The Ongoing Reshaping of North America’s Steel Industry — and the Emerging Leadership Contest Among Asian Mills

The North American steel industry is undergoing a profound transformation.

In late September, POSCO and Cleveland-Cliffs signed an MOU that signals far more than a simple business partnership. Beneath the surface lies a clear narrative: a new competitive dynamic between Japanese and Korean steelmakers on American soil.

Japan’s Nippon Steel has already completed its acquisition of U.S. Steel, securing a firm industrial and political foothold in the United States. At the same time, ArcelorMittal Calvert has finalized its equity restructuring and begun commissioning a new environmentally friendly Electric Arc Furnace (EAF), which will enter full commercial operation next year.

On the Korean side, Hyundai Steel is moving forward with its new EAF investment project in Louisiana, while POSCO is deepening its partnership with Cleveland-Cliffs to expand its footprint in the automotive steel segment. Taken together, these developments suggest that the North American market is evolving into a structure led by one dominant player (Japan) and two strong challengers (Korea’s POSCO and Hyundai Steel).

However, market leadership will not be determined by scale or capital alone. In the end, the decisive factors will be strategy, supply chain agility, and leadership quality—the ability to read market transitions and execute decisively.

---

Automotive Steel as the Strategic Core

Asian steelmakers share one strategic focus in North America: automotive-grade steel.
While construction and energy still represent large demand segments, the automotive industry offers a rare combination of high value, technological intensity, and alignment with sustainability goals. With the global shift toward electric vehicles (EVs), demand for advanced materials—such as electrical steel, ultra-high-strength steel (AHSS), and motor core materials—is surging. Both Japanese and Korean producers hold world-class expertise in these categories, and North America is becoming the stage on which their competitive capabilities are being tested.

---

Mexico’s Rise as a Strategic Hub

This realignment is not confined to the United States. Mexico is rapidly emerging as a new production and supply hub for the region. Ternium is preparing to launch its new EAF in 2026, along with a PLTCM that will soon begin full-scale production. With more than four million vehicles produced in 2024, Mexico now fulfills the USMCA’s regional value requirements and provides a stable base for local steel sourcing. ArcelorMittal, meanwhile, has expanded its Lázaro Cárdenas facility from slab production to hot-rolled coil (HRC), strengthening the Mexico–U.S. southern corridor as a vital supply chain axis.

---

Japan and Korea: Competition Through Cooperation

In many ways, the North American steel market now represents

“competition within cooperation — and coexistence within competition.”

Japan leverages its traditional strengths—technological sophistication and system integration—while Korea brings flexibility, faster decision-making, and a more agile supply chain model. Both nations are positioning themselves at the core of the EV supply chain,  supplying advanced electrical steels, corrosion-resistant sheets, and ultra-high-strength products that define the next era of automotive materials. This competition is no longer about simple market share—it’s a contest over who will lead the next generation of steel innovation.

---

Leadership in the New Era of Steel

And at the center of this transformation stand Japan and Korea. Beyond technology or capital, what will ultimately define success is leadership—the vision and decisiveness to navigate uncertainty and act with clarity. True leadership is not about reacting to change, but shaping it. In that sense, the evolving contest between Asian steelmakers in North America is more than a corporate rivalry—it’s a test of leadership itself.

Electric cars in the future would have the same cycle as current smartphones.

** No professional opinions or terms were used in this article. I wrote down my current personal thoughts on the market that I'm personally interested in. 

Recently, electric vehicles are solidifying their trend as environmental vehicles to replace the current internal combustion locomotives. Hydrogen cars are considered as alternatives, and many studies are continuing, but for the convenience of the article, I would like to describe the trend of future cars based on electric cars. It is not at a deep professional level, but just trying to express shallow ideas in terms of suppliers that supply materials to automakers.

I have been working in the steel industry for such a long time that supplies materials to automotive companies and auto parts companies. As a result, I become interested in cars, and when data or articles on trends and technologies about electric vehicles come out, I read them and see them from a marketing perspective that I have learned.

Looking at the trend closely, I think that interest in batteries is almost at the level of runaway rather than changes in the supply pattern of steel materials in cars or stories about vehicle design. In the automobile market, which has endured for a long time with fossil fuels, the change to fuel now is not just fuel change, but results in almost everything being turned upside down. 

Electric cars are not just fuel changes, but they are bringing about breakthroughs in advanced IT technology with semiconductors, lightening batteries, battery life, battery raw materials, and autonomous driving.

