AND NO, I WON'T EVEN CHARGE THE PSC A CENT FOR MY BRILLIANT IDEAS

Mr Wang Zhen is actually quite busy at work today. But he knows that his faithful fans are waiting eagerly for Part III of his essay on the scholarship system. And he also knows that the Public Service Commission, which is led by government scholars who lack imagination and creativity, badly needs Mr Wang's brilliant ideas. So for the nation's sake, Mr Wang will now share his thoughts on how to improve the Singapore government scholarship system.

Mr Wang's 1st Brilliant Idea

Cut down on the number of undergrad scholarships. Take the money, and instead offer graduate scholarships to outstanding young civil servants who have already worked at least one or two years in the civil service. These Singaporeans use the scholarship to do their Masters. They can then be bonded.

What are the merits of this system? Firstly, you can assess your candidates not primarily on their A-level grades or CCA records, but on their actual performance in their real-life workplace. This is a much more reliable method and you can better decide whether the candidate is someone worth funding.

Secondly, the candidates themselves would by then have had a taste of public service. Compared to an 18-year-old student who has just finished his A-levels, these young civil servants would be much better able to decide whether they are really interested in public service. If they are, they would not mind accepting the bond that comes with their graduate scholarship. If they are not, then they can decline the scholarship and thereby choose not to be bonded.

Thirdly, these young civil servants, having already worked for a few years in the civil service, would be in a much better position to select a Masters course relevant to their actual work in the civil service.

Mr Wang's 2nd Brilliant Idea

Create a new category of PSC scholarships that focuses on the applicant's combined household income. Applicants who come from disadvantaged backgrounds are favoured. If two candidates are equal in all other respects, then preference is given to the financially poorer candidate. A maximum household income level can also be set. For example, if the applicant's aggregate annual household income exceeds [ ], then he cannot apply for the scholarship.

What are the benefits? Poor but bright students get their chance for a scholarship. Rich students who don't need such a scholarship are excluded from the competition. Since rich students are likelier to subsequently break their bonds anyway, the civil service will be more likely to retain its scholars. Being the relatively poorer students, these students are also likelier to feel grateful for the scholarship, and likelier to think of their obligation to serve their bond as a moral obligation.

Also, I think that the ordinary Singaporean's morale will be boosted. We revert somewhat to the original meritocratic dream that the Singapore system used to offer to its people.

Mr Wang's 3rd Brilliant Idea

Offer a new category of PSC scholarships - partial scholarships with shorter bonds. For example, instead of a full scholarship with a six-year bond, the PSC can offer a scholarship that pays only 50% of the expenses. The bond is accordingly reduced to three years. The scholar, or his parents, can pay the other 50% of the expenses.

What are the merits? Some Singaporeans are very bright but their families cannot afford to send them to study at the world's top universities overseas. However, if the government foots half the expenses, then their families may well be able to afford the rest. Thus Singapore benefits from having a larger pool of Singaporeans who have received a high-quality education at the world's finest institutions.

At the same time, the bond is shorter. All the disadvantages of a long bond (which Mr Wang had already discussed earlier) are therefore reduced by 50%. If it turns out that a scholar is not performing or that he does not like public service, then he can finish his bond much sooner and leave without causing too much grief to himself or to the civil service.

Mr Wang's 4th Brilliant Idea

As Mr Wang has pointed out, scholarship providers in Singapore are primarily the Singapore government, and the Government-Linked Companies. They should all get together and work out a scheme whereby they can exchange scholars and post scholars to each other, based on the scholars' indicated preferences. If a GLC "takes" a scholar from the PSC or from another GLC, then the GLC which is taking the scholar can pay the GLC the costs of the scholarship.

What are the merits of the scheme? If the PSC and the GLCs get together, they are able to offer a wider range of career choices and options to the scholars. It becomes likelier that the scholar will be able to find a position that he is genuinely interested in. In turn, he will be more motivated to do a good job and to complete his bond.

