Recently, more and more Taiwanese companies are considering entering the U.S. market with world-class technology and capital. They generally believe that the essence of competition remains efficiency, cost, and execution. However, in a different linguistic system and trust structure, the market will not automatically recognize your value. When you cannot be searched, seen, or clearly defined, no matter how strong your company is, you will not enter the decision-makers’ field of vision.
In this exclusive interview with《The Icons》, Steve Hsu, Director of the Arizona-Taiwan Trade and Investment Office and a driving force behind the Arizona Research Institutes, deconstructs the most fundamental misalignment for Taiwanese companies going global and explains why “visibility” has shifted from an option to a basic prerequisite for market entry.
Visibility Resets to Zero: Factories Move Overseas, Trust Doesn’t
The success of Taiwanese companies in their local market has long been built on an extremely solid yet often overlooked foundation. It is not just about technological advantages or production capacity, but an entire trust structure accumulated over time. From years of steady media coverage and public records in capital markets, to credit histories with banking systems and tacit understandings and evaluations along industry supply chains, even including the leader’s personal social connections and public participation, these elements weave together into a moat with extremely high barriers. Within Taiwan, companies hardly need to prove who they are anymore.
“Most business owners think they got where they are by their own strength, but in fact, they have long been operating inside a trust bubble,” Hsu points out. This illusion comes from being in a market environment where cognitive construction is already complete. When everyone knows you, understands you, and even presumes you are trustworthy, companies naturally come to believe that branding and narrative don’t matter. Yet these “things that need no further explanation” are essentially the hidden assets accumulated over decades.
The problem is that these assets cannot be taken across borders. When a company enters the U.S. market, the original trust system does not automatically extend; almost all past accumulation becomes invalid at the same time. Lacking searchable and understandable content in the English language, having no place in mainstream industry narratives, and never appearing in decision-makers’ information sources, this state is not just “less known,” but a structural non-existence.
“You don’t become weaker; you go straight back to zero,” Hsu says bluntly. “In another market, if no one can clearly say who you are, it’s as if you never existed.”
Speak Local or Lose Talent: The High Cost of a Silent Brand
When a company is “invisible” in a new market, the first thing to suffer is often not revenue, but talent. This is especially evident in the U.S. market because high-end talent makes decisions based heavily on information transparency and self-judgment. Before formally contacting a company, they will first search and build an initial perception through media content, and this process often determines whether they will engage further.
“In the U.S., talent will always search for you before submitting a resume. If they can’t find you, they won’t apply,” Hsu observes directly. When search results come up blank, the company might as well not exist in the talent market. And when search results are scattered and unstructured, the market will quickly define you with the simplest, often most negative, labels. In such a situation, the company not only loses the chance to explain itself but also loses the gateway to attracting the right talent.
A deeper impact is the loss of narrative power. When a company cannot control how the outside world understands it, the market’s valuation of its value is formed passively, and that passivity ultimately shows up in business terms, from talent choices and customer trust to partnership conditions and price negotiations.
“When you have no narrative power, you have no pricing power,” he highlights the core of this relationship. “The market will only evaluate you by the lowest standard it can understand, not by your true value.”
Misaligned Voices: The Strategic Failure of Mismatched Messaging
When companies begin to realize their invisibility in international markets, the most intuitive reaction is usually to increase exposure. But without redesigning the message structure, such efforts often only amplify confusion without truly changing market perception. The key issue is not saying too little, but that from the very beginning, the communication has not been targeted to different audiences.
“It’s not about talking more, but about talking to the right people,” Hsu emphasizes. Cross-border markets are never a single audience, but a set of stakeholders whose logics are completely different from one another. Federal government, state government, corporate client decision-makers, technical teams, and potential employees, each group cares about different things and uses different criteria. If a company tries to persuade everyone with the same language, the result is often that no one is truly convinced.
Under such a structure, messages must be re-layered. For the market, you need to show macro vision and industry positioning. For the government, you convey cooperative intent and policy alignment. For local communities, you explain the specific value you bring. For high-level client decision-makers, you deliver insights and strategic understanding. For talent, you paint a vision and opportunity. For technical teams, you return to the most direct professional competence and standards.
“Each type of person judges you by a different logic,” he says. “If you speak to everyone the same way, you might as well not speak at all.” This is also why simply translating existing content into English does not constitute true internationalization. Language conversion is not the same as building recognition.
Media Matrix: Visibility is a Frequency, Not a Moment
Once the message structure is rebuilt, the next key is how to get those messages effectively received. On this point, a single medium or one-off exposure has very limited effect, because trust is never born from a single contact, but from repeated, cross-scenario accumulation.
“Trust in the U.S. market doesn’t come from one article; it comes from repeated appearances,” Hsu points out. What companies need is not just an English website or sporadic media coverage, but a media matrix that can operate continuously. This matrix must cover both local and international media, corporate owned media, and social platforms, consistently releasing layered messages at different times.
In such a system, media is no longer just an exposure tool but a node for building trust. When the same narrative is seen on different platforms, when different roles receive consistent signals in different contexts, the market begins to form a stable perception.
“You want different people, in different places, to see the same you,” he says. “This is not aimless publicity; it’s strategic encirclement.”
Beyond Convincing: Trust as a Long-term Verification
Even with message layering and a media matrix, trust will not emerge immediately. The reason is that in today’s information environment, any company can manufacture buzz quickly, but the market is equally capable of rapid discernment. A single point-in-time exposure rarely translates into long-term trust, and may even raise suspicion because it feels abrupt.
“Trust is built over time,” Hsu says. This is not just a matter of pacing, but of structure. When a company appears consistently across different media at different times, when its narrative is repeatedly validated and gradually expanded, the market begins to integrate these signals into a credible image.
In this process, third-party media play a particularly critical role. Because what is truly persuasive is not a company’s self-description, but the consistent and stable observation and presentation of it by the outside world.
“It’s not about who you say you are, but who the market, after some time, starts to believe you are,” he notes. Most Taiwanese companies, he points out, are not lacking stories or value, they are lacking a consciously designed and continuously advanced narrative trajectory:
“The problem has never been having no value, but not being seen.”
Beyond Relocation: Why Visibility is the True Measure of Globalization
When the discussion returns to the corporate decision-making level, the conclusion becomes exceptionally clear. Physical infrastructure can be built quickly with capital, but trust and influence cannot be replicated the same way. They require structural design, long-term commitment, and a deep understanding of how market perception works.
“This is not PR, nor marketing,” Hsu says, his tone restrained but more precise. “This is part of corporate strategy.” And precisely because of that, visibility is no longer an optional add-on, but a basic condition for entering international markets. Not being seen means not being understood; not being understood means not being chosen.
“What you need is not someone to help you issue a press release,” he concludes. “It’s a strategic partner who can help you build international narrative power.”
Recommend for you:
