branding wisdom, ultimately undermining their potential in the global marketplace. The gravity of this problem can easily be discerned through comparison with that of Japan. The bilateral comparison will be the topic for next week. Acronym as Trademark

Another critical weakness of an acronym concerns its trademark issue. In principle, acronyms or the random selection of single letters cannot be owned by a single party for exclusive use because those are merely a simple way of identifying given objects. In other words, corporate names based on initials cannot be a subject of legal protection as trademarks unless widely accepted in society.

A number of recent trademark disputes support the risky nature of corporate acronyms. The W hotel chain tried to lay legal claim to the letter W in August, 2004, out of its displeasure with a couple of political souvenirs makers selling T-shirts and caps imprinted with the same letter to support President George W. Bush. The hotel company believed the merchandise mimicked its trade dress, thus eroding the unique brand identity developed in the W logo. However, the use of the letter W is in the public domain. At present, the letter W, pronounced ‘‘dubya’’ in southern accent, increasingly refers to President Bush, while the consumer electronics giant Westinghouse also employs a W logo. On the other hand, the hotel chain’s W is supposed to represent any arbitrary concepts like being warm, wonderful, witty, wired and welcome.

In 2001, the legitimate use of the term WWF was the focus of the court battle between the World Wildlife Fund and World Wrestling Federation. The match resulted in the muscles losing to the cuddly pandas, and the wrestlers became the WWE, the ‘E’ being “entertainment.”

By Choe yong-shik
Contributing Writer