To give you a simple example, an 18-year-old gets a PSC scholarship and studies Law at Oxford. During his final two years in law school, he finds that his true interest is in aviation law. In fact, it is his passion. Upon graduation, the scholar is posted to the Ministry of Law, but there the work that he is assigned does not appeal to him at all. In fact, he hates it so much that he is thinking of breaking his bond.

Thanks to the scheme I mentioned, our unhappy scholar is able to apply for a transfer to Singapore Airlines, where he can pursue his interest in aviation law. If Singapore Airlines finds him to be a worthy candidate, Singapore Airlines can pay the PSC the expenses (on a pro-rated basis, depending on how much of his bond the scholar had already served at the Ministry of Law) of the scholarship, and "take over" the scholar.

Conclusion

There are simple yet effective ways to improve the Singapore scholarship system. However, since the system itself is run by a bunch of idiotic scholars, those people will never think of those ways by themselves.

The ever-helpful and ever-wise Mr Wang Zhen thus will step forward to offer those ideas, which some high-ranking civil servant somewhere will read, mull over, and eventually seek to implement. Of course, the ideas will work very well, and the civil servant will take the credit, but Mr Wang does not mind. All this is for the good of Singapore, you see.

By the way, Mr Wang is an INTJ. Also known as a Systems Builder. INTJs are a very rare species of human beings - their brains are innately hardwired to analyse complex systems, detect weaknesses and generate solutions. Hence all my brilliant analysis comes effortlessly to me.

(Unfortunately, INTJs are also known to resemble psychopaths. Read what a psychiatrist wrote about INTJs and psychopaths. Sigh. This is a major impediment to Mr Wang's public image and future career success.)


"That was just delicious, Mr Wang.
Did you know that I've been typed as an INTJ as well?"
- Hannibal Lecter, Silence of the Lambs

PUH-LEASE. IS IT REALLY SUCH A BIG DEAL?

ST Forum July 7, 2005
Singapore's IOC role fills him with pride

AS A Singaporean living in Britain, I feel immensely proud that Singapore has been hogging the headlines in the media for its role in the International Olympic Committee (IOC)'s selection of the 2012 games venue.

The Republic has really outdone itself with this project.

I have been asked many questions about Singapore by my British friends and colleagues who are very impressed by pictures of Singapore that they see in their
newspapers and on their prime-time news slots.

Indeed, I have never quite experienced such a surge of interest in our country during my years here, and I feel very honoured and privileged to be able to share details about Singapore.

So many world figures and celebrities have arrived in Singapore these few days; it is hard to describe what joy this means to an overseas Singaporean accustomed to seeing the same figures mentioned daily in world media.

I would like to congratulate the team behind the project, and all Singaporeans who share my delight.

Truly, our city state deserves the accolades.

Ong Lu-Ann

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Is it just me? Or am I not the only one who thinks that this is getting hopelessly ridiculous?

Singapore itself is not bidding to host the 2012 Olympics. Singapore just happens to be the venue where other countries are bidding to host the 2012 Olympics. So why are we getting all excited?

Beijing will host the next Olympics in 2008. That's very interesting. But does anyone care about the venue where Beijing representatives, and the representatives of other countries, gathered a few years ago to bid to host the 2008 Olympics? I don't. I don't even remember what the venue was.

So Singapore held an international convention. Big deal. We hold international conventions all the time. Singapore is an international convention centre, remember? This is what we are supposed to do. If we did a good job, let's give ourselves a pat on the back. But please, let's not get over-excited.

We were just the venue to decide on the venue of the Real Event, ok? We're not the Real Event, and we're not even the venue for the Real Event.


"The most memorable event of my life?
Well, I once had the chance to worship the ground that XiaXue walked on."

WHY IT WORKED THEN, & WHY IT FAILS NOW

This is a continuation of my previous post. Here I examine how modern-day trends have affected the basic operations of the government scholarship system.

