Large institutions have pushed to have them serve as role models for many developing countries, especially the Tiger Cub Economies of Southeast Asia.

[5] Some analysts argued that industrial policy and state intervention had a much greater influence than the World Bank report suggested.

A World Bank report suggests two development policies among others as sources for the Asian miracle: factor accumulation and macroeconomic management.

Meanwhile, Taiwan and South Korea began to industrialize in the mid-1960s with heavy government involvement including initiatives and policies.

[12] The four countries were inspired by Japan's evident success, and they collectively pursued the same goal by investing in the same categories: infrastructure and education.

They also benefited from foreign trade advantages that set them apart from other countries, most significantly economic support from the United States; part of this is manifested in the proliferation of American electronic products in common households of the Four Tigers.

Each of the Four Asian Tiger states managed, to various degrees of success, three variables in: budget deficits, external debt and exchange rates.

[13] Dani Rodrik, economist at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University, has in a number of studies argued that state intervention was important in the East Asian growth miracle.

[14][6] He has argued "it is impossible to understand the East Asian growth miracle without appreciating the important role that government policy played in stimulating private investment".

South Korea was hit the hardest as its foreign debt burdens swelled resulting in its currency falling between 35 and 50%.

The Four Asian Tigers recovered from the 1997 crisis faster than other countries due to various economic advantages including their high savings rate (except South Korea) and their openness to trade.

[13] A 2011 article published in Applied Economics Letters by financial economist Mete Feridun of University of Greenwich Business School and his international colleagues investigates the causal relationship between financial development and economic growth for Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, China, India and Singapore for the period between 1979 and 2009, using Johansen cointegration tests and vector error correction models.

The four governments focused on investing heavily in their infrastructure as well as education to benefit their country through skilled workers and higher level jobs such as engineers and doctors.

For example, all four countries have become global education centers with Singapore, Taiwan, South Korea and Hong Kong high school students scoring well on math and science exams such as the PISA exam[citation needed] and with Taiwanese students winning several medals in International Olympiads.

The culture of Confucianism is said to have been compatible with industrialization because it valued stability, hard work, discipline, and loyalty and respect towards authority figures.

Prime Minister of Singapore Lee Kuan Yew advocated Asian values as an alternative to the influence of Western culture in Asia.

[18] In 1996, the economist Joseph Stiglitz pointed out that, ironically, "not that long ago, the Confucian heritage, with its emphasis on traditional values, was cited as an explanation for why these countries had not grown.