So, if you buy a car - of course there are people who change cars every year or in a very short period of time. - , it is expected to have the same cycle as a smartphone, not an item that is continuously used for a certain period of time. It may or may not be in the near future, but if you look at China's electric vehicle policy drive, which can be strongly pursued once the policy is established, and if you look at the sanctions of each carbon-related country unless there's another alternative, you don't think it's that far away, 

In future automobiles (electric vehicles), IT-related fields will be led by existing companies such as Samsung Electronics, Apple, and Google etc., and steel will not deviate much from existing suppliers, so it will be a battery war in the end.

A battery is divided into a cathode material and an anode material. In this sense, are there enough reserves for the raw materials of the cathode material to last for decades or hundreds of years? Or wouldn't it be possible to develop and replace the raw materials that are currently in the battery? 

Competition will be fierce. As expected, the battery war is intensifying around large companies that have the ability to mobilize funds, and competition to secure raw materials is also fierce. You don't know who will win. However, it seems to be moving on to such a competition that once it explodes, it will be a big hit.

In the end, in order to win or survive the battery competition, rapid deployment of the Supply Chain must be premised. It is understood that activities such as securing lithium mines and researching sodium continue. Since companies around the world have been interested in lithium mining for a long time, the supply lineup may already be solidified to some extent. Some raw materials are about 70% owned by China. In that sense, this raw material market also seems to have some vested interests in some companies. 

What's clear is that this period of upheaval can eventually be an opportunity from heaven for some people and companies if it's a change that reverses almost everything, such as securing battery materials and excellent IT technology. In the meantime, there seems to be a war of securing new raw materials again. Whether the war is a battery war or an IT war, the winner and the loser will be divided after some time, but now they seem to be just fiercely preparing for the war.

In Mexico alone, factories that make battery-related materials are being built here and there, and there are requests to secure steel materials that go into batteries here and there. The market is clearly visible. However, if you wonder how to enter this market and even if you enter it fortunately, you would doubt you can survive and continue to develop it. It could be a market you may hesitate to be in. 

It feels like many companies survived and were eliminated in the early days of smartphones. The smartphone companies that come to my mind now are S** and A** company. Yes, there have been several companies in other countries. But I can only think of two companies now.

In existing internal combustion engines, whether the design is good or bad, whether you like the color or not, liquid fuel is used normally, so there was no need to hesitate about fuel. But it will be different in the future. Indeed, we have more options than we do now. A lot of options, a lot to think about. We could buy a car right away, but after a while, it would be heartbreaking if a car with a better function and a lighter, longer-life battery came out at the same price. 

From a company's perspective, it has struggled to establish a supply line, but if other technologies are developed and the supply from those developed technologies is transferred to other companies, it will inevitably suffer a huge loss. From now on, it is not a matter of entering the industry first and later. It is a matter of how interested you are in analyzing the market, establishing strategies, and implementing them.

Please increase the inventory level by 0.2 days.

I have worked for a steel company for a long time, and I'm still in the steel industry. Strictly speaking, I am a steel salesman.

In 2013, I was working as president (General Director) of a small branch company in Mexico. One of the clientes was a large company, and we were located within the client's supply chain complex. The company's factory started operating almost the same period as ours. 

 

We established a company, built a factory, and started the supply to the customers. At that time, we maintained a surplus in operating profit and net profit even though it was a short period after the completion of the construction. 

 

As mentioned before in another article, I have been holding a full-day performance review meeting every morning since I was appointed to Mexico in 2008, and I have not left it out when I work as a corporate director. 

 

We discussed every morning about the figures on supply quantity, price, quality issues, inventory level, etc.. I wanted to predict daily profits through the meeting. 

 

One day, after I finished the meeting, I went back to my seat, and I was looking at the figures for the earnings forecast for the month. Then one of the sales managers knocked on my office. Upon entering, the manager informed me that the customer was reducing its own inventory days. As part of the Just In Time policies, it meant that it would reduce its own inventory days and at the same time reduce inventory costs. 

 

I think all decisions start with the analysis of the data. We immediately launched an analysis of how that would affect our sales and profits. In our company, which was in the early days of corporate operation, the reduction in the number of inventory days of the customer predicted a two-month deficit. Our analysis said that after two months, the current inventory would be exhausted and routine supply would be possible. Then we were able to turn into a surplus again. 

 

If that was the case, we believed that our surplus would be maintained if we could have the two-month grace period or if the customer company could expand the number of inventory days by 0.2 days as our analysis suggests. 

 

We started requesting those two suggestions to the manager of the client who was in charge of the inventory management.