"I'm very good at Chinese brush painting.
They should make me the Prime Minister."
- Chinese Imperial Scholar

THE NEW ECONOMY

20 years ago, most people changed jobs infrequently and freely accepted the idea that they might very well work all their lives for the same employer. For example, Mr Wang Zhen's father worked for the same company for 35 years. In those times, a scholarship bond would not have been perceived as disadvantageous. Instead it would be seen as an advantage - even before graduation, the scholar would already have been guaranteed employment, and for six to eight years!

Nowadays, people change jobs frequently. This is the New Economy. If you stay too long in the same job, you may be perceived as lacking in drive and dynamism. Changing jobs every so often is one of the best ways to stay on the learning curve, acquire new skills and boost your earning power. You also have to move quickly to grab opportunities in the fast-changing marketplace. So far in his life, Mr Wang has already worked for the civil service, two law firms, and two banks.

In this new age, a scholarship bond can be hazardous to your career. This is especially so because a civil servant's experience is often not easily transferable to the private sector. If you work for Citibank, chances are that your skills will also be relevant to JP Morgan; HSBC; DBS; OCBC; UOB or ABN AMRO. If you work for the Government of Singapore, well, there is no other government in Singapore that you can work for.

All these factors means that bright young Singaporeans will think twice, and very hard, before accepting a government scholarship. The New Economy demands that each individual take responsibility for his own career; plan his own strategy; and be ready to move quickly when opportunity comes along. Being trapped for six years to the same employer can therefore be highly detrimental to your career. Increasingly, this means that many bright young Singaporeans who accept government scholarships will do so only after doing their calculations and concluding that if they really needed to, they would be able to afford to break their bond.

COMPETITION FROM THE WHOLE WORLD

A long time ago, the common perception was that the Singapore government was a most excellent employer. Government jobs were cushy, the working hours were regular, and most importantly, the job was an iron rice bowl. The government would never go bankrupt and it would never sack you, unless you screwed up formidably or committed a crime. Furthermore, and very importantly, the Singapore government provided accelerated career paths for scholars and gave them quick, easy promotions. Thus the Singapore government was a great place to work, for people who were bright enough to win scholarships.

All of the above remains more or less true (except that some civil servants nowadays have terrible working hours). A few other things have changed. Firstly, the world globalised and became a smaller place. Secondly, the MNCs of the world now understand that human capital is the ultimate key to success. In other words, the competition to attract talent has become much hotter. The Singapore government is not just competing with other local employers for the brightest young Singaporeans. The Singapore government is competing with the whole world for the brightest young Singaporeans.

If you are a truly talented young Singaporean with a brilliant academic record, the choice today is not just whether to be a scholar in Singapore, or a non-scholar in Singapore. The other available choices are whether to work for the world's biggest companies and most generous employers - in New York, London, Hong Kong, Silicon Valley, wherever opportunity calls you to.
Increasingly, this means that the Singapore government will fail to attract some bright young Singaporeans, even though they are the brightest of the bright, and therefore the Singapore government's most desirable targets.

A CHANGE OF VALUES

I believe that in the past, many of the people who applied for government scholarships genuinely felt a calling to public service. They wanted to serve the country and felt that the best way to do that was to be in the government.

Times have changed. This is obvious even in the uppermost echelons of the government. Today, our ministers tell us that if we do not increase their world-class salaries to the world's highest salaries for government ministers, then they are likely to become corrupt and rob our nation's coffers.

"Ex-Minister Mr Teh Cheang Wan.
Autopsy reveals the true cause of death - low ministerial salary."

With leaders like that, we should not expect our bright young Singaporeans to possess high ideals. If they do possess high ideals, then we should applaud them, but if they do not, we should not be surprised.

The point therefore is that high ideals have grown somewhat obsolete in our system. In contrast, monetary rewards play an ever-increasing role. This will affect the government scholarship system. Fewer Singaporeans will accept government scholarships because they genuinely feel called to public service. More and more Singaporeans will accept scholarships because of reasons such as monetary rewards or prestige. And when monetary rewards are better elsewhere, then we expect bright young Singaporeans to decline scholarships. When the alluring novelty of prestige has worn off, we expect government scholars to break their bonds.

