A register of international trade experts sounds, at first hearing, like an obvious public service. A British firm facing its first overseas order ought surely to be able to find somebody qualified to help. Yet the phrase conceals a difficulty that has repeatedly defeated well-meaning export support schemes: international trade is not one profession. It is a chain of separate disciplines, and a weak link in any one of them can turn a promising sale into an expensive failure.
This was one of the central flaws in the Government’s Export Adviser Scheme. It treated experience in exporting as though it were a general competence that could be listed, matched and supplied. Some advisers were undoubtedly capable people. The problem was structural. A person who had sold industrial equipment successfully might know little about marine insurance; a banker who understood letters of credit might have no useful knowledge of selecting distributors; a lawyer might be excellent on contracts but unable to judge whether a consignment had been packed suitably for a tropical port.
The exporter did not need an impressive title. He needed the right judgement at the right moment.
Why a register of international trade experts is misleading
The word “expert” is particularly troublesome. It gives the impression that someone has mastered an entire field. In practice, genuine expertise is usually narrow, earned over many years and tied to particular types of goods, markets and transactions.
An experienced freight forwarder may spot immediately that a proposed route is unreliable, that a shipment needs different packaging, or that a document will not satisfy a customs authority. That does not make him the right person to advise on pricing in the Gulf, appointing an agent in South-East Asia, or negotiating payment terms with a state purchaser. He may have sensible views on those matters, but that is not the same as professional competence.
The same applies to country knowledge. A consultant may have long experience in France and be of little assistance in Nigeria. Another may understand the habits of a particular engineering sector in India, but not the distribution arrangements required for consumer goods in Japan. National markets are not interchangeable, and neither are industries. The notion that one register can certify broad international expertise therefore risks giving inexperienced exporters more confidence than they deserve.
There is also a commercial issue. Many of the most useful people are employed by firms, trade bodies, banks, insurers, carriers or specialist advisers. Their knowledge comes from current work and accumulated relationships, not from a place on an official list. A register may attract those willing to be listed, but it cannot reliably capture the best available judgement for every problem.
The export transaction is a sequence, not a single task
The sale is often regarded as the difficult part. It is certainly important, but obtaining an order is only the beginning. From that point onwards the exporter must decide whether the buyer is creditworthy, what terms are acceptable, how the goods should be described and packed, which documents are required, who carries the risk at each stage, how insurance is arranged, and how payment will be secured.
Each decision affects the next. An unsuitable term in a quotation can undermine a contract. A careless packing specification can damage goods before they reach the vessel. An error in documentation can delay payment even when the buyer is honest and willing. In earlier decades, before electronic records and instant communication, these matters were often more laborious. They have not disappeared merely because documents can now be transmitted electronically. Digital systems can process an instruction quickly; they cannot correct poor commercial judgement.
This is why the best export assistance has traditionally involved asking precise questions. What is being sold? To whom? In which country? On what payment terms? Is this a repeat order or a first transaction? Does the supplier have the capacity to perform? Is the product regulated? The answers determine the expertise required.
A broad adviser may help a company understand the range of issues. That has value, particularly for a business taking its first steps abroad. But the adviser should then know when to stop and bring in a specialist. A scheme that promises one person who can solve everything encourages exactly the opposite behaviour.
What the failed adviser model got wrong
Government programmes naturally favour orderly systems. A database, a standardised accreditation process and a visible network of advisers are easy to explain to ministers and easy to measure. Numbers can be reported: advisers appointed, firms contacted, seminars held, enquiries answered. None of these measures proves that exports were profitable, payments were received or a durable market was established.
The real work is slower and less tidy. It rests on credibility with businesses, knowledge of particular sectors and the willingness to say that a proposed venture is unsound. An adviser under pressure to demonstrate activity may be tempted to encourage a company towards a market when the sensible advice is to wait, improve the product, strengthen cash flow or find a domestic partner with relevant experience.
There is a further problem with general accreditation. It can reward those who are good at presenting expertise rather than those who have repeatedly dealt with the consequences of a late ship, a disputed document, a failed agent or an unpaid overseas debt. Trade knowledge is not acquired in a classroom alone. Courses are useful, and professional standards have their place, but experience becomes valuable when it has been tested against real contracts and real losses.
Over nearly six decades of involvement with industry, overseas markets and trade promotion, I have seen how often small practical details decide the outcome. The most effective people did not pretend to know everything. They recognised the limits of their own knowledge and could put a client in touch with someone who knew the next part of the job.
A better way to connect exporters with help
The useful alternative is not to abandon public support or professional directories. It is to describe them honestly. A register should be a means of finding specialist assistance, not a badge suggesting universal competence.
Its entries ought to make clear the adviser’s field: market research, export marketing, agency agreements, credit control, documentary credits, customs procedure, packing, transport, insurance, legal matters or a defined industrial sector. They should also state the countries or regions in which the person has worked, and whether that experience is current. A record of practical work matters more than vague claims of international exposure.
The first contact point, whether a trade association, chamber, government office or experienced independent adviser, should act as a diagnostician. Its task is not to dispense a standard answer. It is to identify the immediate risk and direct the firm to an appropriate person. For a small manufacturer, this may mean speaking first to a bank about payment security, then to a forwarder about shipment, and only afterwards to a market specialist about appointing an agent. The order depends on the circumstances.
Exporters also need to accept that specialist advice costs money. That can be frustrating when a company is testing a new market, but false economy is common in trade. A modest fee for sound guidance on a contract or payment method can prevent a loss far larger than the cost of advice. Equally, not every problem requires a consultant. Firms that export regularly should develop internal competence in routine documentation, logistics and customer management, while keeping trusted specialists available for exceptional matters.
The sensible question is not, “Where can I find an international trade expert?” It is, “Which part of this transaction do I not understand well enough to carry the risk myself?” Asked early enough, that question leads to better advice, fewer grand promises and a much stronger foundation for trade that lasts.