 

At that time, I knew almost everyone from the person in charge of production, quality, purchasing, and logistics of the customer's factory to the directors. I attended all meetings of the client company during the initial setting process. 

 

And when I had heard that the customer would organize TFT to improve the operational productivity, I asked the customer if I could join the TFT team. These activities resulted in accumulating the trust of both sides.

 

So the customer said they would review our request, and we were waiting for the result of the review. While waiting, I visited the customer's warehouse and reviewed the number of work trucks considering our storage capabilities. I also reviewed all matters according to the reduction in the number of inventory days of the customer.

 

Finally our suggestions were accepted that the customer would expand 0.2 days of inventory level for two month. 

 

As a result, we were able to maintain the surplus, and the customer sent us a feedback saying that they were satisfied with our response and services. I look for favorable feedback from these clients in trust. Trust between the two companies can lead to a lot of cost savings and promote communication channels. 

 

From the beginning of the customer’s factory operation, we tried to find and do almost everything that could help improve the quality and productivity of our customers, so there was even a case where the maintenance department of the customer visited our factory to take measures in case of facility problems at our factory. This case cannot be made without mutual trust. 

 

After making profits with just one supplying act, it is not desirable to withdraw immediately when the customer is in trouble. 

 

The recognition that the development of customers is also our development is the first step in building trust.

Listening is a virtue that makes a leader stronger and stronger.

I have lived and worked in Mexico for 11 years. My company in Korea dispatched me to Mexico.

I have worked in the head office in South Korea for such a long time. Then I was dispatched. I started as a sales director of the branch company, the coil service center in Mexico. After 5 years in that company I had to move to another coil service center as a president following the order of head office. I had to start the company from the beginning.  I have established, constructed, managed, and operated the coil service centers which were designed as the outpost for supplying steels to the customers in Mexico. After years, the head office ordered me to move to a steel production company as CMO. So the total duration of my working in Mexico was for 11 years.

After 11 years in Mexico, I went back to Korea. And then I am back to Mexico again. I am staying in Mexico now. It would be quite rare for Koreans to have this long stay and work experience in the Mexican steel market.

The reason why I describe my career is that I want to talk about ‘Listening’.

One day, a team leader from the headquarters came on a business trip to Mexico. As far as I remembered, he had traveled to Mexico about two or three times. We prepared several customer interviews according to his business trip schedule, and the schedule went smoothly. 

Since then, the business trip schedule has almost ended, and he had consultations and interviews with us, who are working as sales directors there. In conclusion, we only listened to the team leader's extensive knowledge without saying a few words for 2 hours. 

The team leader seemed to know everything about the Mexican steel market more than me, who had worked in Mexico for more than 10 years. With only two or three visits, the team leader was excellent enough to be a Mexican market expert. 

In that way, he returned to the headquarters with only his thoughts lined up. Did the team leader achieve his business trip goals and contribute enough to the development of the company? I doubt it. Above all, the team leader wouldn't listen. Even if he knew a lot – I hope he actually knew a lot for the development of the organization. –, the team leader should have listened. 

He should have listened to the local voices, added his knowledge and thoughts, made a business trip report that would contribute to the development of the organization, reported it, and made his superiors' judgment right. 

That was the team leader's business trip. But he didn't listen. Our directors who attended the meeting together were also people who had met and listened to customers in Mexico for at least three years and solved the situation. We were silent on the team leader from headquarters, who refused to listen to our thoughts and opinions. Now that I think about it, we shouldn't have been silent, but we didn't want to talk to him who didn't want to listen. There are quite a few such cases. Too many examples of this can be found within the organization. There are quite a number of errors in listening within the organization. 

We are human beings. It would be natural even if the colleague sitting next to me is an expert in the related field, we often don't want to admit the person who eats together and goes to the bathroom together as an expert. Therefore, we pay a considerable amount of money for listening, even though our capabilities and qualities are no different from those of famous consultants. Leaders should listen to such opinions. The view we know cannot be the same as the view of others.

That's what I think. The role of leaders in achieving organizational goals is really important. Depending on the environment or market situation the organization faces, the virtues that leaders must have may vary. However, we should think about an excellent leader. For leaders, listening is a highly excellent fighting skill. Even in negotiations with rivals, listening increases the chances of winning the negotiations. 

That doesn't mean you should keep your mouth shut. But basically, you have to listen to it a lot. At least you shouldn't make the mistake of talking on a business trip to listen. 

There is too much uncertainty in people's lives. In fact, even in such a leader that has no qualifications as a leader, there exist phenomena that can only be seen as luck due to changes in market conditions and environments. A good man must be blessed, and a good leader must surely be rewarded for his role, but there are many cases that are not the case.