The PERILS OF BEING MORE AFFLUENT

Many, many years ago, the personal stories of our government scholars were an inspiration to the ordinary people of Singapore. We used to read in the newspapers about how a taxi driver's son or a widowed seamstress's daughter studied so hard and scored all the A's and won a President's Scholarship. The moral of the story was that if you worked hard, then there was always hope, no matter how disadvantaged your personal circumstances might be.

This no longer happens. It simply no longer happens. The typical profile of our scholars has changed. The vast majority of scholars come from very wealthy family backgrounds. Their parents are likely to be highly educated themselves.

I think that this is a natural manifestation of a highly competitive education system. Over the years, our system has grown ever more competitive. And in a highly competitive education system, every little advantage counts. To be rich is an advantage. To have well-educated parents is an advantage.

The rich kid spends no time on housework because his maid does all of it; therefore he has more time to study. The rich kid's parents can afford to send him for violin lessons and tennis class; therefore his CCA record looks more impressive. The rich kid's father is a doctor and his mother is a lawyer; therefore his father can help him with A-level Biology and his mother can help him with General Paper. The rich kid's parents can send him to the best independent schools which in turn lay the route to the best junior colleges.

These advantages accumulate over years, and in the end, we see that the most prestigious scholarships almost invariably end up with the rich kids. A President's Scholar is not made in a day. He is not even made in a year. I say that the process starts somewhere around the age of eight or nine, when his well-educated parents engineer his entry into the Gifted Enrichment Programme by buying him books with MENSA IQ tests that he can practise taking.

"Thank goodness I wasn't born in Singapore.
They would have sent me to ITE!" - Albert Einstein
I believe that it is still quite possible for the relatively poor Singaporean to succeed (say, to the extent that he enters a local university and graduates). I just don't believe that it is very possible for the relatively poor Singaporean to succeed at the very highest levels, and win the most prestigious scholarships.

Why is this significant? It is significant because only the relatively poor would be profoundly grateful for their scholarships. It is only the relatively poor who would think, "If not for this scholarship, I would not be able to attend university at all, let alone study here in Stanford. I must serve my bond faithfully and give something back to Singapore."

For the rich, the prestigious scholarship is more like a trophy. It is a symbol of achievement, something that looks good in a CV, something to be very proud of. But it is not something to be deeply grateful for.

In the end, it means that the Singapore government scholars of today, being affluent, and being less grateful for their opportunity, would tend to be relatively less committed to public service. This is in comparison to the poorer Singapore government scholars of yesteryear - those heroic sons and daughters of taxi drivers and widowed seamstresses. That noble breed is now extinct.

ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE GOVERNMENT

The performance of the Singapore government has steadily grown less and less impressive over the years. Mr Wang himself used to be a staunch supporter of the PAP government. In the years 1994 - 1997, Mr Wang zipped busily around the Internet chastising those who would criticise the PAP government.

But one thing happened, then another, then another - electoral gerrymandering; world-class ministerial salaries; faltering economic growth; collapsing highways; a ridiculous criminal legal system; massive unemployment; nationwide blackouts; poor Singaporeans living without water and electricity. The evidence is undeniable. Today Mr Wang cannot say with a straight face that he thinks highly of the Singapore government. Mr Wang is an honest man.

Mr Wang believes that he is not the only one who feels this way. He thinks that there is a higher percentage of intelligent people today who have a negative perception of the Singapore government. This is in contrast to Singaporeans, say, 15 years ago.

As the public perception of the Singapore government grows more and more negative over the years, Mr Wang feels that fewer and fewer bright young Singaporeans will feel inclined to accept a government scholarship. No one wants to work in an environment populated by incompetent fools.

