If this is not a simple manifesto for a worthwhile productivity campaign that will engage Singaporeans, I don't know what will.
The concept of "total cost to society" in measuring productivity is important.
Singapore is such a small country. With a fully IT capable civil service, I find it hard to imagine that any ruling party is unable to plan ahead for; - the number of immigrants coming in - quantity of housing required - hospital beds required - number of ageing Singaporeans - number of hospices required to cater for ageing population (Straits Times, 10 March 2010, page B1)
" He who looks up into the sky to envision grand plans will eventually stumble across the tree root of reality."
Everytime i see another headline describing Singapore's latest hub initiative, I throw away the newspaper.
These hubbing initiatives do not help me with resources to look after my ageing parents.
Of course Ms Chua Mui Hoong (Straits Times 10 March 2010, page B9) will take the government's stand that " ... the love of the family members cannot be delegated away."
I'm not going to debate the logical errors in Ms Chua's arguement. All I'm going to say is that "Understanding the needs of your citizens cannot be delegated and outsourced to CONsultants and other productivity experts."
A good body of government, no matter how motivated it is, even if efficient and effective, it is not enough to push us up the productivity ladder.
Well-known management guru, and Harvard professor, Michael Porter said here In S'pore a few years back when he was invited to speak here by the EDB...notwithstanding even a first class infrastructure.
I agree with Mr Tan that too much rules in Singaore may actually affect our "productivity" adversely...coupled with a "climate of fear" to voice out against obsolete rules and self imposed "fear to change" .
There is also a conflict of interest situation; pushing away responsibility for "productivity", say to private business entities and also down the "value chain".
I am strongly against a "leviathan" state which makes life difficult (poor quality of life as explained by Mr Tan), with an "inorganic" business environment which also leads to loss in productivity in our economy...and "WASTE" all round.
Even if the Govt. is prepared to "incentivise" firms, I believe there is still "WASTE" and poorer "quality of life".
Hence, obsolete rules and regulations must also be repealed and inefficient processes re-engineered to avoid WASTE and poor alignment of strategy.
I think a motivated "civil society with a loud voice" will help to boost productivity by getting rid of bad rules and regulations and to improve the culture for "CHANGE" to push innovative efforts.
I call it a "de-leviathan" state. Read about the meaning for "leviathan" in the introductory chapters of my blog (Dec 2009) :-
Go right down to education and start modeling our ITE after the European systems. There should be an emphasis on learning real skills that complement white-collar skills.
For example, process operator training for those in chemical/oil and gas industries. Even apprenticeships and traineeships for aerospace etc which may take years admittedly, but should pay off in the long run.
I strongly agree with Mr Tan's views, especially those related to govt agencies pushing the buck and overdoing things eg on security and work safety procedures and compliance. I have first hand encounters with them which add greatly to business costs but with no relevance to our area of business and are sometimes even plain ridiculous due to the one size fit all approach (easy for them) by the govt agencies and their affiliated companies.
The sad thing is that the govt is most unlikely to change for the better on this aspect, despite feedback or even protests. And of course not helped by the fact that they will win again at every election.
I whole-heartedly agree.
ReplyDeleteIf this is not a simple manifesto for a worthwhile productivity campaign that will engage Singaporeans, I don't know what will.
The concept of "total cost to society" in measuring productivity is important.
Singapore is such a small country. With a fully IT capable civil service, I find it hard to imagine that any ruling party is unable to plan ahead for;
- the number of immigrants coming in
- quantity of housing required
- hospital beds required
- number of ageing Singaporeans
- number of hospices required to cater for ageing population (Straits Times, 10 March 2010, page B1)
" He who looks up into the sky to envision grand plans will eventually stumble across the tree root of reality."
Everytime i see another headline describing Singapore's latest hub initiative, I throw away the newspaper.
These hubbing initiatives do not help me with resources to look after my ageing parents.
Of course Ms Chua Mui Hoong (Straits Times 10 March 2010, page B9) will take the government's stand that " ... the love of the family members cannot be delegated away."
I'm not going to debate the logical errors in Ms Chua's arguement. All I'm going to say is that "Understanding the needs of your citizens cannot be delegated and outsourced to CONsultants and other productivity experts."
Very well written, Mr Tan.
ReplyDeleteA good body of government, no matter how motivated it is, even if efficient and effective, it is not enough to push us up the productivity ladder.
Well-known management guru, and Harvard professor, Michael Porter said here In S'pore a few years back when he was invited to speak here by the EDB...notwithstanding even a first class infrastructure.
I agree with Mr Tan that too much rules in Singaore may actually affect our "productivity" adversely...coupled with a "climate of fear" to voice out against obsolete rules and self imposed "fear to change" .
There is also a conflict of interest situation; pushing away responsibility for "productivity", say to private business entities and also down the "value chain".
I am strongly against a "leviathan" state which makes life difficult (poor quality of life as explained by Mr Tan), with an "inorganic" business environment which also leads to loss in productivity in our economy...and "WASTE" all round.
Even if the Govt. is prepared to "incentivise" firms, I believe there is still "WASTE" and poorer "quality of life".
Hence, obsolete rules and regulations must also be repealed and inefficient processes re-engineered to avoid WASTE and poor alignment of strategy.
I think a motivated "civil society with a loud voice" will help to boost productivity by getting rid of bad rules and regulations and to improve the culture for "CHANGE" to push innovative efforts.
I call it a "de-leviathan" state. Read about the meaning for "leviathan" in the introductory chapters of my blog (Dec 2009) :-
Link
http://de-leviathan.blogspot.com/
Go right down to education and start modeling our ITE after the European systems. There should be an emphasis on learning real skills that complement white-collar skills.
ReplyDeleteFor example, process operator training for those in chemical/oil and gas industries. Even apprenticeships and traineeships for aerospace etc which may take years admittedly, but should pay off in the long run.
I strongly agree with Mr Tan's views, especially those related to govt agencies pushing the buck and overdoing things eg on security and work safety procedures and compliance. I have first hand encounters with them which add greatly to business costs but with no relevance to our area of business and are sometimes even plain ridiculous due to the one size fit all approach (easy for them) by the govt agencies and their affiliated companies.
ReplyDeleteThe sad thing is that the govt is most unlikely to change for the better on this aspect, despite feedback or even protests. And of course not helped by the fact that they will win again at every election.
Translate whatever cut of money waste and time back into salary and time off for the employee for a year.
ReplyDeleteThat's how you improve productivity from ground up.