Listening does not show weakness. Listening is a virtue that makes a leader stronger and stronger.

Leadership

Do you aware that the world we live in has been the most peaceful era in the late 20th and 21st centuries? Now we are in COVID-19 situation. But I'm going to talk about here is a war. It is not a war in a comprehensive sense, but a war that literally uses lethal weapons such as knives, guns etc. to kill people and occupy the region.

In human history, the war has never been really stopped in so many years. When I was in elementary, middle, and high school, most of the great Korean men were Generals in the war. The great people of Korea I remember were Admiral Yi Sun-shin, General Kang Gam-chan, General Eulji Mundeok, General Gyebaek, General Kim Yu-shin, General Kwon Yul and so on.

In the war, the leaders are sharply divided. We assume that the winner of a war has excellent leadership, and the loser of a war is the absence of leadership. Those who won the Korean War are always referred to by his subordinates as men who have good leadership. 

Now we are not in the war. As a result, leadership seems to have become more diverse and complex. In consideration, as society itself becomes more diverse, the role and capabilities of leaders will also have to pursue diversity.

First of all, I think 'leadership' in a company is 'a leader who values concrete implementation.' Just say 'follow me' has passed. Even if they do so, few members blindly follow them. The world has changed now.

In an excellent leadership, communication is the basis. Even though the current means of communication are so developed, the efficient communication is so difficult. Communication does not come from emphasis or direction.

Communication comes from the leader's studying and practicing communication. I don't understand if the leader does not read a book about communication and the generation of the members in the department.

Leaders should be interested in their own health and take care of it steadily. Decisions from unhealthy bodies are often misjudgment. If you are a worker in a company, your company supports medical checkups once a year, so you must get a checkup and pay attention to the figures. Efforts should be made to maintain a pleasant physical condition for the sake of the company and for the members.

Leaders should be clearly aware of the objectives of the company. What is the goal of the department? If it is expressed numerically, it should be memorized. For the sales department, the sales volume would be targeted. We cannot be a good leader without recognizing this. A leader exists to achieve a company's management goals. Communication with members is important to achieve management goals. 

I believe that leadership in the enterprise can be defined by each position. Because each company's goals are set, there is no reason not to define the leadership appropriate for each department. It is difficult, but it can be done. If it is made once, it could provide clearer criteria for educating leaders, and making members become leaders. The larger the organization, the more difficult it seems to be, but it is possible and certainly effective.

I want to see such a great leader who shows outstanding leadership through small actions.

Talking about leadership, I think the core of corporate management is attention, analysis, and execution. The company should select, train and reward 'leaders' who deserve them. If you have a dream to become a leader, you should study. Can a leader who does not study be a leader?

* One question: If AI (Artificial Intelligence) holds the position of all leaders in a company, what will happen to the company? Could AI be an 'excellent leader'?

The basis of innovation is concrete implementation.

Innovation and constant improvement are necessary for companies to achieve sustained growth and development. With each member of a company's own ideas and desperation for innovation, it is necessary to create a culture in which the members make a list suitable for their departments or positions and implement them one by one.

Usually, in an organization, innovation is thought to be done only by the department or the leader of the organization who is in charge of. Like that, innovation could be thought of as something grand and big. I approached innovation in a different direction. What is innovation? Is it just innovation to flip over all the past forms of work that have been so familiar so far? I don't think so.

 If the existing types of work had been wrong, our company would not have survived until now. I'm going to describe here the very small actions that I've been working on our tasks.

After serving as the president of a steel processing company in Mexico, I was transferred as CMO of a steel production company. As soon as I took the post, I did my own analysis of the existing sales performance. From the annual sales target, monthly sales target and performance were analyzed, and influencing factors like the number of production, inventory, etc. to sales was analyzed.

Afterwards, we divided customers by industry and looked at the numbers for the sales targets and performance of the classified customers. Daily analysis also confirmed which day of the week sales were the highest point of the week. I analyzed sales and operating profit by linking them, and listed sales goals and performance of each team.

Based on these analysis results, I made a list that I can expand the sales of company and link them to operating profits. I always value concrete implementation. While setting and proceeding with annual goals, I focus on what I have to do, what the team leaders have to do, and what the team members have to do to achieve the goals. Accordingly, I made a list of things to innovate in our marketing department. The list I made was reduced and shortened to about 100 pieces, and I numbered it on the whiteboard in front of my desk.

The innovation of our company, especially the marketing division, was aimed at achieving fixed sales goals and realizing profits, maintaining and developing close relationships with customers, and contributing to the company's sustainable growth by exploring new markets.