PERFORMANCE, NOT GRADES

In the drive for higher performance, what really matters is .... higher performance. In the most efficient organisations, this means that everyone matters and everyone is encouraged to do his best. It also means that nothing is written in stone. The best people get the highest rewards, but who the best people are - that changes from year after year. You have to keep performing. If you perform less well, then you get smaller rewards. If you perform badly, then you have to leave. You cannot argue that you deserve to be made Director because 15 years ago, you scored 4 A's and 2 S-Paper distinctions and had an outstanding record as a Boy Scout.

In the Singapore scholarship system, the government and the scholars are stuck with each other for six years. Even if a scholar performs mediocrely, the government cannot ask him to leave. The government had already "paid" for him - it now needs to live with him. It is like mistakenly buying an expensive but ill-fitting pair of shoes. The shoes are so expensive that you cannot bear to throw them away. So you force your feet into them and suffer the blisters for six years.

"So what if I can't perform?
You guys are still gonna make me rich!"

Since the government is stuck with its scholars, it is also forced to design career paths for them. Since the government does not like to admit to any mistakes in its selection process, it will persist in its belief that all its scholars are truly superior. Since the government believes that all its scholars are superior, it will engineer their path to high-ranking positions. Due to such artificial engineering, high-performing non-scholars are denied opportunities that they should rightfully have. These persons grow frustrated when they find out the rules of the game. So they quit.

Over time, this leads to several implications. Firstly, the Singapore government will consistently fail to get optimal performance from its employees. This is because it will consistently fail to reward optimal performance.

Secondly, some people will be pushed into senior positions, not because they are performing well and have displayed the ability to do well in these positions, but merely because the government gave them a scholarship when they were 18 years old, is now stuck with them, and has to put them somewhere.

Thirdly, as high-performing non-scholars will regularly leave the civil service after a relatively short time, the majority of non-scholar employees lefy behind will be average, mediocre or poor performers. Once again, we have a model where the Singapore government is failing to get good performance from its overall workforce. This has serious implications because non-scholars still necessarily form the bulk of the civil service.

CONCLUSION

These are the main reasons why I said in my earlier post that the scholarship system worked very well in the past, but not today. If the readers of Commentary Singapore are still interested, then in my next post, I will propose how the Singapore government scholarship system can be improved.

MR WANG EXAMINES THE SCHOLARSHIP ISSUES

Scholarships seem to be the current hot topic. As usual, Mr Wang Zhen will surprise you with insights that you probably never thought of. To begin with, a quiz question. Find two differences between Group A:

Singapore Airlines / Singapore Press Holdings / Development Bank of Singapore / Singapore Power Ltd / SembCorp Industries / Singapore Armed Forces / Singapore Police Force

and Group B:

Citibank Singapore / Hyflux / Creative Technologies / Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation / Asia-Pacific Breweries / Courts Singapore / Goodwood Park Hotel /
Osim International / Fraser & Neave Ltd.

Got it? Here's the answer:

1. All the Group A entities are linked to the Singapore government. But all the Group B organisations are genuine private-sector entities.

2. All the Group A entities offer undergraduate scholarships. But none of the Group B organisations do.

Why is this the case? What makes genuine, bona fide commercial organisations shy away from offering undergraduate scholarships?

Money is not the issue. These are not puny little SMEs we're talking about. The Group B organisations are big players in their own right. If they thought that scholarships were a good idea, they would have no problems plonking down a few million dollars a year to fund the programme.

It is also not about the private sector not valuing talent. In fact, Citibank Singapore is an award-winning employer, well-known for the quality of its human resource programmes and policies. Banks like Citibank and OCBC in fact also run sophisticated management trainee programmes for people whom they believe have the potential to become their top employees. No bonds, and no scholarships, though.

The real reason is that the private sector knows that the undergraduate scholarship system is simply not reliable. It is a poor method for attracting and retaining talent. There is just too much crystal ball-gazing involved.