In the course of this series of activities, I have some emphasis on the members. For example, in parallel with activities aimed at achieving sales goals, I emphasized mail-backing to employees. For our company to continue to grow and develop, customer value should be at the top of any company's list. For us, customers should be in a partnership position where they must continue to grow and develop together. Every day I thought of practical activities that could help customers. One of them was a quick e-mail reply. In addition, this was a small practice of innovation activities.

I suggested to our members that we should not let our customers be curious. I told my members to let them know if the product they ordered was completed, to let them know what time the truck will arrive at the client company's factory if it is in transit, to let them know if there is an unexpected situation, and to let them know what we will do to solve it. It would be the best if we let them know in advance, but sometimes customers ask first. In this case, we should reply as soon as we received the email.

I emphasized on replying immediately when the client company sent us an email. It actually seems easy. However, it may not be easy for working-level officials. Countless emails come in a day, and it's not easy to respond to them one by one. Nevertheless, I emphasized that my members had to respond quickly to the client's. "Let's start improving our customer service from here."This is one of the examples we have undertaken in our innovation activities. I'm still convinced that in order for innovation to be succeeded, all members of the company must know what to do right now and practice every day, even small things.

The evaluation of members should be based on performance.

I think the evaluation of members should be based on performance. Most companies could say that the evaluation is based on performance. But is that true? Sometimes in-house politics can be involved, personal relationships can be a factor of consideration, and the boss can be generous in the assessment of her/his long-time co-worker. I think that no matter what anyone says, evaluations in companies should be based on performance. The process is also important. Yes, it's important. But even if the process is so important, the assessment should be based on performance.

The evaluation based on the result is important even for someone who fits well with the boss, or someone who is good at so-called flattery. If there is no problem with ethics and attitude, it should be evaluated based on performance. Performance evaluation is the fairest in the evaluation of the company. It cannot be a fair evaluation without being based on a numerical performance assessment.

When I was working as the president of a subsidiary company in Mexico, our company had to carry out an important project. I selected the staff in charge, and delegated her full authority and responsibility for the progress of the project. Of course the final responsibility was on me. Later she often reported to me about the progress of the project. After a certain period of time, the project began to be delayed. I had her come to my office to check the progress of the project. At that time, she confessed many reasons for the delay, including the lack of cooperation from other departments, the lack of support from the system, and the lack of interest from the members. 

I explained why I chose her as the person in charge. As I was working on the project, I thought that the members would not be interested unless it was their job, and I also knew that departmental cooperation would not work out well. I told her about it. I explained that I had entrusted the work to her in the belief that she could bring such situations into harmony for getting it done well. In addition, I stressed that that project was one of the most important project in our company that year.  And I guaranteed to evaluate only with the performance. As expected, the project was successfully completed, and I fully reflected the results of the project in her evaluation and compensation. If the project had been delayed or expected to fail regardless of the circumstances, I would have replaced the person in charge without any hesitation.

One day our factory manager came into my office. He had to quit the company because he had to move to another state for personal reasons. I was at a loss. It was a very difficult time for our company. We just finished the construction and it was time for full-scale sales. Even so, due to personal reasons, I could not seize the factory manager who had to quit the company. I had to ask HR department manager to hire someone with experience. 

After that, I hold a meeting with the coordinators in the factory. After they came into the conference room, I asked to discuss the matters after the factory manager left the company. I talked them that the sales manager would temporarily manage the factory until a new factory manager was hired. That meant they had to report business issues to the sales manager.

After the factory manager left the company, the coordinators came to see me. They came to me to suggest things. They asked me to trust them and not to hire factory manager for the time being. They asked me to trust them and watch them. They said if the results were bad afterwards, they would take responsibilities. Of course, the only way they could take responsibilities for the production or quality control failures would be to resign. Surely I didn't want that to be happened. I knew how our factory's coordinators had been working from the beginning to the present, so I decided to trust them. 

And if the performance is maintained or improved after a certain period of time, I decided to promote one of the coordinators to the factory manager. Since then, the work of each department of the factory had been reported directly to me, and I had also served as the factory manager. Six months later, significant performance was shown in various indicators (production quantity, yield rate, quality defect rate etc.) managed by the factory. I promoted one of the coordinator to the factory manager. What if they didn't show any results? I would not hesitate.

Our company made an evaluation every day. The evaluation was made every day at the daily meetings I mentioned before. I didn't hesitate if I thought it would not be achieved. We found the way to achieve, then we achieved.