"I see .... glass and soap. I hear .... the sound of running water.
You will be bonded to the A*STAR Test-Tube Washing Department."

Suppose in the year 2005, you plonk your money on a bright young lady with excellent A-levels and a great CCA record. You are actually betting:

1. that she will perform well and learn valuable things in university from 2006 to 2009;

2. that in the year 2009, your organisation will have a job vacancy that's a good fit for her;

3. that she will be an outstanding performer when she starts work in 2009, (so outstanding that it was worth waiting 4 years for her);

4. that she will remain an outstanding performer from 2009 to 2014;

5. that from 2009 to 2014, there will be no mismatch between what your organisation can offer her, and the kind of career she expects or aspires to have.

So right now in 2005, scholarship boards are making bets all the way to 2014. And you thought the traders from China Aviation Oil were bad.

"Scholarships are just too risky.
I prefer to speculate in oil derivatives."
- Chen Juilin, China Aviation Oil.

In reality, some scholars break their bonds because they suddenly realise that their true interest lies somewhere else. Others grow disinterested and perform mediocrely. They count down their bonded days the way NSmen count down their military days to ORD. Others find that they just don't have the temperament for the job they're given. I know someone who took a PSC teaching scholarship only to find out too late that she really hated teaching. Other scholars are really great at physics or engineering or chemistry, but just don't like government policy-making.

Crystal ball-gazing is very difficult. You can't even tell where the oil prices might be next week. Never mind what will happen between now and the year 2014. That's why the private sector generally does not adopt the undergrad scholarship system.

GLCs follow the Singapore government system, because the GLCs are linked to the Singapore government. Ever notice how GLCs tend to be headed by ex-PSC scholars?

Meanwhile, the Singapore government struggles to revise the scholarship system. That's because this was the same system on which the Singapore government built itself. It would be a tricky exercise for ex-President's Scholars like Lee Hsien Loong or Vivian Balakrishnan to come forward and say that maybe President's Scholarships aren't such a great idea.

"Yes, I am the emperor. You like my new clothes?"

The traditional PSC scholarship system may have worked well in the past. Times, however, have changed, and the system hasn't evolved sufficiently. It is now a weak, wobbly dinosaur struggling with climate changes.

If the readers of Commentary Singapore are interested, Mr Wang will, in a subsequent post, explain why the system that once worked, no longer does.

Tyrannosaurus Scholarus Rex.
Enforces moral obligations & feeds on bond-breakers.

WILD BOAR ON PULAU UBIN

Straits Times Forum, July 2, 2005
Life's a boar for this Pulau Ubin resident

ON JUNE 25 I spent a day on Pulau Ubin with a group of friends. We had a fantastic time until we saw the one and only wild boar on the island.

Compared to the pampered and healthy animals in the Singapore Zoo, the boar was like an abandoned old person.

The owner, who was smoking and looking very impatiently at all the visitors, said in Hokkien: 'I really don't know what to do with this animal. The Government also doesn't want him. Worse still, the Government doesn't allow me to collect money when tourists come to look at him. Now I have no money to buy food for him. But even if I had, I don't think I'd let him eat anything because his faeces are so smelly that I can't tolerate it anymore. I think I will let him starve to death. Or I will just throw a few coconuts to him.'

From what I overheard, it seems that the owner had previously collected money from visitors who had photographs taken with the wild boar until the Government put a stop to it.

I took a few photographs of the poor boar and walked away with a very heavy heart, thinking that even putting him to sleep would be kinder than letting him starve to death.

I hope the authorities can do something soon before the poor boar dies of starvation.

Susannah Low Xiao Rong (Mdm)

Mr Wang Zhen would like to point out that keeping wild animals or birds without a licence is an offence under Section 5(1) of the Wild Animals & Birds Act. Please be kind to your fellow living creatures.


"I still try to think positively. I'm inspired by Nelson Mandela,
Aung San Suu Kyi and Viktor Frankl. Oh, and Chia Thye Poh, of course!"